Leaderboard

I encourage you to read their position statement for yourself and make your own decision: https://tucanada.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/TUC-statement-on-NCNT-Jan-2018.pdf I used to be a board member with a local chapter and stepped down because of policies like this and I will no longer donate my time/money. TUC is not an angler's group, they're a cold water conservancy org whose membership mostly happens to be anglers.

Think most people don't actually realize that TUCs mandate is the following: " To conserve, protect and restore Canada’s freshwater ecosystems and their coldwater resources for current and future generations." With that mandate, it pretty much has to be supportive of a closure that's goal is to "conserve, protect and restore". With that, there is obviously some benefits for anglers, but they are not an angler group. Something like the Backcountry Hunters and Anglers group is a little more angler-driven with their mission.

I read the position last night, and wasn't entirely surprised by it. I've never been under the impression that TUC is an angler's group (likewise Ducks Unlimited isn't a bird hunters group). Their mission statement is pretty clear on that. I think TUC are resigned to the closure decision, and they don't intend to expend energy fighting against something that appears to be pretty clearly written in stone at this stage. The statement is, at least, "conditional support" and does outline several of the very same concerns and confounding factors that those opposed to the closure have expressed. I might not entirely agree with their stated support of the closure, but it is pretty hard to disagree with much of the land use/habitat, angling, and enforcement pieces they go on to describe.

That is surprising - With TU’s mandate (and its supporters largely being in the FF community) I thought they would be critical of a plan that appears on the surface to prioritize closures over other habitat rehabilitation. Maybe TU should survey its members re: priorities and support for closures. If TU supports closures on the Oldman & the like - depending on the circumstances - I might reconsider my support.