Yes I sit on a board and when I was asked to join I thought about it and told the other existing board members I would come on board to help with the following condition. That the groups focus was as much about restoring fish populations as it was about restoring fisheries access to the resource. I told the board that if I feel the focus shifts to much to just the access I would be out. In my mind you can't be taken seriously by other stakeholders and the public if they think it is all really about gaining access and the rest is lip service. That is my position with SVIAC not the SFAB so much just explaining that because it was brought up. There are some very talented people representing us and they do it by giving up their own free time and in today's climate get very little reward for it. Its almost always more bad news. When was the last time we came into a new season looking at some good news, especially around the south coast? Its time to change it up and I'm not saying I have the answers or the right direction, I have ideas. All I know for sure is that the present way we interact with DFO isn't working and I see no reason why that will change. We want DFO to change...maybe we should lead by example and do it first.
Minister's decision on SFAB Chinook announced
- Thread starter cohochinook
- Start date
Derby
Crew Member
Thats all you got!!!
never claimed the be a wise one? just average person who works hard for a living and then donates about 45 days a year to TRY & help out the Public fishery. As one door closes another door opens... As a chair of area 17 I would be more then happy to turn my chair over to anyone who really wants to get involved, more then willing to train them up. Just no one wants the responsiable or invest there time.. Its a big job lots moving parts.. So please its easy for some to spout off on here deviding groups & people here . What does that achieve ? If anything this is a time where we need to come together and ask SVIAC, SFI, BCWF & PFA.. hey Im mad what can I or we do... This taking shots is just a waste of time & energy. I will remind you & some others on this forum there is always 2 sides of a story.......
Last edited:
We need a Political not nonPolitical group respresenting us. We need news letters and press releases that name names! Don’t for her don’t vote for him, and here’s why! Vote for him vote for her and here’s why. 30-40,000 members is what’s needed. $10 a year is a $3-$400,000 war chest. It’s not a big ask! We are fractured and we are 75,000 individual voices whining on social media. This is a ***** fest with no solutions. We need an email to our membership that says we are voting for this candidate ONLY, and here’s why. My taxes will be going up exponentially over the next few years and my rights are being peeled away like a rotting banana in a field. If SFAB represents all of us then we all need to join, give our opinions, support OUR AGENDA, and go forward together. The NRA had 5 million members in America, they shape American Political Politics. if we had 50,000 members, that’s no longer whining, it’s Political Muscle
No i have alot more !!!! , just don't want to make a bad situation worse by posting on a public forum . At the end of the day people i hope do appreciate what the dedicated volunteers bring to the table. Were just working in a system that is out dated and broken causing decention and distrust. We need a formal voting system for better representation on the issues that way there is no surprises, not a show of hands, Were in pretty deep hole now from a advocacy perspective, . ,I believe data and science is our friend maybe just not right now. Data and science in this decsion wasnt even taken into account, If we dont figure how to pressure the government to change the way we allocate stocks the salmon are done. Im my opinion we should have set DFO up for a court case .
wildmanyeah
Crew Member
maybe but it’s hard to suck and blow at the same time.
SpringVelocity
Crew Member
wildmanyeah
Crew Member
Your probably an expert.
god help us
OldBlackDog
Well-Known Member
It is interesting that the BCWF fighting for Steelhead has shown clearly how the fight needs to go forward.
DFO IN OTTAWA is the problem. Until we hold OTTAWA bureaucrats accountable we will lose.
SCIENCE is not winning this war. As noted the Fraser Chinook will be gone for exactly the same reasons as Steelhead and yes you will not be fishing for years.
Interesting that the BCWF has always been noted as a hunting group, yet they are leading the parade on fish.
Maybe this is the group to lead the parade?
DFO IN OTTAWA is the problem. Until we hold OTTAWA bureaucrats accountable we will lose.
SCIENCE is not winning this war. As noted the Fraser Chinook will be gone for exactly the same reasons as Steelhead and yes you will not be fishing for years.
Interesting that the BCWF has always been noted as a hunting group, yet they are leading the parade on fish.
Maybe this is the group to lead the parade?
bcbassfishing
Well-Known Member
Regarless of the group who helps the good fight... it has nothing to do with facts or science with managment of our resorces. Those who do I thank you for the effort but it comes down to just living on our knees in this country and handing out more and more money to slowly have our rights and oppertunity stripped away so others can sit on there butt and get handouts or entitlement. Not sure when we gave up all our rights but I have been standing with 2 fingers in the air to the people who run this country. ALL respect has been long lost for them for many years now. We have the most to loose and push back and they have no problem to cripple you as they hold all the cards.
hippaisland
Well-Known Member
So... nothing really available for retention that’s feasible for us local guys. Cheers.
The SFAB process has failed to achieve any meaningful success in the last 10 years at least. This should be recognized and acted upon. Any company with this track record would see consequences and the leaders be fired. Not to diminish the effort of the SFAB leaders, they honestly tried but couldn't find a concept to provide a meaningful impact on fisheries decisions in these trying times. That's a clear failure and I hope the current SFAB leaders are responsible enough to draw the right conclusions from this - step down. If that means the entire SFAB folds, so be it. It should not linger on as a process that is hollow and phoney. Everyone hates when failed ministers cling on, so do the right thing. It either opens the door for new people with new ideas on how to reconfigure this process or the SFAB will die and open some eyes on the other side that changes are needed. Don't stand in the way of much needed change!
cohochinook
Well-Known Member
You're pointing your finger at the wrong people. The SFAB worked extremely hard on proposals that were scientifically supported and data driven that would have allowed angling opportunities in the current environment of high level of concern for certain Fraser Chinook stocks.. Simply put it would not have mattered what was put forward under the current Federal Liberal Government. This decision came directly from Fisheries Minister Jordan and the Prime Ministers Office!
A better question to ask yourself is what can you do in response to this decision and how you can contribute to getting a change? Sitting behind a keyboard firing arrows at SFAB volunteers is pathetic on your part @calmsea! Step up to plate and pull your weight!
Coho...you are missing the point. It is not the people on the board that are the problem as they for the most part are very knowledgeable on the problems and are dedicated in their efforts. (I still have a personal problem with equal representation that makes up the boards...but that is me. The problem is that it is wasted effort, time and knowledge as DFO's ear is elsewhere. It should be apparent that not much has changed in decades when it comes to how DFO basically ignores advice given from the SFAB.. In my time there the only time we had real input that was implemented was during the creation of RCA's and our recommendations as to how we caught our halibut quota. I remember during the meetings well when got together and we drew up our local RCA recommendations and then months later seen them approved in exact form as to our drawings. That felt good...you really felt like you contributed and had a positive impact. Too bad it happens once in a lifetime and not every meeting. Politics needs to be taken out of fisheries management...that is the root problem and until that is fixed you can't make progress. The SFAB has no mechanism to deal with that problem and so will never be an effective means of helping guide DFO to do the right things. The brains on that board would be far better used to achieve ours goals by freeing up those wasted hours to help in a campaign where we bad together, take the gloves off and go after those in DFO making **** decisions based on politics.
cohochinook
Well-Known Member
I don't if you understand the SFAB process? Its not meant to be lobby organization or political. Thru the SFAB process recommendations are made by consultation. I have seen this work in my local SFAC. More recently though under the current government of Justin Trudeau political decisions are being made.
The job of lobbying or dropping the gloves is better done by the Public Fishery Alliance and Sport Fishing Institute which anyone who wants to have any hope of access to fish for salmon should join!
Membership Form - Public Fishery Alliance
Membership Form We can accomplish more together. Become a free member of the Public Fishery Alliance and know that you are helping to ensure future access to our sustainable public fisheries in British Columbia. We rely on members and volunteers to keep our organization strong and our activities...
publicfisheryalliance.ca
Membership Types | Sport Fishing Institute of British Columbia
Help us ensure a vibrant and sustainable future for BC’s sport fishing community. Become a member today
sportfishing.bc.ca
I fully understand the role and advirory capacity of the board...I’m saying it doesn’t work and those talented people would make better use of the that time fighting DFO rather than trying to work with them..working with someone requires two willing partners and DFO isn’t that partner
Derby referiing to your post to someone else about gladdly stepping down if someone wanted to take on your duties. You never want to loose someone with superior knowledge of the issues and who has or is willing to give the time to try and be effective in that position. But if the local anglers felt it might be time to change things up because a better individual was willing to step up...I would hope those people would respect you enough to approach you telling you they were going to put forward a name for your position. Allowing you to reflect and decide to simply step aside or to inform the angling community that there would be a challenge for the chair and that those who want to vote either way should attend and cast their vote. Not stack the room secretly and shove the incumbant aside. My opinion and my beef.
Again, in case you missed it; I am thankful that the current SFAB reps tried hard, used science and common sense to persuade DFO to make a better decision. But this approach failed for the Xth time now and was a huge waste of everyone's time, like profisher said. Our SFAB reps can try again next year and for the following years with the same approach through this same rigged process but everyone can tell the outcome already. Stop wasting yours and everyone's time with this phoney process! If you don't know another way, step down! It's shameful to watch our reps getting ridiculed year after year. Do you like getting egged every year? I wouldn't. And believe me, I have put my time in years ago.
UkeeDreamin
Well-Known Member
We moved into the 21st century over 21-years ago and have had a func internet for longer than that. Intl Halibut commissio, Oregon Dept of F&W, Washington F&W and countless other jurisdictions moved their public participation on line ages ago. Here in BC? With the exception of a couple of urban centre, the vast majority of SFAB groups rarely, if ever, have more than a handful of participants ...
As such, why would either a Con or Lib govt pay any attention at all? There simply aren’t the numbers truly active on behalf of the rec fishery given the current system to make a politician blink let alone oppose seal and whale lovers, commercial fishers or FNs. Those groups are organized, political and can easily whip up impressive #s of voters to their causes. Rec fishery, no where close. A LOT of cat herding required to harness what should be a BIG political voice.
A decade or more ago the internet should have been harnessed. Nothing can be done about yesterday, though I wonder how many tomorrow’s will pass before there’s meaningfup change?
Cheers!
Ukee
As such, why would either a Con or Lib govt pay any attention at all? There simply aren’t the numbers truly active on behalf of the rec fishery given the current system to make a politician blink let alone oppose seal and whale lovers, commercial fishers or FNs. Those groups are organized, political and can easily whip up impressive #s of voters to their causes. Rec fishery, no where close. A LOT of cat herding required to harness what should be a BIG political voice.
A decade or more ago the internet should have been harnessed. Nothing can be done about yesterday, though I wonder how many tomorrow’s will pass before there’s meaningfup change?
Cheers!
Ukee
cohochinook
Well-Known Member
So what's your solution and what have you done? Seeing as you seem to have the solution in your hands?
Similar threads
