Letter to the Editor. Courier-Islander, March 26, 2010
When I started this letter, I fully intended to include examples of Ms. Morton's mistakes and falsehoods, but had to delete them as every paper carrier would need a flat deck and a fork lift to deliver the paper. If my tone appears angry and mean, it's because that's the way I intended.
Your constant bombardment of border-line liable editorials is one thing. Your blind eye to the ceaseless stream of inflammatory rhetoric in opinion pieces is entertaining. Your decision to allow hearsay and anecdotal evidence to pass as fact is greatly disappointing. Your lack of ability to prevent factually incorrect "news" stories based on incomplete and biased science to be printed is scary. But when you compare Alexandra Morton to Haig-Brown, that, sir, is inexcusable.
When Haig-Brown made a decision, it was after much thought and deliberation, the facts and truth took precedence over his emotions. Having made a decision it was not locked in stone until the end of time, it was always under review as alternate theories, new science and thinking was presented. Morton tried several angles to try to rid the coast of fish farms before she settled on sea lice. After setting out to scientifically prove fish farms were bad, she publicly stated; "I have done the science on this", and "the science is done" - things you must agree that Haig-Brown would never say. Do you think Haig-Brown would approve of her receiving funds from sources that stood to gain if she attained her stated goal while doing her "research"? I would think that an editor of your years would have an inkling that the ravings of an ex-commercial fishing American who lives in the bush and calls herself a folk hero might not be the most credible source of information and in no way shape or form should be compared to Haig-Brown.
Morton's single-minded laser like focus against fish farms (not for wild salmon) invites criticism because of her cherry picking of data and total disregard for the scientific method. While normally this kind of overzealous behaviour might be laughable, placing Morton comfortably in the "quirky but harmless" category of local characters, real lives of many people are going to be affected. Not only the ones directly employed, but also those who rely on the untold numbers of anglers who have been scared away by the negative press and all of us taxpayers as you campaign to destroy a valuable industry and a chance to save the last of the wild salmon.
I find your hypocrisy of supporting one form of farming while being so vocal against another disturbing. Your constant stream of negative editorials and articles regarding the fish farm industry with very little research and a cursory regard to the facts calls into question the accuracy of any and everything I read in your paper (thankfully we are not in a one paper town). Your baseless fear mongering would be better served if you became a speechwriter for the Republican party down south.
You have expressed your support of the current hatchery system and of salmon ranching though you must be aware that even in a terminal fishery non-target stocks will be impacted. For example, the incidental by-catch of rowboats in a net fishery near the mouth of the Campbell River would cause a serious and precipitous decline in the numbers of hatchery brass, and local newspaper editors.
One form of farming weakens the genetic diversity of wild salmon through the actual interbreeding and very real threat of interspecies disease transfer.
It has also prolonged the appearance of abundance that has allowed the taxpayer-funded mixed stock net fishery to continue for far too long. Another problem with the form of salmon farming you support (ranching) is that it is obvious that the carrying capacity of much of the Pacific has already been reached or exceeded. The evidence for this includes, but is not limited to, the starving of orcas and northern marine mammals, the poor ocean survival rate of many salmon stocks and the research into the release timing of hatchery smolts.
In the beginning of your tirades, I thought your editorials were a stunt to stir up the pot and sell newspapers. However, with the recent revelations it is evident that you have fallen so far into the cult of Morton that the re-education was a total success.
As required by all cults, your display of suspension of reality and blind faith is complete and convincing.
Objective and open minds are essential from the purveyors of information in a free society. The constant parroting by you and others in the media shows just how lazy the fifth estate is in general. One statement used over and over is that she "wrote 10,000 letters ".
Well at one hour a letter, that takes eight hours a day, five days a week, 50 weeks a year (without coffee, bathroom or meal breaks) for five, yes, five years!
Even a cursory amount of digging into your new messiah should start the alarm bells wringing.
Spreading your myopic view of the problems affecting salmon does everyone and the salmon a great disservice. Assumptions and baseless extrapolations are not facts, and representing them as such by trusted institutions, (the press) is very dangerous. I know it's an extreme and far-flung example, but the invasion of Iraq, while the real culprits of 911, were left at large is one example of the consequences of the press repeating the inaccuracies of zealots without doing the due process of verification.
While it is nice to have villains and easy answers, it is more important to have the right villain and the right answer or the real problems can be greatly magnified. You are calling for the elimination of one British Columbia's most valuable exports, based on incomplete and inaccurate information. There has been a judicial inquiry called on the sockeye collapse and it will wrap up at the latest by May 2011. If a 96-year-old obese smoker (the commercial net fishery) dies after severe chest pains, it's probably a good idea to wait for the autopsy before screaming bloody murder.
Weather it's hypoxia, acidification, pollution, global warming or the fact that countless fishery collapses caused by heavily subsidized commercial fisheries worldwide have proven that the bounty of the sea is finite and the mass harvest wild life during times of transition is unsustainable.
I feel it's a good idea to have a profitable, sustainable source of high quality healthy protein available for domestic consumption and export while providing year round jobs and much needed tax revenue. Having a local newspaper editor seemingly determined to rid this resource extraction area of value added jobs by perpetuating the myth that the last vestige of hunter gather food harvesting practices is a viable path to the future is shocking. I am sure you are aware that aside from certain mushrooms, seafood is the only "wild" foodstuff available in our local grocery stores.
Even you must recognize that Haig-Brown did not cherry pick his data, omit crucial details, and disregard evidence contrary to his stated objective. He was nowhere as inconsistent, vengeful, or just plain wrong as Morton. Comparing Morton to Haig-Brown is not like comparing an intelligent thoughtful studious person to a venomous zealot, it is comparing an intelligent thoughtful studious person to a venomous zealot.
There are some very serious problems facing the salmon and the Cameron and Morton, smoke and mirror show is diverting much needed brainpower, political will and the resources needed to address the real problems.
I highly recommend reading the thousands of scientific papers now available online, as it is a great way to pass the endless soggy winter days and nights on the coast (and as an added benefit, some of the reading is so dry, it can stop your roof from leaking.)
In viewing your lack of responsible judgement on this issue, perhaps your paper should employ someone to vet articles and letters. Someone with at least the illusion of objectivity, allowing only thoughts with some semblance of truth and reality to be printed. That person should have a title reflecting their duties and responsibilities, something like EDITOR, Has a nice ring to it.
In closing Mr. Cameron if you and Morton fear progress so much you should take off your farmed clothes, climb up a tree, pick, and eat the inevitable "wild" ticks off each other's backs.
Eric Becherer
P.S.
If you are waiting for Morton's apology to the hard workers at Walcan and their families so you can print yours next to hers, I suggest you may as well start without her
