Canadian Government Muzzling Scientists

Meshach writes "Scientists in Canada researching why salmon stocks are depleting face being muzzled by the Canadian Conservative government. Quoting: 'Science told Miller to "please feel free to speak with journalists." It advised reporters to contact Diane Lake, a media officer with the federal Department of Fisheries and Oceans in Vancouver, "to set up interviews with Dr. Miller." The documents show major media outlets were soon lining up to speak with Miller, but the Privy Council Office said no to the interviews. The Privy Council Office also nixed a Fisheries Department news release about Miller's study, saying the release "was not very good, focused on salmon dying and not on the new science aspect," according to documents obtained by Postmedia News under the Access to Information Act. Miller is still not allowed to speak publicly about her discovery, and the Privy Council Office and Fisheries Department defend the way she has been silenced.'"

Comments

Imagine

[Anarchduke]

A scientist telling an uncomfortable truth being silenced by conservatives. It's preposterous.

Re:Imagine

[myurr]

You needn't be so specific in targeting the conservatives - it's true of all politicians from all sides across the whole world. If a report or scientific study doesn't give the result they want, then they reframe the question and try to bury or hide the original. The EU even do it with national referendums (e.g. the Irish vote to ratify the Lisbon treaty that had to be held a second time as they didn't get the result they wanted).

Re:Imagine

[MacTO]

True. On the otherhand, I don't recall the actual muzzling of scientist by centrist (right or left wing) governments. Yet North Americans have enjoyed at least two such leaders over the past decade.

Re:Imagine

[Ironhandx]

Realy?

I say this with incredulity because the Liberals did exactly that.

The only real difference is that the liberals shut down local fisheries and then sold the quotas equal to the fisheries they had just shut down to foreign nationals. So we still have over fishing going on, its just not helping canadians at all. All of it was very hush hush and no one knew about any of the fishing quotas that had been sold until Portuguese boats started getting spotted in Newfoundland waters.

Re:Imagine

[sayfawa]

I hear that a lot, and maybe it's true in other countries. But in Canada, yes, you do need to be specific in targeting the Conservatives.

This Conservative government is an anti-fact government. They don't like evidence getting in the way of their agenda. From this, to the abolishment of the long-form census, to firing scientists who speak out, to going ahead with their "tough-on-crime, lock-'em-all-up" strategy in the face of evidence around the world that it doesn't work. The other parties are not like this. True, the other parties sometimes have other faults, but this abhorrence of data, facts and objectivity in general is a Conservative thing.

Re:Imagine

[Richard_at_work]

Take a look at how different the two versions of the ratification that the Irish voted on were, its quite interesting...

Basically, they didn't just vote on the same thing twice - it was rejected, they heavily amended it and asked if the amendment was acceptable and it was.

Re:Imagine

[pnewhook]

They don't like evidence getting in the way of their agenda. From this, to the abolishment of the long-form census...

They did not abolish the long form census, they only made it voluntary instead of mandatory. From a freedom point of view this is exactly the right thing to do.. Do you really want your government asking you very personal questions, then having the ability to fine and jail you if you don't want to answer? Thankfully they fixed that piece of nonsense.

Re:Imagine

[Midnight Thunder]

At the same time what are statistics worth if they are voluntary? I thought the whole point of the census was to have decent statistics to help confirm choices made and help future decisions?

Re:Imagine

[Midnight Thunder]

I sometimes wonder if Harper based his governance methods on those of George Bush and his cronies?

Re:Imagine

[Hatta]

You needn't be so specific in targeting the conservatives - it's true of all politicians from all sides across the whole world. If a report or scientific study doesn't give the result they want, then they reframe the question and try to bury or hide the original.

Yes, whenever a politician encounters a scientific fact that conflicts with their ideas he will try to cover it up. The difference is that conservatives are much more likely to have ideas that conflict with scientific facts.

Re:Imagine

[Toze]

I know this will be shocking, but guess what Conservative supporters say about the Liberal party and its policies and supporters? Pull your head out of your bias, dude. "Blah blah oh the problems are really THIS party's fault" means that you're on the other team. Problems in democracies are systemic, not partisan.

Re:Imagine

[tqk]

You can't just sit in a corner come election time and say "they're all the same," because they aren't.

I used to think that too, before I became hopelessly disillusioned with politics as it's now practiced. However, yes, they are all the same. The only difference between them is the colour of the hobby-horse they're riding. There's not a lick of "civic duty" left in any of them. Their "job" these days is to generate campaign funding for the next election, and nowadays, that means doing the bidding of corporate interests.

Sorry, but they've irrevocably lost me.

Re:Imagine

[I.S.Bear]

I bet you created the internet too :)

Re:Imagine

[anyGould]

This Conservative government is an anti-fact government.

If I needed to be more specific, I'd say that the current Conservative government is trying very hard to become a franchisee for the Republicans.

It's moving a little slower up here, but all the fingerprints are there - blocking work to make a point, the compulsion to argue that everyone without an opinion Obviously Believes The Same As I Do, and people who oppose are Subversives (of whatever stripe we're painting this week), and the complete obliviousness to anything that might indicate they may be incorrect in the slightest.

My favorite Harper quote so far: "Conservative values are Canadian values and that the Conservative party is Canada's party". Translation: if you don't believe as we do, you're not Really Canadian. (Keep in mind they only got around 40% of the vote - hardly a massive endorsement.)

Re:Imagine

[anyGould]

They did not abolish the long form census, they only made it voluntary instead of mandatory.

This sounds good in theory (Freedom good, Privacy good). In practice, I've never heard of a case where someone's personal information leaked from StatsCan. In practice, in order for those statistics to be useful, you need an unbiased random sample. Making it voluntary means it's self-selected, which ruins the results.

And in practice, the long-form census is easily the least intrusive thing the federal government does to us, and it's done with a clearly stated and obvious benefit (I've filled out a long-form - it's really not that bad, and again - StatsCan has built a reputation for not screwing around with this.)

So, while in theory it's good to do this, in practice we just screwed up one of the things our government actually did well.

Re:Conartist Party Lies

[Anonymous Coward]

I wouldn't go so far as to godwin it, but it IS amazing what Harper will do given a majority government for the first time.

It's times like this I wish Canada had a strict no-third-term rule like the US has. Harper would have been gone long ago and he'd have little choice but to stop meddling with the system to keep his seat.

Only 4 more years

[future assassin]

of Harperizim. By then 1/3 of us will be in private jails for breaking copyright laws or smoking a joint.

Welcome, O Canada, to the Fraternity

[macraig]

We here in the United States will try to teach you how to give the Fraternity the finger. For now... until we've marshaled the strength to put a stake through its dogmatic heart.

Let the fishermen be the judge

[Anonymous Coward]

I have done stream survey on the west coast of British Columbia. I am a fly fisher, and have an intimate knowledge of what is really going on. The truth is that a combination of factors are ruining what was once one of the greatest fisheries on earth. It comes as no surprise that the Tories would try to put a muzzle on anyone trying to ring the alarm bells.

Intensive ongoing stewardship of the resource is the only possible solution. Yes it is extremely expensive and needs the complete cooperation of all. As things stand we can study the problems till there is no longer a fish problem to study. This is what our federal government would do as it keeps their cronies in work and makes for really good press. The federally funded studies are all centered around how to exploit the the fishing resource more efficiently, not how to preserve it. Every single paper that I have read is centered around a hands off approach to stream management...Let nature heal itself, is the doctrine.

The truth is that the damage has been done and the only approach that can possibly make a difference over the long term is, the clearing of blocked streams, the enhancement of riparian areas, the improvement and restoration of estuary land that is being gobbled up by our greed for real estate. And first and foremost let the truth about what has occurred be made public.The conservative government of Canada is a short sighted bunch of politicos that could not see the forest for the trees. What is needed is a conservation industry that pays our children back by returning what we and our parents have stolen from them with our short sighted greed!

Re:Let the fishermen be the judge

[Nursie]

Amateur fishermen or commercial fisheries?

'cos the commercial fisheries are fishing the oceans out at the moment, but if you try and actually get them to do anything about it they bleat about traditional industry and having to make a living. Most of them don't seem to understand that the rate they're going they won't be a fishing industry in a few years either way.

Re:Let the fishermen be the judge

[catchblue22]

The truth is that the damage has been done and the only approach that can possibly make a difference over the long term is, the clearing of blocked streams, the enhancement of riparian areas, the improvement and restoration of estuary land that is being gobbled up by our greed for real estate.

Her research, as far as I have heard seems to indicate a virus propagating in the salmon population. It doesn't seem unlikely that such a virus could be coming from the salmon farms that the wild salmon often have to pass on their way to spawn. Combine that with the very likely fact that salmon farms are a source of sea lice that have been shown to infect wild salmon fry as they pass by, and you have a good argument that salmon farming is a primary cause of the decline in wild stocks of salmon.

The conservative government seems to not understand an important fact about science and the pursuit of truth, simply that money and the truth are often enemies of each other. If you view the world through dollar signs, you will have a very warped worldview.

Re:Let the fishermen be the judge

[Anonymous Coward]

Her research, as far as I have heard seems to indicate a virus propagating in the salmon population. It doesn't seem unlikely that such a virus could be coming from the salmon farms that the wild salmon often have to pass on their way to spawn. Combine that with the very likely fact that salmon farms are a source of sea lice that have been shown to infect wild salmon fry as they pass by, and you have a good argument that salmon farming is a primary cause of the decline in wild stocks of salmon.

I have caught wild Sockeye and they do not suffer from sea lice the way local fish do. And yes the sea lice problem has increased...but so has the effluent from things other than fish farms.

And yes I agree a productive natural fishery could easily again make chemically stupid fish farming financially ineffective if managed with common sense.

Deploy the submarines we bought from the British out in the open Pacific and sink the Asian drift net factory ships first...If they ever get the subs out of dry dock...But then again a whole industry has sprung up just fixing those boats so if they ever did go into useful service then their would be more unemployment.

I agree that sea lice and farmed fish are a part of the equation...there have been enough government and industry studies paid for by out tax dollars and the fish farm industry to prove that farmed salmon are not the cause to prove that there is more here than meets the eye. Same thing with the paid studies that prove that shitting in the ocean here in Victoria is not a problem. Like the good old lab rats...show me one that does not get cancer from exposure to just about anything. Pay enough money and government funded studies can prove just about anything, especially here in Canada.

My point was that the real damage to the fisheries is from many causes and will not be fixed by something as simple as eliminating salmon farming! Did you know that the Adams run last year was a record? Yet two years before that it was a bust. When the railways put a second track down the Fraser canyon in the early 1900's the canyon had a slide that blocked the fish migration for over one year at hells gate. The Adams is just starting to recover now. Some rivers like the Quesnel have never recovered.

Where the fish come from is just as important as where the go to mature and Sockeye spend very little time in close in coastal waters unless the spawning water in the rivers is too hot. Resident Georgia Straight Coho, Chinook, Cutthroat are much more likely to suffer really severe from the effects of sea lice. And as it turns out they are the fish that are most endangered. Also the fish that spawn in the lower river like Chum are suffering because of the loss of estuarine habitat...like the problems that plague Vancouver Island estuaries...the rivers Cowichan, Nanaimo, Puntlage, Stamp/Somas and the list goes on and on. This does not even take into consideration the myriad of hundreds of once pristine and productive creeks that produce smaller local fish in huge numbers. The answer is not in more useless studies it is in hard work and common sense. And above all stopping the wholesale rape of the seas.

Re:Let the fishermen be the judge

[Nursie]

"I'm sorry to say this but you're ignorant."

I'm ignorant because I think forcibly slowing down fishing now is better than being forced to slow down later because the tasty species are dead?

Seriously?

Re:Conartist Party Lies

[physicsphairy]

Did this really just get modded "informative" for attacking the way the Prime Minister's name is spelled?

Kind of said it all

[redkcir]

The Privy Council Office. If any of you remember what a Privy is, that should explain it. For those who don't see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privy, bullet #4.

Re:Kind of said it all

[gaderael]

FLUUUUUUUUSSSSSSH!

From the abstract

[reve_etrange]

Long-term population viability of Fraser River sockeye salmon (Oncorhynchus nerka) is threatened by unusually high levels of mortality as they swim to their spawning areas before they spawn. Functional genomic studies on biopsied gill tissue from tagged wild adults that were tracked through ocean and river environments revealed physiological profiles predictive of successful migration and spawning. We identified a common genomic profile that was correlated with survival in each study. In ocean-tagged fish, a mortality-related genomic signature was associated with a 13.5-fold greater chance of dying en route. In river-tagged fish, the same genomic signature was associated with a 50% increase in mortality before reaching the spawning grounds in one of three stocks tested. At the spawning grounds, the same signature was associated with 3.7-fold greater odds of dying without spawning. Functional analysis raises the possibility that the mortality-related signature reflects a viral infection.

The DOI is 10.1126/science.1196901.
The genomic signature that their microarray analysis identified suggests: 1) infection by a virus (virus associated pathways activated), 2) a possible connection to certain leukemias (same reason) and 3) osmotic gradient control malfunctions contributing to stress and mortality (same reason). Apologies to those without access - but Science isn't open - but their methods seem very sound. I really don't see the point of suppressing this. All that media attention would change is how polished her presentation is when that commission or whatever gets around to talking to her.

P.S. The biopsies were non-lethal!

Re:From the abstract

[Anonymous Coward]

The entire paper is freely available here: http://homepages.ed.ac.uk/qgjc/2010_2011/Canadian%20Salmon%20genomic%20signature%20Science.pdf

It's fairly old (February), seems a bit late to be suppressing anything...

Re:From the abstract

[ColdWetDog]

There is a difference between an academic publication accessible to a small number of people, and science journalism conducted by reporters writing for a public audience. They are suppressing a popularized account based on her explanations to reporters, not the technical account which few could understand.

Yes, but the information is out there. It's published in one of the highest visibility general science journals in the English language. Since there are many people who's lives are impacted by this research, and there are other researchers in the field, it's not likely that the information is going to be repressed in any meaningful way.

It's a dumbshit move, typical of politicians and may not even be malevolent, but it's not a very good way to keep the knowledge closely kept.

Re:Notice: "Department of Fisheries ..."

[1u3hr]

. In that respect, it's not much different from a tobacco company telling their scientists not to talk about the health effects of smoking.

It's completely different. But the morality is simple: they're civil servants. "Civil" means the people of the country, not the government in power. In practice, of course, if you embarrass those in power you will be punished.

Re:another 1/3 for possessing hacker tools

[CyberSaint]

Optimist.

Harper doesn't give a shit about public opinion. He's skilled at selling a story and manipulating the shit out of the media. He hasn't actually achieved a damn thing of significance since his first term as Prime Minister. He's managed to convince half the country sitting on his hands and pushing an agenda that bears no resemblance to his campaign platforms is progress. "Staying the Course" my maple dipped left testicle. He's even managed to blame his opposition for him repeatedly sabotaging his own legislation.

I don't have any doubt, if he could find a way to make a buck for him or his corporate handlers doing it, he'd jail every citizen in the country.

~Disgruntled Albertan

Re:leak the damn thing

[Gorshkov]

She is being muzzled because she is not being allowed to talk about her findings to the public via the press. Her findings are buried in a pay for access science journal that is likely written in language that most in the public will not understand.

TFA said she was told she couldn't speak because she has to give evidence in a judicial inquiry. Then came much officious huffing and puffing from lefty paranoids about how it was an excuse and that she was being muzzled.

Unfortunately for those theories, TFA also said, near the end of the article, that she will be allowed to speak in August, WHEN HER TESTIMONY HAS BEEN COMPLETED.

So call the PMO paranoid. Make fun of them, if that's your wont - god knows that hasn't been a PMO since the country began that hasn't been stupid or out to lunch is very many ways, both Tory and Liberal. Vote against the Tories next chance you get, if you are so inclined.

But you don't need to invent stuff or pull it out of your arse just to score political points. All it does is make you look strident, knee-jerk, and absolutely invalidates the point you were trying to make in the first place.

There is a HUGE difference

[aepervius]

Tobacco= private, can do whatever they want with their money, even suppress the own research they asked for, even if unethical. Departement of Fisheries = PUBLIC, they are beholden to the public interest, and have no right to suppress research done with the PUBLIC money. And this is the big difference.

Re:Notice: "Department of Fisheries ..."

[epine]

I've talked to many people about the census, and the only intelligible reason for him screwing around with the census that comes to light is so that there's less quality data available to organizations doing good work with fewer agendas. I've always heard that the quality of StatsCan data was legendary, in part for having excellent continuity and statistical control. Well, it only takes one man to burn the library of Alexandria, doesn't it?

I'm not so sure this majority will work in his favour. Rome fell when they ran out of other countries to pillage. In Harper's case, the limiting resource is other people to blame.

Re:Notice: "Department of Fisheries ..."

[Kashgarinn]

Of course the difference here is that the government should represent the people and the people's interest, and letting the people know about the research is normal.

If your representatives are willing to block something vaguely important like this, what are they hiding which is really important?

Re:Notice: "Department of Fisheries ..."

[should_be_linear]

I don't think you (or Canadian government) understands how science works.

Re:Same in Australia

[ColdWetDog]

You realize that the article in question was published in one of the more visible science journals? All the idiots in the Canadian government did was muzzle attempts at having they lay press talk about the research. That is to be condemned and will turn out to be futile, but you don't need Wikileaks, just a subscription to Science.

Science (the magazine) while not quite as politically involved as Nature (the magazine, not the mother) is still pretty activist. It will be interesting to see if they get wind of it and make it a Streisand Effect issue.

Documentary about Canadian fishing

[jr0dy]

I caught a great documentary one time regarding the way in which he Canadian government is destroying both fish and independent hand-line fishermen - it's called "One More Dead Fish". I highly recommend it - it's a glaring example of Corporatism, outside of US borders for once.

Links for the paper

[damn_registrars]

You can read the abstract at pubmed:

Genomic signatures predict migration and spawning failure in wild Canadian salmon.

Which gives you a link to sciencemag.org:

Science Abstract

Of course, there is a paywall at sciencemag.org. Being as all the researchers are Canadian, there is no NIH requirement for the paper to be released for free. You may need to venture to your local university library to download the paper, but with those links it won't be hard to get. You can get as far as the abstract for free:

Long-term population viability of Fraser River sockeye salmon (Oncorhynchus nerka) is threatened by unusually high levels of mortality as they swim to their spawning areas before they spawn. Functional genomic studies on biopsied gill tissue from tagged wild adults that were tracked through ocean and river environments revealed physiological profiles predictive of successful migration and spawning. We identified a common genomic profile that was correlated with survival in each study. In ocean-tagged fish, a mortality-related genomic signature was associated with a 13.5-fold greater chance of dying en route. In river-tagged fish, the same genomic signature was associated with a 50% increase in mortality before reaching the spawning grounds in one of three stocks tested. At the spawning grounds, the same signature was associated with 3.7-fold greater odds of dying without spawning. Functional analysis raises the possibility that the mortality-related signature reflects a viral infection.

Voluntary Juries.

[mevets]

Nobody should be threatened to perform public service; besides there are lots of people who would gladly serve on juries. What could go wrong?

Minister of Environment, J Baird

[mevets]

When he took that position in early 2007 said that
        The facts are in about climate change; the time for study is over; it is time for action.

His action was to fire the climate scientists from Environment Canada. EC has been reduced to a marketing wing of the tar sands oil extraction travesty.

There is a pattern.

PM Harper is a control freak

[lsatenstein]

This man would want to be a dictator. Canada was so so very very wrong to elect his party for leadership. In terms of popular vote, the conservatives did not win a majority. But in terms of ridings, they did. Harper is an image of GWBush. Deny anything that is negative, keep everything possible as secret. Muzzle every public employee. Muzzle his own caucus. I cannot trust the man, based on his public actions. I feel he is not to be trusted.

Canadians Kept in the Dark

[DERoss]

My daughter lives in Canada. To keep current with what is happening where she lives, I read several Canadian newspapers online daily. I went to their Web sites after reading this Slashdot article and could not find a single newspaper article about it. A Yahoo news search turned up only one Canadian item.

I sent my daughter an E-mail about this. Since she was an investigative reporter before becoming an educator, she generally keeps up with all the news. She replied:
"This is the first I've heard of this. Why would they need to black out research on what's harming the salmon stocks? Is it linked to national security?"

I think it's more political security -- Prime Minister Harper staying in office -- than national security.