Proposal in Quebec - Page 3 - Fly Fishing Forum
Classic Atlantic Salmon No pursuit rivals salmon rivers, flies & legacy

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Rating: Thread Rating: 3 votes, 5.00 average. Display Modes
  #31  
Old 01-10-2005, 11:00 PM
billg billg is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Gaspe
Posts: 115
Spey 66:

I have no problem if non-residents wish to express themselves. I am not sure how one would form such an association, but even if one were formed I do not think it would be recognized by the Quebec Government as we are, the zecs are, and the FQSA, FQF, and First-Nations.

Further, since the Government established the round table and was also responsible for deciding who would sit at the table it is their choice to decide who sits at the table. I doubt that anyone other than the current participants will be invited to the round table; least of which would be a non-resident group. In fact, there are no business people at the table except for individual outfitters. I have heard that individual guides have asked to be present but because there is not a guide association that is recoginzed by the Government they do not participate.

This does make sense. Can you imagine that the Fish and Game Department in Montana would invite Quebec residents to a round table which included ranchers, outfitters, guides, and fly shops to discuss irrigation and access issues for the Madison and Big Horn rivers. I cannot.

Who can non-residents contact? They can contact the zecs they do business with or the Government directly and ask for their point of view to be considered.

As to Dave, Glen, and I on the issue of non-residents and guides/outfitters it is fairly simple. Our federation unaimously supports mandatory outfitting for noble species which includes Atlantic Salmon. Though as individuals we may not support this, I won't (I can't speak for them) push this issue either at the round table or through other channels. I have a personal opinion but whatever a policy decision might be is irrelevant to me. My #1 concern (aside from the preservation of the resource) is to secure access to the salmon rivers for my clients in order to continue to provide desparately needed jobs and stimulate the local economy. If it is decided that mandatory outfitting is the right thing, so be it. I will not argue for or against it.

As to the Quebec papers, not one of them ever contacted any outfitter or the outfitting association for comments or data. Nor, to the best of my knowledge, did they contact the river managers of the rivers whom they attacked. Their information came from a couple of sources who have had axes to grind. If you believe that the media always reports all sides of a story fairly and balanced then perhaps I could offer to sell you some great land that I have in Florida. Have you ever seen the press refer to the many jobs created by outfitters and zecs? No. Jointly we have been easy targets. Why all the attention and rhetoric? Some based upon jealousy (actually a lot of the mudslinging is a direct result of this)-- people who do not have resources to compete for market share or accessibility wish to find convenient excuses and then whip up a frenzy.

I believe that the outfitters association will be responding in the media to tell "the rest of the story".

Lastly, as to why people are not happy if 90% of the anglers are residents, it is simple. Some anglers in Quebec are concerned about the percentage of residents who participate and are selected in the winter draws. This is being addressed at the round table. But, there is a small number of people who are providing mis-information about the system and attempting to scare people into false conclusions. This has caused concern because of what has been stated but I believe that those at the table understand fact from fiction andI am sure that as the fiction continues to shown as just that there will be more tranquility than had been the case over the past year. As Dave said, most of this is coming from the same place and eventually it will stop.

In the meantime, enjoy the beautiful rivers that Quebec has to offer; and don't worry too much about mandatory outfitting for now. There are bigger issues to work out in the present and this is not on the discussion table. As I mentioned before, feel free to contact the Government or zecs (or both). If you buy your daily pass through a zec then you are their customer and they should take into account what your opinions are.

Bill Greiner

Last edited by billg; 01-10-2005 at 11:04 PM.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
  #32  
Old 01-11-2005, 10:10 AM
Salar-1's Avatar
Salar-1 Salar-1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Quebec Salmon rivers
Posts: 422
Bill
If your federation has actually mandated the notion of mandatory outfitting for non residents on Qc. Salmon rivers.You ,Dave and Glen had better get together and nix this foolish idea right away ,as this would effectively kill 80 to 95% of nonresident ZEC clientele .There's a hell of a lot of REPEAT, and I'll repeat , REPEAT non-resident fisherfolk that come here to Qc. that DO NOT wish/require a guide/outfitter and MOST Qc. Salmon anglers support this. position ! That being said nothing truly equates canoe/guiding with an excellent guide such as the very knowledgeable Claude Bernard,the pleasant , very enthusiastic Steve Whiting,the Genteel efficient Marc Leblanc and the sublime wiley Dave Bishop. The very nature of the business you are in forces issues partly because of the personalities involved.
If, however Mandatory outfitting is mandated for on residents ,I as a minor Druid Diety will immediately pronounce all Qc. resident LICENCED Salmon fisherfolk as outfitters and we will gladly provide this service .No money will change hands ,however the non-resident will be expected to pay only for our daily fishing fees
Cheers

Last edited by Salar-1; 01-11-2005 at 10:11 AM.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #33  
Old 01-11-2005, 10:25 AM
billg billg is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Gaspe
Posts: 115
Brian:

As I mentioned before the issue of mandatory outfitting/guiding is not an issue which I feel that I need to be proactive about either pro or con. I do not believe for 1 minute that it would increase my business. People book with me because of the product we offer and the service we provide. I cannot see people booking with me at the rates I charge simply because they can no longer fish on their own. Some of the small guiding businesses who offer just a guiding service may benefit from such a rule change. I am not sure that mandatory guiding has caused a proliferation of activity with New Brunswick Outfitters. It has, though, created money for individual guides.

The main issues that we as outfitters must deal with are accessiblity to salmon rivers and preservation of the resource. We certainly respect the right of Quebec and First Nation Anglers as well as non-residents. And, as I mentioned earlier to SPEY 66, it is the zecs who non-residents can turn to too weigh-in against these initiatives-- after all they are the clients of the zecs.

Bill Greiner
Malbaie River Outfitters
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #34  
Old 01-11-2005, 11:50 AM
Gaspe Salmon's Avatar
Gaspe Salmon Gaspe Salmon is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Gaspe Peninsual, Petite and Grand Cascapedia, Bonaventure, Nouvelle etc...
Posts: 82
Brian

Brian,

First of all, you obviously have NOT READ the posts correctly. THIS IS WHY SO MUCH CRAP GETS stirred up! I BEG OF YOU, read carefully what we post!

Here is what we said regarding mandatory guiding in Quebec. Please refer to the quotes below. And PLEASE STOP interpreting and USE specific quotes when they are available to you. Doing otherwise is simply irresponsible and creates confusion, or is this what you would like to see, confusion?

"1. On December 4th, at the annual Quebec Outfitters Federation meeting in Quebec City a motion was passed that stated the following: (The QOF would like to propose looking into the possibility of making guiding mandatory for all noble species including Black Bear, Moose, Caribou, Atlantic Salmon, Deer, and Migratory birds), considering that this is practiced in most other provinces and several states, not to mention many other countries. The reasons for examining this possibility are many but the two major points were of a social (employment basis) and for accessibility considerations. THE SUBJECT WAS DISCUSSED BY ALL OUTFITTERS (FOR ALL SPECIES) and WAS NOT ONLY PUT FORTH BY A FEW OUTFITTERS as some would have all of you believe. The proposition was to EXAMINE the impact, NOT adopt it right away. I am sure that it will be a very long time before it happens, if it ever does. So please do not lose any sleep over this!"


"The translation is incorrect as you state it. There WAS NO PROPOSITION offered, only that AT THE TIME, this sort of system was a QUICK FIX to some concerns on the part of the resident angler. Meaning, how could we fix this quickly. The issue was quickly shot down by all of us, as we know that A QUICK FIX of this nature is not in the best interest of anyone, including outfitters. Personally, I do not want to see my father, brother or other friends who fish here, have to hire a guide as they would in some other provinces BUT, if the folks around the round-table, remember we are 5-organizations, think it is best, then we are 1 out of 5 voting. I truly doubt that this has much support at the moment but the question will be examined from all angles. Again, for the time being I would not lose any sleep over it. I know that is not what you wan to hear but that is all I can offer. Nobody knows yet what will happen in the medium to long term, but in the short term I can assure you that it is not in the cards."


Here is another example of getting people riled up for no reason! Get your FACTS, as you call them, straight! For goodness sake people what is going on here!

It is not a rumour, but a factů.not only (guides mandatory) but some want a % (of rods on some rivers) before the pre-season draws in order to accommodate their clients.

Where did you get your facts again? Why post something like this if it is not true?

What will this accomplish? The facts, are INCORRECT as they are written. WE ARE NOT ASKING FOR MANDATORY GUIDING for Atlantic salmon, the Federation wants to EXAMINE the issue for ALL NOBLE SPECIES. Are we so ignorant as to think that Atlantic salmon is the only species outfitted for in Quebec? Out of over 500-Federation members only about 18 of them are Salmon outfitters. Now then, does this SHED A BIT OF REALITY AND FACT FOR ALL OF YOU?

Comments such as the ones posted withing this thread are scare tactics that would like to discredit outfitters and make us out to be THE ONLY source of problem. We know that there are some things that need to be fixed, but let's talk about the REAL ISSUES without always making us out to be the CAUSE of the problem. Examine all of the regulation changes from the Zec's and you will find that many problems were caused by these changes. We have an OFFICIAL POSITION from the government that stated that WE nor anyone else HAS DONE ANYTHING illegal in the past and that the way we operate fits within the guidlines set by the zec regulations as they pertain to the draws at the present time and more specifically as they were in the past.

Now I will concede that the spirit of the regulations was stretched from time to time by individuals, guides, booking agents and outfitters, and this is where we are now. Trying to fix it for the future. During this reflection we are trying to see what the needs are for all parties, including the non-resident angler. How should we best manage the resource so that it is available to everyone. How this will be done is still to be decided. Who will make the decisions? The people invited by the government at the table.

For the record, EVERYONE around the table KNOWS what went on in the past, and it is now considered the PAST, whether it was an individual, group of individuals, guide operations, booking agents, outfitters, whoever. It is all being considered and we are trying to learn from the mistakes of the past.

WHY ARE SOME OF YOU CONTINUALLY BRINGING UP THE PAST? The whole point of the round-table is to put that behind us and bring forth a new and better system.

I am not so naive as to say that we should forget the past... get that out of your head right away. It is just that we have gone over and over and over and over the same darned subject and they have been clearly explained, but still some of you, perhaps you are too lazy to read all of the posts in a thread properly, feel the need to stir up the pot! Are you doing this because you really care, or, are you doing if for someone else? To make them look good and us bad?

Whoever owns this site, or monitors it, would do well to carefully examine this issue and decide if you want REAL debate, or, if you want to allow outfitters to continue to have to reiterate the same thing over and over again in their defense. I am not asking that you to take sides, but at least moderate responsibly and try to read between the lines from time to time and see that some people here have their own agenda's.

As for the outftitters, our AGENDA is clear. We would like to have access to water to sell our guests, so that we no longer are perceived to be a strain on the draws, we are willing to cut back CONSIDERABLY in the total amount of water we purchase which will lead to a lot more water available for everyone. Many of us do not agree with the idea of mandatory guiding for Atlantic salmon but need to consider the needs of all outfitters in Quebec and are willing to EXAMINE the pro's and con's of the issue. Our personal views differ and I have stated what mine is at the moment. We feel that our propositions will greatly increase accessability for Residents, non-residents, guide companies and others in the industry, as well as meet the needs of outfitters who are the major employers in this industry. Most of our propositions ask for NEW rods to be added, therefore we would not be dipping into what already exists at the time. If our propositions are considered favourably, we may just have MORE access to our rivers.

One last thing in terms of the 20%... this is NOT the only thing being discussed so be careful about what we say here. We do not want to panic before something is accepted. To my knowledge, nothing has been officially proposed or accepted at this time. Perhaps some of you who are posting and questioning would like to PROPOSE a solution. I know that I would love to hear about what you might see as a solution rather than bring up past points over and over again.

Hopefully I will not have to reiterate these FACTS in another post. I invite you to CAREFULLY read what is posted, verify your sources through the FQSA, FPQ, GRSQ, or the government. These are the most reliable people to speak with. Anyone who is NOT seated at the table is hearing things SECOND hand and you know what that can lead to.

POSTING your solutions to the problems would be more constructive than beating up on a certain part of the industry. Only my humble opinion...

Looking forward to seeing your posts regarding POSITIVE solutions in the near future!

Salmonly yours,

David
David
__________________
David Bishop
Independent Salmon & Trout guide
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #35  
Old 01-11-2005, 08:26 PM
Salar-1's Avatar
Salar-1 Salar-1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Quebec Salmon rivers
Posts: 422
Dave
I did read the posts and my reply was to Bill's 11P.M. 01/10/05,which DID mention the outfitter federation's stand.
Cheers
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #36  
Old 01-11-2005, 08:50 PM
Salar-1's Avatar
Salar-1 Salar-1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Quebec Salmon rivers
Posts: 422
And here is the quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by billg
Spey 66:


As to Dave, Glen, and I on the issue of non-residents and guides/outfitters it is fairly simple. Our federation unaimously supports mandatory outfitting for noble species which includes Atlantic Salmon. Though as individuals we may not support this, I won't (I can't speak for them) push this issue either at the round table or through other channels. I have a personal opinion but whatever a policy decision might be is irrelevant to me. My #1 concern (aside from the preservation of the resource) is to secure access to the salmon rivers for my clients in order to continue to provide desparately needed jobs and stimulate the local economy. If it is decided that mandatory outfitting is the right thing, so be it. I will not argue for or against it.

e.

Bill Greiner
Cheers
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #37  
Old 01-12-2005, 10:10 AM
Gaspe Salmon's Avatar
Gaspe Salmon Gaspe Salmon is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Gaspe Peninsual, Petite and Grand Cascapedia, Bonaventure, Nouvelle etc...
Posts: 82
Clarification

Brian,

When you read Bill's post, it does give the impression that outfitters are in favour of mandatory guiding but THIS IS NOT THE CASE, I believe that he may have typed his response incorrectly, or has translated, like others, incorrectly. Point is, I made it VERY clear what was discussed in Quebec City in December. I know that he was not there on December 4th and I was, so please allow me to once again clarify the Quebec Outfitter's Associaion position regarding this supposed mandatory guiding for non-residents.

On December 4th, at the annual Quebec Outfitters Federation meeting in Quebec City a motion was passed that stated the following: (The QOF would like to propose looking into the possibility of making guiding mandatory for all noble species including Black Bear, Moose, Caribou, Atlantic Salmon, Deer, and Migratory birds), considering that this is practiced in most other provinces and several states, not to mention many other countries. The reasons for examining this possibility are many but the two major points were of a social (employment basis) and for accessibility considerations. THE SUBJECT WAS DISCUSSED BY ALL OUTFITTERS (FOR ALL SPECIES) and WAS NOT ONLY PUT FORTH BY A FEW OUTFITTERS as some would have all of you believe. The proposition was to EXAMINE the impact, NOT adopt it right away.

The fact that you, Brian, call on us Glenn, Bill and myself, would tend to seem a bit unfair! That is a lot of responsibility to be putting on our shoulders, don't you think? I have stated my personal opinion. Your cry for us to nix this soon, confuses me. Will this make me a better Dave in your eyes if I do it? Or, are you suggesting that if it was our idea, we need to nix it. I think I was clear on my position and Bill was too.

Listen Brian, this just proves my point that things are written to discredit us and to make us look bad. All of us know that ANGLERS needs, rights, and interests are covered by the FQSA, not the Quebec Outfitters Association. You would honestly have me, Glenn and Bill go in front of over 500-members and say, uh well d'er boys, I think that we made a mistake in December by wanting to examine the question of noble species mandatory guiding. Sorry Mr. Caribou guy, sorry Mr. Moose guy, sorry Mr. Black bear guy etc... Asking THREE of us to change what 500 want to EXAMINE is a tall order but I will see what I can do!

IF YOU ARE SO WORRIED about this issue, then why don't YOU DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT! I have tried to be fair, patient and honest with my responses but I can still see and feel some of you out there wanting to put the blame of all Quebec's problems on our shoulders. If this is the case, then will you take the recommendations that we will offer to fix the (perceived) problems? I certainly hope so.

I am still waiting for some of your suggestions on how to BEST manage the resource. I would really like to get something positive to come out of this thread, instead of innuendo and brining up the same old same old! We are at the NEGOTIATION stage Brian, not the BITCHING stage! That stage, has already passed for those at the table. Remember that those seated at the table will be the ones trying to figure this out over the next few months, so I strongly and respectfully SUGGEST that you and others, start to offer us suggestions, not ultimatums! I think we have all had about enough of the BS, LET's FIND A SOLUTION for goodness sake!

David
__________________
David Bishop
Independent Salmon & Trout guide
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #38  
Old 01-12-2005, 10:21 AM
fcch's Avatar
fcch fcch is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Rv Ste-Marguerite Saguenay Quebec
Posts: 194
Thumbs up

Salar36,

The pic is actually the #24 in Zone 2 about 200 ft upstream from Alan's Arm. Lots of anglers confuse the 2 pools as they are both accessed from the parking lot at the Warden's camp that is at Alan's Arm (#23)

This is Alan's Arm (Bras d'Alan) taken from the parking lot and looking down river.
__________________
Christopher Chin
christopher.chin@videotron.ca
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #39  
Old 01-12-2005, 11:20 AM
Salar36 Salar36 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Gaspesie
Posts: 111
Thanks Chris,

Looking your second picture, water seems to be very high in the brook. Don't remember having seen the brooks so strong. But remember that pool was a very productive one.

Pierre
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #40  
Old 01-12-2005, 11:34 AM
salmo52's Avatar
salmo52 salmo52 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Bonaventure
Posts: 11
Gaspe Salmon,

Are you sure you don't loose any sleep over this subject ? It looks like a few more days of this thread and you're gonna have nightmares.

The only thing we want as resident is a fair representation at the november draw ( 43% of the best fishing days on the best rivers of the province for the residents and 57% for the non-residents is not what I call fair). This subject was discussed last year on two other websites but someone somewhere forgot that salmon fishing was not about grabbing but about sharing.

Regarding the mandatory guiding, I was at the Montreal FQSA chapter meeting last november and it is true that mandatory guiding was suggested by some members but it was not supported by the vast majority of the assembly.

Quebec residents have a tradition of generosity and all the non residents are welcome on our salmon rivers, not only the rich and wealthy, but the ordinary guy who will live here a fantastic experience for a very reasonable price.

The problem of the draw has to be settle soon because it's time we put this dispute behind us.

Have a fantastic season and try a glass of Macallan 25 years of age before you go to bed, it helps
__________________
Carpe Diem
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #41  
Old 01-12-2005, 12:23 PM
billg billg is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Gaspe
Posts: 115
SALMO 52:

I believe that what is frustrating Dave is the same thing that has frustrated many of us in the salmon world. Perpetual spreading of misinformation, playing the blame game, and orchestrated attempts to discredit people. Debate and discussion are fine and welcomed as long as they are constructive (the history of a small number of people has been anything but).

You are absolutely correct that things need to be changed with respect to the draw system. As a member of the FQSA you are certainly aware that this is in the works, and your federation is actively and constructuively involved.

You bring up an interesting point about accessibility to rivers based upon draw card percentages. This, of course, has been hashed out in other forums in the vein of "cheating, deception, grabbing (you have used this adjective as well), power trip", etc. The fact is none of these characterizations are true and they have done nothing to attract people to Quebec. The opposite has occured; people are tired of seeing that the system of salmon fishing in Quebec is plagued with problems and borders on being corrupt (thats what the posts insinuate).

If you want to look at why on certain rivers there are differences in the percentages of non residents and residents that is an interesting dynamic. Take all of the rivers that are opening to killing large salmon. The fact is that more residents fish them and more residents therefore submit draw cards. Go back 3 years ago and campare the difference between the Matapedia or Bonaventure versus the St. Jean which is a catch and release river. Open the St. Jean up to killing from June 1 tomorrow and watch the numbers change.

Add to that the fact that the GRSQ and zecs spend many thousands of dollars to market to non-residents (they will be represented in at leats 2 upcoming fly fishing shows in the U.S.).

And, the double edge sword ot Quebec not requiring nonresidents to hire outfitters or guides makes it very easy for anyone to come and fish. More people means more draw cards and more pressure.

Last but not least are outfitters and guides. We, too, participate (although that should change for 2006).

Clearly there are a variety of factors which influence accessibility on any given river. To state that there are issues with the draw system is correct. To state that outfitters or any other group is "grabbing" is not factual.

As Dave has said, let's spend less time bitching about the past and trying to take shots and spend more time on solutions. We are working on our own to present in a couple of weeks.

I challenge all that have participated to come up with their own proposals. To SPEY 66 who suggested a nonresident anglers association to get certain viewpoints made, use this as an opportunity to come up with a positive solution for everyone. That is where the engery should be focused at this time. We are all open to suggestions.

Bill Greiner
Malbaie River Outfitters
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #42  
Old 01-12-2005, 12:40 PM
fcch's Avatar
fcch fcch is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Rv Ste-Marguerite Saguenay Quebec
Posts: 194
Pierre,

Quote:
Originally Posted by Salar36
...
Looking your second picture, water seems to be very high in the brook. Don't remember having seen the brooks so strong. But remember that pool was a very productive one.
Pierre
The pic is from this past September. It's misleading as Alan's Arm (the branch which flows into the mainstem from left to right) was actually low.

Yes ... a very productive and exciting pool. My avatar was "taken" there in 2002

This is low flow ... Marc Bergeron in august 2002 taken from the gallery
__________________
Christopher Chin
christopher.chin@videotron.ca
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #43  
Old 01-12-2005, 01:15 PM
Gaspe Salmon's Avatar
Gaspe Salmon Gaspe Salmon is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Gaspe Peninsual, Petite and Grand Cascapedia, Bonaventure, Nouvelle etc...
Posts: 82
Macallen 25 year! Great idea...

Dear Salmo 52,

First of all, I would like to thank you for your concern about my sleep... I can happily tell you that I am not losing any sleep from this subject, however, I am getting a good laugh at some of the behind the scenes workings to discredit us. (you are obviously not in this category)

The rumours and outright-created-lies posted on these boards are at root of why I have waded into the boards to respond. If you did not notice, I stayed out of it until it reached a point of being ridiculous. Now that I have waded in and have OFFERED the FACTS, I find it strange that many who started the controversey seem to be absent from offering solutions, they only continue to stirr the pot through others, who unfortunately have been victim of some of my rants. Oh well, for those in the know, the ones who will make the decisions, we all know what is REALLY going on! For those who have been pointed out as stirring the pot, I am sorry that you have been caught up in this, and that some of you have been soured, as you say, about continuing in the converstation, but this is the price to pay of aligning with people who have personal score's to settle and who have been spreading false information about our province. Do you think for one minute that the government and others really care about what we exchange here on the BB? Think again if the anwer is yes. I am only responding because I am sick of the lies and want to share the REAL story with others.

It would be really nice if these people (the one's who get others to start these topics) would offer suggestions on how to make the system work, before it is too late. Continually bitching about what we already know needs to be fixed, does not help anyone. So, once again I throw out the welcome mat to anyone who has suggestions. I have made several within my organization and welcome the ideas of others to incorporate into our work in progress.

Thanks for your input. You are correct, we need to take care of the draws first! Although I would really like to offer what we will be suggesting at the round-table, I simply cannot out of respect for all who will be hearing it soon enough. It is a work in progress but the GRANDE LIGNES have been suggested and will be offered soon!

What I CAN TELL YOU is that Quebec residents NEEDS in terms of the percentage of rods available through a draw is DEFINATELY priority number 1. As a matter of fact, it is FAR superior to what is the reality today. Enough said, you will all hear about it soon enough. I will go on to say that we have tried to consider every single utilizer and business in our proposition.

If you look at the FQSA model, which for the most-part suggests that outfitters be alloted a portion of the 20%, it would lead us to believe that they want about 80% of the total rods to be alloted to Quebecer's in a first round draw, if I am not mistaken. What we propose fits closely into this but takes into consideration, believe it or not, non-residents and other businesses in Quebec who deal in salmon. I am offering my comments based on the memorandum offered by the FQSA, but cannot tell you exactly what they are suggesting and the above should not be taken as fact, it is only my interpretation. I will have to wait like everyone else to find out in February what their real suggestions are.

Perhaps when all of this is all said and done, when our proposition is examined by all parties, many will see outfitters in a different light!

Thanks for your input!

Best to you,

David
P.S. out of scotch, can you suggest something else to help my sleepless nights!
__________________
David Bishop
Independent Salmon & Trout guide
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #44  
Old 01-12-2005, 01:29 PM
fcch's Avatar
fcch fcch is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Rv Ste-Marguerite Saguenay Quebec
Posts: 194
Thumbs up

David,

Thank you. New dossier for me. Just finished reading the FQSA document (all 108 pages). Waiting for february too.

Quote:
P.S. out of scotch, can you suggest something else to help my sleepless nights!
Standard fair on my home waters for those sleepless nights (like the eve of the season opener) ... Jack Daniel's
__________________
Christopher Chin
christopher.chin@videotron.ca
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #45  
Old 01-12-2005, 02:38 PM
Salar36 Salar36 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Gaspesie
Posts: 111
David,

I think you should read again recommandation 56(P.50) and 60 (P.53), it should help.


Pierre Manseau
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Fly Fishing Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Another ANWR oil drilling proposal Doublespey Our Environment 15 04-03-2006 08:56 PM
Get Your Proposal In! rich_simms Pacific Northwest Sea Run Forum 1 11-14-2005 08:32 PM
NOAA Fisheries proposal kjackson Worldwide Flyfishing Discussion 0 05-28-2004 02:57 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:34 AM.



Copyright Flyfishingforum.com (All Rights Reserved)