Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Canada Wild salmon - nice to have known you

BC Conservative MPs Who Abandoned Our Wild Salmon May Find Voters Abandoning Them. by Rafe Mair The Canadian.org

Note well the names that follow, for they are British Columbia MPs who voted for the final destruction of the Pacific Salmon, the sea going Rainbow trout (Steelhead), river resident Cutthroat, resident Rainbow trout, river dwelling Dolly Varden and Bull trout:
Don Albas, John Duncan, Nina Grewal, Richard Harris, Russ Heibert, Randy Kamp, James Lunney, Colin Mayes, Cathy McLeod, James Moore, Andrew Saxton, Mark Strahl, Mark Warawa, John Weston, David Wilks, Alice Wong, Wai Young, and Bob Zimmer.

These toadies are our Conservative Members of Parliament, the blind followers of ultra-conservative Stephen Harper. They voted for Bill C-38, which in itself was a gross abdication of democracy in that it was an act to amend the Budget Act, yet included in it critical amendments to the Fisheries Act and many other environmental protections, making it all but a slam dunk for developers to ravage salmon habitat.

These lickspittles uttered not a word of objection (except Wilks, when caught on candid camera, before promptly recanting) that Harper abused an omnibus bill in order to restrict debate on amendments to the Fisheries Act, then proceeded to vote for it.

The Conservative Party under Brian Mulroney and Stephen Harper started their war on our salmon back in the 1980s when they muzzled Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) scientists over the Alcan plan to lower the Nechako River, near Prince George, to dangerous levels, thus threatening runs of sockeye salmon en route to their spawning grounds. The danger came in summertime, when excessive heat would meet low waters � a certainty which then-Fisheries Minister Tom Siddon called �an acceptable risk�.

DFO scientists had studied Alcan�s plans and vigorously opposed them and one by one they were moved sidewise, given early retirement or forced by their own code of honour to remove themselves.
The government passed an order-in-council forbidding the usual environmental assessment process, clearly knowing that it would have to call these scientists to give evidence, thus exposing the Kemano Completion program for what it was � naked aggression against the salmon.

Along the way, the DFO, mandated to protect the fish, was instructed to support Atlantic salmon fish farms on the west coast, driving another nail into the coffin of our sacred signature salmon. DFO, unable to enforce the act while supporting the presence of fish farms chose, under stern political guidance, to avoid enforcement of their mandate to protect west coast salmon. Now they have virtually no power to restrain any development. They are eunuchs.

Here�s how the Sudbury Star put it:

Bill C-38 does a lot more than simply implement the federal budget. It eviscerates many of Canada's historic environmental laws, and establishes a new regime that promotes unrestrained economic development at the expense of environmental protection. For starters, Bill C-38 will repeal the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, one of the foundational pieces of legislation, which for decades has required an assessment of impacts when development is proposed. In place of the Act, the Conservatives are offering new legislation that will severely restrict the required assessment of environmental impacts, and limit opportunities for input from the public and First Nations.

The Fisheries Act will also be gutted by the omnibus bill, as fish habitat protections will be removed. Tom Siddon, the former Tory minister of Fisheries and Oceans in Brian Mulroney's government, expressed his outrage over this regressive step to managing the economically important fisheries resource.
Why would the government want to gut the Fisheries Act?
Anyone in mind who might like these changes?

Here�s what Postmedia reports:

Federal fisheries officials were having "troubling" disagreements with Enbridge Inc. over the company's interpretation of its responsibility to protect fish habitat along the Northern Gateway oilsands pipeline route before the company submitted its project proposal in 2010, according to internal documents.

Enbridge was concluding some of the crossings, over an estimated 1,000 waterways, were low risk when fisheries biologists felt the same were medium or high risk to fish and fish habitat, according to emails obtained through the Access to Information Act.

Here�s what The Northern View wrote, reporting on Prince Rupert Council's opposition to C-38:

Bill C-38 also includes the changes to the Environmental Assessment system for big industrial projects, and the provision that gives the federal cabinet final say over decisions made by the National Energy Board. This change has lead to a considerable loss of confidence in the Enbridge Joint Review Panel hearings by local Northern Gateway opponents, who, at the last hearing in Prince Rupert, repeatedly accused the panel of being stripped of credibility and authority.

Many, including me, have been making the point for years that under our system, Members of Parliament do not represent their constituencies but, instead, return to their ridings to tell us what Ottawa is doing to us and that we can like it or lump it.

I understand, from personal experience, how hard it is for an individual to disagree with the leader and do so publicly. But surely a time comes when the leader is so egregiously in contempt of an MP's interests that he/she must lay it on the line, knowing it will be politically fatal. If this is not the case, what the hell do we need the MP for anyway? Is their only role to do what they�re told and check it out when a constituent�s pension cheque is late?

One of the consequences of this tight discipline is that the MP no longer informs him/herself of contentious issues. I spoke with my Tory MP, John Weston, a couple of weeks ago and it was obvious that he knew dick-all about the pipelines issue, to add to his utter ignorance of the private power (IPPs) issue. Why learn the other side when you�re going to vote as you are told? What�s the point of cluttering one�s mind with facts when they don�t count for a damn thing when you come to vote?

The system stinks but it will survive as long as the government has absolute control over government members. Here we have the proof � every single BC Conservative MP voted in favour of further decimating our Pacific salmon and their cousins.

For shame! On our Tory MPs for not standing up for their province and on all of us for not understanding how our dishonest system fails us, thus not doing anything to force a change.

Rafe Mair was a B.C. MLA 1975 to 1981, Minister of Environment from late 1978 through 1979. Since 1981 he has been a radio talk show host, and is recognized as one of B.C.'s pre-eminent journalists.

Website: rafeonline.com/

We cannot stand in the way of "progress", "jobs", "free enterprise", "development" and selling Canada, to the highest bidder!

I mean,do you actually believe that the fascist dictator, Harpler and his plans to sell out Canada, via "trade agreements" to benefit his international corporate masters will listen to Mair or you or me or ANY Canadian?

The "fix is in" and we now also have foreign law enforcement on Canadian soil,empowered through agreements signed by this little monster, to arrest Canadians in OUR country.

There are new "military agreements" signed with the Zionist Netanyahu, for Canada's military to support his nation in war and on and on and on..........

Quite a cost for repealing the LGR, eh................

The offshore fish farms are no friend to 'wild' fish so along with habitat destruction, overfishing and hydro our fish are going the way of the Dodo bird.

The rape of this province has only just begun.

When an ex-Socred cabinet minister starts lambasting the (neo)Conservatives, you know their boat is getting leaky.

Remember Harper initially voted for the gun registry, it was only until he saw it as a political advantage did he start voting against the registry. What this tells you is that he has no basic understanding of the firearms community or those that participate in hunting, and now I have to add fishing. Can you imagine Steve with a fishing rod in his hands? No neither can I. His attack on BC's environment and by extension the citizens of British Columbia will not go unrecognized come the next federal election. His eagerness to destroy one of the most magnificent ecosystems in the world is nothing short of criminal. All in the name of sending Bitumen to China. In our eagerness to get rid of the registry we threw the baby out with the bath water.

It sure was nice to have known the wild salmon, but no matter how long Rafe holds his axe to the grindstone, he cannot grind away the fact that the path leading to the salmons demise was laid out long before Stephen Harper graduated from university.

Given the DFO record on controlling Indian fishing, and our societies record for developing up and down the Fraser and Columbia systems, pointing the finger at the CPC's actions in the past six months is sort of laughable.

Controlling Indian fishing? That's a lark....if you want to point fingers then you'd have to be a dingbat to ignore how DFO allowed the west coast commercial fleet to rape our fishery!! It sure as hell isn't something that you can get racial about when all races were involved in the over fishing. :-)

While there can be little doubt that latter day Indian fishing, which is, in many respects, a black market commercial fishery, has a noticeable impact on some salmon stocks, it is a drop in the bucket compared to commercial fishing and habitat alteration and destruction.
Fishing is certainly one of those areas which NEED regulation and the regulations have to be based on real science. The regulations also have to be all-inclusive with no exemptions. I somtimes think commercial interests should not even have a voice. Their history of going for the short term profit over sustainability is too obvious. GD

???????? Fifth generation native-born BC commercial fishermen should ...not have a voice... in determining how our fisheries are managed? WTF, kind of bullshit is this?

I know guys, commercial fisherMEN, whose families,like mine, are among the founding pioneers of BC and they are as conservation-concious as anyone and more than most. Yet, they should not be allowed to exercise their democratic rights in the country that their forefathers helped build and, in most cases, volunteered to defend in 1914-18 and 1939-45???????

Some of these guys also hunt and while they live here on the BC Coast, they like to hunt in the Kootenays.

Maybe, we shouldn't be allowed to do that, either, eh.....?

Okay, guys. So here's a question: Harper may be making some bad choices, but is there a better option? Is there a party that we can vote for in the next federal election that will be less anti-gun, and less anti-hunting than the CPC? If anybody says Lib or NDP I'll laugh hysterically...

Here's another question, which party is least likely to protect the environment, you know, that place we like to fish and hunt.

I won't vote Conservative next time.

I'm done - my Conservative membership card has been burned. I'm betting that no party will resurrect the long gun registry.

Truth be known I'd rather have to live with a registry - and an environment to hunt in fish in (complete with animals and fish) than the other way round.

It's now clear to me that corporate interests totally own the Conservatives.

I think yer right brian,big buisness is ruling the roost.I too would rather have an enviroment that sustains native species in numbers large enuff to hunt/fish.
I haven't got a membership card to burn but the cpc wont be getting my vote untill they pull up their socks on all of the enviromental issues out here.

The NDP party has expressly stated that they WILL resurrect the LGR if given the chance.

You guys can't give up now! The LGR was a minor stepping stone towards changing the real problems with Canadian firearms law. We have to keep supporting the parties that support us as firearms owners. Having game to hunt doesn't do much good if my freedoms are sacrificed on the altar by the next corrupt government that decides to take away our ability to own firearms and stand up for ourselves against corruption.

Let's not be too extreme, here. The CPC isn't going to take this country in a direction that will eliminate the game and fish that we have. But other parties sure as hell will actively try and completely eliminate our ability to own firearms. Do we want the rest of Canada to turn into Ontario? Plenty of game over there, but they are ruled by Nazi leaders. Ammunition ban in Toronto? Handgun ban across the country? Worse things would come our way if those leaders were given half a chance to do so...

My thoughts on this: I have no idea what I'll be doing come next election. It scares the schitt outta me what each party is capable of pulling these days.
WRT the environment, fishing, hunting etc maybe we should now be pushing our Provincial govt towards more protections. Yes, I am only too well aware of that issue in Alberta but still if enough of us were to push provincially it could be done. How many guys work in the Patch that hunt, fish, trap etc. Plenty of them. They aren't there to rape Mother Nature anymore, those days I believe are gone. Here we have big oil willing to spend money on conservation issues including purchasing land as mitigation to other lands that gets destroyed. They don't pick and choose the lands either, it is provided to a third party group to use. I volunteer with this org and can gaurantee that the lands we protect are at least as good as the stuff being destroyed, often we are able to acquire much better habitat than what is being developed. It is a good model that other jurisdictions could and should adopt. These lands are open to the public for hunting,trapping,fishing. Win/Win

The problem now days is the upper echlons of the cpc are all lawyers,and bankers I doubt very many of them are outdoorsmen.Back in the day even city guys hunted and fished,now not so much.Priminsters used to fish and even hunt.I doubt harper or any of the patry leaders know the difference between a len thompson five of diamonds and a shotgun shell

I heard much this same rhetoric from the BC forest industry for decades, about how they "produced a better forest" by their landraping,clearcutting activities. It was total bullshit and still is, PROFIT is the name of that game!

Big oil is NOT going to drive their pipelines across BC,not now, not in a 100 years from now, not EVER!!!! BC needs only to learn ONE thing from Alberta and "The Tar Sands" and that is simply what NOT to do with OUR oil and gas reserves.

The NDP member of parliment for our area is Nathen Cullen. He has tabled a plan for banning oil tankers on the North and central coasts. Why not the South coast? Could it be that oil tankers are already using these waters and traveling thru the narrow "straight of Rosario"? Is he leaving those waters open in case we(Canada) need to have tanker traffic coming and going and not want to upset voters in the lower mainland which probably has more voters then the rest of B.C. put together.Pizz them all off and kiss votes goodbye.How will,or how is,the oil getting to the tankers?

I e-mailed him and asked why his plan did not include 'Southern Coastal waters'. His reply was standard politician and did not really give me an answer at all.

As for the main topic of this thread.I do not think that companies will now be able to destroy fish streams,lakes, etc.They still have rules and laws protecting the fish and their habitat.
A new set of rules that are easier for those involved to use is needed. On a news story I saw about this subject they interviewed a farmer who stated that in order to clean out a ditch on his farm it takes 2 years to get permission to do this and he needs to do this job every 5 years!

1)When our town was built they ran a storm sewer of some kind to the edge of town and then used an open ditch to continue on a bit further into the bush. Back in the 90's it was decided to build some soccer fields and they wanted to lay pipe in the ditch and fill it in, but could not do this because over the years a few fish fry had been seen in the ditch.

2)We have a creek that runs thru the lower part of town and drains gullies and bush area in the upper part of town. It has filled in over the years with trees and vegitation as well a sediment and is now prone to flooding. This drainage ditch was never meant to have fish in it and there was originally screens etc put in but fish did find their way in over the years. Town wanted to dredge the ditch for its entire length to help water flow better but again it is a no go.

3)One of the most popular fishing spots is at the end of a road that requires everyone driving their atv/4x4 thru 2 washouts that can and will have fish in them. This is not a problem to anyone. The road follows a power line as well as a gas line, and when the utility companies want to go in they need to bring portable bridges in.

The above are just three examples of a system that is a little bit ridiculous.
Our local river is world famous, we have healthy runs of salmon and trout, and we would still have if the soccer club was allowed to extend the pipe and fill in 200-300 meters of ditch.Same thing if the town was allowed to dredge 1000m of the drainage ditch many call a creek. The utilite companies vehicles are in better shape then the average persons vehicle and would leak less oil into the river then all the atv/4x4's do.There are several fishing spots that require people to drive everything from atv's to trucks,cars and even motorhomes to the river, and the garbage,sewage and mess they leave behind is a real crime. But because they are not a company and are recreational users it is some how tolerated.

Where do you draw the line. If it is not OK for companies or utilites to drive thru a wash out what makes people think the recreational user can.Imagine going thru a wash out with an ATV and having a CO or DFO officer jump out and hand you a fine.

The farmer that was interviewed on the news still has to get permission and a 'window of oppertunity' to do the work, it just should not take 2 years.This is what I think they are trying to do, make things a little more user friendly but still protect the environment.

For now,Cheers, 257Stew