Print

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

[mr.pink]

 seems the dfo is taking the "easy"way out,instead for enforcing the rules already in place.i think it will hurt the sport in the long run
less people will fish=less money for fish.seeing how i have here in front of me heres there reasons:
1 conserve fish resources
2 maintain as many angling opportunities as possible
3 help harmonize angling regs across the province
 i don t even use bait,and i think it s wrong province wide,biff made some good points about juveniles and i could see that helping.but a total ban with out proof,of any kind that it will "help",there is alot more the dfo could do to help than this.weak.

[mr.pink]

Fired off emails to the two email addresses provided by C.G.  The letter explains my position on this subject.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Dear fishery minister,

As a member of some of the most popular fishing web sites in BC, and an avid sport angler for many years, I am concerned about the proposed regularion changes for BC rivers.  It is rumoured that there is a total bait ban on all BC rivers in upcoming regulation changes.

My opinion, like many among sport fishing communities, is that government should definitely protect the wild & C/R systems with this regulation, but leave the hatchery enhanced systems alone.  A blanket bait ban will be seen as biased and unnecessary.  Considering the impact of illegal nets fishery, bad forestry practices, commercial fisheries, environment degradation, the use of bait in hatchery-enhanced systems will have very little impact on fish stocks.

Every year the hatchery-enhanced systems like the Capilano, the Chehalis, the Chilliwack/Vedder, the Stamp etc have surplus returns, and these surpluses end up in fish fertilzer plants for pennies a lb. Why not leave them to anglers who pay ever increasing premiums to fish. There is no need to reduce catching efficiency in these hatchery enhanced systems. Unreasonable restrictions will be seen as bias, and perhaps causing one fishing group pitting against another.

The drift fishing group already starts questioning if the government is yielding to the flyfishing elitists who are more vocal and better at lobbying the government.  Their opinion is that the government is increasing fishing license premiums every year, but reducing fishing and catching opportunities at the same time.

In this time of general mistrust towards the government due to fishery's inability to enforce rule of law with the natives in regard to the Fraser fishery, the sport fishing community in general are waiting to see if they are getting a better deal from the government this time.

 excellent post mind if i copy it and send it in?thx funfish.cheers

[Hiker]

First to say: I am a bait fisherman.
Second: I would like to try fly fishing.
Third: In my oppinion both methods are completely correct ways to fish.

There is much more bait fisher people than fly fishing (I think, based on a simple observation whenever I go fishing). This simply means that you will have many more people who will be doing unethical or illegal things on the water when bait fishing, because of proportion. If government bans bait fishing, I am almost completely certain, I will be seeing a lot of fly fishing people doing many different illegal or unethical things. Simply people who are doing it now baitcasting will be shifting to illegal fly fishing methods.

If you are using proper methods (short floating mostly), when bait fishing, fish (salmon) which isn't a baiter any more, will not be hooked in most of the cases. If you fish in a stream with a sinking fly fishing line, and "pull" your line through a scull of spawning salmon, you will be "hooking" on almost every cast. This is something I have seen with my own eyes. At first as I didn't understand fly fishing, I thought I should just throw away my baitcaster, buy fly fishing rod, and come back to river. After few minutes of carefull observation, I realized that fly fishers on the other side of river where snagging almost every single fish.

In my oppinoin when it comes to fishing for salmon in rivers, it isn't about bait or fly fishing, it is about how you do either of them. Maybe fish is more eager to go after a bait, but banning bait fishing on all rivers will not solve the problem. There must be done much more, and many different things to find a solution. Personally I do not think we will see a solution to all problems, and I just hope there will be some changes before we come to the stages of NewFoundland, or some other places, where people started thinking when it was too late.

I can not believe that government did cut hatcheries programs. This is the first thing that it should be back, and in greater numbers than before. Fish has so many predators (including us) that we simply need larger numbers to start with. Otherwise comercial, sport, and all other industries in connection with fish will suffer, including ordingary people who buy fish in the store. What do you think how much will Sockeye be in the store when they come back in 4 years (because of  last year overkill, caused for whatever reason)?

[FF]

Well Sassyboy just because these fishing methods are happening on the vedder does not mean that 90% of the other rivers in bc should'nt have a bait restriction.

Cammer If I could ever make out what your posts on this forum mean i'll be sure to send you a reply.Till then Go fish the vedder and have a good ole time.

[Oliver]

Then watch out for the biggest anti bait petition you've ever seen. It's going to happen.

Its possable that it will come down with little to no exceptions in the regs.

And the fish will finally get the break they deserve.

What fish? And what break exactly are they going to get? Maybe you could clarify this a little more.

 

Because the issue here is to many anglers are hooking to many fish...

Actually the problem is a lack of fish. There is a plethora of problems that come in much higher on the mortality scale to the fish than an angler using bait.

...and if you think about it were are doing more damage as a sport anglers by targeting fish in the last stages of there life (on there spawning run) in the rivers they spawn in.

How so? Unless you are picking them off of their reds or targeting dark fish in known spawning areas how is it anymore stressfull than hooking a fish in the ocean?

Specially on the vedder the fish just dont get a break anymore.

If there was more than one river with more than a skeletal run of salmonids for the lower main land anglers to target there would be no problem. I'm sure that there are many, many anglers who would like to fish closer to home rather than drive out to Chilliwack every time they want a chance at a fish.

Better no bait then nothing at all because something has to change before it is to little to late AGAIN. 

Actually it would be better to enforce the rules for all user groups that we have now. Adding more regs for the sports angler will only regulate them off of the river. Maybe somewhat better for the fish but it will be detrimental to the entire sport fishing community in the long run. This proposed bait ban will not bring back the fish from their critically low numbers and no matter how hard WLAP tries to spin it like that, the paltry number of fish that die to bait induced mortality wont make up the difference from the abuses of all the other user groups.

I think they should move the boundry on the vedder down to tamihi bridge to increase the "safe" zone for Steelhead because that upper river is where they really get beat on.

And what about in low water years like this one? Hundreds of steel were holed up in the fish traps in the lower end being pounded relentlessly by hoards of fishermen every single day. Its been my view over the past few years that the biggest effort has shifted to the lower river but you may have s different experience. How would lowering the boundry do any good anyways? You'd be cutting out roughly 1/3 of the fishable water and forcing the same number of anglers to fish in a more confined area. This would ensure that even more fish will not make it though unhooked since there will be guys behind every rock and in every shallow riffle and the fish will have no where to hide.

Ban Bait on all wild rivers!! Thompson should be the first to go.

I could live with this, it makes the most sense of anything you've put up on this topic yet.

CG times are changing you and I will have to give up some fisheries we enjoy but when it puts the fish first in any sort of way your sefish not to agree and accept.

Maybe you should quit harassing those fish on the upper Pit then. Now since the bait ban is proposed to limit the number of fish caught to, in theory, limit the associated mortality I think it would only be fair to say then you are doing some serious damage on the Pit. Here's a quote from one of your previous posts on jet boats in the Pit, "As a guide working for the lodge on this river I am on it more then anybody period." Now I'm not taking a run at guides here, just posting an interesting change in attitude. Maybe then you should agree to limit your days on the river because other wise that would just be selfish would it not?

Lastly bait will catch more fish which increases the % of mortality weather you like it or not its not bS its called math.

Of course more hooked fish equals a higher mortality but that statement rings true with every method. Bait will catch more fish in certain situations but everything has its time and place. The good anglers will continue to rack up big numbers of fish while the new anglers strugle to get any, regardless of wether there is a ban on bait or not. Maybe we should limit the good anglers then instead.

[Steelhawk]

Limitkiller has an excellent rebutal to FF's post.  Sorry to say that FF's post sounds too much a petition on behalf of PETA, therefore it brings on Cammer's comment in reaction to the post.  Hiker is right that flyfishing is not a totally clean way to fish.  I have 3 fly rods and tie my own flies. Besides fishing trout lakes, I initially tried them on salmon for a while.  But after trying them on the Big Qualicum for springs (the only allowed method) years ago, and actually seeing how the fly could actually foul-hook into fish accidentally & frequently while it swinged through schools or packs of fish, I concluded that it is  really not that target specific way of fishing when applied to places with high number of fish.  Just watch flyfishers this coming season when they target coho in lower Vedder, and see how many pinks can get foul-hooked.  Therefore, to say bait fishing, particularly short-floating like how CG does it, can harm more fish than flyfishing is just not proven statistically.  Fish mortality does not come only from inhaling baits too deep.  How about a fish foul-hooked mutiple times by flyfishers, each time taking forever to land because the fly rod just does not have enough body strength to horse the fish in to avoid causing fatigue to the fish.  You can argue forever about this kind of things. So why do bait fishers take all the blame for fish mortality and not flyfishers?

Another point on FF's post that bothers me is attacking people who has to fish the river where salmon return to spawn.  Sorry to say
most of us are not rich enough to own an ocean-worthy boat or a jet boat.  So are we saying that salmon are only reserved for those who have the bucks, or who guide for a living?  If a fish is harvested, it is one fish less to spawn whether it is harvested in the ocean or the river.  At least in the river, it is more species and run specific.  So surplus stocks can be open for the taking without affecting other endangered rivers.  You cannot say that about fishing in the ocean.  Say a Thompson coho strays to American waters, and say they do not limit catch to wild coho, that precious Thompson coho will be toasted. So, should we close the ocean fishing too. Ocean fishers are already getting better deals, don't they?  They are allowed 4 socks per day, but 2 for us.

I'll say, if fishery cannot enforce the rule of laws on FN poachers and cannot addresss the other big-picture problems that can harm fish in a major way, all their token gestures to regulate us, the least effective group in fish catching, are mere tokens only.  They want headlines that imply message like "See, public at large, we are doing something to regulate the sporties so we are actually actively managing fish stocks!"    LOL  It is about time for us sport fishers to unite, not divide in our fights with the government.  We are regulated to death already.  We don't need more meaningless regulation like this blanket bait ban, and we don't need one fishing group pointing the accusing finger to another.  Fishery will love to see the infightings going on among us.

[Jonny 5]

Do any of you believe in conspiracies?  Its all just to distract the concerned fishers from the fact that over half of the sockeye run from last year magically vanished.  On top of that people are starting to show disrespect towards the fishing "authorities", so heres a draconian measure to get them all divided and disorganized.

But don't get me wrong.  I think a bait ban is not such a bad thing, on some small and wild rivers.

[Fish Assassin]

I believe it's a proposal at the moment.

[chris gadsden]

Is it official yet? if it is is there any way we can fight it.

Write letters to WALP and your MLA's. Ask for a reply in your letter. Remember it is an election year.

If you wish to write a letter and send it by land mail here is an address:

Ministry Water, Land and Air Protection,
Fish &Wildlife Branch
PO Box 9363,
Victoria, B.C.
V8W 9M2
 Att. Al Martin, Fisheries Director

[chris gadsden]

. NO! not while there are people fishing with floats put on upside down ( because they don't even know how a rig is put together) and then snagging them with eight to twelve foot leaders. (under the Veddder bridge is a great example of this during the coho run) Taking fish that are not actually caught in the mouth and so on. You could go on forever about all the ways fish are injured or overcaught, I would like to wager a hundred times more fish are injured or die through foul hooking than through being taken by bait, this seems to me, more of pressure being applied by some self interest groups than a valid way to protect the fish stocks. I strongly believe that "most" of the anglers using bait are ethical fishermen who care deeply about the resource and the handling of fish with extreme care. 
Just one mans opinion

Could not agree more. If you visit the Chilliwack Hatchery during the peak of the run in the Fall take notice of all the gear that is snagged in all parts of a salmon's anatomy. Also if you go into the office you will see on the wall a display that could be called "a wall of shame".

Not much of it is put there by anglers fishing with bait.

[blueback]

Ya know; it's kinda like a buddy of mine says: unscrupulus logging practices, illegal netting, overfishing in the ocean (netting), in-river netting (gill, drift and set), fishfarms ruining an entire run of pinks and getting a paultry fine, and the powers-that-be want the poor old sportie not to use bait in order to conserve fish? Gimme a break! 

[Fishin Freak]

Well on the flip side hardware sales (lures, spinners etc...) will go up which i'm sure Rod will enjoy and the 'what did you catch it on' questions will be much more limited 

[Sterling C]

Ya know; it's kinda like a buddy of mine says: unscrupulus logging practices, illegal netting, overfishing in the ocean (netting), in-river netting (gill, drift and set), fishfarms ruining an entire run of pinks and getting a paultry fine, and the powers-that-be want the poor old sportie not to use bait in order to conserve fish? Gimme a break! 

The exact same argument could be said for barbed hooks

[mr.pink]

Mr. Pink, of course you can copy my letter & send it out to as many politicians as you can.  We need people to knock on  some dummy heads out there who are neglecting the big pictures and too chicken to confront the illegal FN poachers, but jump on us law abiding citizens with rules which are ridiculous and mean little for saving fish stocks.  If we don't exist, they could look pretty bad, because no one cares about what they say except us.  We are easy targets, thus we get all these sour deals.  We make them feel that they are still important & relevant. What a joke!

Are you sure you read printed regulation changes?  I thought Rod said it is only in the proposal stage.

 hi funfish
the regs say its going into effect 2006-2007 season.i assume we can still fight it by letters,emails etc.maybe even protests of some kind.any suggestions?i m not really against a bait ban,its just there is some much more they could do to protect the fish by enforcing the rules already in place,they just want to take the easy way out.thats why the cover of this years regs is such a joke(in case you havn t seen it)a pic of a co checking someones license,lol.where were they during flossing season?

[blueback]

Biff,
You are probably correct, except for one thing; barbs always leave holes (usually big tears) when removed; bait does so very rarely, as long as the're not attached to a barbed hook . Anyway, the point my buddy was making (and the one I sympathise with by restating it) is that if the rule makers were truly responsible as resourse stewards, there would be no thoughts about, or need for a baitban because there would be alot more fish (or at least that is how I think they make their argument for a baitban, lack of fish). I think this is at least part of the Cheam argument; if the folks taking fish ahead of them (commercial nets) took a lesser proportion, their (Cheam) impact would be sustainable. When most of the fish are intercepted before they reach the river, the Cheam impact becomes devastating. Now I'm not certain that this is their strategy and I certainly do not condone it if it is, but for the survival of the fish, we need to do much more than a bait ban. In fact, personally I think a bait ban is almost meaningless in the bigger pic. Cheers.