– The Directorate of Fisheries cannot keep this a secret just to make it convenient for itself. They must be able to provide documentation when there has been such a great deal of interest in this quack. It requires secretary general of the environmental organization Sabima and biologist Christian Steel. On Sunday evening, he comes with a clear request after the assessments that were made before the Norwegian Directorate of Fisheries traveled out into the Oslo Fjord in the early hours of the morning and took the life of the wrasse. – They have a reason for it. There must have been professionals in the picture who have made an assessment that this animal has been stressed, says Steel. He would like to see the assessment and know who made the assessments. DIVERSITY: Biologist Christian Steel believes that it was not necessary to euthanize Freya. Photo: Margret Helland / news The office is closed on Sunday Director of Fisheries Frank Bakke-Jensen tells news that they will not present any more of the background for the killing on Sunday evening. – We have to come back to this on Monday, says Bakke-Jensen on the phone to news. In the press release that was sent out on Sunday, it appears that both the Police and the Norwegian Food Safety Authority were notified in advance. But what actually happened, how they took Freya’s life and why, the Directorate of Fisheries refuses to say anything about Sunday. – It is Sunday and it is closed, there is no one at work who can find that documentation tonight, says Olav Lekve to news. He works with communications in the Directorate of Fisheries. Many dangerous things Earlier on Sunday, he said that the directorate does not give details about the killing, but that it happened as stated in the guidelines for marine mammals. Freya died instantly and without pain. – The decision to euthanize was made after a health assessment where we concluded that the person’s life and health could be in danger, the Directorate of Fisheries wrote in the press release that was sent out on Sunday. This causes Christian Steel in Sabima to react strongly. He points out that there are many dangerous things in nature that the authorities neither want nor can do anything about. – There are moose, there are wasps and there can be steep drops and everything possible. We cannot adapt and arrange nature so that there is no risk. GIVE SUPPORT: Biologist Per Espen Fjeld believes that it was right to take Freya’s life. Photo: Tobias Prosch Simonsen / news Supports the directorate Biologist colleague Per Espen Fjeld, who wrote a column about Freya should be shot, is on the other hand well satisfied with the Directorate of Fisheries. – I think it was wise. Then we have to consider that this is a single animal from a population of 30,000 North Atlantic terns. There is no crisis. He also believes that if Freya had been allowed to live, the consequence could have been that even more quail rosses would have established themselves in the Oslofjord. – A stock of several tens, perhaps hundreds of animals, would be too much of a problem, Fjeld believes. Christian Steel, on the other hand, believes that there should have been room for one quail in the Oslofjord, an area with well over one million inhabitants. That someone has been dangerously close to Freya is not enough of an argument to take Freya’s life, Steel believes. – People must be able to use their heads, see where they are and look for jellyfish and stingrays when bathing.
ttn-69
Demand to know why Freya was euthanized – news Norway – Overview of news from different parts of the country
