Fishing with Rod Discussion Forum
Fishing in British Columbia => Fishing-related Issues & News => Topic started by: TNAngler on July 23, 2014, 01:28:24 PM
-
But why does DFO no longer seem to patrol the river? We got stopped last year at the boat launch as they were going to go out looking for illegal nets and just waiting around. This year we got stopped at the boat launch again but there were three of them in a pickup truck with no way of leaving shore. I remember they used to show up in a boat, stop off at a bar and walk up and check everybody fishing the entire bar.
Or, better yet, have some guy go in plain clothes and fish at some of the hot spots and call other officers in to check out people obviously snagging or who obviously don't have their barbs pinched.
From what I saw, there would be enough fines to pay for the operation if not plenty more. There were a couple guys bottom bouncing who almost fell out of the boat a couple times "setting the hook" which they did after every cast and possibly a couple times during. All it would take is one guy "fishing" by himself and a couple hidden cameras on the boat to nail a couple of these guys to the wall. It would only take a couple well publicized cases with large fines handed down and upheld before people would change. At least some would.
-
i personally think alot has to do with our federal government and not dfo. dfo has seen its funding cut dramatically by the conservatives. also the conservatives do not seem to like science either. they are more interested in exploiting are natural resources to the highest bidder. i thought this was an interesting read.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-debate/fix-the-link-where-science-and-policy-meet/article19286655/
-
Wait til sockeye season
-
Wait til sockeye season
Oh, I know it will just get worse. Sad thing is, they could probably pay for most of their yearly operations if they got out and did just a little undercover work. Get one guy in the middle of the spot with video and he calls in indicating everybody that needs to be ticketed. One day during peak season, heck, one day last week, would have netted them quite a lot of fines.
-
Read Poachers, Polluters, and Politics: a Fisheries Officer's Career.
Basically what happens is the federal government cuts funding, a commission happens, fundimg miraculously increases, then aftrr a couple years funding is decreased again, and another commission comes along saying the same stuff as the last one, and funding gets increased.
A commission is usually once every 5 years atm...
On a side note the book is not all seriousness and has some very funny stories in it.
-
When was the last commission that caused increased funding?
-
Believe it was the cohen commission in 2010.
Befote that was the Williams review in 04/5, and the Fraser review ten years before that.
-
I'm pretty sure the Cohen report has not caused an increase in funding. Yet at least.
-
Not directly. When it came up they scrambled to portray increased funding.
The thing is Ottawa realizes they are a good thing, but only if a commission or review is imminent.
Once the public forgets, they cut funding again.
None except one of Justice Cohen's recommendations have been implemented as of January.
-
Not directly. When it came up they scrambled to portray increased funding.
The thing is Ottawa realizes they are a good thing, but only if a commission or review is imminent.
Once the public forgets, they cut funding again.
None except one of Justice Cohen's recommendations have been implemented as of January.
Not to nitpick but if Ottawa realized increased funding was a good thing, they would continue it for longer than a couple of years. The public thinks it is good after the commission and pressure makes Ottawa care but once the public pressure is off, they would prefer to spend the money elsewhere.
-
All that money for reports only to ignore them. It's political ruse. Put some of that money to more fisheries officers. I remember a time when co's and fisheries had a presence. Now? I saw a co in town and I had to do a double take it's been so long. Sad state of affairs. Think I'll find a copy of that book - sounds like a good read. Land-locked farms sound like the best option if [salmon farming must remain](edit).
-
intill our waters are a provincial thing and not federal it wont change. why should ottawa be in charge of our waters 5000kms away. its not in their backyard so they couldn't give 2 craps. my 2 cents.
-
None except one of Justice Cohen's recommendations have been implemented as of January.
Actually two recommendations have been implemented ... a major disease survey of wild and farmed salmon has been started, led by scientists Riddell and Miller and, a moratorium on salmon farm expansion in the Discovery Island area has been put in place.
-
true dave, but that moratorium on a specific bay is moot when they have accepted several more applications in various other areas.
-
Oh, I know it will just get worse. Sad thing is, they could probably pay for most of their yearly operations if they got out and did just a little undercover work. Get one guy in the middle of the spot with video and he calls in indicating everybody that needs to be ticketed. One day during peak season, heck, one day last week, would have netted them quite a lot of fines.
That's not how it works although it sounds good in theory. Any money collected from fines would go to "general revenue". If C&P would find ways to save money they would likely not see a big increase in their budget. It means they can do with less. The Feds are in deficit reduction so any cost savings is going somewhere else and not to the ground forces....well maybe at election time.
They do undercover work but it's not all done by hiding behind trees or looking like some angler. Investigative work includes gathering information through emails, texts, social media and the internet in general.
-
That's not how it works although it sounds good in theory. Any money collected from fines would go to "general revenue". If C&P would find ways to save money they would likely not see a big increase in their budget. It means they can do with less. The Feds are in deficit reduction so any cost savings is going somewhere else and not to the ground forces....well maybe at election time.
They do undercover work but it's not all done by hiding behind trees or looking like some angler. Investigative work includes gathering information through emails, texts, social media and the internet in general.
Oh, I know it isn't how it works but that doesn't mean it isn't how it should work. Granted, it might lead to ticket happy officers so that they can pad their budget.
Or, better yet, ticket money goes into habitat enhancement projects, education classes, hatcheries, etc.
And sure, they might do some undercover work without being out on the river, but seeing how some of these people are fishing, you aren't going to know this unless you are out there. Unless it is reported, somebody isn't going to post on facebook pictures of them snagging fish unless they are really dumb.
-
Oh, I know it isn't how it works but that doesn't mean it isn't how it should work. Granted, it might lead to ticket happy officers so that they can pad their budget.
Or, better yet, ticket money goes into habitat enhancement projects, education classes, hatcheries, etc.
And sure, they might do some undercover work without being out on the river, but seeing how some of these people are fishing, you aren't going to know this unless you are out there. Unless it is reported, somebody isn't going to post on facebook pictures of them snagging fish unless they are really dumb.
I like the idea of ticket money going into habitat restoration or extra enforcement, but you will likely get politicians saying that's not necessary because it's covered in the budget already. As for ticket happy fisheries officers I doubt that because writing tickets mean extra paperwork and the possibility to ending up in court to testify. That's no fun especially when they are expected to be everywhere catching bad guys with minimal funds.
You have the wrong idea about the undercover investigative work I was talking about. It's not just waiting to see who is blabbing about their illegal catch. They monitor any buying and selling of salmon that may have a digital trail. They may even pose as buyers themselves. It would be nice to see them often on the river but they don't have the funds to be everywhere all the time. With limited funds they will likely be strategic in where they go and when.
-
I like the idea of ticket money going into habitat restoration or extra enforcement, but you will likely get politicians saying that's not necessary because it's covered in the budget already. As for ticket happy fisheries officers I doubt that because writing tickets mean extra paperwork and the possibility to ending up in court to testify. That's no fun especially when they are expected to be everywhere catching bad guys with minimal funds.
You have the wrong idea about the undercover investigative work I was talking about. It's not just waiting to see who is blabbing about their illegal catch. They monitor any buying and selling of salmon that may have a digital trail. They may even pose as buyers themselves. It would be nice to see them often on the river but they don't have the funds to be everywhere all the time. With limited funds they will likely be strategic in where they go and when.
Oh, yeah, they have to monitor selling and stuff too. A lot of the guys out there snagging though are not selling salmon. I doubt most poachers are selling salmon.
I know what the politicians will say but if you think about it, if more tickets are written, that means there is likely a bigger issue and so more funds are needed. If DFO goes out and can't find a single person to ticket, then it is likely that most people are following the rules and fewer checks are needed.
Politicians just think they should have the control over where it is spent and therefore want it all coming into the general funds. I know it is almost impossible to change but it sure would be nice.