Nanaimo Town Hall Meeting
- Thread starter Derby
- Start date
Fish-Hunter
Active Member
Well people, just got back from the Nanaimo meeting. Another great turnout! Aprox 400 people in attendance, that is super. The panel put on a great presentation, even more polished than the Courtenay meeting, good job guys. Lots of good info and input from everyone. There were a few Commercial guys that stood up to give their point of view and voice their worries for the possiblity of DFO making any changes and how it would impact them. (This may be the time for the Working Commercial Fishermen to also petition DFO to help them stand up to the non-fishing Quota holders "Slipper-Skippers" and stop them from holding them at ransom to lease quota share, lining the non-fishers pockets and not theirs for having to do the work. Just my opinion). It was good to see Mr Lunny there, and hear his point of view and his now public reccomendation on the issue. (In summary, he voiced that he would like to see the minister adjust the allocation of the TAC to a more FAIR position of around 20%/80% for this year, and then look to the future to keep it fair for ALL of us Canadians, Sports Fisherpeople and the Commercial Fisherpeople) - I am not quoting his exact verbage, but this was essentially what he had to say.
Great meeting I am glad I made the time to go. Next up, Campbell River, Will Mr, Duncan have the stones that Mr Lunny showed tonight, and make an appearance to at least listen, or maybe offer a point of view?
Jay.
Great meeting I am glad I made the time to go. Next up, Campbell River, Will Mr, Duncan have the stones that Mr Lunny showed tonight, and make an appearance to at least listen, or maybe offer a point of view?
Jay.
Derby
Crew Member
Great Meeting- Nice to see so many people show their support. Ever better Mr. Lunney stepping up and did show his support for the cause. I believe the first Conservative to do so.=
Very excellent-It would be nice to see Mr. Duncan do the same-listen to people who voted for him.
Hope to see as many or more for Campbell river -Great Job Nanaimo and surrounding areas you should be proud- & Keep sending thoses letters
Very excellent-It would be nice to see Mr. Duncan do the same-listen to people who voted for him. Hope to see as many or more for Campbell river -Great Job Nanaimo and surrounding areas you should be proud- & Keep sending thoses letters
Sculpin
Well-Known Member
My son and I went to the Nanaimo town hall meeting this evening and we were quite surprised to see the turn out. I believe around 400 concerned folks showed up. Lot's of sportsfisherman, a few commercial fisherman, and a couple of MP's.
There was some good information presented. Some great open mike comments as well. We both thought it was a good meeting and came out of it more knowledgeable about the whole situation.
A big thank you to Clyde and all the other folks that put this thing together. I am already a dual member of the BCWF for quite some time now and will continue anyway I can afford to help out with this situation. We will continue to write letters and the postcards they had there to send in to the Minister were bang on and a great idea.
Cheers
John
There was some good information presented. Some great open mike comments as well. We both thought it was a good meeting and came out of it more knowledgeable about the whole situation.
A big thank you to Clyde and all the other folks that put this thing together. I am already a dual member of the BCWF for quite some time now and will continue anyway I can afford to help out with this situation. We will continue to write letters and the postcards they had there to send in to the Minister were bang on and a great idea.
Cheers
John
Last edited by a moderator:
wolf
Well-Known Member
GREAT meeting by you nanaimo people last night and was neat to meet 2 of you on this forum.. was accually surprised to see commercial fisherman get up and voice (crackily mind you) and speak thier miss truths had to chuckle when one of them said (condensed version)times have changed from 20 yrs ago and we need to change(REC fisherman) with them and continued to keep going on how much he has suffered but he doesnt want ANY thing touched on the commercial sector........ hmmmmmm he walks like one quacks like one,,,,, yep its still a duck.
From what I saw last night guys if you havent already PLEASE write them letters becuase it seems to REALLY be making a difference.
If these commercial guys are getting that emotional about it you know damn well the heats been turned up and they are not liking it.
I will say I feel sorry for them as well because they are caught by the system that they put themselves in. I have no problem with the guy who accually owns a halibut boat and fishes for them on the water but in able for the poor ******* to make any money he has to lease quota from a "SLIPPER SKIPPER".
It would be soooooooo easy if the minister would get rid of them plain and simple if you dont fish it you loose your quota and its given back to the canadians that will accually use it!!!!!!!!!! the commercial that does fish!!!! and the RECREATIONAL SPORTFISHERMAN..........
Again GREAT JOB guys
Wolf
From what I saw last night guys if you havent already PLEASE write them letters becuase it seems to REALLY be making a difference.
If these commercial guys are getting that emotional about it you know damn well the heats been turned up and they are not liking it.
I will say I feel sorry for them as well because they are caught by the system that they put themselves in. I have no problem with the guy who accually owns a halibut boat and fishes for them on the water but in able for the poor ******* to make any money he has to lease quota from a "SLIPPER SKIPPER".
It would be soooooooo easy if the minister would get rid of them plain and simple if you dont fish it you loose your quota and its given back to the canadians that will accually use it!!!!!!!!!! the commercial that does fish!!!! and the RECREATIONAL SPORTFISHERMAN..........
Again GREAT JOB guys
Wolf
wolf
Well-Known Member
No sorry just wanted to see what it was like from a different meeting with different people you guys were very professional and respectful to all people involved there was impressed by the turnout,im sure there will be more meetings and will definatlly meet as this really is the beginning......
Wolf
Wolf
Sculpin
Well-Known Member
Good post wolf. I thought it was very civil and everyone listened to everyone without any outbursts or rude interruptions. I may run up to the Campbell River one tonight for the same reasons you posted. Different room of folks. Different open mike statements and questions.
I was pleased to hear that they are planning more meetings in places like Prince Rupert and some of the Interior towns.
T
tofinofish
Guest
Great comments regarding the evening Sculpin, but I am quite confident that the lack of Clapping by was not due to disrespect to any speaker, but very possibly due to physical limitations. He is a very knowledgeable and respectful recreational fishing advocate and has helped keep us all on the water more than many will ever recognize.
Also a huge Thank You to our elected MP James Lunney for leading the way to the Ministers office with the right message, and providing the landscape for John Duncan to join him in this cause or go the way of the Dodo in the next election.
See you in C.R. tonight.
Sculpin
Well-Known Member
Thank you for the insight tofinofish. I apologize for my poor judgement and have edited my post.
Last edited by a moderator:
T
tofinofish
Guest
No problem, Thanks for being there.
Fishing Guide
Active Member
Cheers All,
I also attended the Town Hall Halibut Meeting tonight and was encouraged by the turn out, the comments of both the pannel and the open mic and the general atmosphere in the meeting. It was a positive note to finally hear James Lunney M.P. outline his concern for the process and that he has written Minister Shea for an increase from 88/12 to 80/20 and that, after, even further adjustments be made.
I was proud of our members who listened politely as three members of the commercial halibut fleet addressed their concerns. I spent a half an hour with them after the meeting and discerned that their major concern is that "if" Minister Shea changes the allocations they don't wish to have it come from their 'pockets' and wish to be paid for whatever they 'lose'. These were active commercial fishermen who 'own' some quota and also lease others. They listened to my perspective politely but it is my opinion that they simply don't see anything wrong with the 88/12 split and are adamant that guides and lodges are commercial fishermen and, as such, should have to buy 'quota' and that this gifted Common Property Resource should be also purchased from them (at personal gain) should Minister Shea change the 88/12 split and that the sports fishermen should be the ones providing the financial resources to do such.
It is easy to see how one could quickly become very disillusioned as it is readily apparent that they prefer to see the status quo and the only way movement is going to be made is through a Ministerial Order and not by negotiation.
I am off to Campbell River for tomorrow's meetings and I will report on said meetings.
One thing I am contemplating and have not formulated a final opinion:
All 436 original licenses were intrinsically a gift to the original holders. Some still hold the licenses and fish them. Some are leasing them out. Others have purchased the licenses - one person at the meeting claimed to have invested $70,000.00 to buy licenses. WHEN the Minister decides to change the allocation from 88/12 to 80/20 or 75/25 should the allocation come from only the "non fishing licenses" or should the allocation come from all? Part of me says that they all gained from the allocation and should share the pain while some of me is concerned for the ones who paid for licenses after through sales. However, if we hold those still fishing harmless in this exchange, then those who sold already are off the hook. I will think more upon this.
I also attended the Town Hall Halibut Meeting tonight and was encouraged by the turn out, the comments of both the pannel and the open mic and the general atmosphere in the meeting. It was a positive note to finally hear James Lunney M.P. outline his concern for the process and that he has written Minister Shea for an increase from 88/12 to 80/20 and that, after, even further adjustments be made.
I was proud of our members who listened politely as three members of the commercial halibut fleet addressed their concerns. I spent a half an hour with them after the meeting and discerned that their major concern is that "if" Minister Shea changes the allocations they don't wish to have it come from their 'pockets' and wish to be paid for whatever they 'lose'. These were active commercial fishermen who 'own' some quota and also lease others. They listened to my perspective politely but it is my opinion that they simply don't see anything wrong with the 88/12 split and are adamant that guides and lodges are commercial fishermen and, as such, should have to buy 'quota' and that this gifted Common Property Resource should be also purchased from them (at personal gain) should Minister Shea change the 88/12 split and that the sports fishermen should be the ones providing the financial resources to do such.
It is easy to see how one could quickly become very disillusioned as it is readily apparent that they prefer to see the status quo and the only way movement is going to be made is through a Ministerial Order and not by negotiation.
I am off to Campbell River for tomorrow's meetings and I will report on said meetings.
One thing I am contemplating and have not formulated a final opinion:
All 436 original licenses were intrinsically a gift to the original holders. Some still hold the licenses and fish them. Some are leasing them out. Others have purchased the licenses - one person at the meeting claimed to have invested $70,000.00 to buy licenses. WHEN the Minister decides to change the allocation from 88/12 to 80/20 or 75/25 should the allocation come from only the "non fishing licenses" or should the allocation come from all? Part of me says that they all gained from the allocation and should share the pain while some of me is concerned for the ones who paid for licenses after through sales. However, if we hold those still fishing harmless in this exchange, then those who sold already are off the hook. I will think more upon this.
Fishing Guide
Active Member
Cheers All,
I stayed awake last night contemplating the meeting and mulling over the information provided by the commercial operators. I came to the following conclusion:
All original license holders were provided their quota at one time in a windfall lottery administered by DFO. In other words - they are in it together. To satisfy a change in the allocation from 88/12 to 75/25 (or thereabouts to handle 2/3 OR 2/4) allocation must come from the original license holders. My preference is for the commercial operators to get together and figure out what THEY wish to do, vote on it and submitt that to DFO. Leave the decision (and blood work) for them.
NOG has it that there is already some consensus that the allocation come from Non-Active Licenses you will have no arguement from me. However...if consensus cannot be arrived then the only fair way is to take a little from every license so that nobody suffers more than another. The fairest would be a per cent approach and would hardly put a dent in every licenese but still achieve the required result.
It was proposed that the season start later to ensure fish being available for later in the year. However NOG pointed out that halibut are commonly caught earlier in the season off Victoria and later off Ucluelet and further up island. I whole heartedly agree with NOG on the opening of the season. The season is closed during January for reproduction concerns. Closing at other times is not a stock concern but simply a way to spread out the allocation. To delay the season so that one area can fish longer while shutting down another is simply not right. In this case justice must be done and there must be the perception by ALL that justice was done.
I stayed awake last night contemplating the meeting and mulling over the information provided by the commercial operators. I came to the following conclusion:
All original license holders were provided their quota at one time in a windfall lottery administered by DFO. In other words - they are in it together. To satisfy a change in the allocation from 88/12 to 75/25 (or thereabouts to handle 2/3 OR 2/4) allocation must come from the original license holders. My preference is for the commercial operators to get together and figure out what THEY wish to do, vote on it and submitt that to DFO. Leave the decision (and blood work) for them.
NOG has it that there is already some consensus that the allocation come from Non-Active Licenses you will have no arguement from me. However...if consensus cannot be arrived then the only fair way is to take a little from every license so that nobody suffers more than another. The fairest would be a per cent approach and would hardly put a dent in every licenese but still achieve the required result.
It was proposed that the season start later to ensure fish being available for later in the year. However NOG pointed out that halibut are commonly caught earlier in the season off Victoria and later off Ucluelet and further up island. I whole heartedly agree with NOG on the opening of the season. The season is closed during January for reproduction concerns. Closing at other times is not a stock concern but simply a way to spread out the allocation. To delay the season so that one area can fish longer while shutting down another is simply not right. In this case justice must be done and there must be the perception by ALL that justice was done.
I also attended the town hall mtg yesterday. About 400 people attended and the presentations and comments were enlightening. It was encouraging to see two M.P.'s (Crowder and Lunney) there. Unfortunately I did not see any M.L.A.'s or City officials. I also didn't notice any media in attendance. If these people were not there, it doesn't speak well for them. If they do not intend to take an interest and become part of the solution, they are part of the problem.
To me the bottom line is as follows. The original allocation process was seriously flawed. Those commercial operators who actively fish each year should be protected where possible. Those who do not fish should lose their right to make a very lucrative living leasing quota. Those non fisher's quotas could be sold or leased at more reasonable rates to those wishing to make a living actually fishing. This would substantially improve their cost versus revenue position. This would also provide a substantial revenue stream to DFO allowing better research and enforcement activities. "Waste" in commercial fishing should be counted against quota. There should be no carry over of quota when commercial fishers decide to leave fish in the water. These fish could be transferred to the sport sector or left in the water to mature and propagate. the recreational TAC must be increased to a reasonable level Note that the in the two states sharing our shoreline (Washington and Alaska) the recreational sector is allocated 20% and 36% respectively.
It has been made abundantly clear that the leadership ( Prime Minister, Minister of Fisheries) of the federal gov't does not intend to do anything positive unless their jobs are on the line. DFO senior management finds it more desirable to oversee a small commercial fleet than to protect our rights as recreational fishers. Further, they do not see any value in the recreational fishery. They do not understand, at all in fact DFO wants to move crab, prawn, and salmon to the same failed model as halibut.
If they are not stopped now, recreational fishing will be in the same disastrous mess with reduced or no opportunity similar to what we are facing with halibut. If you value fishing and want your kids and grandkids to have the opportunities we were used to, each and every one of you must take a few minutes and write to the Prime Minister, Minister of Fisheries, and senior mandarins in DFO. Speaking directly to your MP's and MLA's would also be useful. Take a stand now and we can create the impetus for change so that those common resources in our oceans don't become the sole property of one small sector. It's your choice.
To me the bottom line is as follows. The original allocation process was seriously flawed. Those commercial operators who actively fish each year should be protected where possible. Those who do not fish should lose their right to make a very lucrative living leasing quota. Those non fisher's quotas could be sold or leased at more reasonable rates to those wishing to make a living actually fishing. This would substantially improve their cost versus revenue position. This would also provide a substantial revenue stream to DFO allowing better research and enforcement activities. "Waste" in commercial fishing should be counted against quota. There should be no carry over of quota when commercial fishers decide to leave fish in the water. These fish could be transferred to the sport sector or left in the water to mature and propagate. the recreational TAC must be increased to a reasonable level Note that the in the two states sharing our shoreline (Washington and Alaska) the recreational sector is allocated 20% and 36% respectively.
It has been made abundantly clear that the leadership ( Prime Minister, Minister of Fisheries) of the federal gov't does not intend to do anything positive unless their jobs are on the line. DFO senior management finds it more desirable to oversee a small commercial fleet than to protect our rights as recreational fishers. Further, they do not see any value in the recreational fishery. They do not understand, at all in fact DFO wants to move crab, prawn, and salmon to the same failed model as halibut.
If they are not stopped now, recreational fishing will be in the same disastrous mess with reduced or no opportunity similar to what we are facing with halibut. If you value fishing and want your kids and grandkids to have the opportunities we were used to, each and every one of you must take a few minutes and write to the Prime Minister, Minister of Fisheries, and senior mandarins in DFO. Speaking directly to your MP's and MLA's would also be useful. Take a stand now and we can create the impetus for change so that those common resources in our oceans don't become the sole property of one small sector. It's your choice.
Mighty Sylvan
Active Member
It was a good meeting. The Commercial fisherman's emotion was heartbreaking. The one guys comment stands out to me. He said something like a few years ago 6 commercial boats offshore would have been a lot. Now, a couple hundred sport fisherman are out there. To me this makes the point that with sport fishing, more Canadians can enjoy halibut fishing with fewer numbers of halibut being caught. That is, when you compare sport numbers to commercial numbers. Commercial fisherman are very much apart of our culture but they are also businessmen and good businessmen adapt their business to the changing markets. I want to see these men flourish doing what they are good at and what they love but perhaps they need to be looking to team up with the sport fisherman and turn our west coast communities into the sport fishing destinations they are capable of becoming.
Just my .02
Take Care
Just my .02
Take Care
Not a bad thought at all. Another option would be to adjust the system so that those who have to lease quota, could get what they need at a more reasonable rate. 84% of their operating cost to lease quota? That is ridiculous and another great argument for a serious overhaul of the system. We need a fair share and they need quota that allows them to make a decent living. I don't believe that these two needs are incompatible.
Fishing Guide
Active Member
Cheers All,
I was doing the math on what it would take to 'fix' this problem. If one were to assume that the sports sector needs 20% TAC to operate at 2/2 or 2/3 this year then we need 8% TAC from the commercial sector. If we minimize the damage to any one commercial license holder (i.e., take from all rather than just the ones not being fished) then we need approximately 1.85% from each (435 x 0.0185=8.04) If we calculate what that means to an average fisherman with 40,000 lbs "L" quota we get (40,000x0.0185=740 lbs) 740 lbs given up. We then calculate what that 740 lbs is worth to that fisherman (740x$5.00/lb=3700) $3700.00/40,000 lbs of quota per year. Let's put that in perspective as the total 40,000 quota (40,000x$5.00/lbs=$200,000) $200,000 in value. For something that was originally 'gifted' from DFO for free.
SO...all this comes down to the fact that commercial fishermen are not interested in solving this for 1.85% of their catch or $3700/40,000 lbs of quota.
One commercial fisherman in Campbell River stood up and said he was prepared to 'go to war' and, if we wanted to fight he was ready to go. How sad. It is truely this arrogance that has pursuaded me that this is the mountain that I will call my own...and here I will fight.
The resources -all of them- belong to ALL the people of Canada and not a select 435. Whether it is halibut, salmon, crabs, prawns or trees and water...I will never agree to relinquish my right to these Common Property Resources.
"Dear Mr. Harper, "
I was doing the math on what it would take to 'fix' this problem. If one were to assume that the sports sector needs 20% TAC to operate at 2/2 or 2/3 this year then we need 8% TAC from the commercial sector. If we minimize the damage to any one commercial license holder (i.e., take from all rather than just the ones not being fished) then we need approximately 1.85% from each (435 x 0.0185=8.04) If we calculate what that means to an average fisherman with 40,000 lbs "L" quota we get (40,000x0.0185=740 lbs) 740 lbs given up. We then calculate what that 740 lbs is worth to that fisherman (740x$5.00/lb=3700) $3700.00/40,000 lbs of quota per year. Let's put that in perspective as the total 40,000 quota (40,000x$5.00/lbs=$200,000) $200,000 in value. For something that was originally 'gifted' from DFO for free.
SO...all this comes down to the fact that commercial fishermen are not interested in solving this for 1.85% of their catch or $3700/40,000 lbs of quota.
One commercial fisherman in Campbell River stood up and said he was prepared to 'go to war' and, if we wanted to fight he was ready to go. How sad. It is truely this arrogance that has pursuaded me that this is the mountain that I will call my own...and here I will fight.
The resources -all of them- belong to ALL the people of Canada and not a select 435. Whether it is halibut, salmon, crabs, prawns or trees and water...I will never agree to relinquish my right to these Common Property Resources.
"Dear Mr. Harper, "
Similar threads
