Saboteurs Return: Remaining 20,000 Fish Released in California
Four days after 40,000 fish were released from nets, saboteurs return and release the remaining 20,000
“They came back”
In an incredible move, saboteurs returned to the Bay Area site where 40,000 salmon were released Monday night and released the remaining 20,000. The pen that was untouched in Monday’s action was cut open, releasing the last of the fish held captive by the Tiburon Salmon Institute.
The head of the institute stated:
“They clipped the zip ties that hold the nets in place. We were trying to solicit funds for a security camera. But we couldn’t get a security camera put up quick enough, and they came back.”
The Marin County Sheriff’s Department is investigating the vandalism, and said they have a meeting planned with the FBI.
The Animal Liberation Front has not claimed responsibility, and it is not yet confirmed this is the work of an animal liberation group.
Misguided action?
The conversation on these actions has centered on two things:
* The institute’s assertion that the fish were raised to be released into the bay anyway, in a ceremony to be held October 30th.
*How upset the high school students who raised the fish are.
Three things are lost here:
*The “project” was done in partnership with the San Francisco Tyee Club: a fishing group. Yet they would still have us believe this project was about helping fish.
*The basic philosophical underpinning that humans do not have a say in where, how, or when any animal is held captive. Casa Grande High School students who were involved with this program have no right to imprison 40,000 fish in a big net for a single day. Anyone who keeps any animal in a cage anywhere should be reminded: “the ALF is watching”.
*Most “wildlife research” is a fraud to benefit animal agriculture under the guise of “conservation”. So many lies have been told under the pretext of “wildlife conservation”, that an incredible burden of proof rests on anyone doing a “wildlife research program” to show their program is not intended solely to benefit people who kill animals for profit.
“Humane Treatment”
People involved in the program have been vocal about how well their fish are (were) treated. They don’t mention this “humane treatment” is 20,000 fish in 16-by-25-by-8-foot pens. Television news footage of the pens show fish packed at a density that is clearly inhumane and unnatural for any salmon.
Having now lost every fish held, the program of the Tiburon Salmon Institute and Case Grande High School is a total loss.
And those who held these fish captive are still complaining, as though they ever had a right to keep 60,000 fish in nets to begin with:
“This has put a damper on the whole project. We’ve got to find out who did this to us and why. It’s so ludicrous.”
– Peter Young
Receive updates via email: Subscribe here.
Whoever did this vandalism should be ashamed and I hope the authorities find them and charge them appropriately. Any logical human who has done any sort of research of the United Anglers program would know that these Chinhook Salmon would not even be in existence if it were not for these students. The salmon were practically extinct when the program started and the community needs to thank them for their work. Where were these so called ‘activists’ when the students were pulling garbage out of a creek? These people who think they have done a noble cause should have taken the time to visit the hatchery and bring their concerns to the students. Then they would have seen the amazing conditions that these fish are raised in until they are big enough to be released. That every student watches carefully over their salmon, cleans the tanks constantly and cares for each and everyone of the fish which they raise. Whoever vandalized the students project is obviously ignorant and rather take harsh action then spending the time investigating the actual situation. Do these vandals also believe that war should come before diplomacy? There is a reason that the United Anglers program has been praised worldwide even by the likes of Jane Goodall. The work that the program has done for more than twenty five years is amazing, unique and worth even more recognition. I hope that you yourself Mr. Young will take the time to visit their hatchery and meet these future world changers.
This is ridiculous. Do you not realize how much danger this species of fish is in due to water mismanagement and over-fishing? What those kids are doing is helping the actual population of salmon in the world. This is not a factory fish farm, it’s an infirmary. I do not condone nor support the suffering of animals, but this sort of action and misguided point-of-view stands to harm the effectiveness and standing of ALO and PETA. I know several people working for AmeriCorps and Conservation North Bay who put actual hard work into monitoring and restoring Marin and Sonoma salmon habitat, and jepordizing hundreds of thousands of fish in no way helps that population restoration. Do suggest just letting nature take fend for itself? Let me tell you, the odds are stacked against salmon here and by taking this uninformed stance you have positioned yourself as an opponent along with the Central Valley growers and commercial fishermen. Nice work.
Peter,
First, the section in which you have listed things conversation has centered on. Any doubt you implied as to the fact that these fish were scheduled to be released on October 30 is just silly, these releases have occurred very publicly for decades. The early release of these fish has meant that actions that would be taken in a controlled release were absent, meaning that there will be a drastically reduced survivorship of these fish and that there will be little chance of them returning to spawn. You left out what this conversation centers on for most of us outside of the ALF: that ALF affiliates have destroyed an environmental restoration project.
As to the three “things lost” you mentioned:
1. Yes many people in the Tyee Club fish. Most of the people at the forefront of fish conservation have been fishers; there are also a few vegetarians involved in salmon conservation and restoration projects such as this. To clarify, is your assertion that it is not legitimate for people who fish to be involved in conservation efforts? If so, why?
2. This is a basic philosophical underpinning only among the ALF, an extremely small group of people. To most of us it is not part of our fundamental philosophy and therefore makes a poor point to argue from. I read from this that the ALF is opposed to all forms of captive breeding programs for conservation. In addition to being that manner in which many salmon populations are restored, captive breeding programs are responsible for saving the California condor and island fox from complete extinction. Are we correct to assume that the ALF feels that the appropriate course of action is to let these and other species die out? If so, why does the ALF feel that it has the right to make this on the behalf of animals when all empirical evidence suggests that animals wish to survive and reproduce?
3. This is not a research effort, it is a conservation and restoration program. However, as a wildlife researcher, I am extremely curious as to what the ALF regards as fraud and lies. While there have been people who have used conservation and wildlife research as a cover for things which run contrary to conservation (eg the Japanese whaling industry), most of these have been far outside the mainstream of both wildlife research and conservation. Is the ALF unfamiliar enough with the world of wildlife conservation that it cannot parse these out or do you believe that the mainstream of the conservation and wildlife research community is rife with fraud and lies? Do you have examples?
4. As to inhumane treatment. You stated slightly above this that it is fundamentally wrong to keep any animal in captivity. From this it would follow that you believe captivity at any density is inhumane. Therefore this section of your article seems a bit like empty filler. Or do you suggest that there is a density at which salmon may be kept humanely? Is this to be based on the density of aggregations in which they are naturally found or on the conjectures of the ALF (who are clearly unfamiliar with fish biology)?
And, yes, people complain when you destroy their efforts to make the world a better place.
*I think this was absolutely wonderful. Fish have feelings – how would
you like to be side by side with 20,000 humans in the same close quarters. Anyone saying these are just fish are showing their stupidity. Get a project that BENEFITS man – not tortures another animal. Way to go yet again.
Whoever cut those nets are so sadly misinformed. Those smolts were raised to save a species and whoever set them free basically signed their death warrants because they are too small to survive. Great job. If a natural setting is so important, where were you when the United Anglers were cleaning and restoring Adobe Creek for its native steelhead run? Actions like this don’t help the animals, it destroys their chances for survival. But I guess in your mind, a place without animals is better for the animals.
Just shows you how ignorant some activists can be. I guess they would just have us allow certain species go into extinction rather than trying to give back from what we take. Did anyone from the afl bother to do any research? Obviously not. If they did they would of found out the The Tyee Foundation and the Mesa Grande High School students have a 13-17% survival rate on the fish they release. In the wild it is less than 2% and the DFG hatcheries are around 5-7%. Most importantly is the basic philosophical underpinning that another human has the right to damage another humans property just because they don’t agree with them.
This was unconscionable vandalism. Peter, you should be distancing ALF from this rash act, not embracing it. There is no evidence that this was done by someone who gives a rat’s ass about animal welfare, and now news organizations like the Mercury News or knee-jerk bloggers like PZ Myers are using your idiotic endorsement as evidence that animal-rights activists were responsible. Way to make us all look bad, jerk.
“*Most “wildlife research” is a fraud to benefit animal agriculture under the guise of “conservation”. So many lies have been told under the pretext of “wildlife conservation”, that an incredible burden of proof rests on anyone doing a “wildlife research program” to show their program is not intended solely to benefit people who kill animals for profit.”
You people really are ridiculous and idiotic. You know so little, and do so much harm, it is disgusting. You should be ashamed of yourselves, so unbelievably selfish and short sighted. Do you know how the Atlantic Striped Bass made a comeback from near extinction? Fishermen getting together and petitioning for increased regulations. The fact that a fishing club wants to help conserve a species means that they have a much deeper understanding and respect for these animals than you do. 14,000 mink released from an animal farm is a good thing? What impact did that have on the local fauna? You naive, pompous idiots. The vast, vast majority of people doing conservation and management make little money and work harder than you could ever imagine to help save natural populations of wild species. We do this because we can and we should. You idiots look for publicity and pseudo-adventures, playing out spy-thriller fantasies in your head, and probably are too dumb to understand the negative impact you have on the animals you release, the native populations, and in this case, the desire of future generations to care about conservation and animal welfare. Good work. I hope all of that is worth the pat you give yourself on your back, because that is the only positive outcome of your endeavors.
Good Christ Peter – Do you actually think through anything? Or is it all about Feeling, Emotion and Passion (capitol letters used to emphasize sarcasm)? How far will some people go in order to have a Grand Cause against The Man? You know, young (especially teenage) men often behave and think the way you appear to. I wonder, is that is a point of pride for you? Do you ever stop, even for a moment, to consider the remarkably juvenile nature of your messages? Or the fact that you also clearly no nothing about fish biology and whether being clumped together in a tight ball is “good” or “bad” for the salmon (hint – it’s actually the very natural state of young salmon in the wild)? Or the nature of the experiment to begin with? About how it’s actually attempting to improve the lives and numbers of the fish in question? Allow me impart some advice – if you truly have an interest in helping preserve and maintain wildlife in as healthy a manner as possible, try not speaking with authority about something you clearly know little to nothing about. It cannot help but make you look stupid. The actions of the saboteurs were indeed ludicrous. Perhaps you should look into what that word means and why it may in fact pertain to this event or even your own life in general.
Well said JakeO!
As a wildlife ecologist NOT involved with game management, I’m disappointed that animal rightists would short-circuit a project that sought to correct overharvest and habitat degradation effects on a keystone species, and would disempower youngsters among whom could have been leaders in the fight to protect habitats and populations in the future.
You alienated a lot of potential supporters by picking such an action. That’s a damn shame.
Judi Bari, whom you all know about, said it best: “Some people just don’t get it”.
WOW! What a fiasco. A huge embarrassment for those who support animal rights as several of their \activists\ and \undercover saboteurs\ prematurely released a bunch of Salmon dooming them to a rapid death, rather than letting them grow in a safe place with plenty of food until they were large enough to survive.
You call yourselves the voice of the voiceless? You should be ashamed of yourselves. This action has harmed these fish far more than a few more weeks in captivity would.
Do you also sneak out to conservation projects where they are slowly introducing captive animals into the wild so that they can acclimatise before they are released and chase all of those animals into the wild to die?
Unbelievable. You have no credibility.
I suppose you believe babies should be “released” from their cribs into the wild at random locations. That makes as much sense as this.
Seriously, you’re nuts. There are legitimate things you could have done, but this *just hurt the fish*.
Yep, you guys did the right thing. Sure, this species of fish was on the verge of extinction, but they were suffering horrible amount of psychological trauma by being in that awful net. Now they have all the freedom they deserve. Ah…freedom. Like the freedom to get eaten by a larger predator. Sure, if they had been in that net for a few more weeks, they might have been large enough to survive the outdoor environment, but the price of freedom was worth it. I’m sure those fish that were released will thank you…or at least would if they weren’t being slowly digested in the stomach of a larger fish. FREEDOM PEOPLE! IT’S TOTALLY WORTH DYING NEEDLESSLY FOR!