Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Yes Remain Open

No Closed

Open To Guides only

Open (with purchase of Sturgeon tag with monies going toward research and to fund a Sturgeon hatchery)

[Rodney]

I'm sure that everyone here would willingly give up sturgeon fishing in a second if there was any threat to their population. But our particular local population is stable and there is no evidence that sporties are hurting the popualtion.

Not entire true. The findings are... inconclusive. Five years' of population data of a species that has a long life span cannot be used to predict the overall growth of the population. Gender ratio, and class sizes are also key components in determining the population's health. The absence of dead tagged fish does not mean mortality does not exist in this catch-and-release fishery, it may also mean we simply haven't found them before they decompose.

Sam correct, financial/economy impact only plays a small role in the SARA decision. A better point of view would be how can sportfishermen be beneficial to the Fraser River white sturgeon? Allowing sportfishermen to continue catching and releasing these fish will definitely cause some harm (just like utilizing any natural resource, there will always be a cost to the environment). The question is, does the benefit outweighs the harm that we bring to these fish. The answer is yes! You take 20,000 angling days away in one year, you have 20,000 less pairs of eyes observing abnormality of the river. Who will be reporting when dead fish begin to float up on the shore, possible pollution sightings, poaching, physiological change of fish observed when caught? Angling is an effective and free mean of collecting these valuable data. You take this away, you may actually be making the situation worse.

Beside financial, biological, social aspects of this whole issue, I like to suggest people look at its political aspect as well. Take a look at the major players in this decision making, and read about them. Randog suggested LGL, that's a good start.

Maybe if SARA lists them, LGL will get a couple of million to perform a study?

http://www.lgl.com/lglflash.htm

Regarding starting a petition on FWR, unfortunately I am not so keen about that. Two reasons:

1) I am taking on too much right now. Too busy to cordinate it.

2) FWR is a commercial operation. It is an online publication and our main purpose is to provide information to you guys, and does not have an one sided view point on issues. A petition started by my business would only be viewed as self-interest and wouldn't be taken too seriously. A better way of going about this would be asking organizations such as Fraser River Salmon Society, Sportfishing Defense Alliance, to represent you in a petition. I'm sure Buckeye or Chris can let you all know more about it. These organizations are well established and known in the political world.

Thanks.

[legend]

 Sam Salmon I understand what the SARA is all about and have read all there reports on this issue and as for the monies spent on gear your right that has no bearing on the big picture. Merely a statement showing how it may affect certain people's personal interests . As for the lower Fraser's population it's in good shape and on the rise . I personally have been targetting these fish for two seasons and I don't see any concerns with there population in the lower river. On several occasions I have caught 20 fish in an 8 hour period or less . For example on October 16 2004 me and another member Sandhead were out and in two hours we caught 12 fish . I have personally caught over 300 hundred sturgeon in a two year period . These fish will survive weather it's closed or not they are on the incline in my opinion. I have caught several small fish 1 foot and under and many 6 feet and up so obviously the spawner's are spawning and there are lots of fish mature enough to spawn. Do you ever fish for Sturgeon ? . You have hit a nerve ending with me by stating that our hobby counts for ZIP in the large picture  thats the attitude that will surely help have this sport fishery lost to all us who enjoy it.

[legend]

Not a big deal about not wanting to start the petition as a local tackle shop is in the process of doing it any ways . I thought doing it on here might be a good idea as there are so many people with access to the net but not the end of the world the tackle shops will gather it's fair share of names. I would't dout if some on has one going on allready you will more than likley see one floating around the sportsman show this weekend.

[Rodney]

Do you ever fish for Sturgeon?

Legend, now you're really asking for it..... lol.... I'll let Sam answer that one himself...

As for the lower Fraser's population it's in good shape and on the rise . I personally have been targetting these fish for two seasons and I don't see any concerns with there population in the lower river. On several occasions I have caught 20 fish in an 8 hour period or less . For example on October 16 2004 me and another member Sandhead were out and in two hours we caught 12 fish . I have personally caught over 300 hundred sturgeon in a two year period . These fish will survive weather it's closed or not they are on the incline in my opinion.

Again, observation and what we perceive from a few fishing trips cannot be used to conclude exactly how the population is doing. This would be generalizing. And what's the definition of "healthy"? Relative to what number? High recruitment, low natural mortality rate? 20 fish in eight hours or less, would this result be different if it was 50 years ago? If so, by how much? When sturgeon fishing, don't anglers move their boat if no bites are detected after 30 minutes? Could it be possible, that during the entire trip, you only hit fish at two of the ten spots? If so, doesn't that mean you are simply finding one location that is highly concentrated with fish, while other areas are empty? Can we then suggestion that the overall Fraser River sturgeon population is good and on the rise based on this catch result?

Not picking on you Legend , I'm just trying to tackle the issue from another point of view. Going to a bunch of politicians who have been told the population is in crisis, and suggesting that the scientists are actually wrong and we think they are on the increase so let us catch them, just doesn't sound good at all....

[legend]

Rod I don't think thats the way i would be wording it if I were to write these politicians. I'm just a dumb my friend Boilermaker not a university graduate (I am a BCIT grad). So i personally wouldn't take on these kind of people or write them anyways I am a dedicated fisherman though and love to fish.

[Sam Salmon]

  I personally have been targeting these fish for two seasons and I don't see any concerns with there population in the lower river. On several occasions I have caught 20 fish in an 8 hour period or less . For example on October 16 2004 me and another member Sandhead were out and in two hours we caught 12 fish . I have personally caught over 300 hundred sturgeon in a two year period . These fish will survive weather it's closed or not they are on the incline in my opinion. I have caught several small fish 1 foot and under and many 6 feet and up so obviously the spawner's are spawning and there are lots of fish mature enough to spawn. Do you ever fish for Sturgeon ? . You have hit a nerve ending with me by stating that our hobby counts for ZIP in the large picture  thats the attitude that will surely help have this sport fishery lost to all us who enjoy it.

I've fished for Sturgeon for over a dozen years now.
As Rod says your unscientific observations are just that-anecdotal evidence.
Science always errs on the side of caution.
Did you know that many of the back channels in the Fraser are thought to be critical to raising fry yet that's just where many people like to drive their jet sleds @ high speed, jetski too, where 4x4 operators bull their way through to go bar fishing?
The river is pressed hard-I've been fishing the lower Fraser since the early 70's and the changes I've seen are dreadful.
The Sturgeon Society estimates there 60,000+ fish between Steveston & Hope but that doesn't mean there'll always be that many-far from it.
Assume a 10% mortality rate multiplied by the number of times you've caught a fish multiplied by the number of guys on the river every day in season and things don't look so rosy do they?
I'm not blaming you for anything BTW-I've done a lot better than 12 fish in 2 hours a few times over the years so I'm part of the problem too.
Did you know that one in 20 fish is a true Anadromous fish like a Salmon?
Actually goes to sea to feed and comes back to spawn?
You might have noticed that once in a while you'll hook a silvery fish that's strong as a bull and won't quit-that's a Sea Going Sturgeon.
Did you also know that those same animals are subject to a kill fishery when they head south down in WA state and that it's perfectly legal?
That's another problem SARA has to consider-the situation isn't at all simple-saying "I think it's OK there's lots of fish "  doesn't cut much ice in a dynamic system like the Fraser.
What really matters is the fish not the fishermen-that's a true Conservation ethic.
I urge you to reread Rod's answer to you-it's all there.

[DragonSpeed]

Perhaps instead of simply tagging, they could try radio tagging.  Find out if the tags fall off, the fish dies, where it goes etc?

B.

[Randog]

What about sturgeon that get tangled up in native set/gill nets and are left there for a couple of days, do they survive?

 And Legend, FYI There are NO DUMB BOILERMAKERS!!!!!

[legend]

Sam Salmon you seem to be a true know it all  im very interested in what you think they should do with this fishery. If you were in charge what would you do ? .

[legend]

Randog what do you know about Boilermaking ?. Are you in the feild ?. Just wondering.

[Sandhead]

Sam Salmon, I never knew that sturgeon can be Anadromous. I heard of rumor of a sturgeon being caught off ambleside, so maybe there is some truth to that.
Personally, I think the fishery should require additional tags, even if only a part of the money ends up going back to help sturgeon. I've been thinking recently that the way fishing has been going the last couple of years that it is very likely that within the next 50 years there will be minimal pink and chum returns due to degradation of the spawning grounds and global warming. Wouldnt surprise me at all if they end up closing sturgeon fishery in the next few years due to the same reason.

[Sam Salmon]

Sam Salmon you seem to be a true know it all  im very interested in what you think they should do with this fishery. If you were in charge what would you do ? .

It's too bad you have to personalise this  because it's important for people to see this issue in dispassionate terms
Did you reread the post that Rod put up?
If nor Please do so now all your questions are answered therein.

[legend]

Yes I have read his post . I'm not trying to start a debate or get into a pissing match with you personally. I'm very passionate about this issue and I am just expressing my opinions on this topic. And Rodney's post doest answer my question . I sincerely meant that you seem to know alot about this maybe you could answer my question hypothetically if you were the minister of fisheries how would you address this situation. As for the well being of the Sturgeon that is the most important part of all of this . I never once have handled these fish in a harmful manor nor have I ever removed them from the water for a photo shoot as this could harm there internal organs. I have a great fascination with these amazing creatures and have the utmost respect for them . And yes I have hooked a few with the silver tone you referred to in your earlier post and I do agree they fight extremely  hard in fact the hardest fighting Sturgeon I ever caught had this coloring you speak of. I think we both seem to enjoy this fishery and hope we all can enjoy it for many years to come sorry I got personal but I care about this fishery immensely. Just another note I would like to make one day when fishing for Sturgeon a Seal was in the area we were watching him a few minutes went by and he surfaced with a juvenile Sturgeon . He appeared to be trying to eat it I don't know if the scutes on the Sturgeon would protect him or not just one more thing making there existence difficult.

[Addicted To Steel]

According to an article in the new issue of BC Outdoors, page 72; every angler license dollar collected by the Province is directed to fisheries service delivery-either by the Freshwater Fisheries Society or by the Habitat Cons. Trust Fund. or WLAP. This started in April 2003. Prior to that date the $ from licenses and tags went to general revenue.
 The article also points out that there are Sturgeon conservation hatcheries operating in the province. The FFSBC president Don Peterson states in the interview that sturgeon all over the world are in big trouble due to the const. and operation of dams. It states that there are three populations of Sturgeon in B.C. in serious trouble. It mentions the upper Columbia, Kootenay, and Nechako rivers. It does not mention the Fraser river at all. It says that the Nechako is in the worst condition regarding Sturgeon.
 Seems odd to halt the fishery for Sturgeon on the Fraser river. Are they really in that much trouble? I don't fish for them tons, but I have fished for them hard over the past decade or so. My buddies are still fishing for them quite hard to this day. I've gotta say in my experience, and I believe I can speak for a few of my close friends as well; we have not had any trouble catching Sturgeon in the Fraser. We have got pics. and video of litterally 10 to 20 sturgeon hookups in one day(2-5 anglers) quite regularly over the years. I would say that on the average it's more like 2 to 4 in a day, but we've had quite a few of those remarkable days as well.
 Seems pretty drastic to just shut it down entirely. But if they have the evidence that it is in that much trouble, how do you argue with it? Conservation, and Mother Natures best interest must come first. $ and peoples enjoyment can not supercede the importance of conservation.
 It would be nice to see some publicized evidence of the Sturgeon's troubles.

[kermode58]

There are inherent problems with quoting and relying strictly on science. Unless you have compelling data to say what historic numbers were (not perceived) it's completely unscientific to state what the current population should be or should have been had population sprawl,pollution,industrial contamination,incidental catch,poaching and or any other natural or man-made disaster affected the population of a species. I am not convinced that historic numbers are accurately reflected.Science can also be very subjective; just look at the wild vs farmed salmon debate. Both sides have their "scientists" backing up their claims and shooting down the science of their respective counterparts. So if compelled I think science could quite easily kill this fishery. I also believe that if it's your objective to protect the "fishery" , you will lose! If your passion is to protect the "fish" you at least stand a chance to preserve the fishery.(Maybe not as it is today) SARA will need options (not from sports fishers) but from scientists. Ranting and raving and signing thousands of names to a petition wont get it done.Most people know what side  fisherman would land on this debate.We need a scientific voice and approach to this dilemma.This costs time and Money. Here is hoping we are up to it.

Gord