I agree that activists have a role to play. They keep government and industry on their toes, and rightly so. I have more than a decade of working in the United Nations and funding activists. I've been one myself.
I think, though, that on all sides of the equation--in government, industry, and activism--the ethics are really important. We need activism that's grounded in transparency and in truthfulness. Sometimes I think that when criticisms are levied against our industries, and when they're fair, and when they're true, then we need to say so. We also need to say when things that are said are untrue.
I don't think issues should be raised that are fronts for other issues. In this particular case, I think what we're seeing is that there are multiple issues. There is more than one interest at play here.
It's very simple to raise wild salmon as a concern or to raise environmental issues as a concern, but we need to realize that there's more to it than that. I think we need to think outside of the port, too, and think of the global ramifications.
Banning exports in the name of marine conservation is not going to go unnoticed. If it's about marine conservation, then there are many places in the world where money could be spent. It raises questions for me that hundreds of millions of dollars are being spent here, and far less is being spent in other parts of the world.