Observations on Supply and Demand - By Bob Hooton

[terrin]

Membership SFAB​

The majority of members of the SFAB will be Primary Level User Group Members.

Primary Level User Group Members are persons who do not receive a significant amount of their annual income directly or indirectly from the recreational fishery. A Primary User Group Member may include a person who is the representative from a non- industry recreational fishing advocacy organization.

The remaining members of the SFAB will be Secondary Level User Group Members.

Secondary Level User Group Members are persons who receive a significant amount of their annual income directly or indirectly from the recreational fishery. A Secondary Level User Group Member may include a person who represents a recreational industry organization.

Membership on the SFAB will be restricted to individuals who are:

• representatives from the North or South Coast Regional Committees;
• representatives from a recognized angling advocacy organization having a provincial membership base;
• representatives from an angling industry or related industry organization having a provincial membership base; or
• persons holding positions on the Pacific Salmon Treaty process, as representatives of the recreational community
• the chairs of the Groundfish/Shellfish and Chinook/Coho Working Groups.

The SFAB will be comprised of the following members:

Representing	Number of seats
North Coast SFAB Regional Committee Chair	1
North Coast SFAB Regional Committee elected reps	7
South Coast SFAB Regional Committee Chair	1
South Coast SFAB Regional Committee elected reps	7
PSC recreational commissioner and panel members	7
Groundfish/Shellfish and Chinook/Coho Working Group chairs	2
BCWF B.C. Wildlife Federation	2
SFI Sport Fishing Institute of B.C.	1
SSOBC Steelhead Society of B.C.	1
BCFFF B.C. Federation of Fly Fishers	1
BCFDF B.C. Federation of Drift Fishers	1
MTA Marine Trades Association	1
BCMA B.C. Marina Operators Association	1
BCLCA B.C. Lodging and Campgrounds Association	1

Not sure what is so funny about a document? Or is it not factual and just a joke?

 

[OldBlackDog]

Not sure what is so funny about a document? Or is it not factual and just a joke?

Factual, taken from the DFO site.

One wonders if at meetings of the Boards if the question is asked and confirmed about members ability to vote on any subjects.

One hopes that the Government ensures this will always be the way the SFAB is structured.

 

[Teal]

Factual, taken from the DFO site.

One wonders if at meetings of the Boards if the question is asked and confirmed about members ability to vote on any subjects.

One hopes that the Government ensures this will always be the way the SFAB is structured.

Also, it would be interesting to know how many of the committees and groups etc are made up of secondary level users as defined by this document?

 

[OldBlackDog]

Also, it would be interesting to know how many of the committees and groups etc are made up of secondary level users as defined by this document?

It would come out about the same.

Note the following concerns taken from the blog,

• Gino DeVito
  November 11, 2021 at 4:51 am
  Bob are you saying you need to be a member of the SFI to be in the SFAB?
  REPLY
  • 
    Bob Hooton
    November 11, 2021 at 5:27 am
    No. I just make the observation that there are several prominent members of the SFI (a body comprised of commercial recreational fishing interests) that are also prominent members of the SFAB. Further, there is about $1.2M that has been allocated to conduct a comprehensive review and re-structuring of the SFAB. I believe $700K of that money went to the SFI who named one of their own as the “Director, Vision Implementation”, the person largely responsible for co-ordinating the delivery of that re-structured SFAB. Doesn’t it seem a bit strange that a guide belonging to a commercially focused group and also a director of the SFAB would be in such an influential role?
    REPLY
• 
  Roy Nichols
  November 12, 2021 at 5:51 pm
  100% agree with you Bob. The agendas are totally different between the lodges and indendent guides vs the recreational angler. Can you say $$$? Obviously their views will be slanted toward thier agendas. At the end of the day it’s all about the money and not the fish. Make no mistake about. Just look what has transpired on the Thompson

 

[Teal]

There are two types of people in this world. Those that work together, and put personal differences aside to achieve a common outcome. Then there are those that don't.

Your a don't. Blasting the angling group publicly to create divisions online, and also siding with the very NGO groups that to be honest don't care about our fisheries is tacky.

It creates divisions and infighting. I mean look at the comments on blog I posted totally embarrassing.

Just my view as just rec. angler. If this is your way forward I don't see much hope to be honest. No one will want to be in coalition like that. Sorry just tired of it.

Given the extreme conservation crisis these fish are facing wouldn't putting aside differences include working with NGO's and FN's when there is a common conservation goal?

 

[agentaqua]

Given the extreme conservation crisis these fish are facing wouldn't putting aside differences include working with NGO's and FN's when there is a common conservation goal?

Good idea, Teal. But as I've said before on this forum: "egos are a poor fit in any team effort anyways - they get in the way."

Maybe you've noticed that there's numerous big egos in the steelhead lobby?

 

[Teal]

Good idea, Teal. But as I've said before on this forum: "egos are a poor fit in any team effort anyways - they get in the way."

Maybe you've noticed that there's numerous big egos in the steelhead lobby?

There are egos in most situations, that being said I would suggest that the best way forward is to look for common ground with multiple stake holders with a common conservation goal.