Fishing with Rod Discussion Forum
Fishing in British Columbia => General Discussion => Topic started by: Rodney on July 11, 2007, 02:09:19 PM
-
:-*
-
Excellent. Like any good hockey player that wears blue and white, always save enough steam for the third period. ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
Excellent. Like any good hockey player that wears blue and white, always save enough steam for the third period. ;D ;D ;D ;D
Rolling, rolling, rolling right along. ;D ;D ;D
-
From thread number 2:
"I think a good compromise would be to restrict leader length to 36 inches or less"
"I agree, and it's coming!"
I suggested this publicly 3 years ago on FishBC and other forums and got blasted by the hollier than thou anti-flossing crowd. Three feet is still plenty enough for flossing, if that is what turns your crank. Heck, you should see what some people can do with just 12 inches of leader on some systems. It is all a matter of intent.
But a leader length restriction would sure be a good starting point and I would gladly endorse it. However, those who word the regulations must keep in mind that any leader restriction has to be specifically limited to RIVERS, as there are stillwater and saltwater applications (flyfishing and trolling) where leader length should not be limited, as it does not result in snagged fish.
My general opinion on flossing hasn't changed since we last "spoke". Flossing is not a sportfishing technique, it is a harvesting method. It is the non-First Nation fisher's alternative to netting, or as someone called it "a one strain net system". (good one, Ironhead, LOL!)
I am perfectly OK with it, as long as it is limited to the abundant Fraser summer runs of sockeye and chinook. Therefore, abiding by DFO's request sounds like a sensible idea. I personally won't indulge in it until DFO's request is up, as I do care for the early Stuarts.
Maybe later in the summer...if I get a chance. I am too busy flyfishing the Interior lakes these days... :)
Rodney, did you think I wasn't following this saga? ;)
Incidentally, what colour yarn is hot this year? :P
-
Incidentally, what colour yarn is hot this year? :P
Candy FLOSS Pink
-
You really have to have that "can do" attitude when flossing short leaders on stubborn Socs. I think that it will make it more sporting to use the shorter leaders. Good on them bring on the new "changes" and sport to the fishery.....
challenge yourself...... what you personally floss yourself with, same length for leader, don't cheat neither :)
-
You really have to have that "can do" attitude when flossing short leaders on stubborn Socs. I think that it will make it more sporting to use the shorter leaders. Good on them bring on the new "changes" and sport to the fishery.....
I don't think that a shorter leader adds any 'sporting' element to the fishery, as you are still flossing them and not enticing them to bite, but it sure makes it more effortful, which, in itself, is a good thing.
-
Excellent. Like any good hockey player that wears blue and white, always save enough steam for the third period. ;D ;D ;D ;D
Even though they save some steam for the 3rd period they still loose LOL !!!!
I guess that tells us where you stand on the issue.
-
This is the first of two committees that are dealing with this issue, not sure when the other will be complete. However a member of this forum who is the chair of the SFAC (Sportsfishing Advisory Sub Committee) may comment on this but I am sure it will be posted for further discussion when completed.
Remember these committees have members from both sides of the issues and are all volunteers who give freely of their time, I think you can applaud them for their efforts.
For those that may think these discussion are a waste of time it is great that it is your choice to read them or not.
But as I said many times changes are coming in the months ahead as FOC and MOE will take the results of these two committees to heart I am sure.
I know this personally as when the FVSS was started many said we would never get a chinook fishery again but we did after a lot of hard work.
The FVSS working with FOC also got all salmon species open but as some will admit including myself the sockeye fishery has spawned a new generation of anglers.
In my humble option it is time to get back to angling methods where the fish actually bite and are not snagged by the ill luck of many fish being snagged by leaders upwards to one quarter the lenght of the Air Canada Centre.
Is that sporting?
-
I was out today and did not see one single sockeye caught or even hooked.So what I see is a propaganda tactic by ther minority group of fisherman in key political positions to subject there will on all those who dare fish the way they don't like. Here;s he propaganda.They are using the low Stuart run to help with there cause. That's how I see it!
NO SOCKEYES HAVE BEEN HOOKED THESE DAYS! THEY ARE ALL GETTING THROUGH THE FLOSSERS SO STOP USING IT FOR YOUR OWN AGENDA!
My two cents worth.
Hotrod
-
Milo!!! ;D ;D ;D ;D You know, I was wondering about you and wondering what I was doing wrong not to have you included in the discussion! ;D Good to see you and to hear you're doing well in the Interior lakes. 8)
You're right about leader length and intent. One can floss a fish with a pretty short leader; Ive seen it! But 3' is a very good start. Addressing the ones who floss the pocket water with a 24" leader would/could be further down the line (pardon the pun) if even worth addressing.
I always thought your harvest idea held water if implemented properly. It's too bad we have the cart before the horse here though as most flossers consider it a harvest anyplace, anywhere. Im not sure how would could turn this around so guys could get a crack during sockeye openings in the name of HARVEST but it would be difficult/next to impossible to apply to our other fisheries. Might not be realistic, but anything is worth thinking about especially considering flossing is here and in some form, will likely stay. I dont like snagging, but compromises will be key.
You can regulate gear, but not intent.
Fishfreak, speak for yourself in regards to this being a waste of time. I think the sharing is valuable not only to the vocal ones involved but for the many who read it on the sidelines and make their own decisions based on it.
Cool that TWO people didnt see a sockeye hooked over the 60 some odd Km of river being fished right now. ::)
Im also not scared to stand up and say I dont like snagging of any kind, anywhere. Used to be a given that sporting sport anglers would oppose it. Somehow it's now propaganda? Using 'nets' and 'limited impacts' to justify snagging is more propaganda to me considering the major effects this snagging has created on our other systems. Remember, Im not just worried about guys snagging sockeye and chinook on the Fraser, Im also considering other fisheries that are obviously effected and what our future holds.
-
Round 3 and I'm hooked
'Using 'nets' and 'limited impacts' to justify snagging is more propaganda to me considering the major effects this snagging has created on our other systems."
I think everyone should stay focused on the conservation of the stock and how best to do that. If you think people don't poach at places in the dark with nets and bait for fish illegally, then I guess stay focused on what would appear to be your bugaboo. I say there are bigger fish to fry, no pun intended. Fish farms and urbanization ruining local streams because of lax laws etc just pure propaganda from bottom bouncers to "justify" their wretched existence. :-\ I'm at a loss for words......ring ring.... Troll calling
-
Nice to see Milo comes over from fishbc for some debate. We had some fun taking up Oliver & River Watcher there some years back. Still remember Carnivore of Alaska called their technique as 'lining' there and it is legal in Alaska to harvest a sockeye the same way we do it here. I always wondered if they have their anti-flossing activists there. Welcome, now you can face the Olivers of FWR, as I retire to fish in peace. ;D ;D
-
Milo,Milo,Milo so now you think it is ok to floss Chinook.
That right there just shows where this fishery is leading.
It isnt just going to stay on the Fraser either.
Time to clean this mess up and just close this fishery.
Lets get back to fishing and leave the harvesting to the commercial and Native sector .
-
II thought this was over and done with. But even the forum moderators are ignoring their own requests to reduce the talk as it goes nowhere.
But here we go again. Another thread and this one started by the forum moderators. themselves
It is obvious that they want to ram through their own personal opinions and try to stifle any others that dare to disagree with them, why else would they say reduce the talk and then startup another thread with the same topic.
I have a question, If they limit leaders to say 36 inches, is that going to include fly fisherman that use sinking lines to get down to the fish. The leaders in a lot of cases are way longer than the flossers.
As for these committee’s its unfortunate that not enough of the average Joe’s volunteer for these committees which end up usually stacked in favor of some radical opinion.
These small vocal special interest groups always try to do things by committee as they know that if they had a referendum on the issue they would be well and soundly be defeated. There’s a very simple solution to this issue. When you buy your fishing license have a questionnaire attached regarding leader length and bottom bouncing. The majority wins. But we all know from the number of fisherman on the Fraser during sockeye season who is going to win that argument. In this world the majority opinion should be sufficient, however we all know form the past that these small vocal special interest groups love to twist, exaggerate, misdirect, use fear and scare tactics in order to get their own personal agendas approved.
As for the sockeye early Stuart run scare, fear mongering tactics being used. Its so much BS its getting ridiculous. In one day at Steveston public dock I saw more small sockeye being LEGALLY sold by commercial boats at the public fishing dock that I have in 25 years of fishing the Fraser in July. I can count the number of early sockeye that have been hooked on one hand, and they were all long lined released.
This is getting almost as bad as the religious zealots that try to ram their personal version of their religion down peoples throats.
-
Milo,Milo,Milo so now you think it is ok to floss Chinook.
That right there just shows where this fishery is leading.
It isnt just going to stay on the Fraser either.
Time to clean this mess up and just close this fishery.
Lets get back to fishing and leave the harvesting to the commercial and Native sector .
Bruce, Bruce, Bruce...why are you so negative and see only the negative in everything. I think you need to fish more, man.
If I thought it is OK to floss chinook at any time and under all circumstances, I would have been on the Fraser in the last few weeks.
Have I?
No, not even close. I have yet to tie on a bouncing betty this year.
You very well know that I am enjoying flyfishing exotic high elevation Merritt area lakes EVERY weekend.
One thing that you and your lawn chair dwelling brethren should keep in mind is that not everybody enjoys the bar fishing method. Many of us find it too static and boring. And as long as the stocks are abundant enough and flossing does not affect endangered runs, who am I to say that it is not OK to fish for chinook using any LEGAL mathod out there?
If there is a problem with sockeye numbers, close the fishery.
If there is a problem with chinook numbers, close the fishery.
For all sectors, all methods.
It's only fair. Any approach other than that reeks of agenda driven elitism and discrimination.
-
I have a question, If they limit leaders to say 36 inches, is that going to include fly fisherman that use sinking lines to get down to the fish. The leaders in a lot of cases are way longer than the flossers.
Not true. When fishing moving waters, fly fishermen hardly ever use leaders longer than 3-4 feet. It would defeat the purpose of the sinking line or sinking tip, as the fly wouldn't get down to the zone.
So yes, a 36-inch leader length restriction may very well include fly chuckers.
Cheers, Milo
-
:-*
-
Glog, always watch for smilies in Rodney's posts. His sense of humour is just incredible, a perfect attribute to be a good moderator. Don't take it seriously. He just likes to start a new thread when he senses the heated aerial battles between the 3oz betties and the 1lb cannon balls are getting out of hand. ;D ;D ;D
It is better than locking out the discussion. A new thread kind of relaxes the tension and animosity when the 'battle' takes a fresh start again. ;D Even veterans like 2:40 or Steelhawk run out of steam when the battles are stretched out. ;D ;D ;D
-
]
Oops, busted. This is in fact a secret attempt of the global fishing ethic domination that moderators of Fishing with Rod have planned out over the year since the establishment of the website. We disguise our objective by making Dragonspeed participating heavily during the sockeye opening. A couple of years ago, we even made him blend in with the crowd by asking him to drive his precious Toyota Tundra through the side channels at Peg Leg only to have the truck stuck and lost as a result.
knowing the origin of the sockeye salmon sold at Steveston Fishermen Dock would be a good idea before being used to strengthen your point of view.
So, that's what those strings on my back are. I'm just a PUPPET!!! Waaaaaah! ;)
-
It is better than locking out the discussion. A new thread kind of relaxes the tension and animosity when the 'battle' takes a fresh start again. ;D Even veterans like 2:40 or Steelhawk run out of steam when the battles are stretched out. ;D ;D ;D
Think of it as a "reloading break" ;)
-
Well said, DS (who is no less humourous). :D
-
2:40, your debating this year is much more mature and convincing than it used to be a few years ago. I see that you are willing to compromise, and for that, I commend you.
Yes, a solution should be found that will appease all user groups. A strictly enforced leader length restriction would definitely be a great tool.
It would not stop flossing, but it would sure make it much more difficult.
Can we now have a cease fire?
I ran out of bouncing betties! ;)
-
"I ran out of bouncing betties!"
I didn't I collected about 240 of them last summer. :) Along with lots of garbage from Jones.
-
just read the 49 page document and I must say that it raises some good points but seems very biased to me, the barfishing crusaders make it sound like everyone that bottom bounces for fish is double dipping, leaving garbage behind fishing with treble hooks ect. paints a pretty black picture of us snaggers ::) when the river finally closes they will only have themselves to blame. It was said that every fish counts, and that barfishing is a "selective method" what a crock of horse my smelly socks that is, I barfished with spinnglows once last year, hooked one fish, and it was a sockeye that had ran into my line, go figure. In the past I have snagged every species of salmon barfishing the lower fraser simply by having them run into the line. And why is it that barfishing is so much more "sporting" than bouncing? all you do is throw out a huge hook and hope that it lands in a channel that fish are travelling through.
-
If you dont like bar fishing then dont.
Its actually very simple Milo.
I actually just got back from a great week with the family up at Sheridan Lake but you knew that allready.
You can try and hide behind the smokescreens and pointless comments but it wont change my thoughts on snagging. ;D
-
We went over this a gazillion times, Bruce. Both in person and on internet forums.
If you think that what I write are smokescreens and pointless comments, why do you reply to them?
And BTW, I don't expect you to change your thoughts on snagging, and I hope you never will, as
your thoughts on snagging are exactly the same as mine.
Snagging is an ILLEGAL practice and anyone caught doing it should be severely punished. >:(
Cheers, big guy and I hope you catch many springs from your lawn chair this summer! :)
-
This is almost funny.
The SFAC has not approved these proposals and in fact has not seen them yet.
This was done by a group that is called the Chilliwack River Watershed Strategy.
This appears to be made up of a select group of people who were asked to work on this and has "nothing to do with the SFAB"!
The ideal of a leader length rule stopping flossing is a joke, as noted 3 foot leaders are plenty.
There as another proposal coming from DFO that may change totally the way the fishery is handled on the Fraser.
Wait till that one is out to public meetings and see if your concern about leaders really matters.
-
Restrict the length of my leader and I will adapt a new 'technique'. Stay tuned if this regulation becomes LAW as opposed to a request.
-
That opening news clipping, which you have to wonder who wrote, says it all. An emotional issue for some frustrated person who got skunked that day fishing. Then thinks they should blame all the woes on their fellow angler. Imagine people lecturing you on the river for not fishing exactly like they do. I heard this from some fly fishers for reasons why rivers should be fly only, as a "conservation technique". Balderdash I say, and beating up on and saying fellow anglers are the cause of all the fishes problems is a very narrowly focused way of "helping " the fishery. Why didn't they just say no one but the righteous can fish, . Still going to have your tons of garbage left over this summer by the snaggers, because the locals and homeless who play in the water don't leave the garbage there. Stay focused on whats harming the fish and those MOE and DFO could have just read some of these web sites to get a better idea of what peoples concerns are. More travel expenses and lodging bills again.
Fortynine pages like that just paints all sportfishing as something to get rid of. Way to go. Who are you representing BTW. There have been less Conservation officers for years and that probably caused more problems than anything else. If they(DFO & MOE) can get the rightous to do the job for free by lecturing people on the river more donuts for them. Nothing worse than those Wallmart greeters.
-
And forget about using anything rubber (pink worms, jensen eggs, goey bobs) as they destroy bird life. No mention of using sand shrimp, would these not be considered introducing a foreign species to the river. Apparently foreigners are only Americans ( don't even know why that was even writen in there and if I was an American I would be offened.
I am sure it was writen with good intention but it sure seems one sided ( die hard bar fishermen). I sure hope they go to a public discusion forum like they did with the sturgeon. Only fair to get both sides of the debate.
-
Has there ever been a successful study on the numbers of fish caught bb'ing and published.Something solid in the science community? I have heard of no such study. The fact of the matter is there is no evidence to prove otherwise.Everything else said by those who are against it, is all heresay! In a court of law this would not even make it to trial.
Hotrod
-
Well I think I am coming to the conclusion that this whole debate is a giant red herring that is fractioning the angling community for no good reason...
The MAIN issue we ALL should agree on is conservation and management of the stocks. We all kick and cry about whether a fish was "flossed" or if it "took the presentation" while our Coho and steelhead runs are suffering BIG TIME, ocean survival is low, fish farms are damaging our wild stocks, government mismanagement is taking place, there's a lack of enforcement for the already existing rules, etc etc... REAL issues that will affect whether our children will ever be able to angle at all when they are older!
IMO we are our own worst enemy in fractioning ourselves into sub-groups and in that losing our collective voices for REAL concerns.. and yet this issue is more heated than ANY other.
Yes, keep forming committees on how BB'ers are wrecking our fishery, but remember who to blame when we ALL need to band together for a REAL conservation issue and find very few williing to join in the fight..
..and NO I don't bounce when sockeye are closed.
-
just read the 49 page document and I must say that it raises some good points but seems very biased to me, the barfishing crusaders make it sound like everyone that bottom bounces for fish is double dipping, leaving garbage behind fishing with treble hooks ect.
thats exactly my point earlier. these special interest groups exaggerate, blow things out of proportion all to get their narrow viewpoint across. and what is really funny is these guys have no idea the trouble they can cause in order to promote there views.
they point to two snagged sockeye as a major event, yet how many are injured killed by the wide mesh spring nets in the fraser. Its time these special interest groups and their BS disappear and a balance is restored to the whole scenario.
-
If you think about it D.F.O. is very smart with how they handle things!! right now we have the whole sport fishing community divided into two groups bashing the hell out of each other !! it is a classic attempt to take away pressure from the REAL problem !! and so far we are letting it work !! :o
TH
-
Dont forget that this concern is not limited to the Fraser. The same thing is going on in other systems. It isnt 'bar fishermen' but guys who chuck spoons, flies and float fish who are worried. I guess it depends on your perspective, but I think the paper is quite honest. Nothing there cannot be proven by someone with an open mind watching what's going on.
The article at the beginning of the paper is not just some guy mad he didnt get a fish. (See the mentality here...people want a fish on the rocks so bad they assume everyone does!!) If you go on to read it you see him unhappy with snagging, taking more than their limit, garbage and kicking fish. Dont tell me some of us are growing some tolerance for this to advance their wish to maintain the snaggery on the Fraser!
This paper had individuals who support some form of flossing to get at the sockeye. But they do see a problem thats growing in regards to where sport angling's going. It was a group effort.
Milo, you say even playing field for all. Great policy dont get me wrong. But trying to level the field for guys snagging is only going to hurt all guys who hold a fishing rod. That's why snagging is illegal! It cannot be a part of sport angling. Look what happen when a loophole is found! I know the LEGAL thing is beat to death. Who will be the first to say they see that even though it's a loophole, the action is the same! How is it different? Because DFO tells you so and only because they cant do much about it?
DFO knows what's going on. Sure, they have had people concerned about the snagging. They've also had plenty who tell them to keep out of DFO's business. Dont think DFO only has one side of this issue talking to them. While bogged down from the top on a lot, the ones who are on the water everyday know what they're seeing and they are acting accordingly. I dont think there's a goal to divide anglers. We're doing it ourselves by letting greed, lack of foresight and stubborness rule the day.
Outside of conservation issues (which is DIFFERENT but also a SERIOUS issue!!!!!) this snagging debate is the biggest threat to angling. I wish guys would focus on the act of snagging and what it does to sport angling. Why not start a thread about nets and ideas on what we, as a group, can do? I promise I wont say "well, anglers are snagging fish, which really is outside what anglers should be doing, so who are we to talk about nets?" ;D
Guys fuss about these nets, but when I tried to get people to write letters about it to pressure change, only 5% claimed they took the time to write a paragraph and to do their part. I call BS on the net excuse. I think some guys are most happy to see the nets in the river as they're a great thing to hide behind. That's just my view.
Thanks Milo. :D Here take a handful of 14oz bar weights! I have a-plenty. ;D ;D ;D
-
not all fish that are caught bottom bouncing are snagged, and not all fish caught bar fishing are legit hookups, of course there are more foul hooked while bottom bouncing because usually more fish are caught"because more water is covered". Last year alone while fishing for sockeye I hooked two suckers and one small sturgeon bottom bouncing, all three fish had the wool buried deep in there sucker mouths? is it possible that I snagged them deep in the back of the mouth?
-
II thought this was over and done with. But even the forum moderators are ignoring their own requests to reduce the talk as it goes nowhere.
But here we go again. Another thread and this one started by the forum moderators. themselves
It is obvious that they want to ram through their own personal opinions and try to stifle any others that dare to disagree with them, why else would they say reduce the talk and then startup another thread with the same topic.
Oops, busted. This is in fact a secret attempt of the global fishing ethic domination that moderators of Fishing with Rod have planned out over the year since the establishment of the website. We disguise our objective by making Dragonspeed participating heavily during the sockeye opening. A couple of years ago, we even made him blend in with the crowd by asking him to drive his precious Toyota Tundra through the side channels at Peg Leg only to have the truck stuck and lost as a result.
Perhaps a lesson on universal symbols used on the internet is needed in this case.
After observing repetition of arguments being used on both sides, moderators of Fishing with Rod discussion forum would like to request all participants to selectively post information during July and August of 2007. There shall be an implementation of no flossing talk during this requested time. The objective of this request is to preserve the interest and spirit of moderators which are endangered during this time of the year. Failure to comply to this request may result in a total ban of posting by all discussion forum members. ;)
The symbol ;) is known as a wink, usually employed when the poster's intention is humorous and readers should understand that the information posted is not to be taken seriously. Failure to do so, may often lead to misunderstanding and forum wars.
Next lesson will be the differentiation of waste and waist, as well as their, there and they're. Stay tuned for the dramatic ending, they actually have different meanings. :o
As for these committee’s its unfortunate that not enough of the average Joe’s volunteer for these committees which end up usually stacked in favor of some radical opinion.
These small vocal special interest groups always try to do things by committee as they know that if they had a referendum on the issue they would be well and soundly be defeated. There’s a very simple solution to this issue. When you buy your fishing license have a questionnaire attached regarding leader length and bottom bouncing. The majority wins. But we all know from the number of fisherman on the Fraser during sockeye season who is going to win that argument. In this world the majority opinion should be sufficient, however we all know form the past that these small vocal special interest groups love to twist, exaggerate, misdirect, use fear and scare tactics in order to get their own personal agendas approved.
As for the sockeye early Stuart run scare, fear mongering tactics being used. Its so much BS its getting ridiculous. In one day at Steveston public dock I saw more small sockeye being LEGALLY sold by commercial boats at the public fishing dock that I have in 25 years of fishing the Fraser in July. I can count the number of early sockeye that have been hooked on one hand, and they were all long lined released.
This is getting almost as bad as the religious zealots that try to ram their personal version of their religion down peoples throats.
Before more misinformation is being distributed like a bad witch hunt, some clarification maybe needed. The Sportfishing Advisory Committee is made up of representations from all sportfishing associations across the designated regions. Each group has its own interest but all groups share one common resource. The primary goal of the SFAC is to ensure angling opportunities but in addition, the committee works closely with enforcement and other departments in Fisheries and Oceans Canada to make sure the resource that our group is utilitizing is not threatened by our own or other groups.
The average fishermen can indeed be involved. In fact, it is encouraged. To say that the majority of the angling community is left out is a poor excuse of ignorance. One can be involved simply by joining an organization that shares your interest and has a representation at meetings. One can even be further involved by coming out to these meetings as they are mostly open to the public.
Perhaps knowing the origin of the sockeye salmon sold at Steveston Fishermen Dock would be a good idea before being used to strengthen your point of view.
had to print this out so as I could have a sit on the throne to read and digest ;)
-
Well I think I am coming to the conclusion that this whole debate is a giant red herring that is fractioning the angling community for no good reason...
The MAIN issue we ALL should agree on is conservation and management of the stocks. We all kick and cry about whether a fish was "flossed" or if it "took the presentation" while our Coho and steelhead runs are suffering BIG TIME, ocean survival is low, fish farms are damaging our wild stocks, government mismanagement is taking place, there's a lack of enforcement for the already existing rules, etc etc... REAL issues that will affect whether our children will ever be able to angle at all when they are older!
IMO we are our own worst enemy in fractioning ourselves into sub-groups and in that losing our collective voices for REAL concerns.. and yet this issue is more heated than ANY other.
Yes, keep forming committees on how BB'ers are wrecking our fishery, but remember who to blame when we ALL need to band together for a REAL conservation issue and find very few williing to join in the fight..
..and NO I don't bounce when sockeye are closed.
pretty well sums up my thoughts.
-
Look a few pages back or on one of the other flossing threads.
Has there ever been a successful study on the numbers of fish caught bb'ing and published.Something solid in the science community? I have heard of no such study. The fact of the matter is there is no evidence to prove otherwise.Everything else said by those who are against it, is all heresay! In a court of law this would not even make it to trial.
Hotrod
-
Still found no data to back anything up! This is about one group of anglers aginst another.One is using it for the end to their means.
Hotrod
-
This is the first of two committees that are dealing with this issue, not sure when the other will be complete. However a member of this forum who is the chair of the SFAC (Sportsfishing Advisory Sub Committee) may comment on this but I am sure it will be posted for further discussion when completed.
Remember these committees have members from both sides of the issues and are all volunteers who give freely of their time, I think you can applaud them for their efforts.
For those that may think these discussion are a waste of time it is great that it is your choice to read them or not.
But as I said many times changes are coming in the months ahead as FOC and MOE will take the results of these two committees to heart I am sure.
I know this personally as when the FVSS was started many said we would never get a chinook fishery again but we did after a lot of hard work.
The FVSS working with FOC also got all salmon species open but as some will admit including myself the sockeye fishery has spawned a new generation of anglers.
In my humble option it is time to get back to angling methods where the fish actually bite and are not snagged by the ill luck of many fish being snagged by leaders upwards to one quarter the lenght of the Air Canada Centre.
Is that sporting?
As I mentioned in this post a SFAC sub committee was also struck to deal with this ethics issue as well. This committee started with meetings around the same time as the committee that came up with this 49 page document posted here. I believe they are working on a document or paper as well and I am not sure when it will be completed but I would think it will be made public as well.
This SFAC sub committee worked with FOC the last while to come up with the selective fishing request paper that was posted in tackle shops, handed out by committee members at boat launches and posted on the net.
Thanks to Gerry for heading that up.
-
When they came for the snaggers... I said thats OK I'm not one of them.
Then they come looken for the ones keeping more than tey should..Hey hey I'm OK
Then they come looken for the garbage leavers,... OK I'm OK
Then they came for the fish kickers.....oooups gotcha ;D
Moral is there is more than one issue that affects the fishery.
-
This is almost funny.
The SFAC has not approved these proposals and in fact has not seen them yet.
This was done by a group that is called the Chilliwack River Watershed Strategy.
This appears to be made up of a select group of people who were asked to work on this and has "nothing to do with the SFAB"!
The ideal of a leader length rule stopping flossing is a joke, as noted 3 foot leaders are plenty.
There as another proposal coming from DFO that may change totally the way the fishery is handled on the Fraser.
Wait till that one is out to public meetings and see if your concern about leaders really matters.
In all respect this document was presented to the SFAC sub committee a few weeks ago by a power point presentation. This was done of course done out of courtesy as the SFAC sub committee is also dealing with the same topic.
When there is a concern by a number of people things have to be put down in document form so anyone that is interested can see what the concerns are and what possible solutions there are.
As I said before the SFAC sub committee I believe is also comming up with a paper as well and I am sure all will be interested in seeing their recommendations.
-
So Crhsi, just who are the guys in the SFAC? Is there a balance between bar fishing and bottom bouncing (lots of guides bounce for sockeyes) groups? I hope it will be a democratic process, in which these people actually represent their 'constituents'. ;)
-
So Chris, just who are the guys in the SFAC? Is there a balance between bar fishing and bottom bouncing (lots of guides bounce for sockeyes) groups? I hope it will be a democratic process, in which these people actually represent their 'constituents'. ;)
MOE and FOC staff. Others on this SFAC sub committee, I would say it is 5 in favor of BB and 3 are not in favor of this activity because they see it as snagging and for all the other reason that have been stated many times before.
What are you doing up so late and what am I doing up so late too. ::) I guess catching up on e-mails after the fishing trip. ;D
I better get some sleep as River Cleanup tomorrow, I mean today now. :o
-
In all respect this document was presented to the SFAC sub committee a few weeks ago by a power point presentation.
With all due respect.
This was done by a group that is called the "Chilliwack River Watershed Strategy" which is not a part of the SFAC.
This is an independant group and has nothing to do with the SFAC.
It has as noted a number of government people on it and should be taken in that context.
I believe it was set up by the Government people and the people on it were hand picked by them?
-
If it's legal, I will go out floss my Chinook, If the socks are open , I will floss my limit. Then I will go home. If you want to sit in a lawn chair all day and wait for your spring, go ahead, if you wan't to push your ethical high ground and preach how I'm the problem with the fishery , go ahead, but be nice about it, if you're not nice , then I won't be either. And like another poster said, you want to eliminate bottom bouncing , go ahead, I will adapt to another method to floss my limit. I think the best way is to have a daily, yearly limit on all fish, once you're done , get off the river. Catching and releasing stresses fish. Even if a fish is foul hooked (especially), it should be retained if the species is open , and that counts towards your limit. Reducing the encounters with the fish will help the conservation and help eliminate the congestion on the bars, which is what the bar fishers really want. restrict my leader length, go ahead , I will adapt.
Cheers, to all, and good flossing.
-
restrict my leader length, go ahead , I will adapt.
Cheers, to all, and good flossing.
thats good, but if your fishing with the proposed leader length 3' approx then I think you wouldn't be flossing.might be bottom bouncing
-
In all respect this document was presented to the SFAC sub committee a few weeks ago by a power point presentation.
With all due respect.
This was done by a group that is called the "Chilliwack River Watershed Strategy" which is not a part of the SFAC.
This is an independant group and has nothing to do with the SFAC.
It has as noted a number of government people on it and should be taken in that context.
I believe it was set up by the Government people and the people on it were hand picked by them?
Yes you are correct that this report was prepared seperate from the SFAC, as was I, I believe in my last posted statement.
Of course there is nothing wrong for any people concerned about any issue to form a comittee and file a document, that as I have said several times is a great thing about our Demorcratic process. That is why my dad and thousand of others through the history of Canada and in our present times served their country to preserve that right. Many gave and continue to give their lives to protect our democratic society.
If that is every lost we will have a lot more to worry about than fishing issues.
When the SFAC sub committee is finished with their report on fishing ethics I am sure it will be presented to the SFAB and will be made available to the angling public as well.
This will be welcomed by all, I am sure.
-
You are right Chris that any group can put together a report and that is fine.
However if the group is set up by MOE/DFO employees and pick the people they wish to have involved then it becomes very questionable as to its credibility of speaking for fishermen in general.
As to the 3 foot leader proposal, this will "NOT"effect flossing, it will just take longer to get the fish.
You of all people know that this has been going on in rivers throughout the province for years.
Have you looked at the Skeena where the government only allows fly fishing for sockeye and guess what they floss "ALL" the fish they catch.
So are you planning to ban fly fishing there? They use short leader and 3 feet would be just fine with them?
Are you proposing to ban leader length in all rivers in the province?
-
Thanks OBD.
Well I guess the hope is to try to convince people that going out sportfishing by a method that intentionally is used to snag a fish is not really what fishing is about.
Remember most that oppose this method now did it at the beginning of the sockeye fishery (myself, Gwyn, 2:40 and Steve and many others) I have said many times and I repeat I was part of getting sockeye and other species open through the FVSS. Now seeing it for what it is, I, as well as in many others minds as well we must attempt to try and change this attitude.
Of course we realize this will be difficult but we will not be truthful to ourselves if we do not try to correct this method of what some call fishing. It will be up to MOE or FOC regulations to change them or it could be by people's change in attitude. We know it will be difficult, for an example,
many choose not to comply with FOC's and SFAC's 2 notices not to botton bounce during the Early Stuarts migration timming through the Lower Fraser ( the snagging method with long leaders not true true bottom bouncing method used by old time anglers years ago. One, if they really whats to know how they are hooking fish, be it fishing with a spey rod fishing or any method for that matter they can of course check their hook placement when they beach the fish to see. this is not new news of course.
I guess it may be an age factor but I respect our precious fish stocks I have no wish to go out and intentionally try to snag my quarry although I have accidentally done so. I did it the other day while float fishing, my float goes down, I set the hook but I quess the hook pulled out of its mouth and I foul hooked it in a fin, thankfully the hook pulled out. No method is perfect, I know that. When I mooched for salmon we would sometime catch them in the tail as the belief was they would slash the herring with the tail before turning to grab it.
The difference of course we know that people use the long leaders as it puts more flossing material in the water column, they are out to snag plain and simple and use the most effective way they can to accomplish that goal.
Many bring native netting and commercial fishing into the equation but I feel we should clean our house first. If the ones that want to tackle these issue the freedom is for them to do so and they can bring together others to do so, if they choose. It is easy for us all to talk but to pull up ones sleeves and try to do something to get changes is difficult, as well as time consumming, you know that. I admire your dedication to several issues you are involved in.
We present our case and it will be up to FOC and MOE to make the changes they deem necessary, the final call is theirs.
I am not sure how much time the SFAB that you hold a seat on I believe, has given to this issue, if not much they may want to discuss it further in future meetings. If they feel FOC should not get into the anglers tackle box I guess the topic will go no further with the board and it will be groups like the CRWSC to do so.
I and many others would be interested in the minutes of these discussion, hopefully they are made available to all as was the recent 49 page document put together by the Chilliwack River Watershed Strategy Committee.
Thanks for you posts on this subject now and in the past.
Regards,
Chris
-
Our house is like 2% at best. And if we are putting in over 50 % or better of the commercial revenue for fishing, I don't see why sporties get short changed. Some old timers were the worst thing since Salmon Farming to look after the fishery. Or there would still be lots of fish in the States etc. Their most likely to run a fish farm through investment I say. Netting fish to extinction is only good for the skipper of a seine boat, or is that better than snagging fish? :-\
-
Are there any organized groups out there who are going to fight this forced method of fishing being proposed? Theremust be more of them that don't reply cause I certainly have yet to see someone with a 3 ft leader. Have not seen it,or a study that says long leaders are having any effect on present day stocks.
Hotrod
-
However if the group is set up by MOE/DFO employees and pick the people they wish to have involved then it becomes very questionable as to its credibility of speaking for fishermen in general.
Maybe we should all step back and look at what we're dealing with. We're dealing with snagging and nothing more. Why are we going to such lengths over something that's clearly damaging angling and will only continue to do so?
Sure, maybe this has been around for a while. So what. Snagging's always been here and it's not going away. The problem is that NOW it's out of control. It isnt a few guys doing it anymore. It's in the thousands and our rivers wont be able to handle it.
Then what will we have left? Closed rivers and because we fought so hard to make this snagging SPORT angling, all angling will die with it.
Sure, guys snag fish with 3' leaders. I watch them do it for steelhead on the Vedder. But at least steps are being made to address this issue instead of waisting ;) time telling each other what wont work.
OBD, what suggestions do you have (that's tangible) assuming you share concerns with what's a yearly event, let's say under the Keith Wilson Bridge. ???
-
I sit on the SFAC - sub committee so i can speak a bit on this subject. The CRWSC presented the document in a power point presentation on April 27. Many of us felt that the document had some good content but that the general public was not being represented. Most of the CRWS group does not really fish or know much about local fishing politics other than the 2 or 3 of the idividuals that are behind the push to close sockeye. The report is anti-sockeye/pro bar fishing and seems to blame all problems on sockeye. There was much debate over the issue of bias opions and the lack of representation by general public. The chair of the SFAB had asked many times to be involved in the CRWSC but was turned down each time.
Where it stands now - we all agreed that the lower numbers of sockeye would result in a complete closure of fishing on the Fraser if anglers did not comply to the request to selectively fish. Jerry Dewar ( SFAC-Sub Committee Chair) has worked hard to try to distribute the notices as has Chris and others that sit on this committee. The responsibility to do this is not really the mandate of the SFAC sub -commitee but should be done by DFO. we felt that by helping out we would have a hire compliance and less likely chance of a complete closure.
The commitee also agreed that we should be trying to educate anglers on other methods used to catch fish on the Fraser and proper fish handling which we are working on. As far as I know, we the SFAC -Sub commitee does not support the document by CRWS for the above reasons and will not move forward with their recommendations but will try our best to represent all anglers point of view including pro and con. Our recommendations will be forwarded to the SFAC which will then decide what to do or not do.
To keep fishing on the Fraser we need anglers to comply in high numbers with the request not to BB while early stewart fish are moving through. if we get a high compliance, the chances are that the river will open later in the month for rentention of sockeye and all anglers can enjoy fishing with wahtever method they choose to fish with.
Just to clarify, the above statments and opinion is that of mine and not the SFAC-Sub commitee.
Hope you all have a great summer, keep fishing & conserve you catch.
Vic Carrao
STS Guiding Service
-
Many of us felt that the document had some good content but that the general public was not being represented. Most of the CRWS group does not really fish or know much about local fishing politics other than the 2 or 3 of the idividuals that are behind the push to close sockeye.
I think at best 2 or 3 fall in this category as most are avid anglers and have been involved in the politics for a long time.
The report is anti-sockeye/pro bar fishing and seems to blame all problems on sockeye.
I alway say to put credit where credit is due. Why be scared to call something for what it is?
There was much debate over the issue of bias opions and the lack of representation by general public. The chair of the SFAB had asked many times to be involved in the CRWSC but was turned down each time.
I dont think anyone was turned down from attending meetings rather there was little interest aside from throwing together a group to counter this one, which is nothing wrong with that to ensure all get a say.
There will be ample chance for the public to be involved in this document and to where this issue goes in the future. ;)
And I too, speak for myself on the above and my understandings.
-
So, if they did an on river census as to flossing on the Fraser in season,how do you think the majority would vote?
If the vote came back a resounding yes, then as in elections the majority rules?
-
So, if they did an on river census as to flossing on the Fraser in season,how do you think the majority would vote?
If the vote came back a resounding yes, then as in elections the majority rules?
If the vote came back as you said, and I expect it would, what difference would it make?? It wouldnt change the facts surrounding this issue. It could show that sport angling is now under the control of glorified snaggers. I cant see much fishing opportunity continuing for long if sport angling is represented by a high % of snaggers.
The democratic process you indicate is valid in itself. But it is hugely biased.
Remember, most of these guys out there are relatively new to the river, only picking up angling when they found or were taught they could simply snag their fish. They could care less about fishing earlier because it was 'boring' and 'too much work'. Now they're attracted and the main attractant was easy meat.
Are these the people we want dictating what happens on our rivers?
Btw, what 'season' do you refer to? Sockeye openings? May 1 chinook openings? I bet most out there would consider 'flossing' season to be whenever the river's open. J
A personal observation: I think it's too bad that so many are keeling under for snagging. What's worse are long time anglers who I think should know better still calling this 'bottom bouncing' and trying to whitewash it.
-
RA40 just a few minor points to clarify, Frank is the chair of the Upper Fraser SFAC not the chair of the SFAB, he sits on the SFAB as a committee member only. Frank was welcome to attend the CRWSC committee but declined for his own reasons which is his choice. As 2:40 said just about all on the CRWSC are avid anglers and the 2 or 3 that are not are still concerned about fish for the future or they would not have attended.
Glad you mention that the SFAC sub committee is going to try educate the general public on other ways to fish, I certainly hope it will move people away from the present method of snagging fish.
It sounds like the compliance level is slipping as many are not heeding the request as they do not seem to care about the Early Stuart stocks. Some forum members, close to the snagging grounds can verify that if they choose. Nosey???
Their action will most likely see the present method of BB with such long leaders banned in the Fraser River in the future with fishing with a fixed weight only during the salmon migration period.
That will certainly solve the problem on the Fraser but then there is areas like KWB on the Vedder.
While checking garbage dumping issues today on the Chilliwack I saw the snagging method being used in the Upper Chilliwack already for early chinooks, how will we stop that as so many of the new anglers (using the term loosely) know no other way to fish because of what they picked up from their sockeye days on the Fraser.
I wish the SFAC sub committee well with their efforts to change these people who will snag all species of salmon as well a steelhead, I hazard to guess if they were allowed to keep sturgeon they would try that too. That reminds me the snagging crews on the bars have done so as it was reported a jumping sturgeon looked like a Christmas tree with all the hooks decorated with wool, I believe green was the most observed colour. ::) :P
We will be watching with interest how this educating process the sub committee is working on develops in the days and weeks ahead. Of course many of us would be willing to help once the document and process to do so is made public.
We welcome seeing it posted on this and other web sites for all interested people can see and comment on.
-
Here's a little tit bit from another part
"The sturgeon swam into and snagged itself on the rig"
So much for the idea that bar fish don't snag fish!!!
Over the years I've seen every type of fisherman snag fish (95% accidentally), just try fly fishing for coho on any of the rivers when the chum, springs are in they get hooked all over the place.
Just because someone uses BB technique doesn't mean they are deliberately trying to snag. I actually learned the river technique from a fishing show mark peddleton did when he fished the vedder and then the Pitt river using guess what bottom bouncing. I found it quite effective in clear water, with light weights.
So why is it when the majority wants something, these special interest groups and preaching saints all want to ignore the wishes of majority and force their own concepts and beliefs on the rest of us. They will claim that they know what's best and whats right and we know nothing. Its been going on for 100's of years and will continue.
-
"The sturgeon swam into and snagged itself on the rig"
So much for the idea that bar fish don't snag fish!!!
oh boy here we go....
-
Some of the bar fishing elitists (is a dozing fishermann while fishing an elitist? ;D) always think that if we BB, we don't care about fish stocks. That is all BS to me. Most of us are guardians at the bars to make sure no sockeyes are bonked or mishandled by green hands. I have only seen one sockeye landed in about 6 trips. Bfers should leave the fish stock issues to the capable hands of DFO and their scientists and test fisheries. They are the one to issue closures if stocks are low, not some bfers who think they know more than you and me. Behind these talks are just envies of the catches by the bouncing crew. :D
-
I think 2:40 rational is:
you close the Fraser Sockeye fishery for sportys for good, so that they (as in that ilk) don't buy a license and fish the Vedder ever again
You can make the connection now. I could be wrong but that seems to be the gist of it. I'd also bet it won't stop people deliberately trying to snag fish. I've seen that going on ever since I started fishing over 30 years ago.
-
Yep 2:40 knows us all right, we've never fished a day in our life unless were snaggin them up and we certainly don't give a rats my friend about fish conservation. Hoorah hillbillies lets hook them there fish. Oh by the way fished Sat. and Sunday and saw well over 30 big fat chromers brought to shore and yet did'nt see one sockeye caught. Lions and tigers and bears, Oh My.
-
:-*
-
Yep 2:40 knows us all right, we've never fished a day in our life unless were snaggin them up and we certainly don't give a rats *** about fish conservation. Hoorah hillbillies lets hook them there fish. Oh by the way fished Sat. and Sunday and saw well over 30 big fat chromers brought to shore and yet did'nt see one sockeye caught. Lions and tigers and bears, Oh My.
ATZ, I`m glad you are reporting stats from the beach you were at of thirty bonked chinook. Your braggart ways will give DFO a chance to see that snaggers are also having an impact on Chinook stocks. Keep on bragging and conserving ;)
Cheers
Nuggy
-
"The sturgeon swam into and snagged itself on the rig"
So much for the idea that bar fish don't snag fish!!!
While no one claimed it would never ever, this is the first Ive ever heard. Ive put in hundreds of hours with a bar rod and have yet to snag fish #1. To whom this happened to, I might suggest to go buy a lottery ticket!!!!
Over the years I've seen every type of fisherman snag fish (95% accidentally), just try fly fishing for coho on any of the rivers when the chum, springs are in they get hooked all over the place.
It happens, as you said, once in a blue moon. If anglers are fishing using proper methods and intentions, accidental foul hookings are very very rare.
Just because someone uses BB technique doesn't mean they are deliberately trying to snag.
You are most right! Bottom bouncing, used properly in suitable conditions is a acceptable manner to make a fish bite.
But if one's using a 20' leader, the intention is only to snag a fish.
See the problem calling both "bottom bouncing"?
So why is it when the majority wants something, these special interest groups and preaching saints all want to ignore the wishes of majority and force their own concepts and beliefs on the rest of us.
Since when was the majority right?
Yep 2:40 knows us all right, we've never fished a day in our life unless were snaggin them up and we certainly don't give a rats *** about fish conservation. Hoorah hillbillies lets hook them there fish. Oh by the way fished Sat. and Sunday and saw well over 30 big fat chromers brought to shore and yet did'nt see one sockeye caught. Lions and tigers and bears, Oh My.
I never said that. I think I acknowledged that many who partake in this 'fishery' go about it in a common sense manner as possible. I dont think it's right, but I think it's fair to point out they do take their garbage with them, release fish properly and etc. But sadly, FAR too many who took up this snagging are not doing this. I think this is part of the issue. Guys only see what they're doing and overlook what's going on around them. Sure, they're not kicking fish or making a mess, but MANY guys who are doing the same thing these 'ethical snaggers' ;D are supporting ARE. And here lies the problem. And why is anyone surprised? Permitting snagging can only have predictable results.
As Nuggy said, good to hear how sport anglers are still pounding on the Chinook runs. ::)
Why is it the anti-snaggers who take the heat for dividing anglers and ramming things down other's throats? I guess it's just a matter of perspective, but maybe let's be fair as the pro-snaggers are doing the same thing if we want to talk about that. It doesnt make a wrong a right, but thought it should be mentioned. Guys will ultimately do what they want. Sure, they can use the excuse for themselves or to others to say some guy on a fishing forum drove them to do it ::). I wonder if the ads on TV against drinking and driving makes people jump up and want to do it just to spite the TV? ???
-
I think 2:40 rational is:
you close the Fraser Sockeye fishery for sportys for good, so that they (as in that ilk) don't buy a license and fish the Vedder ever again
You can make the connection now. I could be wrong but that seems to be the gist of it. I'd also bet it won't stop people deliberately trying to snag fish. I've seen that going on ever since I started fishing over 30 years ago.
Not sure how you came to that conclusion, but thanks for sharing.
Anyone's welcome to FISH, but SNAGGING shouldnt be an option. My concerns Im so openly sharing has nothing to do with my having more room on the river or any other personal gain.
I think you're right. Snagging's always has been a problem and always will be. Personally, I think it will be more of a problem in the future regardless of what's done to curb the rampant snagging that happens now. Difference is that before, snaggers laid low, did it at night or in hiding. Now they have 50 guys all doing the same thing to blend in with and feel comfortable doing it next to a busy road. 'Legal' snagging brings out more guys looking for easy meat and increases the % of 'bad apples' in a group. That's why Im trying to support a standard in fishing. I think NO SNAGGING is a pretty fair and easy standard to follow!
-
I think 2:40 rational is:
you close the Fraser Sockeye fishery for sportys for good, so that they (as in that ilk) don't buy a license and fish the Vedder ever again
You can make the connection now. I could be wrong but that seems to be the gist of it. I'd also bet it won't stop people deliberately trying to snag fish. I've seen that going on ever since I started fishing over 30 years ago.
Not sure how you came to that conclusion, but thanks for sharing.
Anyone's welcome to FISH, but SNAGGING shouldnt be an option. My concerns Im so openly sharing has nothing to do with my having more room on the river or any other personal gain.
I think you're right. Snagging's always has been a problem and always will be. Personally, I think it will be more of a problem in the future regardless of what's done to curb the rampant snagging that happens now. Difference is that before, snaggers laid low, did it at night or in hiding. Now they have 50 guys all doing the same thing to blend in with and feel comfortable doing it next to a busy road. 'Legal' snagging brings out more guys looking for easy meat and increases the % of 'bad apples' in a group. That's why Im trying to support a standard in fishing. I think NO SNAGGING is a pretty fair and easy standard to follow!
2:40 your language is nothing but offensive and turn people off. There is nothing in your post except to repeat the 'S' words over and over again, and to show total disrespect and deliberate shaming of decent fishermen who may have more fishing (all forms) years than you. DfO does not prosecute people flossing as snagging, so what gives you the right to repeatedly call people snaggers, just because they choose to catch a fish with a method you don't like. Total lack of taste in these demeaning posts of yours with the intent only to shame and label just like PETA. >:( Why not make some posts on fishing skills and knowledge. Your intent of coming over to this forum seems only to destroy the unity of this forum. Just pathetic!!!
-
there are a few individuals on this site who have nothing to contribute but negativity, they lurk around all year waiting for these discussions to come up so they can use this site as a soapbox to ram there personal views and opinions down everyone elses throats. my advice is to let it go in one ear and out the other, there have been many times where Ive wanted to give up on this site because of the constant bashing, but I just take a deep breathe now and step away from the computer for a while till I cool off.
BTW, I had a long talk with two conservation officers this weekend, and both men I spoke with have absolutely no problem with bottom bouncing :o
-
Going fishing but this problem will not go away. As much as some will not like it changes will be coming not tomorrow but they will happen.
FOC and MOE will not be able to condone this snag fishery much longer as it continues to spread and has spread to most of our rivers now. Many written examples and pictures have been posted the last few years that prove this.
The Environment Minister also saw it first hand on Saturday and I donot think he was impressed either.
The debate can go on if you wish but most points have been made on both sides of the issue so we might as well sit back and let it all unfold.
I think my Maple Leaf Drennan float will be going down a few times shortly ;D ;D ;D as will this type of activity in the near future, an activity some people try to call sportsfishing.
If it does not change sports angling as we used to know it will be gone forever and sadly the fish and fishing opportunities will follow in quick succession. What a shame for us to leave too our future generations.
As a side note I hold no grudges against those on the other side of the issue but I am only trying to get them to understand the problems this activity is creating.
I know, as I did this sockeye thing too, I thought it was great until someone that was a lot younger than me told me the fish I was catching were being snagged and I know right then I would have to change. I, as well as all of us should treat our fish with more respect than I was in those days.
Everyone of course is entitled to their opinion and to make their own choice but I ask you, reach way down in your heart and ask yourself is this the way to sportsfish, if so continue but we always can change too.
Kindest regards to all.
Chris
-
Maybe 2:40 calls it snagging because it is snagging?
I cant believe this discussion and fishery is still taking place.
People still defending there right to snag fish is unbelievable.
At first they thought and argued that they were actually catching fish that bit but then conceded that yes they were snagging the Sockeye but they only did this for Sockeye and they then called this a harvest. ::)
Now they are openly saying that they are snagging Chinook. :o
No fisheries officers patrolling this and we were supposed to have gotten all these new officers this year?
What the heck is happening to sport fishing in this province?Im ashamed and disgusted, and to think that people openly admit snagging Chinook on a public forum and think nothing of it just makes me ill.
-
Maybe 2:40 calls it snagging because it is snagging?
I cant believe this discussion and fishery is still taking place.
People still defending there right to snag fish is unbelievable.
At first they thought and argued that they were actually catching fish that bit but then conceded that yes they were snagging the Sockeye but they only did this for Sockeye and they then called this a harvest. ::)
Now they are openly saying that they are snagging Chinook. :o
No fisheries officers patrolling this and we were supposed to have gotten all these new officers this year?
What the heck is happening to sport fishing in this province?Im ashamed and disgusted, and to think that people openly admit snagging Chinook on a public forum and think nothing of it just makes me ill.
Do not give up and let it spoil your fishing outings, we believe changes are in the wind in the not too distant future. It is important to post your thoughts as those that will make the changes are reading these threads. ;D ;D ;D
-
Everyone of course is entitled to their opinion and to make their own choice but I ask you, reach way down in your heart and ask yourself is this the way to sportsfish, if so continue but we always can change too.
Kindest regards to all.
Chris
what the...??????
is this about sports fishing and conservation or is this about sipping tea and eating crumpets. that statement sounded a little...well...........soft ???
-
I read all of these posts and for some reason this whole discussion about BB keeps eating away at me, I wonder why I let it bother me even though I haven't been to the Fraser once this year and may not go at all !! last night whilst thinking about it I came up with a few thoughts that I would like to share....
When these discussions first started this year all the anti BB gang jumped on the fact that the BB were endangering salmon stocks... the sides went back and forth and back and forth and alot of the anti BB gang admitted that BB weren't actually affecting the stocks that much, approx 2% of the total harvest was taken by BB I think we agreed on.. at that point the discussion quickly changed from endangering salmon stocks to the fact that it was unethical !! so now the whole argument has swung back to the fact that it is unsporting ... if you believe that then fair enough, you are entitled to your own opinion !! but how does that point affect the amount of fish being harvested ?? and why would the fact that anti BB think it is unethical cause DFO to close the river ???
It seems to me that the Barfishing fans are so blinded by their dislike of BB that they have lost their focus on what the actual problems are !! all the people I know on this site and others that BB are all good fishermen !! it's not all about meat, it is about having an amazing fish on the end of the line !! and at every other time of the year they are good fishermen that treat the rivers with respect !! they aren't the ones that are "snagging" at KWB, they aren't the ones that are fishing with barbs, or without licenses !! the people you are talking about are the people that don't give a $hit about anything but themselves, they are the people that don't care about regs, and they carry that mentality to other parts of their life !! these are the people that camp along the river and never clean up, that disrespect others around them at campsites when families want quiet at midnight !!!
Alot of you keep harping on the fact that this type of fishery all starts with BB on the Fraser, well I call Bull $hit on that !!! you have no proof, no studies, no charts !! you have an idea in your head and you believe it so fiercely that you spread it as gospel !!! you talk about being sporting !! you say that BB is not a sporting way to catch fish !! you think that sitting in a lawnchair waiting for your bell to ring is the end all be all !! the funny thing is that alot of the people bashing the BB are avid hunters !! Now I would like you to explain to me what is sporting about sneaking up on an animal and shooting it with a high powered rifle or shotgun ?? or sitting in a boat waiting for a few birds to fly over so you can prove to the world how sporting you are while you spray it and the 5 feet around it with shot !!! if you truly believed in what you wrote about BB and how unsporting it is you would be chasing down these animals on foot and cutting their throats with a knife or a spear !!
If the Fraser does get shutdown it won't be because of the BB .... it will be because of your constant battering of other fishermen that don't share you love of sleeping in a chair by the side of the river !! I believe that you have lost site of what is important, I believe that you have built up a hatred of another type of fishing that you just don't get ..... when you have proof of what you say, when you can show the world how Fraser fishing breeds snaggers then maybe people will listen !! but I will tell you now finding proof of something that doesn't exist is going to be a tough challenge
peace
TH
-
The Cap is known for outrageous snagging and non of those true snaggers use a betty or a long leader. And yes, they did this long long before the sockeye fishery ever came about. Blame the Cap snaggers on what now you people? ;)
I think the bfers should just leave the Fraser to itself and push for a shorter leader in the smaller system as a gear restriction. The Fraser fishery is a food fishery with 2% of the take shared by tens of thousands of people who just want to have a realistic chance to catch a fish for the family themselves. It brought economic boom in summer months to that town where many of the die-hard bfers live. Yet they want to shut it down to soothe their biased view of fishing. What if the flyfishers own the lobbying power and try to get all you guys off the river because of your use of heavy gear, especially the big rod and the big egg, crude equipment in their mind? What if I am an environmentalist with lobbying power to shut you down because you repeatedly dump big glob of lead to poison the Fraser? What if I think fishing should not involve bait whiich kill many fish and I own the lobbying power to shut you bait fishermen down? What if I say your lead is so heavy, that when it lands on a busy sockeye travel lane, you actually BONK many sockeyes on the head, causing their final fatality? How do you know you didn't do that? Why on earth you think that your biased idea about fishing has more moral or ethical ground when yours can be flawed just like ours? Oh yes, your method is the sainted one and is beyond criticism. Sporting while dosing and drinking beer, or day dreaming in an arm chair all day during fishing? Give me a break. ;D Totally agree with TH that when the Fraser is shut down, blame the fanatic lobbyists from the anti gang. If that ever happen, the bbers should be up in arms just like the natives to protect their right. Road blocks any one? ;D ;D
Oh yes, the Minister is there to witness how ugly bbers are? Give me a break. If he is a true politician, he knows where the majority is. Just take him to a busy sockeye bar. An a true politician will flow with the majority wishes, always. ;D
-
Beauty post TH :)
I knew that day a blew the back leg off a deer with an old Lee Enfield, my hunting days were lmited :-\ Pretty soon you can get roadkill which is more ethical ;)
and I don't even like talking about what you can learn from some losers on the Cap....worst kind of fishing out
-
I read all of these posts and for some reason this whole discussion about BB keeps eating away at me, I wonder why I let it bother me even though I haven't been to the Fraser once this year and may not go at all !! last night whilst thinking about it I came up with a few thoughts that I would like to share....
When these discussions first started this year all the anti BB gang jumped on the fact that the BB were endangering salmon stocks... the sides went back and forth and back and forth and alot of the anti BB gang admitted that BB weren't actually affecting the stocks that much, approx 2% of the total harvest was taken by BB I think we agreed on.. at that point the discussion quickly changed from endangering salmon stocks to the fact that it was unethical !! so now the whole argument has swung back to the fact that it is unsporting ... if you believe that then fair enough, you are entitled to your own opinion !! but how does that point affect the amount of fish being harvested ?? and why would the fact that anti BB think it is unethical cause DFO to close the river ???
It seems to me that the Barfishing fans are so blinded by their dislike of BB that they have lost their focus on what the actual problems are !! all the people I know on this site and others that BB are all good fishermen !! it's not all about meat, it is about having an amazing fish on the end of the line !! and at every other time of the year they are good fishermen that treat the rivers with respect !! they aren't the ones that are "snagging" at KWB, they aren't the ones that are fishing with barbs, or without licenses !! the people you are talking about are the people that don't give a $hit about anything but themselves, they are the people that don't care about regs, and they carry that mentality to other parts of their life !! these are the people that camp along the river and never clean up, that disrespect others around them at campsites when families want quiet at midnight !!!
Alot of you keep harping on the fact that this type of fishery all starts with BB on the Fraser, well I call Bull $hit on that !!! you have no proof, no studies, no charts !! you have an idea in your head and you believe it so fiercely that you spread it as gospel !!! you talk about being sporting !! you say that BB is not a sporting way to catch fish !! you think that sitting in a lawnchair waiting for your bell to ring is the end all be all !! the funny thing is that alot of the people bashing the BB are avid hunters !! Now I would like you to explain to me what is sporting about sneaking up on an animal and shooting it with a high powered rifle or shotgun ?? or sitting in a boat waiting for a few birds to fly over so you can prove to the world how sporting you are while you spray it and the 5 feet around it with shot !!! if you truly believed in what you wrote about BB and how unsporting it is you would be chasing down these animals on foot and cutting their throats with a knife or a spear !!
If the Fraser does get shutdown it won't be because of the BB .... it will be because of your constant battering of other fishermen that don't share you love of sleeping in a chair by the side of the river !! I believe that you have lost site of what is important, I believe that you have built up a hatred of another type of fishing that you just don't get ..... when you have proof of what you say, when you can show the world how Fraser fishing breeds snaggers then maybe people will listen !! but I will tell you now finding proof of something that doesn't exist is going to be a tough challenge
peace
TH
Rick, you know as well as the majority here that the purpose of recreational angling in this province is to entice a fish to bite your presentation. Throw away the conservation side just for a minute and concentrate on this point...a fish biting your presentation. Bending the current rules a lot of fishermen think that snagging fish is now an acceptable form of angling.
I attended a bar fishout on Sunday this weekend where not one single Chinook was caught yet the flossing crowd is bragging about dozens of Chinook dead on the beaches in the same area. How many Chinook were slayed this weekend by the BB crowd? Probably in the hundreds by the sounds of it, hundreds of fish that would NOT have been caught had the BB fishermen had been trying to get the Chinooks to entice a bite. Now lets talk conservation of fish stalks...If the season opens June 1st for retention of Chinooks on the Fraser start calculating the amount of Chinooks the snaggers are taking from say June 1 until say October or November. The number rises into many thousands of fish caught by the BB crowd. Thousands of fish that wouldn`t have been caught by fishermen using the entice a bite method.
I am discounting sockeye and other commercial and native fish caught as we have been through that. Every fish slaughtered by each user group is one less fish on the spawning ground that affects the next generation. If snagging can produce such large catches of fish on the Fraser imagine the impacts of snagging on smaller more fragile systems? Justifying the flossery on the Fraser means justifying flossing on every lake, stream and river in this province, why not speak up now against this fishery before it becomes a common way of fishing all over the province.
If it is acceptable to floss on the Fraser River why not floss Thompson Steelhead or endangered Nicola Coho? Why is it wrong for the KWB crowd on the Vedder to be snagging salmon and steelhead? It`s there right and it`s not against the regulations ???
The biggest irk of all the banter flying back and forth right now is the DFO has asked people not to floss. The DFO has clearly given fishermen options as to which way they would like to see you angling on the Fraser River. It is a complete embarrassment to me and many members of different forums to see the DFO request mocked, ignored and humiliated by people who I thought really had the act together as conservationists and fishermen. It is not wrong to question and debate this topic but to go out and openly defy a DFO request sets a very bad example for the younger generation of fishers and the ones just getting into fishing. I have made a choice to comply with the request made by DFO and not floss, I have also made a choice to argue that the DFO request be upheld by anglers for the betterment of conservation and future fishing opportunities on the Fraser River.
Cheers
Nuggy
-
BTW, I had a long talk with two conservation officers this weekend, and both men I spoke with have absolutely no problem with bottom bouncing :o
Of course not, bottom bouncing is legit. Did you explain which bottom bouncing method you were talking about because there are two, to snag fish or to get a fish to bite.
Steelhawk, like it was mentioned, I call it snagging because it's snagging. It doesnt matter what DFO says, especially considering they're limited on what they can do and say at the moment. I dont mean to insult guys, but I want to point out what I think is an obivious fact. If someone doesnt want to be called a snagger, they can either quit doing it or just laugh it off if it's really such a stupid thought.
all the anti BB gang jumped on the fact that the BB were endangering salmon stocks...
They're doing their share and sport anglers have to be responsible for their part regardless of what other users are doing. Now that guys are snagging chinook, they're getting way more fish over previous years. Before the snagging was popular, it was a challenge to get a chinook in June. Multiple fish in a day on one bar was unheard of. Now that snagging's rampant you can expect to see more impacts. Maybe sport anglers wont be able to enjoy fishing the river all or most of the season if their success rate continues to rise. Guys are pretty pleased with the fact they're not hooking sockeye, but bragging at their beaching lots of chinook.
and why would the fact that anti BB think it is unethical cause DFO to close the river
I dont shed a tear at the commented on closures coming from the fact DFO shouldnt have any patience with snagging and it's non selective manner. In principle, it's the right thing to do. Because they cant say this is snagging, (thanks to their limiting regulations) maybe they're going after it with what they can, which includes conservation concerns. I understand guys being choked when the nets are still in the river, but we as anglers must take responsibility. Someone else doing it worse or more doesnt give us the right to do as we please. Take the conservation issue where it belongs; in a seperate discussion. But dont worry, I think that one's going to come back and roost on bb snagging soon enough if trends continue.
all the people I know on this site and others that BB are all good fishermen !! it's not all about meat, it is about having an amazing fish on the end of the line !! and at every other time of the year they are good fishermen that treat the rivers with respect !!
I know, most guys on here who do it are for starts, decent people and partake in the snaggery like I did with respect to the fish and others. But we're not talking about them!! These are the minority and we would be better off to realize that and see what this snaggery has created. It has brought out the worst in angling. Instead of having just a few bad apples holding fishing rods before the snagging was rampant, we now have TONS of them. This should not come as a surprise. The bad apples were the snaggers of old with triple hooks, barbed hooks and so forth. Now that a snagging method is 'legal' they're out in droves and dont have to be blatent with barbs, triple hooks and so forth. But the mentality remains (garbage, kicking fish, over limits and what have you) We watched Peg Leg in a morning when sockeye were closed but people were looking for pinks and chinook. Sockeye were dragged over the rocks, kicked and even retained.
Alot of you keep harping on the fact that this type of fishery all starts with BB on the Fraser, well I call Bull $hit on that !!! you have no proof, no studies, no charts !!
I know and respect that you feel this way, but I think you're in denial. Have you made any effort to find out? I did and the results were predictable. Every guy I talked to snagging in the Vedder Canal one morning was introduced to fishing sockeye on the Fraser. Here, make a chart. I talked to 5 guys and 5 guys were from the Fraser. Sure, just a small sample, but 100% response is interesting. This doesnt include Look at their gear for crying out loud! How many bouncing betties and long leaders do you see. TONS! And just because they use a float doesnt mean anything beyond they've adapted to fishing slower and smaller water with the same intention. I dont think we need someone with a PhD to study this when the proof is pretty obvious.
you think that sitting in a lawnchair waiting for your bell to ring is the end all be all !
No, I think that what ever fishing method an anglers chooses, the fish must bite. That's all.
Now I would like you to explain to me what is sporting about sneaking up on an animal and shooting it with a high powered rifle or shotgun ??
Hunting is different than fishing and carries no merit on this discussion. You're welcome to your feelings on it though. Hunting carries its own ethics baggage. They have similar debates too. ;D
If the Fraser does get shutdown it won't be because of the BB .... it will be because of your constant battering of other fishermen that don't share you love of sleeping in a chair by the side of the river
No, it will be because the ones who wouldnt comply with DFO's requests.
I believe that you have lost site of what is important, I believe that you have built up a hatred of another type of fishing that you just don't get
No, I get it just fine. This is snagging and snagging is wrong. I lose no sleep over trying to bring snagging under control because if we let it go, we're going to lose a lot more.
when you have proof of what you say, when you can show the world how Fraser fishing breeds snaggers then maybe people will listen !! but I will tell you now finding proof of something that doesn't exist is going to be a tough challenge
Ill take you up on that one! ;)
Thrasher, it is exactly about fishing stated by one who loves it dearly and whom many can thank for the opportunities they enjoy on our rivers, EVEN the sockeye opening.
Firstlight, that's exactly how it progressed. I wonder when we'll see the first guy, using the same arguments, justifying snagging under the KWB.
-
I know it is about fishing and I am certain that Chris is responsible for some of our fishing opportunities. It was a sarcastic statement made in regards to this dead horse that gets beaten every year.
Every year the only thing that seems to come out of it is a clearer line that has divided the 3 groups (Sporties, FN, and Commercial Fisheries), instead of them all working together for a common goal.
-
Rick, you know as well as the majority here that the purpose of recreational angling in this province is to entice a fish to bite your presentation. Throw away the conservation side just for a minute and concentrate on this point...a fish biting your presentation. Bending the current rules a lot of fishermen think that snagging fish is now an acceptable form of angling.
"Flossing" for Salmon on certain rivers IS an acceptable form of angling !!!
some people just can't accept that fact
If the season opens June 1st for retention of Chinooks on the Fraser start calculating the amount of Chinooks the snaggers are taking from say June 1 until say October or November. The number rises into many thousands of fish caught by the BB crowd. Thousands of fish that wouldn`t have been caught by fishermen using the entice a bite method.
You are talking about a very small % of the total fish taken in a season by other methods !! if fish numbers are what you are really concerned about you need to get to the heart of the problem not take away a ligitimate form of fishing from Sport Fishermen
I know and respect that you feel this way, but I think you're in denial. Have you made any effort to find out? I did and the results were predictable. Every guy I talked to snagging in the Vedder Canal one morning was introduced to fishing sockeye on the Fraser. Here, make a chart. I talked to 5 guys and 5 guys were from the Fraser. Sure, just a small sample, but 100% response is interesting. This doesnt include Look at their gear for crying out loud! How many bouncing betties and long leaders do you see. TONS! And just because they use a float doesnt mean anything beyond they've adapted to fishing slower and smaller water with the same intention. I dont think we need someone with a PhD to study this when the proof is pretty obvious.
People have been "snagging" fish for a lot longer that BB has been around !! someone mentioned the Cap river in another post and with good reason, I remember when I was 6-7 years old fishing at the cable pool with my brother , I would see 10-15 people at a time snagging big triple hooks through the water to get their fish !! even though I was young and impressionable I never tried this type of fishing !! Your claim that the Fraser is where it all comes from is ridiculous and unfounded , not obvious like you state
No, I think that what ever fishing method an anglers chooses, the fish must bite. That's all.
That's one place where you are mistaken !!! according to the law the fish must be hooked in the mouth !! people spend all sorts of time and money trying to come up with the perfect style or lure to get fish on their line, BB just happens to be one choice that is out there !! if you choose not to partake then great
I think it is good that both sides of this get to express how they feel, if the laws are eventually changed and you get your wish then I will abide by it and expect everyone else too aswell, but I will never agree with it... if you want the Fraser regs to change to not include BB then you will need to close the river to all fishing of every kind.. it is the only fair way IMO
TH
-
For all you who missed it on CKNW last night there is something coming to the FRASER that will make this debate a joke.
The proposal is to move ALL the F/N and Commercial fisherys "ABOVE THE VEDDER" and up to Hope.
There would also be fisherys in the rivers, example Vedder, Harrison.
So, you think that you had a rough time catching fish before, wait till the commercial and the F/N all have their nets in the river above the Vedder.
-
I find it interesting that the argument now is the Chinook stocks and that flossing is decimating them.
For you that say that or believe that I would advise you to get your facts before you state this.
There is no concern at this time.
Sports anglers as much as they would like to think they are really productive are not.
-
Raking your long leader through the water is no different than fishing with a net...
The deception is the fishing rod at the end...
Cheers,
Nicole
-
For all you who missed it on CKNW last night there is something coming to the FRASER that will make this debate a joke.
The proposal is to move ALL the F/N and Commercial fisherys "ABOVE THE VEDDER" and up to Hope.
There would also be fisherys in the rivers, example Vedder, Harrison.
So, you think that you had a rough time catching fish before, wait till the commercial and the F/N all have their nets in the river above the Vedder.
Doesn't matter where they put the nets !! they are still gonna take the same amount of fish !! this way there will be no Vedder bound fish taken by the nets and if anything it should improve fishing ;D ;D
TH
-
Raking your long leader through the water is no different than fishing with a net...
The deception is the fishing rod at the end...
Cheers,
Nicole
There is a huge difference !! If I wanted to fish with a net it would be illegal !! if I wanted to bottom bounce with my rod it is LEGAL!!!!
that seems to be quite a big difference don't ch think?? ;)
TH
-
Think a little more deeply on that point.
Cheers,
Nicole
-
Don't need to the Law is the Law, if you want a deeper thought read back a few posts and you will see where I stand :)
TH
-
You will only see the truth when you allow yourself to...
Cheers,
Nicole
-
You will only see the truth when you allow yourself to...
Cheers,
Nicole
always makes me laugh when someone so closedminded tells me I can't see the truth lol ;D ;D
TH
-
I have been following all of this, and managed to stay out of it so far, but here goes....
Trophyhunter, your post summed up some of my feelings on this topic (though I was a little hurt by the references to fishing while sleeping a lawn chair - because I sometimes do that!).
Everyone knows conservation issues for sockeye or chinook are not a true reason in the argument against BB and sockeye. They are simply the only reason those with an agenda could come up with to try and stop it. Sport fishing (even BB) is not a very efficient harvest method compared to any type of net.
2:40, when I read your posts I alternate between admiration for your commitment and will to change things for the better (as you see it), to being a little scared of how you so easily criticize and dismiss a group of people that simply sees things differently than you. Most people I have met who BB do not leave garbage behind, release fish well, and generally try to be "good citizens".
I too see increasing problems of overcrowding and poor ethics on our rivers (I have been fishing this area for 35 years). I have seen gong shows on the Squamish and Vedder as bad as anything on a BB bar and I think it is wrong to blame it all on sockeye or BB. I think population growth to our area along with ease of information over the interent brings in a lot of new anglers, and they start with less mentoring than they perhaps did in the old days (though lots of bad stuff occurred then too). Maybe you should try to shut down fishing websites (sorry Rod ;))? If BB or sockeye are closed, I do not think it will make any difference to ethics on the Vedder. Probably you would just see even more anglers on that river instead of the Fraser.
-
always makes me laugh when someone so closedminded tells me I can't see the truth lol ;D ;D
TH
I'm not close minded at all, I just know better...
;)
Nicole
-
I find it interesting that the argument now is the Chinook stocks and that flossing is decimating them.
For you that say that or believe that I would advise you to get your facts before you state this.
There is no concern at this time.
Sports anglers as much as they would like to think they are really productive are not.
Where's your numbers? I know that early chinook runs are small. I see anglers catching them in big numbers when before hand, these fish were next to impossible to catch. This is certainly something to think about but for DFO to handle.
Rick, bluntly put, Im surprised that someone who shows so many qualities of sportsmanship is so closed minded that he cant see snagging for what it is until a law is made that addresses it.
Rick, tell me why you dont snag fish in the Vedder? What's the difference between the Vedder and Fraser? Regardless of how you think they came, what's with the HUGE numbers of rippers in the Vedder that grows yearly?
People have been "snagging" fish for a lot longer that BB has been around !! someone mentioned the Cap river in another post and with good reason, I remember when I was 6-7 years old fishing at the cable pool with my brother , I would see 10-15 people at a time snagging big triple hooks through the water to get their fish !! even though I was young and impressionable I never tried this type of fishing !! Your claim that the Fraser is where it all comes from is ridiculous and unfounded , not obvious like you state
What's your point? Snaggers and poachers have always been and always will be. Only difference now is that many hide behind a loophole in the laws and use long leaders instead.
Good thoughts Gman. I said before, there are plenty who snag the Fraser and even the Vedder who are responsible outside the fact they're snagging. I dont dispute that. But we all CANT dispute the huge amount of abuse that's happening. Im sure there are other reasons behind this, but without doubt the sockeye fishery really got it going. I was there when it started and worked in a tackle shop. I watched things change before my eyes from the new clientele in the store to what was happening on the river.
The only standard Im after here is snagging. It's alwasy been here I know, but never to the extent it currently is.
-
:-*
-
I find it interesting that the argument now is the Chinook stocks and that flossing is decimating them.
For you that say that or believe that I would advise you to get your facts before you state this.
There is no concern at this time.
Sports anglers as much as they would like to think they are really productive are not.
Where's your numbers? I know that early chinook runs are small. I see anglers catching them in big numbers when before hand, these fish were next to impossible to catch.
Maybe you're right or maybe you are not if you refered to only anglers, but it was never impossible by menthods other than rod and reel to catch back then.
If the stock size is a concern, shut down the fishery.
If over crowding the rivers is a concern, limit the number of fishing licenses issued each year.
-
Gord I am tired of typing ;D all the questions you have just asked have already been answered in my previous posts.. I don't feel like typing them again ;)
even though we agree on some things but disagree on others I still respect your opinion and respect you as a person !! maybe one day this year I will join you on a lawnchair for the day :D
TH out !!
-
oh please give me a break.
This is so typical of these special interest preachers, they get so hung up on converting and preaching they start contridicting themselves.
2:40 just did it, perfectly
"Where's your numbers? I know that early chinook runs are small. I see anglers catching them in big numbers when before hand, these fish were next to impossible to catch. This is certainly something to think about but for DFO to handle"
In early posts you're telling people to use bar fishing techniques and they are successful for catching chinook, now you are saying that they are next impossible to catch except by BB. make up your mind, any credibility has just gone out the window with idiotic statements like that above. keep these guys ranting and raving and all they do is dig themselves a bigger hole in order to justify their one sided opinions.
-
:-*