Petition e-6933 Stop additional closures

[Aces]

This epitomizes the problem. 300,000 licenses issued but no big umbrella organization to contact them. I’d guess 299,000 don’t even know there is a petition. I don’t know how to make this more inclusive or how to better get the word out, but as it is now it works great for DFO. They can tell the minister only 600 of 300,000 don’t like the policy.

How many of those are 1 , 3 or 5 day licenses purchased by tourists for their only trip of the year?

 

[Rain City]

How many of those are 1 , 3 or 5 day licenses purchased by tourists for their only trip of the year?

It should be a requirement of any and all license holders to respond to surveys pertaining to the fishery they're partaking in. No response this year, no license next year. As it turns out, they already have the technology in place.

 

[Tomfoolery]

This epitomizes the problem. 300,000 licenses issued but no big umbrella organization to contact them. I’d guess 299,000 don’t even know there is a petition. I don’t know how to make this more inclusive or how to better get the word out, but as it is now it works great for DFO. They can tell the minister only 600 of 300,000 don’t like the policy.

This exactly. I would have never known about it except for this forum.

 

[ziggy]

How many of those are 1 , 3 or 5 day licenses purchased by tourists for their only trip of the year?

I guess DFO would be the source of that info? It would be interesting to see, but regardless I think we can be pretty sure that such a low participation to the petition is more than likely due to a lack of knowledge of its existence.

 

[chris73]

This exactly. I would have never known about it except for this forum.

And they always say that social media reaches millions in seconds! Where is that when you need it!?

 

[ship happens]

And they always say that social media reaches millions in seconds! Where is that when you need it!?

I've seen it pop up on Facebook groups this and that. My whole circle signed it. I'm extremely dumbfounded. I think the lodges and the groups responsible to a huge majority of the catch, and market such as boat dealers, tackle companies would have more reach with participants then these Facebook groups. People are lazy. It needs to be more aggressive with the shareholders. Either speak up or forever hold your peace and accept what other people want to take away from you.

 

[ziggy]

I find DFO kind of lazy. Instead of polling fishers they offload the responsibility on a handful of well meaning volunteers. They could collect information on a variety of subjects, they have the email data base from license renewals, yet they never do. Is it just too much work, or are they simply afraid of the answer. They seem to only think of widespread consultation before making a decision,with one user group and I doubt they feel heard either. We have the technology, DFO has no excuse for not dealing with license holders directly.

 

[MikePA]

Here is a great resource to fully understand what recreational fishers are up against above and beyond just the killer whale closures. Potentially the end of a way of life for many.

www.salmonforever.ca

 

[cohochinook]

Here is a great resource to fully understand what recreational fishers are up against above and beyond just the killer whale closures. Potentially the end of a way of life for many.

www.salmonforever.ca

It's an excellent resource and great job by the SFI putting this together.

Let's keep the signatures going on the petition.

 

[MikePA]

It's an excellent resource and great job by the SFI putting this together.

Let's keep the signatures going on the petition.

I believe the petition is to deal with the SRKW closures but it's not for the protest of re-writing of the fish allocation policy to heavily favor first Nations and commercial allocation. I believe to have our voices heard for this a letter needs to be written to DFO?

Address below to send an email stating your viewpoint:

DFO.SAPReviewBC-PASRevueBC.MPO@dfo-mpo.gc.ca

 

[fishbadger]

I wish I could sign, but I'm from south of the border. We have our own issues with these SRKW's. Those whales are in a tough spot, but it's not because of recreational fishermen,
fb

 

[JohnS]

I'm blown away at the apathy towards this situation.. this should be all over the news and have way more engagement. If this goes through, fishing will be over, do people not understand that!!

 

[ziggy]

I always info the Minister on anything I send to DFO. You can rest assured the minions don’t want any intervention in their decisions and the dissension never reaches her until they sanitize it . It’s how government works! Gatekeepers are a common occurrence they screen info and provide plausible deniability about unpopular decisions. I’m not suggesting you don’t write DFO, just that you info the Minister as well.

 

[scott craven]

I'm blown away at the apathy towards this situation.. this should be all over the news and have way more engagement. If this goes through, fishing will be over, do people not understand that!!

A mear 687 signatures as of today
Sad...

 

[Duffy]

A mear 687 signatures as of today
Sad...

It is sad that only 687 have signed, how many members are on this site? Could the administrator send every body a e mail saying that it is in our best interest for everybody to sign , or at least look at it.

 

[tuna1]

signed

 

[searun]

When I first saw this petition, like others I was happy to see someone taking action. In retrospect, I wish I had reviewed it more extensively before supporting it.

So I took some time to carefully review the petition wording to critically examine my original thinking and support; 1) what action and solutions are being requested or offered to this government; and 2) anticipate how the Fisheries Minister would respond once the petition is delivered. The more I looked and pondered the petition wording reading it as if I was the Fisheries Minister, the more the petition doesn't make any sense. Looking at each of the petition requests investigating what DFO or the Minister has completed or not....Here's what I found:

Petition Requests are:

"We, the undersigned, residents of Coastal Communities of Vancouver Island, call upon the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans to urgently bring together all relevant stakeholders, including recreational fishers, to complete consultations and establish effective, science-driven actions that support recovery and sustainability for Southern Resident Killer Whales in British Columbia's waters while also sustaining the multimillion-dollar recreational fishing industry that coastal communities depend on."

Here's what the Petition asks of the Fisheries Minister - and what action has already been completed:

1) Bring together all relevant stakeholders - DONE
2) Establish consultations - DONE
3) Establish science-driven actions to support recovery of SRKW - DONE
4) Sustain recreational fishing industry and communities that depend on it - FAILED

So moving onto putting myself in the shoes so to speak of the Minister and considering how I would respond to this Petition as Fisheries Minister, I looked back to see what DFO has historically done to address SRKW issues. The formal reply to this petition are simple - DFO has already DONE most of what the petition requests.

This petition unfortunately asks the Minister to do things that DFO has already completed - and worse, does not offer a viable solution to the 4th request - how does the petition suggest as a solution the Minister moves to implement an action(s) that sustain the recreational fishing industry - and even better - why and what solution would create a balance between supporting recreational fishing opportunity while also enhancing protections for SRKW?? This petition unfortunately doesn't address those objectives. I wish the petition could have been better researched and formulated...as written, the Fisheries Minister will have no problem responding to this petition.

The authors of the petition should have done some homework prior to drafting it...clearly some specifics requested - DFO has already completed 90% of what has been requested.

1) Established a mulit-stake holder consultation - DFO has done so since 2018 - Transport Canada (TC), Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO), Environment and Climate Change Canada (ECCC) and Parks Canada (PC) worked with Indigenous communities and organizations (including through the Southern Resident Killer Whale Multi-Nation Group), the Southern Resident Killer Whale Indigenous and Multi-Stakeholder Advisory Group (IMAG), the Technical Working Groups (TWGs), stakeholders, and the general public to inform the development of the 2025 and 2026 management measures to address the threats of physical and acoustic disturbance by vessels to Southern Resident Killer Whales.

2) Establish Consultations - See above - extensive consultation venues have been undertaken

3) Science-driven actions - Each of the Technical Working Groups have within their memberships leading experts from the scientific community in BC and WA State, including other knowledge holders (FN's, Recreational community, ENGO's).

 

[SpringFever2359]

I guess I've read it differently than you searun.

IMO a petition in response to all the bs decisions and endless closures or slot size restrictions that are being forced down our throats with little to no regard to "science"..they are all for other political reasons, blatantly obvious to critical thinkers it has nothing to do with saving fish for whales!

 

[searun]

I guess I've read it differently than you searun.

IMO a petition in response to all the bs decisions and endless closures or slot size restrictions that are being forced down our throats with little to no regard to "science"..they are all for other political reasons, blatantly obvious to critical thinkers it has nothing to do with saving fish for whales!

None of what you cite is in the petition in the section that asks government via the Minister to address. That's my point.

I've been very close to this issue and having also spent some time in Ottawa have come to appreciate how the Federal brand of government works. You need to be very specific and pin down with precision what exactly is being requested that is markedly different than what government has been already delivering. That's where I see issues with the construct of the petition - its asking the Fisheries Minister to do things DFO has already delivered on quite extensively. So it will be very easy for the Minister to dismiss this petition as worded.

Moreover, the genesis of these new "incremental management measures" wasn't driven by DFO....it was a government response to the ENGO's weaponizing the Species At Risk Act (SARA). Part of the ENGO strategy of death by thousand cuts, using every legislative and legal option available to chip away towards eventually closing all recreational fishing.

So the SARA listing request left government with the task per the Act of reviewing the current suite of measures and trying to avoid "listing" SRKW under SARA - a nuclear option if adopted. A SARA listing would have resulted in legislated management measures that would have closed most coastal marine based businesses that in any way posed a potential risk to SRKW. So, to avoid that, government rejected the SARA listing, and responded by directing DFO to examine "incremental measures" that would offer even greater protections.

And here we are...so asking the Minister to do 3 things DFO has already extensively completed isn't productive IMO as the Minister will simply dismiss the petition out of hand. Waste of time.

 

[chris73]

I did not see any meaningful consultation with the rec sector about the proposed measures. If DFO did the same with FN and called this joke "consultation" they'd be sued immediately.