Ever heard the saying .. insanity is the practice of doing the same things over and over and expecting a different result. Well folks, this is exactly the model we have with fisheries management.
So to get people thinking and spark dialogue, I offer a different model
- retain all existing recreational fishing zones as they are today, (region 6, region 1 etc) however treat each zone as a separate and independently managed zone with FULL responsibility for the zones success and viability
- DFO establishes the minimum standards and expectations which zones will be monitored against, but is up to each zone to manage the zone and meet expectations
- as an example, if fishing zone turns does not meet expectation and does not meet it's "green" status or healthy status, then ALL fishing is banned until status returns to green
- the zone establishes a working group of community residents, natives, commercial and recreational fishermen, guides etc, all working together to maintain the status of the fishing zone
- $$ from the federal gov't will only be alloted to the zones to help them if, where, or when required. So there would be NO $$ for a pet project such as the South Resident Killer whales. If needed the $$ would be given to the zone
- if a zone were closed due to less than acceptable results, the zone would recruit people from the zone to help revive the viability of the zone.. so commercial fishermen, natives, guides would have to work together to enhance the fishery ... $$ from the federal gov't would go to these groups and allocated by the zone
- substantially increase the cost of a fishing liscence.. again $$ goes to the zone
So this are just some brief thoughts.. no doubt there will be a lot of naysayers, however as mentioned it's time to build a better mouse trap ...
So to get people thinking and spark dialogue, I offer a different model
- retain all existing recreational fishing zones as they are today, (region 6, region 1 etc) however treat each zone as a separate and independently managed zone with FULL responsibility for the zones success and viability
- DFO establishes the minimum standards and expectations which zones will be monitored against, but is up to each zone to manage the zone and meet expectations
- as an example, if fishing zone turns does not meet expectation and does not meet it's "green" status or healthy status, then ALL fishing is banned until status returns to green
- the zone establishes a working group of community residents, natives, commercial and recreational fishermen, guides etc, all working together to maintain the status of the fishing zone
- $$ from the federal gov't will only be alloted to the zones to help them if, where, or when required. So there would be NO $$ for a pet project such as the South Resident Killer whales. If needed the $$ would be given to the zone
- if a zone were closed due to less than acceptable results, the zone would recruit people from the zone to help revive the viability of the zone.. so commercial fishermen, natives, guides would have to work together to enhance the fishery ... $$ from the federal gov't would go to these groups and allocated by the zone
- substantially increase the cost of a fishing liscence.. again $$ goes to the zone
So this are just some brief thoughts.. no doubt there will be a lot of naysayers, however as mentioned it's time to build a better mouse trap ...