Cut & Paste from my reply to the same Topic @ FishBC:
This whole scenario is the direct result of managing the fishery under the terms of the Pacific Salmon Treaty. In Canada, by and large the DFO has intentionally shifted the (offshore) harvest focus to US origin passage fish for the commercial fleets, and directs monitoring/sampling resources towards those fisheries nearly exclusively.
On one hand this has had the effect of offering WCVI and to an extent Frazer/Skeena fish some form of protection, and their populations do appear to have responded well (generally) over the last 6 or so years. On the other hand, the troll fleet has been literally crippled by mini-shotgun style openings, that largely don't even cover fuel expenses! These small openings are timed to keep that fleet OFF BC stocks, INTENTIONALLY, and target on US origin fish. And, since the samples that are collected are taken by onboard observers (did just that for many years, and took many of the DNA samples now in question) in those exact fisheries, guess what? aYup, 90+ % US origin is correct, as designed. The DNA analysis is correct, and reflective of the management practise of the day.
The US on the other hand has two regions fishing both their, and our fish. By and large, Washington/Oregon commercial fisheries are closely monitored, and do take a good portion of both US origin and Fraser origin fish stocks. Alaska has always been a wild card. As Washington DC NEEDS their oil reserves, they are not prepared to make a major deal out of the way that the Alaskans hit fish, regardless of origin. As a result, Alaskan fisheries, although controlled, remove far more Canadian origin fish than any other sector/region, PERIOD. They resist overtures by the PSC, for instance: when Canada imposed serious restrictions regarding coho catch, they decided (and did) proceed full speed ahead targetting those stocks. Don't expect that to change in the forseeable future.
The group that is threatening the Lawsuit obviously doesn't understand the management thrust of the PSC via the Treaty. The Canadian "hit" on US (Alaskan, Washington and Oregon origin fish, California is NOT part of the Treaty, so it's basically a free-for-all by everyone on their stocks) fish is a direct trade-off for US harvests of Canadian origin fish in Alaska and off the US Pacific Northwest. It was designed to do just that. Unless they are looking to re-write the management regime and have some BIG-TIME backing, their lawsuit is likely doomed to failure.
On the other hand, should they be successful, this will leave Canada in a most undesireable situation. It is entirely unlikely that the US harvests of Canadian fish will be reduced. Should we have to reduce our harvest of their fish, there would be no purpose in being part of the Treaty, it may just simply collapse, which would directly threaten stocks both side of the border (should we return to the free-for-all fisheries of the past). Sincerely hope that is not realized!
Nog
Author
Topic: 90% of Chinook caught in B.C. waters are U. S. Stock. Lawyers at the ready! (Read 6565 times)