Fishing with Rod Discussion Forum
Fishing in British Columbia => General Discussion => Topic started by: thor on December 07, 2006, 12:14:23 PM
-
How many more "mistakes" does it take to figure things out????
Read the artice posted today on CBC.CA
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/british-columbia/story/2006/12/07/tsawwassen.html
-
http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/story.html?id=4f89e638-c384-44e4-8581-9eb284810d33&k=87927
Hmmm, well let's see now.
360 members of the Tsawwassen First Nation got 1% of the Fraser Valley sockeye.
There are 180,000 aboriginals in BC.
Assuming that they all want equal access to fish in BC.
How many times does 360 go into 180,000?
It's a good thing at least I finally figured out how to use a calculator. ;D ;D ;D
500 times!
So, that's 500% of all fish in BC should go to aboriginals! >:( >:( >:(
Yeah, lucky them.
And, poor us.
Guess we all better take up another sport.
Lawn bowling anyone? :) ;D ::)
-
http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/story.html?id=4f89e638-c384-44e4-8581-9eb284810d33&k=87927
Hmmm, well let's see now.
360 members of the Tsawwassen First Nation got 1% of the Fraser Valley sockeye.
There are 180,000 aboriginals in BC.
Assuming that they all want equal access to fish in BC.
How many times does 360 go into 180,000?
It's a good thing at least I finally figured out how to use a calculator. ;D ;D ;D
500 times!
So, that's 500% of all fish in BC should go to aboriginals! >:( >:( >:(
Yeah, lucky them.
And, poor us.
Guess we all better take up another sport.
Lawn bowling anyone? :) ;D ::)
That's ok.. according to the elitists there is no way for us to catch them ethically anyways :)
-
some days i'm glad i'm aboriginal..... although.... i sure ain't proud of the "it's all ours" mentality of many aboriginal groups in this country. I stongly disagree with the allocations laid out in this treaty and am disgusted that each band member in Tsawwassen band gets 230,000.00 each !!! Un fricken real... our tax dollars at work. For the record, I am Metis, not first nations, as a Metis I get jack diddly fugg all, from our governments coffers.
-
"360 members of the Tsawwassen First Nation got 1% of the Fraser Valley sockeye."
Where did you get this stat from? I had a look at the Sun article as well as the treaty, and couldn't see where it says that....
I saw something about "guarantees natives a share of the lucrative Fraser River salmon fishery" but didn't see an actual figure attached to any statement except in the treaty document. Is the volume of water in the treaty document somehow tied to a quantity of salmon? am I missing something here?
The only good thing I read in all this was after the treatys are in place, these particular bands will be expected to pay taxes....
-
Dear BCGuy,
Please read page 2 of the same article: "It gives them about a one-per-cent share of the fishery, though it is in a side agreement outside the treaty, thus meaning it is not formally "constitutionalized.""
-
Dear BCGuy,
Please read page 2 of the same article: "It gives them about a one-per-cent share of the fishery, though it is in a side agreement outside the treaty, thus meaning it is not formally "constitutionalized.""
I think that there are + 90 bands on the Fraser?
You guys can forget about all the flossing debates as there will be no fish to fish for.
Don't forget that there are bands on the West Coast of the island that are in negotaitions and guess what they are working on.
Yes, more fish and all types of fish.
-
Dear BCGuy,
Please read page 2 of the same article: "It gives them about a one-per-cent share of the fishery, though it is in a side agreement outside the treaty, thus meaning it is not formally "constitutionalized.""
I think that there are + 90 bands on the Fraser?
You guys can forget about all the flossing debates as there will be no fish to fish for.
Don't forget that there are bands on the West Coast of the island that are in negotaitions and guess what they are working on.
Yes, more fish and all types of fish.
I remember Bill Otway standing up at the SFI meeting stating (roughly his words) "Think about this here...cuz once you give it away..you're never getting it back!"
Sick and SAD day for fisheries.
That's ok...120 million won't last them too long. Let me se...120 milllion...360 members...don't worry...won't be long until all 360 are flat broke.
-
http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/story.html?id=4f89e638-c384-44e4-8581-9eb284810d33&k=87927
Hmmm, well let's see now.
360 members of the Tsawwassen First Nation got 1% of the Fraser Valley sockeye.
There are 180,000 aboriginals in BC.
Assuming that they all want equal access to fish in BC.
How many times does 360 go into 180,000?
It's a good thing at least I finally figured out how to use a calculator. ;D ;D ;D
500 times!
So, that's 500% of all fish in BC should go to aboriginals! >:( >:( >:(
Yeah, lucky them.
And, poor us.
Guess we all better take up another sport.
Lawn bowling anyone? :) ;D ::)
Will there be enough lawns after the land claims?
Don't worry about not being able to fish. I'm sure you can for the right price.
Not sure if its true but I heard that you can fish the Little Campbell River on Native land if you pay them a fee.
I also heard of a similar arrangement up north by the Nisgaa area.
-
Yup, see that now, but where is the agreement actually laid out, just trying to get to the fine print...,
another important aspect of this agreement is the removal of land from the ALR for industrial development and port expansion, this whole thing absolutely reeks!!!!
How does that song go?
"You say you haven't been the same since you had your little crash
But you might feel better if I gave you some cash
The more I think about it, old billy was right
Let's kill all the lawyers, kill 'em tonight
You don't want to work, you want to live like a king
But the big, bad world doesn't owe you a thing"
-
Harper, Tsawwassen First Nation agree to $119M treaty
Published: Friday, December 08, 2006
VANCOUVER — Prime Minister Stephen Harper committed his government Friday to a modern-day treaty that will give a West Coast native band a guaranteed quota of Fraser River salmon, a move that has angered one of Harper’s MPs and disenchanted many of his long-time loyalists.
The treaty, also controversial because it awards the Tsawwassen First Nation more than 200 hectares of prime coastal farmland that the natives can use for industrial use, is valued by the native band’s lawyers at about $119 million.
After 13 years of negotiations, the deal is expected to be put to a vote in the B.C. legislature and the House of Commons in the next few months, where its is likely to easily pass. The 358 members of the Tsawwassen band, which is located on a slice of waterfront near Vancouver, will likely vote on the deal this summer.
“This is a great day for us,” said Tsawwassen Chief Kim Baird on Friday. “We value this deal at $119 million. We’ve calculated the value of the agricultural lands.”
But to get the proposed treaty, the second in less than six weeks under B.C.’s treaty process, Harper has had to pay a political price.
Conservative MP John Cummins, a longtime loyalist, has publicly criticized the treaty as creating a “racially based” fishery because a side-agreement awards the natives a share of the salmon fishery — from 0.7 to about three per cent, depending on the species. The treaty values the salmon fishery at under $2.7 million annually.
That has also drawn the ire of some West Coast fishermen, who believe Harper has abandoned his promise to oppose such a fishery with preferential quotas. Phil Eidsvik, the head of the Fisheries Survival Coalition, has accused the Conservative government of a “massive betrayal.”
Indian Affairs Minister Jim Prentice, who took part in the ceremony Friday on the reserve, has said that there is room for a fellow Conservative MP to disagree. But he supported what was in the treaty.
“It charts a future based on respect and co-operation,” Prentice said in a statement.”As the first final agreement in B.C. Lower Mainland, it serves as an excellent showcase for reconciliation among communities and their governments.”
There are far larger stakes than fish at play in this treaty.
Both the federal and provincial governments are hoping to expand a container port that sits just off the waterfront property of the tiny B.C. native band. A treaty will make it possible for a major expansion because the Tsawwassen want to use some of the 207 hectares of farmland they will be granted to build warehouses and storage facilities for the millions of containers that could be arriving from Asia in years ahead.
As well, the treaty will mean the Tsawwassen will be giving up their status as a reserve. That means that after 12 years after the treaty becomes law, the natives will lose their tax exempt status under the Indian Act and must pay the same taxes as other Canadians.
© Vancouver Sun 2006
-
Bill or Gerry for Prime Minister. ;D ;D It seems once a government gets into power they seem to all do the same thing when they set into power be they Consecrative, Liberal or worse still the NDP.
How about the Greens?
-
Mulroney and gang set up race based fishing in the first place. As for the rest of us, I guess it's fighting over the last few pikeminnows. I voted Green once before becuse I know the others track records on looking after old mother earth. Don't blame the first nations for wanting more than a reserve but then what about the Metis. If your the Chiefs family and you marry a white your still FN, go figure. I think were in for bad fishing times despite the treaties and bottom bouncing flossers. Someone has to take stock of our fish and do the right thing. Cummings and his ilk would only fish them to extingtion anyway.
-
Mulroney and gang set up race based fishing in the first place. As for the rest of us, I guess it's fighting over the last few pikeminnows. I voted Green once before becuse I know the others track records on looking after old mother earth. Don't blame the first nations for wanting more than a reserve but then what about the Metis. If your the Chiefs family and you marry a white your still FN, go figure. I think were in for bad fishing times despite the treaties and bottom bouncing flossers. Someone has to take stock of our fish and do the right thing. Cummings and his ilk would only fish them to extingtion anyway.
I think things will be changing on the flossing front but this treaty thing is going to be a real challenge to try and change things as it is very complex issue. The latest document on this treaty is 600 pages long, I have not even started to read it. :-\ ::)
-
Yes Chris, and the thing is written by people who wouldn't know a salmon if it fell out of their pants. ;)
-
It seems once a government gets into power they seem to all do the same thing when they set into power be they Consecrative, Liberal or worse still the NDP.
Couldn't agree more. They'll say and promise anything to get your vote.
-
Time to start the Fisherman Party but there is not enough of us. ;D Bill once ran Federally I believe but he lost to an NDP er. :'(
-
Mulroney and gang set up race based fishing in the first place. As for the rest of us, I guess it's fighting over the last few pikeminnows. I voted Green once before becuse I know the others track records on looking after old mother earth. Don't blame the first nations for wanting more than a reserve but then what about the Metis. If your the Chiefs family and you marry a white your still FN, go figure. I think were in for bad fishing times despite the treaties and bottom bouncing flossers. Someone has to take stock of our fish and do the right thing. Cummings and his ilk would only fish them to extingtion anyway.
I think things will be changing on the flossing front but this treaty thing is going to be a real challenge to try and change things as it is very complex issue. The latest document on this treaty is 600 pages long, I have not even started to read it. :-\ ::)
Chris, you are old enough to know that you should never assume.
There will be no need to deal with flossing real soon as it is obvious that the treatys are going to be done on the backs of fish and wildlife.
Just read the latest three agreements and look at the allocations made.
Sockeye are it appears going to be allocated at 1% per band on the Fraser and there are 96 bands. That does not include all the other bands that get them in the ocean.
So much for that fishery.
Coho are allocated at 500 to the Tsawwassen band and it will not take long for all of them to be gone as well.
Chinook are allocated as well.
Check out the crab alllocation, not many going to be left there.
This was all known years ago and the public in general is going along with it.
The people who fish ( or did ) will get the clear message of what effect this has on them in the next few years.
Wait till you see the one on the west coast and the effect it will have.
Vedder river and all rivers are on the table for agreements.
Wait till the bands around chilliwack negotiate on fish and wildlife.
-
Here is the deal on the treaty. I know someone who was really involved in this process and this is how it was described to me. The food fishery was based on the First Nations historic catches plus a bit to cover off future population growth of the band members. It was generally based on a percentage of the total allowable catch (i.e. the total number of fish available after conservation has been taken into account) and has a cap. In low run years the number will be low but in years of high runs the number they can catch for food is capped so it does not escalate beyond what they can consume. There is an upper limit. Food fish cannot be sold, and cleans up a problem that has been occuring elsewhere. They can use the fish to trade and barter with other First Nation members, but cannot be used to trade and barter with non-aboriginals.
The commercial fishery is not part of the treaty, not constitutionally protected and can be terminated at the discretion of the DFO. The 1% is 1% of the fishery, however the fishery is currently 100% spoken for by current commercial and recreational fishermen. Therefore to have the First Nation access the 1% agreed to in the side agreement, commercial licences will be bought from the current commercial fishermen and provided to the FN. The FN will use these licences to participate in the regular commercial fishery in the same manner as non-aboriginal fishermen, meaning they will have the same openings and closings, same locations, same requirements for catch monitoring and reporting, etc. as everyone else.
So the FN's will have a greater participation in the commercial fishery, but the recreational fishermen should not see any differences at all.
That is how it was described to me from someone who know. We did not discuss numbers and I used the 1% as an example, but when reading through the Tswawwassen agreement the number seemed more like 0.78%, but that is close enough for this example. Does this make sense?
-
FYI. This is only one species. It shows the fish are from the TAC not the commercial harvest.
As I said 1% x 96 bands on the Fraser, not accounting for the fish the other bands get in the ocean.
By the way this band gets Fraser River Sockeye as well.
MAA-NULTH FIRST NATIONS FINAL AGREEMENT Fisheries
110
SCHEDULE 1 – CHINOOK SALMON ALLOCATION
1. In this Schedule:
“Ocean Chinook Salmon Canadian Total Allowable Catch” means the amount established by
the Minister as available for harvest in Canadian waters off the West Coast Vancouver Island by
aboriginal, commercial and recreational fisheries of chinook salmon that are predominantly of
non-West Coast Vancouver Island stocks.
“Ocean Chinook Salmon” means chinook salmon taken into account in the calculation of
Ocean Chinook Salmon Canadian Total Allowable Catch.
“Terminal Chinook Salmon” means chinook salmon in those parts of Areas 23, 26, 123 and
126 as defined in the Pacific Fishery Management Area Regulations, that are landward inside of
a line that is one nautical mile seaward from the surfline, but does not include Ocean Chinook
Salmon.
Allocation
2. Each year, the Maa-nulth Fish Allocation for chinook salmon is:
a. an amount of Ocean Chinook Salmon equal to 1,875 pieces plus 1.78 % of the
Ocean Chinook Salmon Canadian Total Allowable Catch; and
b. an amount of Terminal Chinook Salmon equal to:
i. 200 pieces, when the return of Terminal Chinook Salmon is Critical;
ii. 1,500 pieces, when the return of Terminal Chinook Salmon is Low;
iii. 2,000 pieces, when the return of Terminal Chinook Salmon is Moderate;
and
iv. 2,600 pieces, when the return of Terminal Chinook Salmon is Abundant.
-
Darn governments all seem to be the same, hats off to Cummins for standing what he believes in.
I wish I knew the answer but I donot think there is one, to stop this maddness, the reason is there is so many that donot care so one cannot stop them marching on with their agenda. Never one to give up I will talk to Bill in the next day and see what we can try to do if anything via the court system. As most know we have a lawyer that we pay a yearly fee as a retainer, looks like more work for him and us to fund raise to pay for it.
I always find it strange some groups get money hand over foot for their program and we, the good old taxpayer not only fund it but we can not tap into the gravy boat for our side of the picture.
Time maybe to march on Parliament Hill just dressed in hip waders, maybe not a good idea at the time of year as one couild freeze you know what off. Anyway, who would be interested in a bunch of old fishermen just in waders, maybe a calender would be a better fund raiser. ;D ;D
Its late, I am tired and getting carried away I can see that, will take out my frustrations on a duck hunt tomorrow, with the ducks most likely the wrong target. >:( :( :o ??? ::) :-[ :'(
-
In this agreement, the Province has NO limit placed on Steelhead, cutthroat trout or sturgeon.
Therefore these species are open ended and unless there is a conservation concern it is open season.
Thompson Steelhead can and will be harvested.
-
Let me put all of this conversation into a short comment. The Natives got what they wanted(all the fish) the government signed another piece of paper then read what it said on it and realised what they did. And the fisherman(us guys) Get screwed up the @$$ one more time. ITs always been like this and it always will be!
-
If you re read this entire post and only take the info given by those who actually know what is happening it isn't at all as bad as it seems.. this is just another case of things being blown out of proportion.. people like Drama and the peeps on this board are no different than anywhere else !!
IMO
TR
-
At the end of the day, there is nothing that we can do about this.
It is way beyond us, we will have to get used to the new restrictions that will effect all of your hunting and fishing as these treatys come into effect.
-
I must be missing something. ??? I have read the fisheries chapter of the Tsawwassen treaty, and the Lheidli Tenneh agreement, and don't see anything too scary for me as a sporty. :-\ I suspect some commercial guys may want to sell their licence to the feds (nice retirement package) so the feds could give it to the natives, but I don't see anything causing me heartburn as a rec fisherman. If I am missing something, then show me the sections in the agreement that I am missing. I don't subscribe to misrepresenting facts or playing on fears or innuendo, so I don't believe cummins that the world as we know it is going to come crashing down. Treaties have been settled across Canada for many many years, except for BC, and I don't see their sport fishing curtailed at all.
FYI - I am not native, and am just a regular white guy from the burbs who likes to get out on the weekends. So if anyone actually knows what parts of the agreements is problematic, then I for one would like to know so I can understand it better. ;D
-
I must be missing something. ??? I have read the fisheries chapter of the Tsawwassen treaty, and the Lheidli Tenneh agreement, and don't see anything too scary for me as a sporty. :-\ I suspect some commercial guys may want to sell their licence to the feds (nice retirement package) so the feds could give it to the natives, but I don't see anything causing me heartburn as a rec fisherman. If I am missing something, then show me the sections in the agreement that I am missing. I don't subscribe to misrepresenting facts or playing on fears or innuendo, so I don't believe cummins that the world as we know it is going to come crashing down. Treaties have been settled across Canada for many many years, except for BC, and I don't see their sport fishing curtailed at all.
FYI - I am not native, and am just a regular white guy from the burbs who likes to get out on the weekends. So if anyone actually knows what parts of the agreements is problematic, then I for one would like to know so I can understand it better. ;D
Did you see the lands allocated on the maps?
No you did not as the governments have yet to put them out.
Do you fish for crabs, bottom fish in the Fraser mouth area?
Do you fish Steelhead?
You might want to read it again.
-
You are right about the land maps, but I was not referring to that aspect of the treaty since I have no idea what they have negotiated.
What I read in the agreement about crab is that they are limited to 50 traps per vessel, which is somewhat less than the 300 traps per vessel currently allowed for commercial boats. Therefore in my calculations it would take 6 vessels to match one commercial boat. I do not know how many crab this equates to, or if this is too much or too little for them to eat. I certainly have my opinions, but no facts to substantiate them. I also read that after 12 years the 'non-mention' of the number of allowable vessels, will be eliminated and an allocation will be determined to fix the amount of crab they can catch.
I am not sure how many commercial crab boats currently fish the fishing area identified in the map, but I suspect is fairly high (5?, 10?, 20??). I also don't know how many boats Tsawwassen plan to send out, but I suspect it is not too many given the population size and I would assume that there will be a number of natives that are off doing other things other than fishing (other careers and non-fishermen including kids, elders, etc). But I am just speculating. ::). Again, it does not sound scary to me. but that is how I interpret the clauses, do you see it differently. ???
-
Forgot to mention that I do not fish at the mouth of the Fraser, but certainly do fish Steelhead. In my discussions with other First Nations, that due to conservation concernsthey are obliged to avoid Steelhead in the same manner as everyone else especially when the Thompson fish are going through. I suspect that this will continue, because the treaty states that conservation takes precedence over their food fish and their economic fish.
-
Forgot to mention that I do not fish at the mouth of the Fraser, but certainly do fish Steelhead. In my discussions with other First Nations, that due to conservation concernsthey are obliged to avoid Steelhead in the same manner as everyone else especially when the Thompson fish are going through. I suspect that this will continue, because the treaty states that conservation takes precedence over their food fish and their economic fish.
It is all in the details.
In previous drafts of the Treaty the Province made reference to no harvest of Steelhead.
That is not in the final document.
This now leaves the door is wide open, as the Provincial Government will not move to indicate that there is a conservation problem with Steelhead.
The province has not done so in the past, so do not expect them to do so in the future.
The fact that the Province has ignored fish in this treaty says everything.
White Sturgeon are a provincial fish and they did not address them or trout.