Fishing with Rod Discussion Forum
Fishing in British Columbia => Fishing-related Issues & News => Topic started by: IronNoggin on March 10, 2014, 07:08:58 PM
-
A Fed Judge actually calls DFO Out for "Fudging The Numbers"!
KUDOS Judge Mandamin, for recognizing what so many of us have known for a very long time... ;)
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/british-columbia/dfo-fudging-the-numbers-court-finds-bars-commercial-fishery-off-vancouver-island/article17391117/
Cheers,
Nog
-
Two thumbs up
-
Have either of you read the article and compared what it says to the headline? There does appear to be quite a discrepancy between the facts reported in it and the headline.
-
Better yet...read the judge's decision:
http://www.ratcliff.com/sites/default/files/news_articles/T-404-14%20Reasons%20for%20Order%20and%20Order%2020140228.pdf (http://www.ratcliff.com/sites/default/files/news_articles/T-404-14%20Reasons%20for%20Order%20and%20Order%2020140228.pdf)
-
The judge's idea of what constitutes "fudging the numbers" is interesting.
-
Methinks She (The Judge) may have been a little focused on this:
“the Department would like to see more evidence of a durable and sustained recovery before re-opening.”
Rather than the opening as "recommended" by the commercial sector "albeit at reduced harvesting rates" which the minister then concurred with...
In light of all available current information, launching the fleet on sketchy recoveries may well have been a mistake.
Doing so can be described as "fudging" or perhaps "caving in" to pressure from exploitative operations (something this particular government has become ALL to Familiar with) IMHO. Good Call, and a few a little up the natural food chain will definitely appreciate it! ;)
Cheers,
Nog
-
Uhm....you appear to be a bit mixed up here.
It was the fisheries minister that opened the fishery in spite of the DFO recommendation to keep it closed. The Judge overrode Shea's decision with his injunction and supported the DFO recommendation to keep it closed.
edit: to save you the trouble, see page 4, sections 10, 11, 12 and 13 of the decision linked to above.