WE'VE REALLY WON! - Texada kayaking needs your support

Discussion in 'General Paddling Discussions' started by candikayak, Mar 10, 2019.

  1. mick_allen

    mick_allen Paddler & Moderator

    Joined:
    May 15, 2005
    Messages:
    3,045
    I guess it's now time to point out that we've won a battle but not the campaign. If you note in the letter from gov't, the application was withdrawn and not denied. None of us knows why it was withdrawn - and it could be for many reasons totally unrelated to all our work. And at this point, who's to say some much more sophisticated and resourced applicant couldn't just jump right in and continue the process all over again.
    So,
    - we need to know more: was the gov't going to deny the application and therefore the less controversial way out taken?
    - the procedure for getting higher status for Northeast Bay and it's upland need to proceed.
    - and vigilance is required so that we could if necessary ramp up all over again.
    - I also think some of us [the Texada island resident association and some others of us] need to have a debriefing session.

    anyway, some sober 2nd thoughts.

    [And just a separate addition that maybe needs to be stated: we [most involved that I have noticed statements from] are NOT against aquaculture. Indeed, I personally think that Submersible Longline Aquaculture might just be a great way to produce shellfish because of the seductive advantages that it could provide if done properly . The whole issue here is that one proponent for his own commercial gain was to adversely affect the use of many varied users on the public land, shores, and oceanscape of a designated parklike property that has been used by many [and almost incidentally by kayakers and canoeists as well.]
     
    JohnAbercrombie likes this.
  2. alexsidles

    alexsidles Paddler

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2009
    Messages:
    277
    Location:
    Seattle WA
    Congratulations Mick, BC Marine Trails, and the residents of Texada Island. May our public lands endure.

    Alex
     
    Astoriadave likes this.
  3. mick_allen

    mick_allen Paddler & Moderator

    Joined:
    May 15, 2005
    Messages:
    3,045
    I just received this 2nd hand information. [cut from a longer email]:
    **
    [cut] . . . As it relates to the the reason for the application being with drawn, the message from DFO to the . . . office, the statement made by The Aquaculture office was that this is not an appropriate location for a shellfish farm, due to conflict with recreational uses in the Bay.
    They gave him 2 options, one, withdraw your application or 2 move to another location.
    [they] decided to Withdraw. If [they] didn't the Province (Forestry) would have not approved it and Cancelled the application outright.
    This is normal procedure as the ministries don't want to look, anti Business.
    It's over and no other applicant will chose this site, as they will hear early on that this is not an appropriate location. . . . [cut]
    **

    So it really is over. Amazing. Whew. Unbelievable. The arguments were heard, understood, and convincing.
    -mick
     
    JohnAbercrombie likes this.
  4. mick_allen

    mick_allen Paddler & Moderator

    Joined:
    May 15, 2005
    Messages:
    3,045