Fishing with Rod Discussion Forum
Fishing in British Columbia => General Discussion => Topic started by: Knnn on October 29, 2018, 11:49:10 AM
-
I response to a post by Vancouver_2010, ( http://www.fishingwithrod.com/yabbse/index.php?topic=42332.90 ) I thought I would start a separate thread on interpretation of DFO's current Region 2 regulations.
Figured I'd throw this here rather than starting a new topic (as it partially applies to the Stave), but I was wondering if someone could offer some clarification of the regs. At the top of the DFO page, it states: "There is no fishing for salmon in Region 2 except for the opportunities listed in the table below".
Does this mean that if you were to say fish the Cheakamus with the goal of catching and releasing chum, you would technically be in violation of the regulations because there are no opportunities listed for chum? Or are you free to practice catch and release on any river as long as it does not explicitly state "No fishing for salmon"? I realize I am very likely over-thinking this, but it came up in a conversation the other day and I couldn't come up with a straight answer.
As I write this, I also see now that the Stave becomes "Non-retention", so that is a bit more clear.
For the Cheakamus, it says you can fish for "ALL" salmon between April 01 to March 31, as long as you do not use bait and only retain 1 hatchery coho.
However, the clause stating "There is no fishing for salmon in Region 2 except for the opportunities listed in the table below", appears to indicate that you cannot fish for salmon in the Ashlu, or the main stem Squamish, 1.5 km above the Cheakamus. It also appears that, although the Powerhouse Channel is listed as an opportunity, it is included as the Squamish and therefore excluded because it is more than 1.5 km above the Cheakamus.
So all the folks who have recently or are currently fishing for Coho and Chum on the Squamish above the Cheakamus may be contravening the Regs, if I have read the regs correctly, and they are not out solely targeting "trout"......
Confused much? I know I am.
I have fished the Squamish for Coho for a number of years now and do not recall seeing that particular clause in the 2015-2017 regulations. Does anyone have a copy of the old regulations to see if it was in there or when it was introduced? @rodney?
-
That clause was never there until I saw that post yesterday. Whoever decided to put it in there has no clue about how the rec regulations have worked.
-
Another example of DFO incompetence.
-
There have been times in the past when fishing for (i.e. targeting) salmon was not allowed in the upper Squamish and Ashlu. I had Fishery Officers ask me back then what I was fishing for and my reply was bull trout and rainbow. I don't know if the freshwater salmon supplement had a similar clause back then. I do know though that a similar clause was used a couple of years ago for Region 3 because I checked before fishing the Nahatlatch for coho - it was clear that no fishing for salmon was allowed.
-
That clause was never there until I saw that post yesterday. Whoever decided to put it in there has no clue about how the rec regulations have worked.
Saw you email on Facebook Rod, I think it echo's very well the frustrations of the recreational community.
Thanks for the post!!
-
I have seen from an independent source that the clause was present in the Region 3 Regs in 2015/16, but it appears it was not included within the Region 2 regulations. I have no idea if this was this an oversight that was correctly later.
I would be interested to see if anyone has a hard copy or a cached copy of the old Region 2 regulations. Does anyone here have any skills recovering cached web pages that could help figure out if and when the change occurred.
-
According to the Wayback Machine....
The new clause showed up for Region 2 sometime between Feb 26, 2018 and July 14, 2018. There were no snapshots between this time period to further track down the date.
The old clause was, "Unless otherwise stated in the table below, the daily limit for all waters in Region 2 is zero (0)".
Links:
Feb. 25, 2018 snapshot (https://web.archive.org/web/20180225130043/http://www.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca:80/fm-gp/rec/fresh-douce/region2-eng.html)
Jul. 14, 2018 snapshot (https://web.archive.org/web/20180714152145/http://www.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/fm-gp/rec/fresh-douce/region2-eng.html)
I have seen from an independent source that the clause was present in the Region 3 Regs in 2015/16, but it appears it was not included within the Region 2 regulations. I have no idea if this was this an oversight that was correctly later.
I would be interested to see if anyone has a hard copy or a cached copy of the old Region 2 regulations. Does anyone here have any skills recovering cached web pages that could help figure out if and when the change occurred.
-
Thanks blackskull that's a good find.
I guess there are probably plenty of folks, including guides and their clients, up the Squamish at the moment and over the following weeks who could be ticketed, unless they are fishing for "trout" with their 7/8 wt switch and spey rods. Completely FUBAR.
-
So we've been busy with the emails and phone calls about this because it affects everyone who fishes in Region 2. This goes back to the email I wrote to those who are supposed to be responsible for this yesterday, that recreational fishing opportunities are no longer their best interests, and the importance of catch and release is not understood and recognized at the department. At least there isn't an effort to do so anyway.
If you'd like to read the rest, it's at:
https://www.facebook.com/fishingwithrod/posts/10156016490777712
-
So we've been busy with the emails and phone calls about this because it affects everyone who fishes in Region 2. This goes back to the email I wrote to those who are supposed to be responsible for this yesterday, that recreational fishing opportunities are no longer their best interests, and the importance of catch and release is not understood and recognized at the department. At least there isn't an effort to do so anyway.
If you'd like to read the rest, it's at:
https://www.facebook.com/fishingwithrod/posts/10156016490777712
Thank you Rod.
-
So we've been busy with the emails and phone calls about this because it affects everyone who fishes in Region 2. This goes back to the email I wrote to those who are supposed to be responsible for this yesterday, that recreational fishing opportunities are no longer their best interests, and the importance of catch and release is not understood and recognized at the department. At least there isn't an effort to do so anyway.
If you'd like to read the rest, it's at:
https://www.facebook.com/fishingwithrod/posts/10156016490777712
actually the Fisheries Professional opinion of c&r has moved away from the old low impact model to a recognition that c&r as practiced across all modes of tackle and common angler release practice is much higher than once thought. It is isn't unusual to hear Fisheries Biologist state that across all species and tackle choices, up to1/3rd or more of released fish die. There is also recognition that the non-fatal effects of c&r can no longer be ignored as these include but are not limited to, changes in behaviour, reduced feeding efficiency, increased risk of death through predation and impaired reproductive efficiency even to the point fish that have been caught and released frequently simply don't reproduce.
Perhaps it's time sports anglers stop believing old concepts often based on ideal models of c&r survival or even cases where the data was manipulated or gathered in a non randomized fashion and update their own knowledge.
-
I guess I know why their is no cut throat trout left in your holes now after you go though Ralph. Killing one third of them Jesus
-
actually the Fisheries Professional opinion of c&r has moved away from the old low impact model to a recognition that c&r as practiced across all modes of tackle and common angler release practice is much higher than once thought. It is isn't unusual to hear Fisheries Biologist state that across all species and tackle choices, 1/3rd of released fish die. There is also recognition that the non-fatal effects of c&r can no longer be ignored as these include but are not limited to, changes in behaviour, reduced feeding efficiency, increased risk of death through predation and impaired reproductive efficiency even to the point fish that have been caught and released frequently simply don't reproduce.
Perhaps it's time sports anglers stop believing old concepts often based on ideal models of c&r survival or even cases where the data was manipulated or gathered in a non randomized fashion and update their own knowledge.
::) Exactly what Rodney is saying "the importance of catch and release is not understood and recognized at the department." If they believe that 1/3 of fish perish from C&R done with care and proper handling practices then they are the ones that need to "update their own Knowledge" as many sport anglers have been doing for many years. Those that practice catch and release know 1/3 of fish perishing is not anywhere near factual.
Lets not misconstrued these numbers by including those anglers who will NOT be on the water when harvesting salmon is not allowed by the regulations. Without a harvest fishery, but open to C&R only, one can eliminate many concerns that you speak of above. It has proven to work in various fisheries already and should not be anything new to these Fisheries Professionals.
Further to that if they believe their own theory of 1/3 when sport angled and released I would love to hear what their number represents when released from commercial or economical practices. ;) As this has become common for them to require non targeted species to be released back into he water they must already have an opinion or stats on this. :P
-
I hate to say it but from the way I see the vast majority of folks handle the fish they release id be surprised if the survival rate was even 1/3 fish. A lot people drag the fish up rocks or the bank as it thrashes and leave it out of the water for up to a few minutes.. I see people with nets pull the fish out to suffocate in the net while they take the hook out and take pics :o. Its sad to watch and even when I try to explain it to them they dont seem to understand or care. Sometimes they do learn and with enough reminds people change. Sure most seasoned anglers have good release practices but were probably less tham half of anglers. If only there was some compitency test to aquire a license. Now thays well wishin on my behalf ::)
Yes true, but with a C&R fishery only implemented those same anglers would not bother to be on the water. And if they where they would be better educated by those who now out number the bad behavior.
-
Holy crapola, did I lose my mind or did the DFO Region 2 regulations change back to the old form last night?
https://www.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/fm-gp/rec/fresh-douce/region2-eng.html
It now reads:
"Unless otherwise stated in the Table below, the daily limit for all waters in Region 2 is zero (0)".
-
I guess I know why their is no cut throat trout left in your holes now after you go though Ralph. Killing one third of them Jesus
How would you know how many are left in my holes?
There are few or no cutthroat 'holes' in the FV/LM that are subject to a bait ban yet almost every study done on cutthroat show short term mortality from c&r bait fishing is 40% or more.
I almost exclusively fish for cutts with a fly. I am under no delusions that all or almost all the fish I catch survive and are fine after release. I don't stand or hang around catching dozens of fish when that is possible like some people.
I think you like others need to educate yourself about the consequences of your 'choices'.
Exactly what Rodney is saying "the importance of catch and release is not understood and recognized at the department."
they understand it far better than you or many others. There have been many so called 'meta-studies' that have combined the data of the thousands of c&r studies done over the last 30 to 40 years and on the whole when the sort of tackle used - bait, multiple barbed hooks, the environment; saltwater fish have higher mortality, fish have higher mortality when water temperatures are higher in warmer seasons - the overall effect is mortalities are much higher than the typical propaganda published on angling websites and magazines. But I am sure you have never heard of such studies and you just swallow the tripe of that propaganda whole and think it makes you a better person than someone who doesn't take such a shallow approach.
This is leaving out the non-lethal effects that look increasingly more serious than previously imagined.
-
right....lol
-
How would you know how many are left in my holes?
There are few or no cutthroat 'holes' in the FV/LM that are subject to a bait ban yet almost every study done on cutthroat show short term mortality from c&r bait fishing is 40% or more.
I almost exclusively fish for cutts with a fly. I am under no delusions that all or almost all the fish I catch survive and are fine after release. I don't stand hang around catching dozens of fish when that is possible like some people.
I think you like others need to educate yourself about the consequences of your 'choices'.
they understand it far better than you or many others. There have been many so called 'meta-studies' that have combined the data of the thousands of c&r studies done over the last 30 to 40 years and on the whole when the sort of tackle used - bait, multiple barbed hooks, the environment; saltwater fish have higher mortality, fish have higher mortality when water temperatures are higher in warmer seasons - the overall effect is mortalities are much higher than the typical propaganda published on angling websites and magazines. But I am sure you have never heard of such studies and you just swallow the tripe of that propaganda whole and think it makes you a better person than someone who doesn't take such a shallow approach.
This is leaving out the non-lethal effects that look increasingly more serious than previously imagined.
Please Ralph, your intelligence is over whelming me.
I think you like others need to educate yourself about the consequences of your 'choices'.
So what you are saying is you do not fit into DFO's 'meta studies' because you do not kill fish while practicing catch and release but all of us other chumps do. Please get off your all mighty horse and give it a rest. Until you figure out that there are many like minded recreational fisherman who practice the same kind of care for our fishery, you will be preaching to the choir. I know its hard to understand that MANY have taken the time to educate themselves on best practices/consequences as much as your self.
"But I am sure you have never heard of such studies and you just swallow the tripe of that propaganda whole and think it makes you a better person than someone who doesn't take such a shallow approach."
Yes Ralph I have read many studies, and no I never think I am a better person than anyone. But I do believe I am entitled to have an opinion, and my opinion is that these studies you speak of being 30-40 years old need some re visiting to better tell the story about guys like Ralph who do not kill fish while practicing Catch and release in a respectable manner. Maybe DFO needs to know there are many persons like Ralph out there. ;)
Maybe DFO needs to see that after many years of forums like Fishing with Rod talking and preaching proper catch and release methods that is is actually working. To that I swill say it again, Thank you Rodney and the many others on this forum and other forums for doing your part to help the cause.
Ok your turn Ralph.
-
hey ... the odd thing about this group is I am unfortunately the only person who says such "shocking" things.
BTW STS most of what you wrote is wrong and amounts to straw man arguments and putting words in my mouth. These are not "DFO" studies. DFO has actually funded very few studies of it's own on c&r.
!
-
hey ... the odd thing about this group is I am unfortunately the only person who says such "shocking" things.
BTW STS most of what you wrote is wrong and amounts to straw man arguments and putting words in my mouth. These are not "DFO" studies. DFO has actually funded very few studies of it's own on c&r.
!
I am Sorry Ralph, I did not write your comments or put words in your mouth.
Thank you Ralph, I don't think i said DFO was conducting these studies, but maybe the way I wrote it would give that impression. We all know DFO spends little effort or money on the real issues but pick and choose which studies they throw around to the uneducated public.
-
Rodney, thank you for your efforts in getting that weird DFO notice changed to make sense.
Also, that email was very well written. thank you again for all the work you do behind the scenes.
-
right....lol
Let's not forget who started a discussion with the hyperbolic title:
HOW MANY WILD STEELHEAD DID YOU KILL THIS YEAR?
http://www.fishingwithrod.com/yabbse/index.php?topic=41849.0
rotflmao!
-
I am Sorry Ralph, I did not write your comments or put words in your mouth.
stsfisher wrote above: what you are saying is you do not fit into DFO's 'meta studies' because you do not kill fish while practicing catch and release[/b] but all of us other chumps do.
not DFO's studies, not my words, not what I believe
-
stsfisher wrote above:
not DFO's studies, not my words, not what I believe
Would you feel better if I edited my post and removed DFO's?
My goodness if only we could all be as punctual as Ralph.
-
Rodney, thank you for your efforts in getting that weird DFO notice changed to make sense.
Also, that email was very well written. thank you again for all the work you do behind the scenes.
I would like to second that and also mention that Dave Steele at Highwater also burned up the phone lines yesterday and kicked some well needed butt, which also probably helped with the rest of our inquiries to give DFO a much needed shake.
So was it a mistake (as possibly suggested by the very quick reversal) or intentional..... and if the later why?
Can the dick jousting stop please or at least take it to another room.......
-
I would like to second that and also mention that Dave Steele at Highwater also burned up the phone lines yesterday and kicked some well needed butt, which also probably helped with the rest of our inquiries to give DFO a much needed shake.
So was it a mistake (as possibly suggested by the very quick reversal) or intentional..... and if the later why?
Can the dick jousting stop please or at least take it to another room.......
Dave has been the one responsible for getting this craziness fixed overnight. I just added some noise to bring more attention to it and keep the pressure on.
It's really important for us to find out exactly why that was changed in the first place without anyone knowing.
Thanks for pointing it out, otherwise I wouldn't have even noticed. :)
-
Rod; if and when you find out I would appreciate knowing. Cheers.
-
It sounds like this was a case of simple administrative omission & not a case of DFO failure to appreciate "the importance of catch and release is not understood and recognized at the department".
-
It sounds like this was a case of simple administrative omission & not a case of DFO failure to appreciate "the importance of catch and release is not understood and recognized at the department".
I'm not sure it was an "omission", someone went to the trouble of changing an existing clause to something else on a Department web site, which I presume cannot be done by just anyone like Ralph in janitorial services, i.e. without some form of decision, oversight or vetting. Maybe Ralph can?
-
Janitorial Engineer! Who would have thunk it! I thought he had his Masters in Under Water Fire Prevention!
-
it's all a great conspiracy just like the attack on Pearl Harbour!
KNNN (which is 2 NNs two many),you ever edit an html file and had a little problem with cut and paste?
Tomorrow is Halloween and it's scary, scary, scary!
-
If c/r mortality was actually higher then a few % there would not be a Chilliwack steelhead run at all. RalphH continues to make himself look like more of an idiot with each and every post he makes.
-
KNNN (which is 2 NNs two many),you ever edit an html file and had a little problem with cut and paste?
Hey Ralph you were correct, no conspiracy, apparently it was just a web management mistake. All hail Occam's razor!