Angler rights being threatened in Port Hope

[tweedwolfscream]

On February 26 I emailed the following to the Port Hope council:

Dear mayor and councillors:

I appreciate that it is not normally your responsibility to entertain submissions other than from your constituents. But I feel that the issue of the proposed $40 fishing pass is fundamentally about the sharing of resources between communities, and as such warrants this sort of inter-municipal communication.

Ontario's fisheries are a provincially-managed public resource with a province-wide licensing system. An annual license payment gives one access to fishing opportunities across Ontario. An angler who casts into the Ganaraska for salmon in the fall might be jigging for perch through the ice of Lake Simcoe in the winter, trolling the Kawartha Lakes for walleye in the summer, and portaging into a remote northern brook trout lake in the spring.

The proposed Municipal Access Fishing Pass would be a sharp break with this principle, made without the support of the agency responsible for managing the provincewide fishery and licensing system. Municipalities implementing local fishing passes would chip away at the freedom anglers enjoy to explore the province's waters; if they become standard, one would have to invest in a pass for their own local area and avoid fishing elsewhere. At a time in human history when most would agree people need to strengthen their connections with nature, such a trend would be deeply counterproductive.

Since I am raising here the spectre of a precedent that other municipalities would follow, I would be remiss not to address what the Salmon Fishing Report says on just that matter:
"Staff are only aware of one other municipality that has a similar program, that being Essa Township. This program was introduced in 2007. Since its inception, it does not appear that other municipalities have implemented similar programs."

First of all, I'm sure you can appreciate the irony of using Essa Township both as a precedent for the pass and as proof that it won't set a precedent. Indeed, Port Hope's decision will determine whether or not Essa's pass was the beginning of a slippery slope.

But second of all, it is important to point out that Essa's Fishing Access Pass doesn't have nearly the scope of the proposed one in Port Hope. Essa's pass requirement applies only to three small parks along the Nottawasaga River. Altogether these three parks account for only about 800 meters of Nottawasaga riverbank, and only cover one shore of the river in any one place. By contrast, Port Hope is considering a pass requirement for all municipally- and Conservation Authority-owned land and water, based on the assumption that this includes much or a majority of the fishable Ganaraska river bed.

In other words, while Essa charges a fee for the use of a few specific fishing facilities, Port Hope is contemplating charging a fee for the use of an entire salmon and trout run. A salmon and trout run that was stocked by the province, with provincial tax and fishing license dollars, for the benefit of all provincial license holders.

With all this in mind, I ask that you decline to implement the Municipal Access Fishing Pass.

With thanks for your consideration,