Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.
Thank you for this very reasoned and balanced article. As with any proposals for economic development, we must carefully weigh the benefits (wealth creation and the resulting tax dollars) against the risks – environmental or otherwise. Certainly projects must be environmentally sustainable. But how do we measure the “risks” involved in changing an ocean view or the “yuch factor” of fish pooping in a confined area? Do they outweigh the risk of closuring emergency rooms in rural hospitals or not being able to afford enough family physicians? Are these not connected?
STEVE J CHIPMAN | February 8, 2020 | Reply
Bill, Last year we flew up the west coast of Chile from Patagonia on a crystal clear day and from my window seat I could see salmon or other fish-farm pens in many bays with very small communities nearby. They were quite isolated. However, it was the fact that these farms were so visible from the air that surprised me. They must have been huge. I think if Cooke and others can mitigate the waste/overfeed from their pens, and they don’t cram too many pens in bays that have other fisheries (i.e., all of them), aquaculture can find a place here.
Jill Rafuse | February 7, 2020 | Reply
Creative Commons 2010 – Present