Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[troutbreath]

Yes Dave, after reading this, you may have a point.
http://www.thinkscotland.org/thinkpolitics/articles.html?read_full=12010&article=www.thinkscotland.org

That article looks like something from the Fraser Institute. I think the reply it got captures the gist of it:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
While I agree that policy should be based on evidence, it is unfortunate that this article is chock full of baseless assertion about what the 'real' problems are, what the solutions should be and the motives of the 'green lobby'. He also accuses the green lobby of being alarmist, and then asserts that "we can't regress to being hunting and gathering cave-dwellers"... As regards his comment that "radical environmentalism is now causing vital industries to migrate to countries where they can thrive", I invite Mr. Acheson to spend a morning bathing in the Pearl River Delta and report back on his findings to this publication. I imagine he would describe himself as a 'free-market capitalist', so it's a shame his article fails to recognise the status of ecological impacts as externalities in economic transactions.

Posted on 13/03/2013 by GW

[absolon]

I think the article makes a very relevant point:

.........Much of the green lobby's success is directly attributable to its ability to demonise and brand opponents as heretics, even if their arguments are based on verifiable evidence or if they simply want to promote intelligent discussion. Through their 'hearts and minds’ campaigns centred on perceived environmental injustices, the green lobby uses radical, ‘sexy’ catastrophe theories to bombard us with predictions of ecological collapse. We are warned that there is no time for debate; that radical and swift action is necessary to avoid environmental apocalypse...........

[troutbreath]

" the green lobby uses radical, ‘sexy’ catastrophe theories "


It's not often you see "sexy" and "catastrophe" in the same sentence.

[Fisherbob]

If I read only the fish feedlot blogs and accepted them as being the truth......    I'd probably have the same thoughts you are having.

Morton's sole motivation is to protect the wild salmon. The income she earns as a result could be labeled as poverty level.

What would you think AF if DR. Morton took her feedlot drive to her home land just a few miles south of the Canada US boarder where Atlantic's are farmed? She should be able to at least double her income we donate from her fellow countrymen and the fine US foundations that support the drive in Canada. This might get her off the poverty level. I am confused why her fight is only in Canada. 

[absolon]

" the green lobby uses radical, ‘sexy’ catastrophe theories "


It's not often you see "sexy" and "catastrophe" in the same sentence.

Presumably the word is used in the context of attracting attention rather than causing arousal.

[alwaysfishn]

What would you think AF if DR. Morton took her feedlot drive to her home land just a few miles south of the Canada US boarder where Atlantic's are farmed? She should be able to at least double her income we donate from her fellow countrymen and the fine US foundations that support the drive in Canada. This might get her off the poverty level. I am confused why her fight is only in Canada. 

First Fisherbob, her "homeland" is Canada (you may not be aware that she considered running for the NDP a couple years ago). Second, she is not motivated by money so going somewhere that she might get more donations is likely not a motivating factor. Third, why would she want to focus on the US (why would we want her to focus on the US) when there is so much more work to do in Canada to get the feedlots out of our oceans.

[Dave]

First Fisherbob, her "homeland" is Canada (you may not be aware that she considered running for the NDP a couple years ago). Second, she is not motivated by money so going somewhere that she might get more donations is likely not a motivating factor. Third, why would she want to focus on the US (why would we want her to focus on the US) when there is so much more work to do in Canada to get the feedlots out of our oceans.

Would piss off billionaire Mom too

[Fisherbob]

First Fisherbob, her "homeland" is Canada (you may not be aware that she considered running for the NDP a couple years ago). Second, she is not motivated by money so going somewhere that she might get more donations is likely not a motivating factor. Third, why would she want to focus on the US (why would we want her to focus on the US) when there is so much more work to do in Canada to get the feedlots out of our oceans.

First of all, are you sure of DR. Mortons home of origin? I understand it is the US. I do some investigation before donating. Second, why are we not worried about Washington Atlantic feedlot salmon escaping and traveling north through our waters? We can ride our waters of feedlots, but it looks like we can not stop feedlot salmon migrating in our waters. What is the good of my hard earned $s donated to Dr. Mortons cause if a few miles south of us can still feedlot those parasites?  Alaska fishermen say they catch feedlot salmon. Do my donation $s to DR. Morton go to find out where they come from? Looks like we need to get together on this with DR. Morton.

[chris gadsden]

It amazes me that some still think she does this for money.

[Fisherbob]

It amazes me that some still think she does this for money.

She had better start. Many of us have gave money to her cause. Lets get the Washington Atlantic feedlots out of the Pacific also.

[silver ghost]

Since I don't have time to read the back and forth bickering between guys who share the same passion and interest, yet choose to be wilfully blind and argue with each other regarding an issue which, ironically poses a real threat to said passion and interest, I apologize if this is a repeat of what someone said, but to whoever questioned where donation money goes...

Raincoast Research money goes towards ISA sampling: http://www.raincoastresearch.org/home.htm

and Adopt-A-Fry goes to legal and campaign costs. Such as - organizing/funding rallies and marches, taking the government to court (expensive!), etc. Details can be found here: http://www.adopt-a-fry.org.

That is all.

[Fisherbob]

Since I don't have time to read the back and forth bickering between guys who share the same passion and interest, yet choose to be wilfully blind and argue with each other regarding an issue which, ironically poses a real threat to said passion and interest, I apologize if this is a repeat of what someone said, but to whoever questioned where donation money goes...

Raincoast Research money goes towards ISA sampling: http://www.raincoastresearch.org/home.htm

and Adopt-A-Fry goes to legal and campaign costs. Such as - organizing/funding rallies and marches, taking the government to court (expensive!), etc. Details can be found here: http://www.adopt-a-fry.org.

That is all.

Sure am happy to see none of my donations went to educating the public about the Atlantic feedlots in Puget Sound. You know, the one just south of the invisible boarder.
  Nuff said. 

[Fisherbob]

Why can DR. Morton not start bringing the Washington Atlantic feedlots to their knees? She should have no trouble getting the funding for it.
 http://fairquestions.typepad.com/rethink_campaigns/alexandra-morton-non-profit-revenue-2000-2010.html

[alwaysfishn]

Why can DR. Morton not start bringing the Washington Atlantic feedlots to their knees? She should have no trouble getting the funding for it.
 http://fairquestions.typepad.com/rethink_campaigns/alexandra-morton-non-profit-revenue-2000-2010.html

You're hilarious! Hopefully you realize that the silly biased article you just posted shows the revenue from 2000 to 2010. On average Morton's organization had donations of approximately $91,000 per year in that period of time. For most families that is a basic income.

Morton ran her organization, paid legal bills, research and still had to pay for her living expenses with that money.

Perhaps if you increased your annual donations by approximately $90,000 per year, she would be able to address the US feedlots......

[Fisherbob]

You're hilarious! Hopefully you realize that the silly biased article you just posted shows the revenue from 2000 to 2010. On average Morton's organization had donations of approximately $91,000 per year in that period of time. For most families that is a basic income.

Morton ran her organization, paid legal bills, research and still had to pay for her living expenses with that money.

Perhaps if you increased your annual donations by approximately $90,000 per year, she would be able to address the US feedlots......

That is a very good wage and I still expect DR. Morton to address the problems of Atlantic feedlots in her own country as well.