fish brain
Crew Member
That would be the best scenario, but I fear our best answer is in the courts because those groups will not work together due to the complete lack of common ground.
Lets take DFO to court
- Thread starter fish brain
- Start date
cohochinook
Well-Known Member
I agree that change the government hasn't been the answer in the past but right now we have some great engagement by BC conservative MPS and commitment to making things better. I firmly believe that we would be in a better position right now with the Conservatives managing The Fishery!
searun
Well-Known Member
I think you guys are dreaming in technicolour if you actually seriously think the public will fund a legal case against the crown. For starters, on what legal grounds? And, really think about the risks. You could get a decision that makes things a whole lot worse, so be careful what you wish for. Find the right set of facts, with a narrow legal issue that you have a reasonable chance of winning is the real key to advancing any litigation of any kind. I haven't seen one yet, save perhaps the Central Coast Crab issue.
Much more can be accomplished, IMO, by simply sitting down with people and finding common ground. I'm somewhat encouraged by the Feds committing $647 million to salmon restoration, and the Province of BC stepping up as well. I think it would be more productive to focus on making sure this funding is spent wisely. Hopefully that cash isn't wasted funding a bunch of research that accomplishes nothing much. Not suggesting science isn't important, but this should be considered emergency restoration funding, not to be fettered away by academia. Its a time to take constructive recovery action, using the best "available" science, not playing around funding yet more studies.
Much more can be accomplished, IMO, by simply sitting down with people and finding common ground. I'm somewhat encouraged by the Feds committing $647 million to salmon restoration, and the Province of BC stepping up as well. I think it would be more productive to focus on making sure this funding is spent wisely. Hopefully that cash isn't wasted funding a bunch of research that accomplishes nothing much. Not suggesting science isn't important, but this should be considered emergency restoration funding, not to be fettered away by academia. Its a time to take constructive recovery action, using the best "available" science, not playing around funding yet more studies.
What basis would a court challenge be on, that stocks are healthy enough to exploit for recreation or that other sectors are exploiting so we should be able to as well. If there are stocks that are healthy or stable where are they and how many cycles are being considered. I enjoy forests and would like to see them protected so I can use them forever however commercial interests always trump recreation or conservation. Someone will come out and say "My job depends on it" and the corporate interests in the background will continue to exploit until there is nothing left and that persons job disappears anyways. Same scenario with salmon, exploit until its gone, if sports fishermen cant be a voice for saving salmon for the future not just this season to fill our freezers we lose the audience of the public and become a part of the problem not solution. If you want to take someone to court start with the ministry of environment here in bc they have allowed habitat in this province to no longer be able to sustain salmon or steelhead. We should be fighting to save salmon for the future not just the right to catch the last few of them today. Salmon are going extinct the evidence is clear denying it sounds just as stupid as denying climate change and most of us have already tuned out to the losers that still spew that ****.
DFO should be held accountable for how many, where, when, and who harvests salmon, as well as their cozy relationship with aquaculture, but it is hard to argue with these two points you made.
SpringVelocity
Crew Member
Bingo." If you want to take someone to court start with the ministry of environment here in bc they have allowed habitat in this province to no longer be able to sustain salmon or steelhead."
fish brain
Crew Member
With the feds negotiating nation to nation with the FN's I believe it's imperative that the rec sector gets a percentage of the harvest able fish (TAC) enshrined in law. Conservation must always come first, but I'm positive the politics are only going to get worse.
fish brain
Crew Member
This article illustrates my point
https://vancouversun.com/opinion/co...vt-would-find-it-easy-to-admit-that-to-public
The First Nations are about to take control over huge tracts of land an all of their resources. We like to think that ocean access exempt from these agreements but as the Haida have been pointing out, it is not. I firmly believe that we will be seeing First Nations asserting their rights up and down the coast.
The SCC decision means the Tsilhqot’in-speaking Xeni Gwet’in First Nation “effectively own the land — they have the right and responsibility to manage and control how it is used,” says the recommended response for the incoming minister should he be asked about the case. “Similar to private property, Aboriginal title means the Nation owns the lands and resources in the declared title area” — i.e., the 1,700 square kilometres recognized by the court.
The article also points out that the courts are the best way to resolve disputes for once and forever.
The government, for its part, says the costs and complications of the Tsilhqot’in decision “illustrate why issues of rights and title are best resolved through negotiation rather than litigation.” Woodward says treaty talks tend to lack firm mandates, leading to an endless go-round at the bargaining table. Whereas a judge can clarify what is and is not on the table.
What is happening around the Fraser is also indicative of how fisheries will be allocated going forward. Couched around conservation, the FN's have basically shut down the entire south coast to save the Fraser early runs, yet continue to net the river. The only way we will be guaranteed access to the fishery resource going forward is to take politics out of the equation, and for the courts to recognize our share of it
https://vancouversun.com/opinion/co...vt-would-find-it-easy-to-admit-that-to-public
The First Nations are about to take control over huge tracts of land an all of their resources. We like to think that ocean access exempt from these agreements but as the Haida have been pointing out, it is not. I firmly believe that we will be seeing First Nations asserting their rights up and down the coast.
The SCC decision means the Tsilhqot’in-speaking Xeni Gwet’in First Nation “effectively own the land — they have the right and responsibility to manage and control how it is used,” says the recommended response for the incoming minister should he be asked about the case. “Similar to private property, Aboriginal title means the Nation owns the lands and resources in the declared title area” — i.e., the 1,700 square kilometres recognized by the court.
The article also points out that the courts are the best way to resolve disputes for once and forever.
The government, for its part, says the costs and complications of the Tsilhqot’in decision “illustrate why issues of rights and title are best resolved through negotiation rather than litigation.” Woodward says treaty talks tend to lack firm mandates, leading to an endless go-round at the bargaining table. Whereas a judge can clarify what is and is not on the table.
What is happening around the Fraser is also indicative of how fisheries will be allocated going forward. Couched around conservation, the FN's have basically shut down the entire south coast to save the Fraser early runs, yet continue to net the river. The only way we will be guaranteed access to the fishery resource going forward is to take politics out of the equation, and for the courts to recognize our share of it
Long term, this is looking more and more like a fantasy rather than reality.
Last edited:
fish brain
Crew Member
I'm not sure I understand what you are trying to say.
( I will clarify in terms that all can understand ) Enjoy what you have now cause it ain't gettin better! Non, FN's that make their living fishing better get a backup plan.
Similar threads
