|
Déposant : ron wilton
Communauté : kelowna
Déposé le : Novembre 25, 2011
Résumé :
Qui a le plus à gagner de la disparition du saumon du Fraser? En l’absence de saumon, les grandes entreprises pourraient construire des barrages hydroélectriques sur le fleuve, alors peut-être sont-elles fautives.
|
Représentations :
One seemingly bizarre reason for the plight of the Fraser River sockeye that has not been entertained by the commission is the answer to the question 'Who has the most to gain if the Fraser River salmon were eradicated ?'.
Twenty years ago, the open net fish farms 'seemed' like a positive complementary benefit, in as much as it took some harvest pressure off wild stocks and 'presumably' created 'jobs' for citizens of the province.
Little was known of the plight of wild stocks in other areas of the world where fish farms were developed and established.
We now know that in Scandinavia and most particularly, Norway, that the wild stock has been virtually extirpated as a result of biological interruption and contamination from the farmed fishes.
A not so well advertised 'benefit' of not having migrating and spawning salmon in the river systems in Norway, is the fact that many of the former spawning rivers have now been developed for hydro production to such an extent that Norway now is actually net exporter of electricity.
Without salmon in the Fraser River system, there would no longer be an impediment to logging the watershed or developing the mighty Fraser as the premier hydro-electric producer in North America.
At the time of the greatest proliferation of fish farms on our west coast, there were ongoing talks with the political powers in BC and California to provide that state with a secure and endless supply of electricity.
California has a great need for electricity and they have an equally large great need for fresh water to irrigate their vast agriculural food growing areas such as the Napa valley and others.
Most of the agricultural interests in California are controlled by a few international agribusiness conglomerates. With a limitless year round supply of fresh water and electricity, they would control a very large proportion of the North American food supply.
The Fraser River could supply both of those needs. Except, of course, for those 'troublesome' salmon.
It does not take a great leap of imagination to believe that giant corporations would not consider, or have not considered the possibility and reality of utilising that resource at the expense of another from which they derive no financial benefit.
Corporations are the true sociopaths of our society, as has been so amply demonstrated on Wall St. of late, and they have no compunction about destroying whatever impedes their effort to control and captalize.
This is something we should all take pause and consider. Do we want control of our food supply in the hands of a few at the expense of a natural system that has thrived and perpetuated itself for millennia in the rivers and forests of our beloved province.
Do you believe any of our present or recently past governors are capable of such a horrendous criminal act?
I do.
|
