J.C.W. 500
Member
Here's the last half of the letter.
Not only do many citizens such as myself oppose these changes, but also 625 scientists and two former conservative fishery ministers have been shown to oppose this Act (Calgary Herald March 22nd 2012) “Pressure on the Harper government to reject private sector pressure to water down the Fisheries Act mounted Thursday as a letter endorsed by 625 scientists warned Prime Minister Stephen Harper against any move to weaken the federal government's most potent tool to protect the environment.” If it’s at this multitude that even former fishery ministers are opposing this, these changes must be of great concern. (Calgary Herald March 22nd 2012) “ Two former Progressive Conservative fisheries ministers, John Fraser and Tom Siddon, and the Canadian Society For Ecology and Evolution, which represents 1,000 ecologists and evolutionary biologists, have also condemned the reported move.” For example, when scientists warned about the cod stocks on the east coast being over pressured, they were ignored just to make the quick buck. Now many of those east coast fishing towns have become economically collapsed since then and probably wouldn’t have been if conservation and listening to the scientists was put first.
For more info on the Calgary Herald article here’s the link to it.
http://www.calgaryherald.com/technology/Pressure+mounts+against+changes+Fisheries/6344260/story.html
Here’s a couple links to the collapse of the east coast cod fishery and our already struggling oceans.
http://caperfrasers.wordpress.com/2010/12/02/history-of-the-cod-fishery/
http://www.davidsuzuki.org/blogs/sc...ort-shows-canada-must-do-more-for-its-oceans/
http://foodfreedom.wordpress.com/2011/10/17/canada-regulators-info-suppression-and-fish-collapses/
Lastly, would it be worth weakening this Fisheries Protection Act in times that fish stocks like the Wild Pacific Salmon stocks are already struggling? Sure Canada could make the immediate buck, but would it be worth it when in the not too far future of this generation’s children and grandchildren will have to deal with what this proposed change would likely cause in its wake? It would likely cause this generation's children to go through the hardship of seeing a once pristine Canada turn to an increasingly fishless and industrially exploited land. After all of the resources were exploited, then the industries and jobs would leave Canada. Could we envision a future Canada where our grandchildren would be left with a multitude of toxic, fishless waterways, heavily depleted fishing industries, a highly depleted tourism industry, and no industries in nonrenewable resources because they were all developed? I certainly could not envision my future grandchildren pointing at a picture of a Pacific Salmon and having to tell them that this is a picture of something from history; a species that used to live on the earth. Worse yet, then have to explain to them why.*
Sincerely,
Justin Wood
Not only do many citizens such as myself oppose these changes, but also 625 scientists and two former conservative fishery ministers have been shown to oppose this Act (Calgary Herald March 22nd 2012) “Pressure on the Harper government to reject private sector pressure to water down the Fisheries Act mounted Thursday as a letter endorsed by 625 scientists warned Prime Minister Stephen Harper against any move to weaken the federal government's most potent tool to protect the environment.” If it’s at this multitude that even former fishery ministers are opposing this, these changes must be of great concern. (Calgary Herald March 22nd 2012) “ Two former Progressive Conservative fisheries ministers, John Fraser and Tom Siddon, and the Canadian Society For Ecology and Evolution, which represents 1,000 ecologists and evolutionary biologists, have also condemned the reported move.” For example, when scientists warned about the cod stocks on the east coast being over pressured, they were ignored just to make the quick buck. Now many of those east coast fishing towns have become economically collapsed since then and probably wouldn’t have been if conservation and listening to the scientists was put first.
For more info on the Calgary Herald article here’s the link to it.
http://www.calgaryherald.com/technology/Pressure+mounts+against+changes+Fisheries/6344260/story.html
Here’s a couple links to the collapse of the east coast cod fishery and our already struggling oceans.
http://caperfrasers.wordpress.com/2010/12/02/history-of-the-cod-fishery/
http://www.davidsuzuki.org/blogs/sc...ort-shows-canada-must-do-more-for-its-oceans/
http://foodfreedom.wordpress.com/2011/10/17/canada-regulators-info-suppression-and-fish-collapses/
Lastly, would it be worth weakening this Fisheries Protection Act in times that fish stocks like the Wild Pacific Salmon stocks are already struggling? Sure Canada could make the immediate buck, but would it be worth it when in the not too far future of this generation’s children and grandchildren will have to deal with what this proposed change would likely cause in its wake? It would likely cause this generation's children to go through the hardship of seeing a once pristine Canada turn to an increasingly fishless and industrially exploited land. After all of the resources were exploited, then the industries and jobs would leave Canada. Could we envision a future Canada where our grandchildren would be left with a multitude of toxic, fishless waterways, heavily depleted fishing industries, a highly depleted tourism industry, and no industries in nonrenewable resources because they were all developed? I certainly could not envision my future grandchildren pointing at a picture of a Pacific Salmon and having to tell them that this is a picture of something from history; a species that used to live on the earth. Worse yet, then have to explain to them why.*
Sincerely,
Justin Wood