the Cohen Commission: The rights and privileges of fishing
PostFactum @ Mon Jul 04, 2011 1:08 am
PublicAnimalNo9 PublicAnimalNo9:
Ok, one quick question. Are fish considered a national resource in Canada?
Sure, the same with sky of Alberta and snow
(I'm kidding). According to the world theory of Ecological law, wild fish is part of country animal nature resources and is protected by the law.
herbie @ Mon Jul 04, 2011 9:22 am
We've seen the tourist attractions where one guy hangs from a rope spearing salmon while a dozen more scoop them from the fish ladder with nets. And then sell them to tourists while the guy in the DFO vehicle "takes notes".
Plus seen the feds cut funding for the native run hatchery, then truck salmon all the way from the coast to replace the lost fish. Which too are sold or given away as they "taste funny" (not half rotten and beaten to shit).
Stuff like this and federal recognition of tax free gas and diesel, electronic fish-finders, aluminum hulls, sonar, rifles, ATVs and snowmobiles for hunting as 'ancestral rights' is what pisses people off. But doesn't make them racist for being pissed off.
The 1913 ruling does in fact say that everyone in the realm has an ancestral right to fish tidal water (though I would qualify that with "for food" not for commercial or sport purposes). The fact you live in a Commonwealth country with it's own Constitution does not negate Common Law.
Zipperfish @ Mon Jul 04, 2011 9:44 am
Blatchford Blatchford:
While just about everyone involved in the fishery has a theory about why the fish disappeared — warm water or disease caught from farmed salmon; disappearing habitat; bad counting or a lethal combination of all of the above — no one really knows.
Baloney. Everybody knows. They've been overfished. But we have to engage in this huge finger-pointing exercise now to blame everyone else for it and totally confuse the casual observer. Just like the cod fishery. Everyone sat around pointing at everyone else, and everyone just kept on fishing. There was little enforcement and little incentive to play by the rules. And unless someone mans up then we'll see the exact same thing with the sockeye fishery.
andyt @ Mon Jul 04, 2011 10:24 am
Zipperfish Zipperfish:
Baloney. Everybody knows. They've been overfished. But we have to engage in this huge finger-pointing exercise now to blame everyone else for it and totally confuse the casual observer. Just like the cod fishery. Everyone sat around pointing at everyone else, and everyone just kept on fishing. There was little enforcement and little incentive to play by the rules. And unless someone mans up then we'll see the exact same thing with the sockeye fishery.
Yes.
Zipperfish @ Mon Jul 04, 2011 10:42 am
$1:
The common denominator — and perhaps the common enemy — is the great, unwieldy, moves-at-the-pace-of-molasses bureaucracy known as the DFO, long the subject of criticism across the board, from groups as diverse as the federal auditor-general to fishermen.
As Mr. Crey said, recalling one of the many times he went to government for help, “They didn’t do anything. They didn’t know what to do. They don’t know what to do.
“It’s up to us, as citizens, Indian and non-Indians.”
As Mr. Crey said, recalling one of the many times he went to government for help, “They didn’t do anything. They didn’t know what to do. They don’t know what to do.
“It’s up to us, as citizens, Indian and non-Indians.”
And here we have the old convenient blame-the-government routine. Again, this worked wonders witht he cod fishery. Despite the fact that most of the scientists in DFO had been trying desperately for years to try to get the message across that the fish numbers were alarming, they were ignored.
This is Canada. It is a government "of the people." DFO may be full of faceless bureaucrats, but they exist to carry out the whims of the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans, who is voted in by the citizens of Canada. So when you blame government, you're just blaming yourself.
andyt @ Mon Jul 04, 2011 10:43 am
Zipperfish Zipperfish:
So when you blame government, you're just blaming yourself.
I'm going to save that quote. Got a feeling it might come in handy on CKA.
cougar @ Mon Jul 04, 2011 11:09 am
PublicAnimalNo9 PublicAnimalNo9:
Ok, one quick question. Are fish considered a national resource in Canada?
Yes, but when they swim through Alaskan waters same fish will be a resource of the USA.
To me, if we had a right to fish, there should be no need to pay for this right (no license required). As it was pointed out , a license, provides a privilage to fishing.
My own interpretaion of natural resources is, they belong to the nation (or nations) they fall into. As such noone should be allowed to profit on them. The profit has to be distributed evenly across the whole population of that particular nation. Likewise, if there is a right, it should be the same right for every citizen.
The aboriginal rights over fishing and hunting can be viewed as a form of discrimination / racizm by one of the two parties involved.