You still persist in ad hominem, so I wonder who is defensive? I’ll leave it to readers to decide.

1.There are many big differences between salmon farming and raising hatchery salmon. The criticisms of salmon farming are many; the feed conversion ratio is one among many greater ones. There is a big difference in the amount and duration of feeding hatchery-raised salmon (salmon that are indigenous to local BC waters). Nevertheless, your point is nugatory because it assumes that wild salmon advocates favor hatchery raising of salmon. It is not the ultimate scenario, but it is far preferable to the destruction wrought by salmon farming.

2.You still haven’t learned basic science. Science does not prove anything. As for Hite et al:

“Having analyzed over 2 metric tons of farmed and wild salmon from around the world for organochlorine contaminants, we show that concentrations of these contaminants are significantly higher in farmed salmon than in wild. European-raised salmon have significantly greater contaminant loads than those raised in North and South America, indicating the need for further investigation into the sources of contamination. Risk analysis indicates that consumption of farmed Atlantic salmon may pose health risks that detract from the beneficial effects of fish consumption.”

Readers may draw their own conclusions what this means. I submit it is a no-brainer.

Pregnant mothers are warned not to eat farmed salmon by leading scientists. Dr. David Carpenter, Director of the Institute for Health and the Environment at the University at Albany’s School of Public Health and co-author of the largest and most comprehensive study of toxins in farm-raised salmon: Studies indicate farmed salmon “contain high levels of PCB’s and other chemicals that are harmful to developing fetuses and increase the risk of cancer to the mother. Farmed salmon is definitely not what the doctor — at least this doctor — would ever order for expectant mothers.”

Here’s my response to your (very defensive?) response;

1. You fail to see my point about salmon ranching in Alaska, Japan, Russia etc. Shame. Let me be clearer – cpmbined, they raise over 5 billion salmon in hatcheries that are released into the ocean to graze for food. These are not intended to return to rivers to spawn. They are intended for human consumption – called salmon ranching. This is the same purpopse as salmon farming. My point is valid: if one is concerned about the consumption of fish to feed fish, then salmon ranching needs to be included in the dicussion. On the West coast of America the fish consumed by ‘ranching’ is far greater than that of ‘farming’ (not that we need to name them differently – it’s all fish culture). I believe like you do that fish meal consumption needs to be a focus of future protein production – but a highly selective focus on a single producer doesn’t help that discussion.
2. Your response about the health of wild and farmed salmon in fact proves my point. The Hites study proved that both wild and farmed salmon are a fraction of FDA concern levels for PCB, dioxins etc. (1-2% of the 2000 ppb concern level). Other studies, not as well promoted, prove the same.

By the tone of your opinion peice and subsequent response, I would assume that you have your mind made up and are only prepared to quote those who bolster your opinion…shame.

They are manufacturing a GREAT FAMINE to decrease the population of the earth. It’s all done by stealth so as not to enrage the masses. There are many fish that cannot be found in the wild oceans anymore, and it has been international corporate policy that has set the systems up to fail, they are not shy in their insane pursuit to eliminate the ordinary people, workers and peasants.

If you believe that the government of Canada, or Norway, have any interest in the livelihood of citizens then take a good look at how fast America is falling into bloody chaos. The idea that “government” is somehow the friend and protector of the citizens is a BIG FAT LIE. Believe it at your peril.

1. I fail to see what your point is? Salmon farming is prohibited in Alaska. Thanks for making my point.
2. Even if it is 2 to 1, it is a negative outcome nutritionally. In your world, nuclear fission reactors would be a commercial reality. Cat feed is another topic. It is often stated that two wrongs don’t make a right.
3. First, in science nothing is proven. The null hypothesis is rejected or not rejected. Second, you offer an opinion again. Here is the science that disputes your opinion: Hites et al. (2004). Global Assessment of Organic Contaminants in Farmed Salmon. Science. 303(5655): 226 – 229.
4. Your use of the term “Indian” reveals your level of cultural sensitivity. I have no idea what a “myriad of Indians” is. Where are your numbers?
5. There is also the illegal taken herring. Your numbers are wrong, and it doesn’t matter. If someone steals one watch and not 10, then that’s okay? What is your point?

As for tired and boring … well, when a person has no facts or logic to back one’s claims, such a person will often resort to ad hominem.

Your opinion is becoming tiring. Old and tiring.