SFI UP-Date
- Thread starter Derby
- Start date
Cuba Libre
Well-Known Member
I could swear that I smell RVP somewhere in here!
scott craven
Well-Known Member
He's baaaaack !
searun
Well-Known Member
With ya 100%. There are a lot of folks working tirelessly behind the scenes in the SFI as well as SFAB on our behalf. But for the efforts of these heros the recreational fishery would look a whole lot different than it does today...and not for the better. Anyone who thinks otherwise simply hasn't been paying close attention to what has happened over the past 20 or more years. I don't always agree with positions both organisations take on issues, but I very much appreciate that this is about trying to look after the overall common good of the rec fishery.
Fisher Down
Active Member
Now I remember why I went fishing this summer instead of sitting around reading and posting on SFBC.
All this bickering and bitching reminds me of my ex-wife years ago.
Come on guys, we're better than that. We're all better than that.
Try remember what your mother told you when you were a kid,
"If you don't have anything good to say, don't say anything at all !"
F D
All this bickering and bitching reminds me of my ex-wife years ago.
Come on guys, we're better than that. We're all better than that.
Try remember what your mother told you when you were a kid,
"If you don't have anything good to say, don't say anything at all !"
F D
It is the same in any field of volunteer effort, a few people carry the load while the majority do little except reap the rewards. I get involved when and where I can but still often feel guilty that I can't do more. I also (like Searun) find that at times I don't agree with some of the positions taken by our recreational advisers. After years of meetings I get the impression that we are always taking a position to keep fishing as before and only back down when we have too. I would like to see a fish first (not fishing first) position once in a while...make me believe our group really does care. That is why I have decided to spend more of my time working for fish and less time for us.
Derby
Crew Member
Profisher........perhaps what you and other may not alway see is that alot of time everything has been gone over in the board rooms and committee meeting & the finish product is usually all that presented..... I know personally myself and my fellow people that serve on the boards and in meeting....the fish our always first........
Cut Plug
Well-Known Member
Wow. I never knew this was such a divisive issue. Its really kind of simple to understand actually. Heres the Coles notes version:
The SFAB is a DFO funded advisory process that has been in place since 1964. It is free of charge to attend the meetings, and they are open to the general public.
Its "job" is to provide advice to the Minister of DFO on operational and policy issues that affect recreational fisheries, fishery resources, or fish habitat to name the key ones.
It is comprised of a good number of local committees that represent either angling communities or regions throughout the Province. (ie - Nanaimo vs Central Coast)
Each committee provides advice in the form of motions to regional boards that represent the North and South Coast. The motions are discussed and voted on at the local level, then again at the regional level and then for final approval at the main board level before being forwarded as advice to the minister.
The make up of each regional board is mandated in its terms of reference to provide a voting base that consists of 60% "primary sector" representation and 40% "secondary sector" representation. A secondary sector representative is someone who derives their income through businesses that support the activity of sportfishing. A primary representative is someone who doesn't.
At the regional and main board level, provincial organizations like the BCWF, BCFDF and SFI have voting membership, but the primary\secondary split is always maintained by a large majority of regional seats being represented by primary members.
You'll note that the SFI was mentioned in the last paragraph.
The SFI is a non-profit society that works on behalf of businesses that support the activity of angling, their employees such as guides but also represents the interests of non-professional anglers by representing the interests of the fishery in general. You have to pay to be a member of the SFI, and its business is conducted by a board of directors outside of the AGM and policy conference which takes place in early December each year.
The SFAB is specifically mandated in its TOR as an organization that is not to lobby. Kind of makes sense when you understand that DFO pays for the process. The SFI is one of two leadership organizations that actively lobby on behalf of sport fishing interests in BC. The other one is the BCWF which represents mainly the interests of the "primary sector". Both organizations routinely work together as they understand that there is strength in cooperation and that their interests are actually very closely aligned.
So, to summarize:
The SFAB is an advisory process that doesn't lobby the government. The crappy thing about "advice"is you don't have to listen to it. Any parent with adult kids will know what I mean.
The SFI is the closest thing the sport fishery has to an "industry association" and as such represents those interests first and foremost and it often does that through effective lobbying and political activity. That being said, as a long time member of both orgainzations, I'm still waiting for someone to give me a concrete and plausible example of how, outside a quota based argument, that someone representing the interests of a lodge or charter or tackle store, casn influence the government in a way that would harm the primary angler.
There you have it. A fair number of details left out but thats the basic nuts and bolts of the processes. No conspiricy, no private clubs. If you actually wanna make a difference rather than just play internet hero, join one and get to work like the rest of us.
Sorry to hijack the thread a bit...
CP
The SFAB is a DFO funded advisory process that has been in place since 1964. It is free of charge to attend the meetings, and they are open to the general public.
Its "job" is to provide advice to the Minister of DFO on operational and policy issues that affect recreational fisheries, fishery resources, or fish habitat to name the key ones.
It is comprised of a good number of local committees that represent either angling communities or regions throughout the Province. (ie - Nanaimo vs Central Coast)
Each committee provides advice in the form of motions to regional boards that represent the North and South Coast. The motions are discussed and voted on at the local level, then again at the regional level and then for final approval at the main board level before being forwarded as advice to the minister.
The make up of each regional board is mandated in its terms of reference to provide a voting base that consists of 60% "primary sector" representation and 40% "secondary sector" representation. A secondary sector representative is someone who derives their income through businesses that support the activity of sportfishing. A primary representative is someone who doesn't.
At the regional and main board level, provincial organizations like the BCWF, BCFDF and SFI have voting membership, but the primary\secondary split is always maintained by a large majority of regional seats being represented by primary members.
You'll note that the SFI was mentioned in the last paragraph.
The SFI is a non-profit society that works on behalf of businesses that support the activity of angling, their employees such as guides but also represents the interests of non-professional anglers by representing the interests of the fishery in general. You have to pay to be a member of the SFI, and its business is conducted by a board of directors outside of the AGM and policy conference which takes place in early December each year.
The SFAB is specifically mandated in its TOR as an organization that is not to lobby. Kind of makes sense when you understand that DFO pays for the process. The SFI is one of two leadership organizations that actively lobby on behalf of sport fishing interests in BC. The other one is the BCWF which represents mainly the interests of the "primary sector". Both organizations routinely work together as they understand that there is strength in cooperation and that their interests are actually very closely aligned.
So, to summarize:
The SFAB is an advisory process that doesn't lobby the government. The crappy thing about "advice"is you don't have to listen to it. Any parent with adult kids will know what I mean.
The SFI is the closest thing the sport fishery has to an "industry association" and as such represents those interests first and foremost and it often does that through effective lobbying and political activity. That being said, as a long time member of both orgainzations, I'm still waiting for someone to give me a concrete and plausible example of how, outside a quota based argument, that someone representing the interests of a lodge or charter or tackle store, casn influence the government in a way that would harm the primary angler.
There you have it. A fair number of details left out but thats the basic nuts and bolts of the processes. No conspiricy, no private clubs. If you actually wanna make a difference rather than just play internet hero, join one and get to work like the rest of us.
Sorry to hijack the thread a bit...
CP
Last edited by a moderator:
finaddict
Well-Known Member
Another fruitless waste of time and effort to listen to the un-engaged complain about the "conspiracy in the system". I have decided that I am going to ***** about the bitchers and whine about the whiners. If you think that you can come on to this forum and moan and **** because you don't get a voice in the decisions, then you are part of the problem and not part of the solution. Don't like what you are seeing from the people who devote countless hours to trying to improve the access for sporties? Then join in, you lazy fat whiners. Its not an exclusive group. ANYONE can get their 2 cents in. This forum is not your personal podium for you to bring your self-righteous "holier-than-thou" speeches.
Stop wasting band-width and my time by complaining about the system on this forum. Don't like it? then speak up where it counts, AT MEETINGS.
Stop wasting band-width and my time by complaining about the system on this forum. Don't like it? then speak up where it counts, AT MEETINGS.
Aces
Well-Known Member
Well put!! I agree 100% with you!
Cut Plug
Well-Known Member
As previously mentioned, the SFAB meetings are open to the general public. That being said, the fishery in BC is complex and there is a lot going on at any given time. In an urgent and time sensitive situation, the SFAB executive (a body of elected individuals from the main board) has the ability to offer advice to DFO outside of the normal SFAB process. Remember, this is advice, not decision making. DFO makes the decisions.
The SFI, as a non-profit society, is not required to hold public meetings and therefore can have "closed door" meetings consisting of its directors and\or paid members. The SFI can offer advice to DFO both as part of the SFAB process and through its own lobby efforts outside that process. Lobbying, by its very nature, typically involves a few "experts" trying to influence decisions made by government by talking to either beauracrats or politicians about that groups position on any given issue and how it feels whatever government is going to do will impact the individuals or businesses that lobby group represents.
Their are businesses out there whose sole purpose is to be professional lobbyists on behalf of large industries like the cattle industry, or the commercial halibut fishery as two good examples. With the exception of it's paid Executive Director, the SFI is comprised of volunteers, and the SFAB is 100% volunteers.
Fortunately, both organizations consist of extremely passionate, well informed individuals who can truly be considered "experts" in their field. All are passionate anglers themselves and some of them are even pretty good anglers. Most have well over 10 years experience in the process, and many have over 20.
If you want more influence you'll have to pay your dues like the rest of us. My advice to you is to continue attending the meetings regularly, speak out at the meetings, and offer your proposed solutions. Do your homework first to be sure you are dealing with facts rather than legend or opinion. Depending on how you feel, join the SFI or the BCWF. Both offer individual memberships that are reasonable, and both provide an opportunity for motivated individuals to get more involved by donating their time to the cause.
There are no "backroom decisions" made by any organization. DFO makes the decisions, the groups representing your fishery offer advice and try to influence decisions (which is what they are supposed to do) but in the end it is all up to DFO at either the political or operational level.
I hope this helps.
CP
The SFI, as a non-profit society, is not required to hold public meetings and therefore can have "closed door" meetings consisting of its directors and\or paid members. The SFI can offer advice to DFO both as part of the SFAB process and through its own lobby efforts outside that process. Lobbying, by its very nature, typically involves a few "experts" trying to influence decisions made by government by talking to either beauracrats or politicians about that groups position on any given issue and how it feels whatever government is going to do will impact the individuals or businesses that lobby group represents.
Their are businesses out there whose sole purpose is to be professional lobbyists on behalf of large industries like the cattle industry, or the commercial halibut fishery as two good examples. With the exception of it's paid Executive Director, the SFI is comprised of volunteers, and the SFAB is 100% volunteers.
Fortunately, both organizations consist of extremely passionate, well informed individuals who can truly be considered "experts" in their field. All are passionate anglers themselves and some of them are even pretty good anglers. Most have well over 10 years experience in the process, and many have over 20.
If you want more influence you'll have to pay your dues like the rest of us. My advice to you is to continue attending the meetings regularly, speak out at the meetings, and offer your proposed solutions. Do your homework first to be sure you are dealing with facts rather than legend or opinion. Depending on how you feel, join the SFI or the BCWF. Both offer individual memberships that are reasonable, and both provide an opportunity for motivated individuals to get more involved by donating their time to the cause.
There are no "backroom decisions" made by any organization. DFO makes the decisions, the groups representing your fishery offer advice and try to influence decisions (which is what they are supposed to do) but in the end it is all up to DFO at either the political or operational level.
I hope this helps.
CP
finaddict
Well-Known Member
My apologies HF, If you are in the meetings then you are doing much more than 99% of the sporties who do nothing. Not sensitive, just fed up.
Having said that, no one gets to vote on these issues, only make recommendations. You will be fighting an extremely uphill battle to try to get DFO to accept a vote by sportfisherman on DFO policy, particularly on regional issues and not local issues. DFO would see that as akinto having the fox guard the henhouse (yah know....kinda the way they have allowed other groups to do so ;-) )
lorneparker1
Banned
Before you swear at me, and call mea lazy fat *******. I have and will continue to attend meetings.
I think HF meant having the ability to vote at the local SFAB to pass a recommendation(motion) to the SFAC. ( but i dont want to speak for him)
Which brings up another point that unless you are voted in by the folks at the local SFAB to become a voting member. Your say really means Sweet F'all.
And really it seems like some SFAB (not all im sure) would like to keep their group the way it is, or only bring in people that tow the line. How many new voting members have been added to the local SFAB in say the last 5 years? How bout new seats or new blood at the SFAC level? I have no clue...thats why im asking. Curious is all.
The SFAC is perfect for the DFO. They have complete control over it, and in reality dont have to listen to a single thing that comes out of it. Its their way of saying " we care what you think" when we all know the truth. Granted there are some great things that come out of the process, (updates on potential stocks, potential restrictions for fishieries, some of the science(or lack there of) behind some of the thinking, Hatchery updates, whats going on around the coast, and some of the challenges other groups are facing and potential resolutions. But as i have said REAL change, doesnt happen through a feel good process like this. But hey if this is your thing, give er!
Lorne
Last edited by a moderator:
Cut Plug
Well-Known Member
The SFAB process is always looking for "new blood". New voting members get elected or past members re-elected every two years. All you need to do is put your hat in the ring and get voted in. I can assure you that in no way shape or form is the SFAB process closed, or is there any desire to "keep it the way it is". In fact, much concern is expressed about succession planning and how does the process attract new blood. It seems that in this age of instant electronic gratification, processes that involve people acutally meeting face to face, using a Roberts Rules format, and having to take time to discuss things in order to produce "informed advice" aren't that attractive to younger people.
I wouldn't be so sure that the SFAB is always ignored. There are many examples of where our circumstances would be much, much worse if it wasn't for the efforts of the SFAB. Georgia Strait Chinook, WCVI Coho & Chinook, and Halibut are all good examples of not being perfect from the perspective of many anglers, but would certainly be a hell of a lot worse if no one from the SFAB offered advice to DFO as to how the recreational fishery is impacted by them, and what the views of recreational anglers are regarding DFO's proposals to deal with them.
You're right though, the big, tough serious change issues like the recent reallocation of Halibut, happen through lobbying and policital action, not the more subdued and collaborative approach offered by the SFAB. Perhaps you should take some of that angst and energy and turn it to useful purpose by joining one of the organizations that do that and lend a hand in their political efforts?
CP
Last edited by a moderator:
Aces
Well-Known Member
lorneparker1
Banned
Excellent post. Thank you for that. For almost a year now i have been waiting for a logical well written reponse that makes sense, rather then the rethorical "shut the f up, go to more meetings" or the "you dont know what the f you are talking about" usual responses i get. Do you have an idea of how many new voting members there has been over the last 5 years?
I am a member of the BCWF and have been since i moved here in 2008. I have been at every halibut rally, or info session or what have you sinceIve lived on the island. I do some volunteeering in the fall for coho enhancement on the trent river here in town (catching brood stock). This group is also comprised of and 'older crowd" i think would be an understatement. They say the same thing as you. We dont know who is going to take over, our roles. What is our succcession plan. The younger crowd doesn care like we do. That is BS. We are more passionate then ever! I will same the same thing i have said many times to you and others.
I am 31. There ae LOTS just like me. More then willing to get involved, put some time in, get off our wallets. People that care truly about the fishery and the fish. However.... We have very busy lives. In this day and age, people are VERY busy. In most house holds both parents are working, kids are in 5 different sports, people are working 6 days a week.
So its very hard for a fellow my age Trying to get involved when meetings and events are scheduled on week days, during regualr work hours. It makes it very tough! Also IMO the SFAB doesnt make it well known enough that there is a meeting. Doesnt try to draw a crowd. And i get the reason why. IMO its because the more people, the more off track, the longer the meeting is drawn out, more time is spent on fielding questions and informing people and explaining things then getting down to business. I get it. But if you want " new blood" , want to attract a new crowd, dont want to be viewed as a "good ole boys club" and get some of those people in there that can add value, you are going to have to make it more accessible.
Lastly, i do agree that the format is not exactly 2012. But im not sure how to improve that. Social networking would be one way. Facebook, twitter, etc. IF the SFAC had a face book page, posting meeting times, cliff notes, etc. I can tell you that it would be something widely used.
Last edited by a moderator:
searun
Well-Known Member
Hey Lorne, a good place to start up your way would be working within the local SFAC process to change when they meet. I totally agree with your view that meetings held during normal work hours only serve to exclude rather than include folks who would like to contribute. Many SFAC processes are held in the evenings when more people who might wish to participate are generally available. For all of us, the best place to affect change is from within the process.
As for the SFI, they do an excellent job representing and lobbying for the interests of their members in much the same way as other organizations such as the BCWF. At the end of the day, DFO makes the decisions so it is up to stakeholders like us to ensure we contribute our views to hopefully influence decision outcomes. Democracies are decided by those who show up to vote - not much point complaining if we aren't in some way exercising our vote through involvement.
As for conspiracy theories, well that is highly unlikely...no one is that smart, organized and even strategically positioned to pull that one off. Fact is the pressure to reach a decision in time for the season's start coupled with a lack of understanding the importance of getting facts and information out to the stakeholders is closer to the truth. In my opinion much more needs to be done to earlier in the pre-season to more transparently share the data, decision options and ultimately for all stakeholders who are involved to provide input to DFO. Perhaps even an open house or public forum could be organized to ensure things are as transparent as possible? Would that work for you?
As for the SFI, they do an excellent job representing and lobbying for the interests of their members in much the same way as other organizations such as the BCWF. At the end of the day, DFO makes the decisions so it is up to stakeholders like us to ensure we contribute our views to hopefully influence decision outcomes. Democracies are decided by those who show up to vote - not much point complaining if we aren't in some way exercising our vote through involvement.
As for conspiracy theories, well that is highly unlikely...no one is that smart, organized and even strategically positioned to pull that one off. Fact is the pressure to reach a decision in time for the season's start coupled with a lack of understanding the importance of getting facts and information out to the stakeholders is closer to the truth. In my opinion much more needs to be done to earlier in the pre-season to more transparently share the data, decision options and ultimately for all stakeholders who are involved to provide input to DFO. Perhaps even an open house or public forum could be organized to ensure things are as transparent as possible? Would that work for you?
lorneparker1
Banned
Now your talking.
I dont want to speak for anyone, I am sure many would be in for that.
Lonre
Similar threads
