Well Dang - ran into a really great blog

just as they were taking a hiatus. The author -- Vivian Krause -- has been digging deep into who funds the Canadian environmentalists, how US Foundation (90% progressive agenda) money is sculpting Canadian environmental policies (hint: in favor of US Corporate interests) and various publications from Canadian Universities which show a strong bias toward the Environmental issues du jure. Dr. David (spit) Suzuki makes a big appearance. From her post of July 3rd:

What Got Me Started: A Complaint of Apparent Scientific Misconduct Regarding The University of Alberta's Sea Lice Research Published in the Journal SCIENCE
In February of 2008, I submitted to the University of Alberta (UofA) a formal complaint of apparent scientific misconduct in the sea lice research published under the auspices of the UofA's Centre for Mathematical Biology. This research is at the heart of one of the longest running and fiercest environmental controversies in the history of British Columbia. More than 500 news stories reported this research.

As the basis for this complaint, I wrote a 267 page document. For the 2 page executive summary, click here.

At the University of Alberta, the senior scientist involved in this research is Dr. Mark Lewis. The graduate student who was the first author on most of the sea lice research papers is Dr. Martin Krkosek. One of the researchers in this group is Alexandra Morton, a biologist who has campaigned actively against salmon farms for years.

This research was partially funded by the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation, through the David Suzuki Foundation, and was published (Krkosek et al. (2007) in the journal SCIENCE, one of the most prestigious scientific journals in the world. In 2009, the University of Alberta awarded the Gold Medal of the Governor General of Canada for this research.

My complaint and request for investigation was supported by The B.C. Council of Resource Community Mayors, the Aboriginal Aquaculture Association and a scientist with expertise in sea lice. "While this activity has created an economy within academia, it has done nothing to alleviate Third world living conditions in coastal communities. Instead it has denied First Nations and others opportunities for jobs and prosperity," wrote the executive director of the Aboriginal Aquaculture Association.

How did the University of Alberta handle this formal complaint of apparent scientific misconduct? The University dismissed the complaint with no investigation of the information provided. When I appealed to the president of the University, I was told that there was no right of appeal and that all information had to be kept confidential.

By way of background, it is important that I mention that I worked in the salmon farming industry during 2002 and 2003 so I am familiar with the fish farm fuss. During 2007, I also did two short consultancies for the salmon farming industry. I was paid $17,750 for those. I have not worked for the salmon farming industry in any capacity since July of 2007, nearly five years ago.

From my experience working for UNICEF during the 1990s, I am familiar with cases of scientific misconduct because one of the worst cases in the history of Canadian science involved a prominent scientist in my field, Dr. Ranjit Chandra at Memorial University. Without a background in salmon farming and some understanding of issues related to scientific integrity, I wouldn't have noticed that something is fishy about the University of Alberta's sea lice research.

Of course, the revisionists were fast out of the gate:

• The Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation quietly re-wrote four grants for $3.6 million for its "anti-farming campaign" against salmon farming.
• The University of Alberta removed a key press release in which, as I had pointed out, the headline was a false claim.
• The University removed another key document in which the Centre for Mathematical Biology reported that it had a "research partnership" with SeaWeb, a Maryland P.R. outfit, paid by Moore to co-ordinate the "antifarming campaign."
• The entire part of the UofA's web-site about Dr. Martin Krkoksek sea lice is now gone. Parts of it can still be accessed through internet archives. Click here.
• The David Suzuki Foundation quietly removed 23 press releases and web-pages that I had noted to contain inaccurate, false or misleading information about farmed salmon and salmon farming.

By the time the University of Alberta and the David Suzuki Foundation removed their press releases that contained false and misleading claims, it was years too late. By then, the sea lice research findings had been falsely reported in hundreds of media stories around the world and much of the media and the public had turned against salmon farming - albeit, in part, on the basis of claims that are false.

There is no genetic difference between farmed salmon and wild salmon. What farmer would want to sell an inferior crop? How would that benefit them? Take two infants -- one of them is breast-fed, the other is raised on formula. You are going to sit there with a straight face and tell me that there is a difference between the two and that one is superior and the other inferior? Lots of posts to dig into -- I wish Ms. Krause the best and hope that she feels she has the time to post every so often. I know I will be visiting her site on a regular basis.