Aquaculture improving?..The Fish Farm Thread

Unreel said:
So Horgan is trying to get Ottawa to help the fish farm industry.. Has he also reached out to the feds for support for the commercial fishing sector or rec sector that’s been hammered by restrictions and closures? Interesting to see where the government’s priorities are these days.
Click to expand...
It’s like everything else in politics these days just follow the money.
 
vancouverisland.ctvnews.ca

Horgan concerned over effect B.C. fishery closures will have on tourism

Horgan accused the DFO Pacific Region of focusing on short-term fixes rather than a cohesive long-term strategy.
vancouverisland.ctvnews.ca

In a letter to Fisheries and Oceans Minister Dominic LeBlanc, Horgan says the department's approach to managing northern and southern resident killer whale populations is hurting coastal communities.
 
I think this situation brings us full circle back to the issues already discussed on pages 94 thru 96 in this thread. As I said back then disputes are often common - esp between non-hereditary leaderships (C&C) between adjacent FNs, and especially when regarding this contentious industry.

And of the 200-odd FN in BC, maybe at best a dozen might be ok w open net-pens operating in their territories. The other FNs are largely opposed to those impacts - esp when discussing FNs adjacent to those farming areas. And there is substantial debate even within those dozen communities on the legacy of the operations - despite all the glossy websites and brochures produced by the industry:

namgis.jpg
 
agentaqua said:
I think this situation brings us full circle back to the issues already discussed on pages 94 thru 96 in this thread. As I said back then disputes are often common - esp between non-hereditary leaderships (C&C) between adjacent FNs, and especially when regarding this contentious industry.

And of the 200-odd FN in BC, maybe at best a dozen might be ok w open net-pens operating in their territories. The other FNs are largely opposed to those impacts - esp when discussing FNs adjacent to those farming areas. And there is substantial debate even within those dozen communities on the legacy of the operations - despite all the glossy websites and brochures produced by the industry:

View attachment 77179
Click to expand...

just more hypocrisy, one hereditary chief says they should have the right to stop a pipeline with countless FN support behind it but First Nations wanting to fish farms should have to abide by some consensus from all overs.

thaus why them going back and Fotth like this is awesome it’s breaking their code of not getting involved in another FN Buisness.

not to mention it just makes them look like an other incompetent politician

gonna see this more and more as the government hands more control over.

you even said you would be okay with First Nation fish farms. Of course now that that could be a reality even you are walking that back.

nation to nation I thought
 
Last edited:
There was quite a bit more context & posts describing the needs for defensible siting criteria, as well as a lengthy discussion over determining realized & potential impacts/infringements to adjacent wild stocks and to adjacent FN aquatic resources as I am convinced you already know goes along with that discussion WMY - because you participated in that discussion.

In short - there is a difference between "approvals" verses ongoing impacts from operations.
 
agentaqua said:
There was quite a bit more context & posts describing the needs for defensible siting criteria, as well as a lengthy discussion over determining realized & potential impacts/infringements to adjacent wild stocks and to adjacent FN aquatic resources as I am convinced you already know goes along with that discussion WMY - because you participated in that discussion.

In short - there is a difference between "approvals" verses ongoing impacts from operations.
Click to expand...

instead of complaining to the government perhaps they should try nation to nation first,

o suspect tho they know what it’s like to try to negotiate with another FN tho lol

they can’t even figure out how to share salmon among themselves on the Fraser with nations breaking rank and protest fishing all the time impacting another First Nation.

the more control the note they get the more they are going to be to deal with the same issues the goverment had to. It’s awesome.

just wait till they have to pay taxes to fund their own governments.

pretty obbould why the Canadian goverment can’t wait to hang over the control ov these resources, way less headalkes.
 
Last edited:
many compounding issues you mentioned on your last post, WMY. I believe the accumulation of those issues highlights the differences and issues inherent in comparing and contrasting the differences in governance between the hereditary systems (where they exist and are functional) verses the band council institutions which we also discussed previously on this thread.

There is less confusion about rights, title, territory and representation in the hereditary systems and there always are very defined ways to reconcile any disputes, as well. But any alternative options are seen as a direct threat to the colonial politicians, and many actions have been taken over many years in order to dismantle those pre-existing governance platforms (the institution of the band councils, outlawing potlaches, denying the right to vote and the right to hire legal representation being but a few examples).

And, as you mentioned - the long-term changes imposed by any treaties (where they exist) end-up separating FNs from what now is called Indigenous Services Canada (used to be called Indian and Northern Affairs Canada) and that support; and the imposition of nation taxes. I don't think that worked in Kincolith's favour in the case of the Nisga'a Treaty, as one example.

And - also as you mentioned - land/water use issues are but 1 theme that any government will always have to deal with. No simple answers for any of it.

But - as always - esp with any government - accountability is always the key holy grail that can reconcile disputes - if it exists. Crooks never want that - and that adequately describes our federal system IMHO - including DFO and the Aquaculture Branch.

So any issues between FNs would best be resolved thru hereditary systems - not thru the Band Council system, IMHO. And those changes will take years.

But on the issue of determining potential and realized impacts to aquatic resources - we all would be best served thru an actual environmental assessment with scoping (determination of geographic boundaries using science that is totally available). It may take a court case to force DFO and the Aquaculture Branch to do that. All of this was also mentioned previously on this thread on pages 94-96.
 
no signatures at all on this letter - just an email for a PR firm. Yet they claim they speak on behalf of a number of FN communities:
277229210_519907736366292_1650116119921795969_n.jpg

277562062_519907769699622_7365036233965984812_n.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

R
The Salmon Skyline - A good read.
Replies
0
Views
499
Rockfish
R
Whole in the Water
Concerns about herring kills at B.C. fish farms
Replies
26
Views
3K
Fishing?
F
B
Integrity commissioner launches investigation of DFO officials over alleged attempts to silence scientists IAN BAILEY
Replies
6
Views
1K
Fishing?
F
R
The Crisis Facing Alberta Wildlife Expert biologists are being elbowed aside by politicians and special interests.
Replies
0
Views
374
RalphH
R
Dogbreath
Tofino Finally Stops Shitting into the Ocean
Replies
1
Views
450
agentaqua
A
Back
Top