|
Post by ShadowCaster on Jul 31, 2005 14:28:29 GMT 8
There are 3 main possibilities on the outcome of our proposal that had just been sent to the 2 Ministers.
Possibility #1 : Proposal Ignored My definition of an "Ignored Proposal" is that nothing is heard from both Ministries within 6 weeks from now.
Possibility #2 : Proposal Rejected This possibility outline the scenario whereby the Ministries replied that our proposal cannot be accepted in total.
Possibility #3 : Proposal Accepted This possibility outline the scenario whereby the Ministries replied that our proposal is accepted either in part or in total.
Possibility #1 is the easiest to react to. We simply continue to seek avenues to get our proposal across to the right people until we get a feedback from the correct agency.
Possibility #2 is the most diappointing but it certainly does not mean the end. We'll need to clarify the details and reasons behind the rejection, learn the lessons, and re-propose a frame work that can be accepted by the authorities.
Possibility #3 is what we all hope for. But I caution that it is also potentially the most difficult to react to. We will most likely need to find answers to the following questions before we can proceed further meaningfully.
1. Given that our proposed principles are accepted, what are the concrete actions required of the authorities? Should they legalize all fishing in all reservoirs? If not should it be done in parts? If so, which parts and how big an area? What are the considerations?
2. To implement enforcement measures, how to resolve resource constraints problem of PUB & N Parks?
3. How would PUB and N Parks know that their new policies and regulations are practical and acceptable to the local community? Should they continue to consult SFAS like what they had done so far or is there another avenue that they can go to?
4. Where do we find expertise in fish reproduction and fish stocking info to facilitate fishery management information?
These questions are by no means exhaustive.
So what does everyone think? how do we proceed?
Your views please?
Its important to ride on the momemtum and push on for Phase 2!
|
|
|
Post by AnglerAdventurer on Aug 1, 2005 15:57:21 GMT 8
Good day ShadowCaster,
Thanks again for sending the proposal out to the 2 Ministers.
In my opinion, before the authorities come back to us..... I think we need to get some of the things done on our side.
1. Form the Fly Fishing Club. This way, the authorities can work with us as a body and not as individuals. If need be, work hand-in-hand with SFAS should the authorities seek their expertise to oversee this proposal plan.
2. Form working Committee groups This is the tough part, working groups to oversee the operations of the action plan.
We may need a group in Club Management, Fishery Management, Fishing License, PUB and NPark Liaison, PR Liaison and Flyfishing Activities.
Club Management - personnel running the club ie. Chairman, Secretary, Treasurer just to name afew.
Fishery Management - personnel understudying the proposal plan and working with the authorities on this research plan.
Fishing License - personnel formulating and implementing of the Fishing License. Rules and regulations.
PUB and NPark Liaison- personnel working closely with this two bodies for this new policy and at the same time hghlight to them that flyfishing is as safe as crossing the roads.
PR Liaison- personnel working closely with PA, NS, MOE and public awareness programs.
Flyfishing Activities- personnel working on scheduled programs for the year.
Are we ready to face what are the authorities' expectation of our part in this and I hope this proposal doesn't come down to $$$$ to get it going.
The time has come............. Walk the Talk.
Huns.
|
|
|
Post by ShadowCaster on Aug 3, 2005 0:04:03 GMT 8
Walk the talk indeed! Thank you Hun San for the comprehensive list. Forming a fly fishing alliance and associated working committee is an interesting suggestion. But I don't know if we can get enough bodies to form a critical mass Let say......... for argument sake.......... a fly fishing alliance pops up in Singapore, looking for keen flyfisher for its working committee, how many fly fisher would be interested to pitch in their effort ? Anyone?
|
|
|
Post by mtshark on Aug 3, 2005 0:53:22 GMT 8
Me. Me? I hope I could help abit here.
|
|
|
Post by xxJiMboZxx on Aug 3, 2005 7:56:39 GMT 8
I may of not much help, but I would surely volunteer my service in any sense to make this work.
|
|
|
Post by Qwek on Aug 3, 2005 8:33:37 GMT 8
Walk the Talk!
It time to get the ball, eh line rolling! We have to get together to show that we are committed to the clause.
I have forwarded TY's proposal to several agencies, and they are very encouraged to see this proposal coming from our community. We have found allies to our clause and we must act now.
We should found a group to promote awareness and care for our nature habitats and environment along this line:
Conserving, Restoring & Educating Through FlyFishing.
The draft is still on the drawing board, this is to show our commitment to the proposal that we are submitting. Some of the objectives are as follows (not in any particular orders) and are some that I have "borrowed" from similar club/federation in the US.
Objectives 1) To support fisheries conservation and educational programs for all fish and all waters.
2) Cultivate and advance the art, science and sport of flyfishing as the most sporting and enjoyable method of angling and the way of fishing most consistent with the preservation and use of game fish resources;
3) Be the voice for organized fly fishing;
4) Promote conservation of recreational resources;
5) Facilitate and improve the knowledge of fly fishing;
6) Cherish the spirit of fellowship among anglers everywhere; Maintain the standard of integrity, honor, and courtesy of anglers:
7) Establish and maintain liaison with other organizations of anglers and conservationists and government agencies concerned with the sport of angling; and
8) Keep its members informed of developments of interest to the membership.
It a tall order but I think we can achieve with the help of these agencies. I have sound out to them that we are not trying to parallel what the SFAS is doing, it agenda is well known to them. Those that I've spoke to, strongly suggest we go on our own to share our knowledge through FlyFishing. Even though our activities will be through FlyFishing, we can also help to educate the public and other anglers on the Conservation, Restoration and made angling a safe and enjoyable recreational activity.
These are just some of the guidelines for a new formation, Billy Teo is also looking at the goundworks where we can launch it. Many of you are not aware that Billy havs been working quietly on these for a long time, and i think together we can propose a solid ground to start.
Folks, it time for another PICNIC!
Cheers Qwek
|
|
|
Post by AnglerAdventurer on Aug 3, 2005 8:45:52 GMT 8
Hi Master Q,
Time for another picnic? Gosh, better go check with my Airline ticketing office?!
This is it guys.......... just do it!
Huns.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Aug 3, 2005 9:23:56 GMT 8
Let's do it. Count me in as a volunteer too.
|
|
|
Post by Qwek on Aug 3, 2005 9:30:23 GMT 8
1. Given that our proposed principles are accepted, what are the concrete actions required of the authorities? Should they legalize all fishing in all reservoirs? If not should it be done in parts? If so, which parts and how big an area? What are the considerations?
Some areas are considered out of bounds, and some agencies are not keen to have any activities in these waters at all. But some like to have public access as much as possible. There will be a compromise to balance as much access to the public and water activities. Angling and public do not mix well as we all know.
To have the authorities monitoring all the waters may not be possible, knowing the limited manpower they have on hand. Nature reserve waters activities limitation have been a issue for some time and they will fight tooth and nail to protect these water. We may have to look at man-made reservoirs, just the same some would want all the water activities there as well.
2. To implement enforcement measures, how to resolve resource constraints problem of PUB & N Parks?
To monitor thousands of anglers would be a mamoth task for these two agencies. The onus should be on the anglers themselves to follow the rules, easily said than done. Licence should be issued together with a mandatory briefing on the rules and regulations governing fishing in local waters, both coastal and inland. Then the anglers would know that they have no excuse for any voilations, just like littering.
3. How would PUB and N Parks know that their new policies and regulations are practical and acceptable to the local community? Should they continue to consult SFAS like what they had done so far or is there another avenue that they can go to?
They have consult them for the last seven years or so and... well that much I can remembered. But there will be another avenue for them if we the alliance right.
4. Where do we find expertise in fish reproduction and fish stocking info to facilitate fishery management information?
I think the right agency would be the AVA, there are ongoing reproduction program on St John Island for saltwater species and at another location on the mainliand. There are also the aquarium trade that we can approach for ready stock. The AVA also have a list of fish that are considered alien to our waters.
Just my $2.50 worth. hehe
Cheers Qwek
|
|
|
Post by snakeriver on Aug 3, 2005 10:07:17 GMT 8
Hi guys, Firstly, I am always ready to lend my helping hand for the future of our fishing in local waters. As for the proposal of a fly fishing group/club, I am just wondering if the numbers are too small and whether if we should take in consideration for lurers too, which make up a huge number of fishos here. Qwek has certainly spell out most of the concerns and constraints that these agencies have. They certainly lack the manpower and the knownledge to manage. We also need them to be committed to the rules and regulation should the proposal goes through. Just to share what I gather from feedback about the present legal area. Many actually regretted the opening of such area as it has become a "killing field". The ground has been destroyed and overfish and the authorities are not strict with "live baiters" nor they care about re-stocking. They felt unless proper rules and regulations are enforece, if not it is better to leave the ground as it is now. However, that is what we are trying to acheive, to able to work with the agencies to improve, conserve and regulate our fishing here. comments anyone?
|
|
|
Post by alberto on Aug 3, 2005 11:27:57 GMT 8
Hi Folks, I'll help out in whatever way I can! Just let me know.
regards Alberto
|
|
|
Post by Chee Yung on Aug 3, 2005 16:19:46 GMT 8
Hi Guys , I'm in for any complimentary support group that can work with SFAS when necessary and also work independently if the focus is different... mutual respect here . You have my help in anything relating to building/architecture, landscape and any graphic or artwork ( eventhough I think our nutty brother Mel excels in the latter ) IMHO, the strict implementation of license is critical with possibly a proper tag/life-jacket for licensed anglers. I'm tempted to go for flyfishing only but the point is that all licensed anglers should understand, support and comply with a good code of conduct and may need to log in time for conservation/water-guardian work to qualify .... OOPs that rules family men like me out ;D hahahaha.... anyway just throwing some ideas... Hmmm... who knows, maybe we become better anglers by watching/guarding the waters 90% of the time and fish smart 10% of the time ;D Cheers CY
|
|
|
Post by oldfly on Aug 6, 2005 14:29:01 GMT 8
Hi Shadowcaster,
I think AnglerAdventurer has some good points and you ended your post with the word "Anyone?".
Could you be more specific when you said, "Let say......... for argument sake.......... a fly fishing alliance pops up in Singapore, looking for keen flyfisher for its working committee, how many fly fisher would be interested to pitch in their effort ?"
I guess at this point, it would be good for you guys to be at the forefront of forming a pro-temp group. If you leave it to other members of this forum to get the ball rolling, then I would guess that this process of submission of the white paper has been just an academic exercise.
Wishing you all the best in your future endeavours in seeing this white paper to fruition.
~ just an old fart...er I mean oldfly
|
|
|
Post by ShadowCaster on Aug 6, 2005 15:16:07 GMT 8
Hi Shadowcaster, I think AnglerAdventurer has some good points and you ended your post with the word "Anyone?". Could you be more specific when you said, "Let say......... for argument sake.......... a fly fishing alliance pops up in Singapore, looking for keen flyfisher for its working committee, how many fly fisher would be interested to pitch in their effort ?" I guess at this point, it would be good for you guys to be at the forefront of forming a pro-temp group. If you leave it to other members of this forum to get the ball rolling, then I would guess that this process of submission of the white paper has been just an academic exercise. Wishing you all the best in your future endeavours in seeing this white paper to fruition. ~ just an old fart...er I mean oldfly Good point oldfly! Words of wisdom indeed...... Rest assured that things are brewing....... Will we have the previledge of your participation?
|
|
|
Post by ShadowCaster on Aug 10, 2005 21:22:58 GMT 8
As a follow up to the policy frame-work proposal sent out recently, I'm now working on an implementation proposal customised towards our local reservoirs.
The sequence of argument for the implementation proposal are as follow : 1. Do a case study of Lower Pierce reservoir since the day it was opened for fishing till today and describe the current state of sports fishing there.
2. Draw lessons learnt on what could been done better and what other regulations could have been implemented and how they could have been better enforced to achieve a better outcome.
3. Propose a brand new set of difinitive policies and regulations and enforcement plan, customised towards each individual reservoir.
4. Propose that we do a pilot project implementation on one of the reservoir (LP? Pandan? 73?) to refine policies/regulations/enforcement plan before opening up more reservoirs.
Give me 3 to 4 weeks for this.
All comments/suggestions/critiques are welcome.
|
|