• 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Thanks for voting!

Top of page



Recent comments

  • James
    June 05, 2013 - 13:47

    When Justice Cohen said that the data did not show a significant impact, I took that as meaning that all means available were unable to quantify it. If it is too small to measure, or does not stand out from all other impacts, it must be either very small - insignificant, or non-existent. It does not mean that the assumption that it must be happening is true and the professionals who have spent considerable time researching the issue have missed a "significant impact" simply because the issue is (in the minds of some) "unresolved". The profession of the letter writer also has no bearing on the validity of the facts presented. Regardless of the source data must be weighed on its own merit, you don't see salmon farmers simply dismissing work presented by the likes of Morton and Krkosek - they actually take the time to show people where it is wrong - or, in a few instances where it may be right. That is how science works. Justice Cohen took the time to weigh all evidence presented during the commission and although there was a high level of fear and speculation acknowledged - the lack of evidence showing any measurable impacts from all data collected was clear.

  • fish tailer
    June 04, 2013 - 20:37

    This is Atlantic salmon, not that old pacific stuff that lives in warmer waters on the other side of the country and in the garbage from coming over across the ocean. Nice try though Ian but we've seen trev in action before.

  • Gordon
    June 04, 2013 - 10:26

    Roberts says that "data...did not show that salmon farms were having a significant impact on" wild salmon. In other words, the issue is unresolved and the salmon feedlots may well be having a significant impact on wild salmon. The precautionary principle would have us err on the side of caution and not place these massive, overcrowded feedlots in wild fish habitat. This salmon feedlot industry should be moved into land-based facilities where waste and disease can be better controlled. One cannot help but get the impression that DFO has given up on trying to protect wild fish.

  • steve
    June 04, 2013 - 07:25

    Just googled this letter writer. He is a salmon farmer from BC. He has a financial vested interest. John Gibson is retired, and has no financial interest at play in this issue.