Views Tell Us A Lot About Us

[DonAndersen]

Folks,

 

Looking over things that are viewed and a Flames post gets >1400 whereas a post about what really effects your fishing [the election] gets much less.

 

Tells a lot about what is important to us - well make that you.

 

Don

[Hawgstoppah]

Folks,

 

Looking over things that are viewed and a Flames post gets >1400 whereas a post about what really effects your fishing [the election] gets much less.

 

Tells a lot about what is important to us - well make that you.

 

Don

 

Don.

 

I strongly disagree here. The govt never has and never will do enough... there always very slow and only reactive, not pro-active. I myself grow tired of pressing gov't for changes WE CAN make. How many views on the streamwatch auction page right now? Don't call us out on our priorities here man.... I think I speak for most of us when I say that I am sick of gov't dragging their feet again and again. Give me a cuase I know without a doubt is gonna make a difference though, and I'll be all for it...

[reevesr1]

Auction is over 4000 hits. Most I've ever seen. The Flames post has been running for WEEKS by the way and has way less.

 

I know of a bunch of people who have contributed to the streamwatch program, including my company with some matching funds.

 

I have no idea what political party is the best for the water I fish, nor do I really understand a lot of the issues. So I may not view the threads on them as often. But I have found when something needs to be done, many members of this group tend to do it. What else do you want?

[Brownstone]

could it be alot of the population here at FFC feel more comfortable talking about something they can have a voice in?

 

the Auction thread clearly shows people do care about the fishery, habitat and other environmental issues ..

 

people here are much more inclined to step up and support a good cause directly rather than take chances with government

 

 

my 0.02

[Castuserraticus]

Grass roots - Don I don't think you waited for politicians to direct your work on the Raven. They didn't come up with the fall rescue. They will show up for photo ops when a program appears to be successful. I don't see the election affecting fishing unless some candidate tries to severely restrict it. I don't see this happening.

 

So far I think Ed is sounding a bit dim. He's making all sorts of promises that facts show can't be implemented.

 

The "environment" in Alberta is a polarizing issue. Where some people see disaster (eg fires, floods) others see nature's normal cycles. No successful politician is going to make it a major plank. People care about their jobs, health, safety, lifestyle,... way more. These are personal issues.

 

The true job of government is to provide the physical (roads, hospitals, schools) and regulatory (rule of law, personal and property rights protection) infrastructure, and consistent policy that encourages individuals and corporations to make long term plans/investments. Our democratic governments are not generally capable of making long term plans. Politicians campaign based on abusing the other guy and are often elected to "fix a problem". It's the rare politician who's goal is to work with all parties. They don't really lead.

 

I can't remember who said it - "Democracy is the worst system of government, except for all the others." At least with democracy individuals have the opportunity to take personal action on issues that matter to them - as you have on many occasions.

[reevesr1]

I can't remember who said it - "Democracy is the worst system of government, except for all the others.".

Churchill.

[DonAndersen]

Let's list the things that have been done in 2007 to effect your fishing that were either lead by or resulted from Govt actions:

 

1] Recognizing that the oil sands region is an industrial waste land and normal environmental regulations will not apply.

 

2] Police Outpost Lake regulation changes

 

3] Fiesta Lake regulations > C&R

 

4] Quality Lake fishing Policy

 

5] Land use Policy

 

6] Commencement of listing of the West Slope Cut as a endangered species.

 

And that is but a few from SRD. Other Govt agencies would have their own list.

 

Like it or not, the Streamwatch program wouldn't be in existence W/0 Govt.

 

And certainly, some folks have been able to effect the direction of Govt. The big effect is @ the ballot box.

 

catch ya'

 

 

Don

[Tako]

I want to comment here, but I don't feel qualified to have any kind of debate on the subject. But I'd like to say that the first threads I open are policy, resource, regulatory or gov't oriented.

[BillyGopher]

Don, You won't catch me disagreeing with too much of what you've typed. However, where the bait gets furry is in your posturing overtone that brow beats as bad as we've seen on most ff forums. I understand it, don't agree with it, but it's clearly intended to net the gullibles, which derides your point and renders it unheeded.

[DonAndersen]

GopherBoy,

 

I agree with whatever you meant and am going to the basement and hide till Feb is over.

 

Don

[Tako]

GopherBoy,

 

I agree with whatever you meant and am going to the basement and hide till Feb is over.

 

Don

 

Or you could become a Flames fan, and drop 40 IQ points. That way these silly concepts would never even enter your mind!

[DonAndersen]

Tako,

 

You got that backwards. First you drop 40 points and then you become a Flames Fan.

 

I dropped 60 points and never watch hockey. Tried once - fell asleep during the final game of the cup - score tied. IQ now <40.

 

catch ya'

 

 

Don

[hydropsyche]

And certainly, some folks have been able to effect the direction of Govt. The big effect is @ the ballot box.

 

So why do you rural guys keep voting the conservatives in for the last 1000 years?

[Tako]

Tako,

 

You got that backwards. First you drop 40 points and then you become a Flames Fan.

 

I dropped 60 points and never watch hockey. Tried once - fell asleep during the final game of the cup - score tied. IQ now <40.

 

catch ya'

Don

 

Wat? Yer talkin to a Leafs fan. Dumbber down a bit hoss.

[Tako]

So why do you rural guys keep voting the conservatives in for the last 1000 years?

 

Funny thing bout that is I think my Liberals are more conservative than your conservatives :blink:

[drshoal]

In what ways?

[Hawgstoppah]

I guess what I was trying to say that, I don't really think who is elected will make much of a big difference. educate me as to who and why to vote for someone who will make a difference (for SURE) in our fishing enjoyment. Becuase right now to me I don't think it matters who is in the gov't there, as long as good folks continue to organize and run programs that are working now I think they would be accepted in gov't...

 

Do I really think some gov't is gonna come in and really clean up alberta's fishing? no... that's something we have to do... just my 2 cent's really....

 

(not a big gov't lover atm.... there in my pockets for 4k for something out of my control , kinda not happy at 'em)

[wongrs]

Politicians are self interested and will react to whatever voters tell them. If more voters tell them that they care about fisheries and conservation, then they will alter their platforms to reflect this. They want to be re-elected. Take for example the 180 the federal conservatives have done on climate change. Before the "science wasn't conclusive" but now they're willing to spend 'all these billions of dollars of my hard-earned taxpayer money' on building carbon storage pipelines and creating industrial/commercial/residential incentives. Even the Alberta conservatives are addressing climate change (at least superficially). Why? Because it's what the voters want and the ministers want to stay in power.

 

If we really wanted to see action on fisheries conservation, we'd need to work on a number of fronts: volunteer action (like our Bow River Cleanup), non-profit groups (like Trout Unlimited or Nature Conservancy of Canada) and at the political level. For the latter, we'd need to gather support from as many as we could and demonstrate to the candidates that this is an election issue. Perhaps with a petition of some sort and try to meet with candidates to 'lobby' them. It is rare that a single-pronged approach will be effective. The really difficult part is that recreational fisheries will always take a back seat to climate change, health care and education as the electorate largely doesn't care about the topic.

 

But as stated by Don, there doesn't appear to be much interest in fisheries conservation even on a fly fishing forum (at least indicated by hit count).

[drshoal]

I guess what I was trying to say that, I don't really think who is elected will make much of a big difference. educate me as to who and why to vote for someone who will make a difference (for SURE) in our fishing enjoyment. Becuase right now to me I don't think it matters who is in the gov't there, as long as good folks continue to organize and run programs that are working now I think they would be accepted in gov't...

 

Do I really think some gov't is gonna come in and really clean up alberta's fishing? no... that's something we have to do... just my 2 cent's really....

 

(not a big gov't lover atm.... there in my pockets for 4k for something out of my control , kinda not happy at 'em)

 

Amen to that hawgstoppah!

[wongrs]

Don.

 

I strongly disagree here. The govt never has and never will do enough... there always very slow and only reactive, not pro-active. I myself grow tired of pressing gov't for changes WE CAN make.

 

Hawg, this is an interesting comment you've made from 2 perspectives:

 

The govt never has and never will do enough... there always very slow and only reactive, not pro-active.

 

perspective 1: fiscal conservatives (whether they be liberal or PC striped) are the type that like to slash governments and put the services into the private sector. there is no way that you will ever see pro-active government in this area if we keep electing strictly fiscal conservatives. small governments do not have the capacity to be dealing with recreational fisheries. big ticket items include health care, education, police services, climate change, foreign policy. if you have small governments, who the hell is going to handle the lesser priority items like recreation? recreation is WAY down on the priority list for governments. for small fiscally conservative governments to deal with issues like this effectively, it needs to be profitable and dealt with effectively by the private sector (ie. handed over to private sector). this means that fisheries management falls into private hands that will charge users money for operations and maintenance. that's the only way it will get dealt with pro-actively. i don't believe that small governments can ever be pro-active enough. by nature, they have a smaller capacity to deal with these types of issues.

 

edit: another mechanism of funding/public-service that governments can count on is philanthropy

 

I myself grow tired of pressing gov't for changes WE CAN make.

 

perspective 2: like i said before, it has to be an election issue for governments to take action on things. governments are slow by nature. they react to public demand. public demand follows those 'activists' that lead the charge (in this case it is hardcore conservationists). remember, fly fishers are a subset of fishers are a subset of nature enthusiasts which are a subset of total population. with respect to the rest of the population, we are tiny or a 'special-interest-group'.

 

governments lag public demand who lag activists.

 

if we believe that this is a serious issue then we need to be raising it louder and more often to sway public demand which will sway governments.

 

 

 

comments? it appears to me that this topic is dead anyhow.