Ontora neglected by the OFAH

[trimmer21]

I see a really nasty battle on the horizon. I think it's way past high time we took the bull by the horns by hammering the OFAH to publish any existing policy pertaining to this issue and to show,definitvely,what they have been doing about it and how they intend to follow up or,more importantly,if they choose to ignore the issue,completely. That,in and of itself,would be very telling. No doubt,many current members would see the organisation in a whole new light. At the same time,the same letter writing campaign by us mere peons who happen to cast votes could be lighting a fire under the butt of our local MPP and riding association executive,especially the ridings who are in opposition. By writing enough letters,they can't hide behind the "We didn't know" excuse. It may be a good time to create enough that it may turn into an election issue. Watch them all dive for cover.

[trimmer21]

I've sent a general e-mail to the OFAH. If I get a response,I'll post it.

[Gilroy]

I've sent a general e-mail to the OFAH. If I get a response,I'll post it.

Better you than me,the last time I spoke out against them on this site I got a 30 day ban.LOL Suprised I,am still on.

[trimmer21]

Better you than me,the last time I spoke out against them on this site I got a 30 day ban.LOL Suprised I,am still on.

I sure heard that. Most of the time,we can say what we want. We just have to cautious how we say it.LOL

[woody1948]

As far as OFAH's position on the subject, NORA's Simon Guillet asked OFAH several times before he finally got this reply where they admitted supporting public access restrictions…quote, " Therefore, in order to represent both groups, OFAH fights against excess MNR/NOTO road closures and too many MNR/NOTO access restrictions, but agrees that some road closures and access restrictions are necessary to allow remote tourism members to run more profitable enterprises by offering a "remote" experience to their guests [

Thought I shoud repost this quote, seems we have problems seeing their position.

[trimmer21]

As far as OFAH's position on the subject, NORA's Simon Guillet asked OFAH several times before he finally got this reply where they admitted supporting public access restrictions…quote, " Therefore, in order to represent both groups, OFAH fights against excess MNR/NOTO road closures and too many MNR/NOTO access restrictions, but agrees that some road closures and access restrictions are necessary to allow remote tourism members to run more profitable enterprises by offering a "remote" experience to their guests [

Thought I shoud repost this quote, seems we have problems seeing their position.

What a crock. It's like saying we're only getting a little bit screwed. Do you have an idea as to how old their comments are? Maybe,they've had time to re-evaluate. At any rate,I intend to find out,one way or the other. My information is these closures have encompassed some very vast areas taking in great fishing lakes and hunting areas for their own financial gain at the disadvantage to everyone else. I don't have a problem with folks making a living,of course,but,this is just plain wrong.

[woody1948]

We should be in a pretty good position here to get a reply on where they stand.

[trimmer21]

I've sent a carefully worded,very respectful e-mail to the OFAH executive leaving ZERO wiggle room for an ambiguous response. When/if there's a reply,I'll post it. I also intend to contact our MP and MPP (they're PC and Conservative,father and son,so,this should be interesting.)

Sometimes,it pays to shake the bushes,politically,now and then,if for no other reason to show them all that we're still watching.

[Birdbuff]

Hey if the outfitters want to keep these areas remote, I've got an idea.....tell the logging companies to stop building roads in the bush to allow access to these lakes. Wait a second, are the forests that are logged belonging to us, or are they leased by other countries? Hmmm seems more fishy everywhere you look.

[Gilroy]

What a crock. It's like saying we're only getting a little bit screwed. Do you have an idea as to how old their comments are? Maybe,they've had time to re-evaluate. At any rate,I intend to find out,one way or the other. My information is these closures have encompassed some very vast areas taking in great fishing lakes and hunting areas for their own financial gain at the disadvantage to everyone else. I don't have a problem with folks making a living,of course,but,this is just plain wrong.

I agree with you that "this is plain wrong" because it creates two classes of hunters/fishers in Ontario, those with money to spend on
the outfitters and those who do not.The worse part is that the excluded group are Canadian taxpayers and the visiting groups to the lodges are very often from out of the country.How can this be fair.

The outfitters are already getting a pretty good deal in relation to property they bought and the vast area that they hunt.Maybe they should be allowed to pony up money for the thousands of acres they are using as a private resort and they can block of their
own properties.If you open up a road through Crown land in southern Ontario to a lake you have to allow people to use it even if it starts on your private land.But it seems if you open up a road in Northern Ontario the opposite applies?