OntORA and OFAH Work Together

The Ontario Outdoors Recreational Alliance (OntORA) is a grassroots organization fighting to restore equal public access to Crown Land and Lakes in Ontario. In just 2 years OntORA has become an important voice representing thousands of disenchanted outdoors people across Ontario.

OFAH_LogoThe Ontario Federation of Anglers and Hunters (OFAH) is the oldest and largest non-profit, non-government fish and wildlife conservation organization in Canada representing more than 100,000 individuals. For over 80 years OFAH has been recognized as an advocate for Ontario’s natural resources, and the rights and traditions of anglers and hunters.

OFAH represents a broad spectrum of member interests, and has a history of working professionally and cooperatively with the MNR at various political levels. OntORA’s goal of restoring equal public access to Crown land is an important issue that also affects many OFAH members.

Although OntORA and OFAH are separate organizations, both organizations represent Ontario outdoors people with common interests. It makes sense to work together as much as possible. OntORA looks forward to a strong working relationship with OFAH so everyone will be able to enjoy the wonderful Ontario outdoors for generations to come.

{ 9 comments… add one }
  • Allain Labelle May 9, 2011, 8:54 am

    Good morning,
    I don’t recall OFAH as OntORA’s partner in the fight to keep roads open, in fact they don’t seem to defend the “equal access to Crown Land” cause. I find this odd that we make such a misleading statement.

  • charlie lawrence May 9, 2011, 1:35 pm

    at last months meeting, i do not remember giving the executive permission to jump into bed with the OFAH. With this present executive, I believe that it is only time that they will be sleeping with the NOTO and go against the wishes of the general membership and join the CLUAH project. Mark my word !!!

  • Tom Brason May 9, 2011, 7:40 pm

    OntORA was created because the OFAH hierarcy was in fact supporting the practice of preventing lawfull and equal public access to our Crown lands and lakes. I for one tried to get OFAH moving when a member but was told I was an access extremist by an OFAH spokesman, consequently I’m no longer a member.

    Quote from a March 2005 NOTO Newsletter… “The other thing we need is recreational road access planning. NOTO has been working with OFAH and the forest industry for almost two years to bring this about. The principle is very simple. We need to look at the land base and agree where mo-torized vehicles will be allowed for recreational use and where they will not.”
    http://www.noto.net/images/news/archives/newsletters/NOTO_News_Mar05.pdf

    Quote from the OFAH response to the Wawa CLUAH project…
    “The buffer zone around designated tourism lakes will be set at 1 kilometre, as per the December 2009 CLUAH Management Direction”…
    Yes, thats OFAH saying they support buffer zones around publicly owned lakes to keep the citizens of Ontario off their own lakes… so what’s up here?
    Those responsible for aligning OntORA with OFAH here certainly didn’t get the support of the membership for this foolhardy nonsense.

    Develop a wing of OFAH and use their resources in the fight for access if they’re so honourable in your eyes, why do you need two groups if OFAH is Soooo good.

  • Tym Barker May 11, 2011, 1:30 pm

    As far as I’m aware OFAH and OntORA have similar goals regarding equal public access to Crown Land in Ontario. Both groups may not necessarily agree about every issue, but in general I believe we are fighting for the same principles.

    OFAH represents a wider cross section of members, and as such they may take a more conservative approach to some issues. I believe that can be a good thing, and if we have different groups working at different levels it can actually help get these MNR policies changed.

    As long as both groups support each other and work together we will all benefit in the end. Remember, “strength in numbers”.

  • Tom Brason May 12, 2011, 11:10 pm

    OFAH is not supporting public access, Mr Barker you’re aware of the info in my comment where they support buffer zones. What world do you live in?

  • Matt DeMille May 13, 2011, 3:55 pm

    On January 26, 2010 the Ontario Federation of Anglers and Hunters (OFAH) provided recommendations for the Crown Land Use Atlas Harmonization (CLUAH) project. The letter clearly illustrates OFAH’s ongoing support for public access to Crown land. For example, the OFAH recommended:

    1. Any newly constructed primary roads within these areas are open to the general public.
    2. “No net loss” of road access. No construction of “new” roads on top of existing roads to restrict access.
    3. Public access during winter (e.g. snowmobiling, ice fishing), on lakes where the commercial LUPs are not used during this time of the year.
    4. In areas where all of the commercial/tourist LUPs are no longer used, there should be a conversion back to General Use Areas.
    5. Removal of the two-week hunting road closure.
    6. Reduction of existing 3 kilometre buffer zone around designated tourism lakes to 1 kilometre (as per the December 2009 CLUAH Management Direction).
    7. All road signage needs to be updated with consistent, easy to understand, wording.
    8. Included some forms of access (e.g. fly-in or walking in) to the Kabinakagami Wildland Area

    Please follow this link to access the entire letter: http://www.ofah.org/News/index.cfm?ID=147

    It is important to keep in mind that these recommendations were made in January 2010 and were based on the best available information at the time. The CLUAH project is ongoing and the OFAH continues to be an active participant. Our involvement with the CLUAH project is just one example of how OFAH advocates for fair and reasonable access to our natural resources throughout Ontario.

    Yours in conservation,

    Matt DeMille
    Land Use Specialist
    Ontario Federation of Anglers and Hunters

  • Tom Brason May 15, 2011, 8:09 am

    Lets quote things as your report indicates…

    5. We recommend that “Proposal C” be followed as it removes the two-week hunting
    road closure and represents the most equitable and balanced of the options presented.
    (see proposal ‘C’ below)
    6. The buffer zone around designated tourism lakes will be set at 1 kilometre, as per the
    December 2009 CLUAH Management Direction.

    .• Proposal C
    – Create a 2 km buffer around
    designated LUP that restricts roads within buffer for two
    weeks of moose hunt.
    • Pros
    – Assigns restrictions around a determined value (Improved
    economic inequity)
    – Increase hunt opportunities for customers
    – Increase feelings of solitude during hunt for customers
    • Cons
    – Costs for enforcement (signage, staff resources etc)
    – Social inequity (ImproVed)

  • Werner Weiss December 6, 2012, 6:08 pm

    Tom, you’ve asked this Mr. Barker the wrong question : namely, “What world do you live in”?
    The right question should have been : ” what are you smokin’, man” ?
    To you, OFAH; ” guaranteed, you won’t do business with me anymore by selling this kind
    of perverse spin”.

  • Gord Pedersen December 18, 2012, 3:40 pm

    Any bi-partisanship should never be explored with any platform via hunters rights,access issues, or any other platform challenging the policies made by our MNR. The OFAH time is spent in two different
    manners working with our MNR implementing policies that always seem to be behind closed doors with no consultation from other advocacy groups ex:[moose management policies]. And the next being a management tool for OUR MNR managing us the BATTLESCARED ONTARIO SPORTSMEN . They also spend their time giving us sportsmen a false sense of security making signs or bumper stickers ACCESS DENIED CROWN LAND IS PUBLIC LAND. The OFAH is a WOLF IN SHEEPS CLOTHING.

Leave a Comment