Spinning our Wheels, by Bob Hooton

[OldBlackDog]

Spinning our Wheels

How many voices of how many persuasions, all claiming to be devoutly concerned about the future of wild salmon (steelhead are completely off the radar), are now engaged in the processes that are re…

steelheadvoices.com

Taken from blog,
How many voices of how many persuasions, all claiming to be devoutly concerned about the future of wild salmon (steelhead are completely off the radar), are now engaged in the processes that are reasonably bracketed by the definition of “collaboration”? Wikipedia states “collaboration is the process of two or more people, entities or organizations working together to complete a task or achieve a goal. Collaboration is similar to cooperation”. Their definition goes on to state “Most collaboration requires leadership, although the form of leadership can be social within a decentralized and egalitarian group (defined as one believing in or based on the principle that all people are equal and deserve equal rights and opportunities)“. Oops, all of a sudden the term collaboration is just slightly out of sync with what governments would have us believe recreational anglers are engaged in today.

The feature that completely overrides everything all the overlapping, often redundant collaborative processes now cluttering up the recreational fisheries airwaves is crystal clear in the June 11 news release issued by BC’s Ministry of Indigenous Relations and Reconciliation. That release includes one particular reference that anyone who thinks they have access to politicians or decision makers needs to be familiar with. Have a look:

https://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/government/ministries-organizations/ministries/indigenous-relations-reconciliation/act_action_plan_for_consultation.pdf

Those of us who vote in this supposed democracy are shut out of any opportunity for input. All those other processes that keep spawning and inviting our ongoing collaboration are trumped by this one.

 

[OldBlackDog]

More from blog,
The LFFA is the most impactful group in terms of the conservation status of every stock and species traversing the lower 200 km of the Fraser River. They are addicted to gill nets that didn’t exist prior to their introduction by the evil colonialists 150 years ago. No amount of data or logic will deter the LFFA members from believing they invented gill nets and used them “since time immemorial”, nor will any amount of evidence that the term selective gill net is a classic oxymoron. In fact, the 2020 efforts to restrict set net and drift net activity by LFFA members to daylight only hours only and mandatory attendance of nets to “hot pick” them and release non-target endangered Interior Fraser Steelhead were flatly rejected for 2021. Those methods don’t even qualify as tokenism, let alone conservation, but they were wholly dismissed as outside the jurisdiction of DFO in the comments on the 2021 draft IFMP. How will all those collaborative groups above deal with that declaration? The IFMP commentary by the LFFA emphasizes the messages inherent in the link at the outset of this post. They consider themselves to be fully in command, not by-standers subject to the collaborative outputs of all those groups described above. Do those involve in those groups get it?

 

[onefish]

My experience with collaboration with various entities including the dept headed by Mr Hooton. Attend meetings, listen to agenda, various people make suggestions, presenters nod heads and say they will get back to you, after waiting patiently the finalized agenda is posted basically word for word from the introductory proposal first seen a couple of months earlier. I have gone through this with various govt entities and private sector business and the results have been identical each time.
I have come to the conclusion consultation is simply a box to be ticked off and now we can proceed with the project/directive/initiatives as originally brainstormed behind closed doors.

 

[terrin]

My experience with collaboration with various entities including the dept headed by Mr Hooton. Attend meetings, listen to agenda, various people make suggestions, presenters nod heads and say they will get back to you, after waiting patiently the finalized agenda is posted basically word for word from the introductory proposal first seen a couple of months earlier. I have gone through this with various govt entities and private sector business and the results have been identical each time.
I have come to the conclusion consultation is simply a box to be ticked off and now we can proceed with the project/directive/initiatives as originally brainstormed behind closed doors.

What dept does Bob Hooten head?

 

[onefish]

What dept does Bob Hooten head?

He was with the MOE and his area of expertise is/was steelhead management, first on the Island and then on the Skeena system.
I am in no way trying to denigrate Bobs efforts, however it has been my experience that the consulting process is seriously flawed, regardless of who is doing the consulting.