Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Kraft]

Please read this, I recieved this Email sent to Vancouver Angling and Game Association (a fishing club I belong to) .....
To All ,
I do not know if you are aware of this fact so I am sending out emails to those that might have an interest. The BC Gov't is trying to enact Bill 30 and contained within this Bill is clause 56 which will privatize 535 rivers in British Columbia. On Monday this Bill goes to the committee stage. One of the companies that will be in charge of a river is BC Transmission Corp. This is a total outrage, firstly to privatize a River but to allow companies to run a river is a staggering thought. Imagine if Alcan was one of the companies and the raminification this could have on all peoples of this province. I hope you will take a few minutes and either pass this email along or write your own letter to your MLA and express your dissatifaction with this.

Bob Ashton
VP ILWU Canada (International Longshoreand Warehouse Union)

This E-mail was recieved by me on May 15 /2006

[Sandy]

Could you post a copy?I hope this is not the thin edge og the wedge. the people of BC are going to be the big losers. from the sport angling end only the weathy will be able to fish the best rivers, where have we heard this before?
www2.news.gov.bc.ca/news_releases_2005-2009/2006AG0022-000503.htm

[keithr]

you mean like just anybody wouldn't be able to fish rivers like the Dean?

[Sandy]

rumour has it the Liberals( Campbell ) wants to lease the rights to useable resources available in a river or creek , ie: power, fisheries.My concerne is that this would exclude people from fishing a public river because a person or corperation has been given the rights to turn the fishery into a buisness and therfore you would have to pay an additional fee to fish that river or stream.
Ask Your MLA to check into it. mine will not give me a definative answer.
my appologies for the hyjack   

[BwiBwi]

Nanoose Bay area on the VI, many places is not accessable because the shoreline has been leased to bivalve farming. Hope rivers will not come to that.

[Uncivil]

I think you are referring to the clause in the act that allows the government to overrule local zoning authority. If that is the clause you are referring to It may be a stretch to call it privatization of rivers.  My understanding is that it allows the government to override local municipal governments when they are unreasonably standing in the way standing in the way of allowing a run of the river project to move forward.  This comes about because the SLRD is not using reasonble grounds for refusing the Ashlu river project ot move ahead.  That project in my estimation was the only project in the Sea to Sky corridor that made any sense. And it was held up because of transmission line zoning( at the time I was involved with it).  The SLRD has a good point when they complain about the random scattergun approach to water licensing.  The provincial government needs to have a regional plan for dealing with these projects.