Little Hawk
Active Member
Below is copied a portion of the SFI Newsletter concerning the halibut fracas.
Is it just me, or do the 3rd & 4th paragraphs basically contradict each other?
SFI Member Update April 13, 2012 2012 Issues
April 13, 2012 Halibut
By now you've all read or heard a lot on the recent 2012 change to government's halibut allocation policy and the likely fallout from the decision. While we don't want to revisit those issues, we do want to offer some thoughts on an aspect of the decision that has received less attention.
As part of the policy announcement, DFO said that it plans to make last year's experimental pilot program for halibut leasing a permanent fixture of the recreational fishery. This program was an unmitigated disaster last year, with few participants, few fish recorded and with widespread acknowledgement from the department that its lacks the staff and resources to police or effectively monitor the program in any meaningful way.
We believe that the program is unnecessary and divisive. It attempts to create user-group distinctions within the recreational fishery where none exist. The recreational quota leasing program is inappropriate as it turns recreational fishing into a quazi-commercial harvesting activity; it seeks to create different classes of recreational anglers when all recreational anglers ought to have equal access to a Canadian public resource; it unjustly enriches a small number of commercial quota holders; and, it simply distracts anglers from government's principal error which was granting private property rights to a Canadian public resource.
Ultimately we remain firm in our belief that a fixed number allocation system or some method to permit the entire recreational sector to acquire more quota if necessary through license fees or a halibut stamp is the only real solution to address establishment of certainty and stability and the challenges facing our critical halibut fishery.
What part of this am I not getting?
Is it just me, or do the 3rd & 4th paragraphs basically contradict each other?
SFI Member Update April 13, 2012 2012 Issues
April 13, 2012 Halibut
By now you've all read or heard a lot on the recent 2012 change to government's halibut allocation policy and the likely fallout from the decision. While we don't want to revisit those issues, we do want to offer some thoughts on an aspect of the decision that has received less attention.
As part of the policy announcement, DFO said that it plans to make last year's experimental pilot program for halibut leasing a permanent fixture of the recreational fishery. This program was an unmitigated disaster last year, with few participants, few fish recorded and with widespread acknowledgement from the department that its lacks the staff and resources to police or effectively monitor the program in any meaningful way.
We believe that the program is unnecessary and divisive. It attempts to create user-group distinctions within the recreational fishery where none exist. The recreational quota leasing program is inappropriate as it turns recreational fishing into a quazi-commercial harvesting activity; it seeks to create different classes of recreational anglers when all recreational anglers ought to have equal access to a Canadian public resource; it unjustly enriches a small number of commercial quota holders; and, it simply distracts anglers from government's principal error which was granting private property rights to a Canadian public resource.
Ultimately we remain firm in our belief that a fixed number allocation system or some method to permit the entire recreational sector to acquire more quota if necessary through license fees or a halibut stamp is the only real solution to address establishment of certainty and stability and the challenges facing our critical halibut fishery.
What part of this am I not getting?
