Talking Point: Leftie attack on salmon farms displayed poor knowledge of science

I found this a good read coming from a Hobart science teacher Peter Wilson who has also worked as a population ecologist with CSIRO in the fields of phytopathology, entomology and biological control.



Talking Point: Leftie attack on salmon farms displayed poor knowledge of science

PETER WILSON, Mercury
November 6, 2016 9:05pm

THE Tasmanian salmon industry beat-up on the ABC last week displayed a lack of understanding of how science in agriculture works.
Four Corners took our state’s salmon industry on a well-researched yet empty ride of accusation and hyperbole.
We all seem to like our Atlantic salmon, and aquaculture makes it more affordable and accessible.
Yes, the fish pollute the water, but what other farmed animal does not pollute its natural environment? Do we see the ABC sticking its microphones into the faces of farmers wanting them to explain why livestock irresponsibly defecate in a paddock? Like many things the Left-leaning media like to get worked up about, consideration is not given to the fact that despite the effluent dump beneath fish farms, it still remains the lesser of evils in terms of feeding our appetite for high quality fish.
The dynamics of ocean fish stocks are complicated and at times unpredictable with rising sea temperatures. Would the ABC suggest we return to more intensive long-net fishing and decimate global stocks of a food source that cannot be fenced in?
Four Corners seemed to take the industry to task for outlining the recipe of fishmeal given to farmed fish and yet to me it sounded much like a sensible use for waste products from other industry. I do not understand how this seemed so shameful.
The science of intensive farm fishing is possibly the best option open to us while our species continues to grow in number exponentially.
To feed an overpopulated world, we need to devise new technology and agricultural methods. It is not rocket science. What is rocket science, however, is the industry’s ability to colour the flesh of Atlantic salmon by natural means, for example. Because penned salmon are unable to source a diet of crustaceans — protecting the natural stocks of things such as prawns — their flesh appears white. It is quite a coup for chemists to have identified and isolated the naturally occurring astaxanthin that gives prawns their pink shells and add them to aquaculture feed in order to colour salmon.
Do we see the ABC sticking its microphones into the faces of farmers wanting them to explain why livestock irresponsibly defecate in a paddock?
The planet is made of chemicals. They only get a bad rap because of poorly read journalists with a hidden agenda to beat a story up.

That is why science needs to be front and centre of every child’s schooling, to avoid kneejerk reactions to kill an industry as this reckless piece of reporting may well yet do.
The Greens used to get upset about farmers using herbicides and some journalists are fervent about chemical-free organic farming.
Never mind that MCPA, a common broad leaf killer, is a naturally occurring plant hormone that effectively grows a plant to death such that its roots cannot keep up. Never mind that despite social media reports to the contrary, the herbicide Roundup breaks down in soil to form food for soil-conditioning bacteria. A cursory research of online resources finds a clear split on this one, but peer-reviewed academic work all suggests this is what happens.
The internet is awash with amateur websites that claim the opposite, and yet, chase down any rabbit warren of their “scientific” sources, and you find cyclic reasoning: those expounding the evils of Roundup, for example, base their fervour only on others who do the same by making an almost religious website and on little else. And yet when an alternative to chemical use is proposed such as the wizardry of genetic modification, off runs the Leftie demanding we ban something we have been doing via natural selection for a few million years.
Scientists concede GM canola was released before its time, but I pose a question to those who think this warrants a total ban on GM food: did we abandon biological control methods after the cane toad disaster? No, we sharpened our science and got it right. Biological control agents now keep many industries afloat.
It is one thing to not like using chemicals or GMOs or introduced species agriculturally, it is something quite else to expound non-science like the truth.
It is important we note the risk of environmental damage our salmon industry has the potential for but at the same time we need to know just how tight the Environment Protection Authority’s guidelines are.
Hobart science teacher Peter Wilson has worked as a population ecologist with CSIRO in the fields of phytopathology, entomology and biological control.


Link:
http://www.themercury.com.au/news/o...e/news-story/ca5432c1fa2509a25141894efa662227