Call to Action – Help Save BC’s Public Fishery

Status
Not open for further replies.
Curious, what is the rationale or position being promoted by the rec sector? Presumably it isn’t “let’s fish these Fraser Chinook stocks into extinction” so, assuming that’s not it then what is it? Is there a list of areas and or times that the rec sector agrees need to be closed unless stock levels can be shown to be at “X” to support C&R fishing and at “Y” to supports some level of harvest?

I ask as I hope most rec anglers agree that several Fraser stocks, and quite a few Skeena stocks as well, are in a very dire state and need to be conserved if we hope to be able to fish in the future. I also ask as it is very easy for other sectors and interest groups to paint rec fishers as selfish IF, and I emphasize the IF, we present ourselves as fighting to kill the last fish. That certainly isn’t the approach I support nor do I believe the majority of rec fishers want that. So, what is the message that’s consistent w/ conservation of these stocks that is being championed or recommended the rec voice get behind?

Cheers!

Ukee
 
Nog posted the feedback summary, The response from the ENGO is bad the response from First Nations is terrifying.

https://documentcloud.adobe.com/link/track?uri=urn:aaid:scds:US:1e61f87a-2842-46bd-993c-b72dfbb1bb44

Is there really any surprise from this document? the ENGOs sent out a form letter to their mailing lists that has been forwarded many times, their members don't even bother writing anything original. FN are always going to say shut everything down and give it to us, if they are asked for feedback. Commies just want sport fisherman cut back, again no surprise.
 
Reply to the big 3 just sent. FWIW, I don't think they give a rats butt what we write. I been writing letters to DFO for decades on Thompson river steelhead. At best I get form letters in return stating that they are very concerned and all the wonderful things they are doing. Didn't seem to get them a lot of success with that race of steelhead. I doubt they are going to accomplish much by killing our fishing. Not unless all other sectors are also curtailed.


Here is my letter. This one is the most terse I have ever written. I am completely fed up with trying to be Mr. Niceguy to the asshats.


Dear Sirs,

I am writing to you today to express my continued disappointment with the manner in which the Department of Fisheries and Oceans attempts Chinook salmon management and "knee-jerk" proposal for SRKW management in the Strait of Georgia and points elsewhere within its jurisdiction. Once again you have targeted the Sports angler directly as the sacrificial lamb to rectify all problems for the SRKW while you vacillate over studies of other direct effects that are also contributing as much or more to the issue. The decimation of Chinook stocks in the Strait of Georgia comes as no surprise to those of us who live and breathe these fisheries, this coast and this lifestyle. Decades of mismanagement of habitat and water rights protection, hatchery enhancement, illegal netting in the Fraser, over harvest by all sectors, continued commercial over-harvest of the prey species, neglect of management of predator species (i.e. Pinnipeds) and rampant lack of enforcement has led to this situation. A situation that recreational anglers and your own people have been warning senior officials for decades.

Your proposal to dump all this neglect onto the recreational anglers of the Strait of Georgia is akin to killing the goose that lays the Golden eggs. In addition the countless hours of volunteer stream and hatchery enhancement that we donate, our contribution to the Gross Domestic Product on a per piece basis far exceeds that of all other user groups combined. The maximum value you can get for any salmon is through its availability to recreational anglers.

As a recreational angler who fishes the ECVI and WCVI all season long from March to October, I know that my dollars spent on Vancouver Island have a very significant impact on local economies from Chemainus to Winter Harbour, but in particular from Ladysmith to Parksville on the East coast and Ucluelet and Tofino on the West coast. For inside waters, my average annual rod days is well over 100 days and on the Ucluelet and Tofino is over 80. My average annual investment is boats licensing, insurance, fuel, accommodations and local spending is well over $10,000 annually. These will all be tourist dollars that will no longer be distributed in the small sports fishing towns that rely on them to maintain their economies.

I trust that you will be able to confidently look those people in the eye who you will have relegated to the unemployed and tell them that their sacrifice is worth it for the SRKW.

Your in disappointment,

Stephen Cooper
Ladysmith B.C.
 
2 letters sent
 
Note that ENGO are using form letter for the vast majority of letters 2783. I know there have been many examples provided by members. Maybe we need a simple cut, copy and paste and email like they are using.
Actually those "form letters" are not being well received. Personal letters are the BEST approach - realize not everyone is a letter writer, but your letter doesn't have to be pretty, just say what is on your mind (well leave out the 4 letter words). :eek:
 
What is needed at his office is BODIES with picket signs. Easy to ignore a letter--not so easy with live bodies and the press attending.
100%, and I would add to that we need to be picketing the ENGO groups that are behind the "close the rec fishery" movement. These people need to feel the sharp end of the stick....some of the 9,000 people employed in the rec sector should go stand there and ask why the ENGO's are trying to take away their jobs or close down their businesses and communities!!
 
Curious, what is the rationale or position being promoted by the rec sector? Presumably it isn’t “let’s fish these Fraser Chinook stocks into extinction” so, assuming that’s not it then what is it? Is there a list of areas and or times that the rec sector agrees need to be closed unless stock levels can be shown to be at “X” to support C&R fishing and at “Y” to supports some level of harvest?

I ask as I hope most rec anglers agree that several Fraser stocks, and quite a few Skeena stocks as well, are in a very dire state and need to be conserved if we hope to be able to fish in the future. I also ask as it is very easy for other sectors and interest groups to paint rec fishers as selfish IF, and I emphasize the IF, we present ourselves as fighting to kill the last fish. That certainly isn’t the approach I support nor do I believe the majority of rec fishers want that. So, what is the message that’s consistent w/ conservation of these stocks that is being championed or recommended the rec voice get behind?

Cheers!

Ukee
The rationale is we can use selective fishing techniques that allow opportunity and expectation of catch, while allowing Fraser stocks of concern to pass through areas where they are encountered. BTW, the difference between Option A and Option B is 0.008% lower Exploitation Rate (ER) for the rec sector. We think there are ways to use science (DNA and CWT) to inform us as to what areas/times and fishing rules will successfully pass those Fraser fish successfully to the River.

ALSO, if we go with Option A, that would require in-river FN's fisheries to be reduced by 60% in order to achieve the 5% overall goal....whereas, if we select Option B the FN's in-river contribution drops to 15%.

BUT, no one wants to actually use the science - far easier to listen to politics and make feel good decisions and put 9,000 jobs at risk...Western alienation in action. We will see just how much a western job is worth, as compared to those same 9,000 jobs at SNC Lavalin.
 
Last edited:
Need it to be actual science based and data based closures. Right now it’s all political and we have NO push back. It’s ridiculous. I believe they documented one Chinook...ONE from stocks of concern caught in area 12 last year...yet they are proposing restrictions on it an further north even...its absolute insanity that will have devastating consequences based on zero data...in fact data that goes the opposite way against what they're doing.
 
Last edited:
The rationale is we can use selective fishing techniques that allow opportunity and expectation of catch, while allowing Fraser stocks of concern to pass through areas where they are encountered. BTW, the difference between Option A and Option B is 0.8% lower Exploitation Rate (ER) for the rec sector. We think there are ways to use science (DNA and CWT) to inform us as to what areas/times and fishing rules will successfully pass those Fraser fish successfully to the River.

ALSO, if we go with Option A, that would require in-river FN's fisheries to be reduced by 60% in order to achieve the 5% overall goal....whereas, if we select Option B the FN's in-river contribution drops to 15%.

BUT, no one wants to actually use the science - far easier to listen to politics and make feel good decisions and put 9,000 jobs at risk...Western alienation in action. We will see just how much a western job is worth, as compared to those same 9,000 jobs at SNC Lavalin.

Appreciate that!

Cheers!

Ukee
 
Reply to the big 3 just sent. FWIW, I don't think they give a rats butt what we write. I been writing letters to DFO for decades on Thompson river steelhead. At best I get form letters in return stating that they are very concerned and all the wonderful things they are doing. Didn't seem to get them a lot of success with that race of steelhead. I doubt they are going to accomplish much by killing our fishing. Not unless all other sectors are also curtailed.


Here is my letter. This one is the most terse I have ever written. I am completely fed up with trying to be Mr. Niceguy to the asshats.


Dear Sirs,

I am writing to you today to express my continued disappointment with the manner in which the Department of Fisheries and Oceans attempts Chinook salmon management and "knee-jerk" proposal for SRKW management in the Strait of Georgia and points elsewhere within its jurisdiction. Once again you have targeted the Sports angler directly as the sacrificial lamb to rectify all problems for the SRKW while you vacillate over studies of other direct effects that are also contributing as much or more to the issue. The decimation of Chinook stocks in the Strait of Georgia comes as no surprise to those of us who live and breathe these fisheries, this coast and this lifestyle. Decades of mismanagement of habitat and water rights protection, hatchery enhancement, illegal netting in the Fraser, over harvest by all sectors, continued commercial over-harvest of the prey species, neglect of management of predator species (i.e. Pinnipeds) and rampant lack of enforcement has led to this situation. A situation that recreational anglers and your own people have been warning senior officials for decades.

Your proposal to dump all this neglect onto the recreational anglers of the Strait of Georgia is akin to killing the goose that lays the Golden eggs. In addition the countless hours of volunteer stream and hatchery enhancement that we donate, our contribution to the Gross Domestic Product on a per piece basis far exceeds that of all other user groups combined. The maximum value you can get for any salmon is through its availability to recreational anglers.

As a recreational angler who fishes the ECVI and WCVI all season long from March to October, I know that my dollars spent on Vancouver Island have a very significant impact on local economies from Chemainus to Winter Harbour, but in particular from Ladysmith to Parksville on the East coast and Ucluelet and Tofino on the West coast. For inside waters, my average annual rod days is well over 100 days and on the Ucluelet and Tofino is over 80. My average annual investment is boats licensing, insurance, fuel, accommodations and local spending is well over $10,000 annually. These will all be tourist dollars that will no longer be distributed in the small sports fishing towns that rely on them to maintain their economies.

I trust that you will be able to confidently look those people in the eye who you will have relegated to the unemployed and tell them that their sacrifice is worth it for the SRKW.

Your in disappointment,

Stephen Cooper
Ladysmith B.C.
Well said! I too am done with the “pretty please sir” tactic.

These sob’s are f’ing things up and I’m p’d right off! It’s a bunch of g.d. b.s. is what it is!

Letter sent!
 
Strong belief that form letters have very little influence. It's a simple copy and paste. I think the 900+ individual rec letters explaining personal situations would have much more influence. I don't know how fisheries views it but to me the engo's form letter numbers are negligible. Maybe some but nothing like what we did IMO viewing it unbiasly. Write more letters to him even now. If it was based on science I'd get behind it but much of what DFO has put forward in this document is not...which is even more infuriating. SCHEER 2019!
 
How to mount an effective letter-writing campaign


1 – Set your goals

There are probably hundreds of things you’d like to achieve through activism. Although we all want to end global inequality and discrimination, we sometimes have to set our sights on more reasonable, achievable goals. Even the most successful campaigns will struggle to promote meaningful change if their aims are poorly-defined.

When creating your campaign make sure you have an achievable and easy-to-define goal that you’d like to reach. This might be repealing a law, increasing funding to a certain area, a simple political change, or any number of other goals.

Most importantly of all, make sure your goal is achievable by the group or individual you are targeting. It might be worth researching the power and influence they hold first of all, which leads us to…

2 – Find your target
You’ve found the issue in your community you’d like to change, but you need also to find out who can change it. If you’re calling for a government official to take action then you should first research the best way to get in touch. Most officials have websites and phone lines that can help you find this information.

For a department, or organization, it’s worth find a direct contact for the person with the power! In a similar way, if you’re contacting a private business then it’s important to make sure you address the person that actually makes the changes.

Overall, writing to a specific individual or group that directly works with your issue is always more important. It’s also important to remember that someone high up the chain might have the power, but will be much harder to contact and

3 – Spread the word
Invite your friends! Family! Loved ones! Community group! Church group! Whoever!

If you already have a campaign group or network established then spread the word to as many people as possible. Modern technology makes this even easier, with Facebook events, Twitter and email.

Set a date (or dates) and a time for everyone to meet, and let as many people know as you can. It might seem obvious, but even the best organized events will fail if not enough people manage to take part.

4 – Make it accessible
The more people willing to take part, the better – but it can sometimes be hard for everyone who might support your aims to take part. If you’re holding the campaign as part of an event at a public venue then make sure it’s easy to find, and accessible for everyone.

If possible try to avoid bars and nightclubs, or any other kind of space that might make people uncomfortable. Community centres or conference spaces are usually the best option.

If your campaign isn’t part of a single public event then make sure the information needed to take part is easily available, either online or in an accessible format. One important aspect of this would be creating the basic resources everyone needs, such as a draft letter or email, an address, and the goals of your campaign.

And adults aren’t the only ones that matter! The input of children and young people can be especially powerful and important. Whenever possible, make sure you try to involve young people in your campaign, especially if the issue is something youth-oriented. Getting the opinions and thoughts of a broad range of society is incredibly important when advocating for change!

5 – Make it fun!
Let’s be honest: Sometimes campaigning isn’t everyone’s cup of tea! Activism can be a lot of fun, but letter-writing isn’t exactly a thrill-a-minute activity!

If you’d like as many people as possible to get involved then it’s good to have some other form of incentive to attract them.

If you have the funds or the time, food is always a great option. Other activities could include a film screening, tea and coffee morning, or even something as simple of a meet-and-great with other members of the community.

6 – Invite the press
An important part of letter-writing campaigns is raising awareness of your issue. Inviting local media and journalists can be a great way to get your issue into the headlines.

Not only does it raise awareness, but the added attention can help add pressure to those you’re trying to target.

Contact your local newspaper, radio or television stations and speak to them about the issue you’re trying to address. If you’re holding an event then invite journalists along to discuss your aims.

If you know how, writing a press release with important information about your campaign might also be a good way of working with the press.

If you’re expecting a lot of media attention then it might be worth arranging a member of your team to act as the press liaison. This is the person that deals directly with any questions and enquiries and therefore should be someone who is well-informed and articulate when it comes to your issue.

7 – Keep up the pressure
Most importantly don’t forget to keep up the pressure until your goals are met!

A single letter-writing campaign is likely not to bring about all the change you want along. Instead, make sure that multiple campaigns, of different scales and styles, are taken out.

Making your campaign one part of an ongoing campaign for change is the best way to make sure that public opinion remains high, and that those who are capable of making change, do so.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top