Think about it, fishing is the most popular sport in Canada by far. How do wingnut special interest groups stand a chance against reasonable conservation practices put forth by organized fishermen and the many other organizations that would align themselves with us. Fishermen are the eyes on the water that protect our heritage.
So what is this issue all about? It's politics and fear mongering by those who HATE government and want you to hate government too. It doesn't matter how you wrap that package, be it our flag or what not. That kind of politics stinks.
Could Government actually ban public fishing rights??
Wow, do you ever need to educate yourself on the topic of Marine Protected Areas. Please prove other wise.scuro wrote:Think about it, fishing is the most popular sport in Canada by far. How do wingnut special interest groups stand a chance against reasonable conservation practices put forth by organized fishermen and the many other organizations that would align themselves with us. Fishermen are the eyes on the water that protect our heritage.
So what is this issue all about? It's politics and fear mongering by those who HATE government and want you to hate government too. It doesn't matter how you wrap that package, be it our flag or what not. That kind of politics stinks.
Hockey is Canada's most popular sport (do a simple google search)
BTW Laccrosse is our official National Sport.
By wingnut special interest groups do you mean Green Peace, World Wildlife Fund, PETA, and the many other special well funded interest groups. In Ontario we have the OFAH and small fish and game clubs which most are club members of the OFAH.
Which organizations do you believe will allign and assist anglers other than to just say "yes we support you and good luck" Will they provide funding for educating and getting the message out?
I agree we believe that we as anglers are participating in reasonable conservation efforts. Unfortunately there are other special interest groups that have different agendas and ideas and I fully support that they have the freedom to express them.
"Fishermen are the eyes on the water that protect our heritage"
Please expand in detail on how this is done.
How can the issue not be about politcs, if it involves any level of government making laws or rules? I have not read one comment on this site being anti government, advising to vote for one particular party because of this topic. All that has been done is fishermen posting thought provoking information in regards to what is happening in North America to different water bodies and that it may or may not impact us as recreational fishing enthusiasts.
Do you think that a company like Shimano is investing time and money into this because they need a way to spend money (keep in mind they have feed Big Jim this week at the Toronto Sportsman Show), or are they doing it because they have a little bit of vision, and are looking out for the future of themselves and their customers.
You are on the wrong board, if you think Fish-Hawk.net and its members are an anti government millitia.
Please do everyone and yourself favour and do a little research.
BTW, there are several different MPA's around the world in existance today, some allow recreational fishing and some don't. We just want to make everyone aware of the possibilities good and bad.
Thanks and have a wonderful sunday afternoon.
?
Lots of fretting and illogical jumps in the article and in some of the responses. The idea that the GL would be a non fishing MPA just isn't logical. Money talks and even though PETA WWF etc are well funded, the revenue brought in by sportfishing dwarfs the revenue that these groups can raise. Could the GL be a protected area with stricter rules on fishing? maybe some day but I don't see that as a big deal. Lets not be hypocritical, when news broke of the asain carp closing in on the GL the fishing community ,along with a number of GL states wanted the shipping canal locked up.(which would be a multi billion dollar/yr action) All because we wanted to protect the great lakes. These special interests groups just want to do the same thing, they just have a different, extreme IMO, take on it.
To summarize: We think fishing accessibilty should be expanded and more money should be spent on the fishery increase stocks and enforcement etc. They want to eliminate fishing so all the little fishes can go on living a happy productive lives blah blah blah. Like anything else the truth lies somewhere inbetween and the end result will probably be somewhere in between as well.
To summarize: We think fishing accessibilty should be expanded and more money should be spent on the fishery increase stocks and enforcement etc. They want to eliminate fishing so all the little fishes can go on living a happy productive lives blah blah blah. Like anything else the truth lies somewhere inbetween and the end result will probably be somewhere in between as well.