Dart voting

would be better

Editor:

Re: Wanna complain? Don’t vote, Brad Reddekopp, letter to the editor, The Interior News, Oct. 1.

I recently read a letter in this paper stating that not voting is showing your displeasure with the system or parties. Imagine if that were true. The United States would be the country harbouring the most people expressing displeasure with their parties and democracy.

According to this opinion almost 50 per cent of U.S. voters are ‘taking a stand’ saying no to the system, no to democracy! Yeah, right!

The truth is only the opinions of those who vote count. Those who do not vote, are not heard, they simply stand idly by, watching the world progress. Their own protest remains unheard.

Not voting lowers the voter turnout, making it easier for extreme parties to get into parliament, since they need fewer votes. If you cherish your freedom of expression, that Canadians have defended with their own blood you go out and vote. If you have no favourite, vote for your least ‘non-favourite’.

Even voting by throwing a dart at the political board is better than not voting, since then at least we will get a parliament balanced by chance rather than extremism.

If you want to truly complain, go and find people who agree with you. Form an interest group to attract more people. Found a party. Get elected and then change the system.

True complaining about the system takes guts, personal investment, passion and love for country and people. By staying at home and grumbling about it you do just that: staying at home, grumbling.

Uwe Gramann

Smithers

Somebody has to take care of fish

Editor:

Last weekend I saw the prime example of why non-resident anglers should be required to have a licensed professional guide to be able to fish in B.C.

It is required for hunting so why not for angling too?

I was walking up to a favourite run to fish when I came upon five non-resident fishermen. They were kneeling down on the rocks about 20 feet from shore.

A few minutes later, I learned why they were so far from the river. One of the fishermen was holding a beautiful Steelhead. They were trying to set up for a picture when the Steelhead slipped out of the guy’s hands and slammed onto the rocks. He then literally pounced on it like a cat on a mouse and pressed down on it so he could grab it again. He then lifted it up for some pictures and he then packed the Steelhead to the river to take a couple more pictures of him holding it above the water before finally releasing it to the river.

The group then proceeded to high five each other. The fish was out of the water for at least two or three minutes that I saw. I guess we can kiss that fish goodbye. But that’s OK because “we got lots, don’t we, eh?”

I went to the top of the run and watched as these guys hooked six more Steelhead and again dragged these fish, using their rods, out of the water and bounced each fish across 15 to 20 feet of rocks where they proceeded to mishandle and take pictures of the fish before getting it back in the water.

These guys are either ignorant about how to handle fish or just don’t care.

I am not saying that all non-resident anglers are this negligent; there are many very excellent and responsible non-resident anglers, just as there are some irresponsible resident anglers. But we have to start somewhere.

I am sure if there was a professional guide with this group, this situation would not have happened and the fish would live to fight another day.

Having mandatory guided non-residents would also help cut down on the illegal guiding that is going on now. Those of us who spend time on the river have all heard the stories. “I don’t need rod days, I’m not a guide. I just bring my boat and take friends out. I have a lot of friends.” Or, “I don’t need rod days. I’m not a guide. I just have rooms and vehicles for friends to use. I have a lot of friends.” Who is going to take better care of our resources?

Legal resident guides or illegal guides?

In our region we have only a few conservation officers, certainly not enough for such a large area. I think it is time for the government to come up with some money to help out with this problem. One way that was suggested is to take the money the non-resident anglers have to pay for fishing classified waters and return it to the region it was collected in to help pay for protection of the resources. This would start to correct these and other issues.

We have five major river systems in this area within a one-and-a-half to two-hour drive. Anglers come from around the world to have the privilege to fish here, and this is pretty special to have at our back door.

This is a precious and non-replaceable resource and we have to take responsibility to take care of it now and for the future.

Once the Steelhead are gone, the non-residents will take their money elsewhere and we will be left standing on shore with our rods in our hands remembering the good old days.

Lane Rabbiosi

Smithers

It is a fish

story, dummy

Editor:

Re: Todd Hamilton’s column, Not another fish story, The Interior News, Oct. 1.

To say this is an economic story is to miss the point.

I believe it is first and foremost a quality of life story for the resident anglers who like to toss a line now and then into the amazing Skeena River.

If you are an angler like I am, it’s a bit tough to take when someone hides behind the inability to speak English and happens to be a tourist/guest in the Province of B.C., yet displays a total lack of civilized decorum because he/she needs to catch a fish.

When tourists display aggressive behaviour toward B.C. residents and others fishing alongside them on an ever-increasing scale it’s time to make some basic changes.

Last summer I witnessed all kinds of inappropriate behaviour on the Skeena system — enough to take the joy out of fishing.

It’s common knowledge in the angling community that a lot of anglers avoid certain spots simply because a group of tourists show up very, very early and “hog” the spot for the bulk of the entire day.

Restricting free and unlimited access to a world class resource is the only appropriate way to manage this problem.

Failure to do so would diminish the quality of life for resident anglers and show a lack of respect to this truly world class fishing resource.

Charles Claus

Prince George

You’re lucky you can complain

Editor:

Re: Wanna complain? Don’t vote, Brad Reddekopp, letter to the editor, The Interior News, Oct. 1.

Ironically, the very system of government about which you are complaining, is the system which allows you the freedom to complain, and to express your views.

It’s called democracy.

Gillian Bakker

Smithers

Sign defacing not child’s play

Editor:

It has come to my attention that a number of Sharon Smith campaign signs have been vandalized or stolen, while not one of the other candidates signs have been disturbed.

I’m not pointing any fingers but dedicated people take time out of their lives to help with the campaigns by putting up signs and then people have the audacity to tear them down or steal them?

Do they have any morals?

I’m only in Grade 11, but I’m old enough to know what’s going on is wrong and unjust.

Last weekend, people put signs up around Telkwa High Road and Old Babine Lake road. This morning on the way to town, it was obvious that someone had thrown a rock or put their fist through Sharon Smith’s face on one of her large signs, while right next to it the opposing candidates sign was intact, many of the Sharon Smith small signs that had been placed along the road were missing while all of the opposing candidates signs remained untouched.

I have reason to believe that this is not the act of teenagers, because really what would a 15-year-old be doing stealing signs and breaking out faces.

It is, if I remember correctly, a federal offence to damage, remove or obstruct in anyway a campaign sign or poster.

Yes, I understand this is federal election and maybe these people think this is the way to beat the competition, but do they think that defacing and stealing signs is really going to help their party?

I just wanted to bring this to the attention of citizens of the Skeena-Bulkley Valley riding because this isn’t something we can just sit on our butts and do nothing about. At least I know I won’t and I will keep fighting for what I think is right.

Tess Wood

Smithers

What planet

is he on?

Editor:

Alright. J. Edwards takes umbrage at Brenda Mallory’s criticism of some teenager’s language. (The Interior News, Oct. 1., 2008. Fair enough.

But to get his point across, he subjects us to a diatribe that spans more than two millennia — from Cicero, “a grumpy old man” to the present.

And then Mr. Edwards goes madly off in all directions. His sweeping condemnation ranges from “the short supply of understanding in modern North America-Canada-Smithers,” to our failure to recognize the “inevitable” wisdom of youth, to his conviction that “much modern media is one-sided and simplistic.”

In support of this assertion, he ties himself into a linguistic pretzel by constructing a sentence so convoluted, that he finally disproves himself.

Is this simply the result of pent-up anger at society at large? Or could Mr. Edward’s final exhortation to “communicate with your fellow earthlings,” be a clue to where he is coming from?

Walter Hromatka

Smithers

None of

the above

Editor:

Re: Wanna complain? Don’t vote, Brad Reddekopp, letter to the editor, The Interior News, Oct. 1.

I would like to suggest that every ballot (federal, provincial, municipal) have a space marked “None of the above.”

This would be a legitimate and measurable manner in which to record protest votes. Refusing to vote — an indication of apathy — or spoiling a ballot does not necessarily mean a protest vote.

I wish to encourage Canadians to study the issues, challenge the candidates and exercise their right to vote in the coming election.

If our elected officials were made aware of the number of protest votes cast, perhaps they would be more willing to take their responsibilities more seriously and earn the respect of the electorate.

Louis Kwantes

Smithers