Fishing with Rod Discussion Forum
Fishing in British Columbia => General Discussion => Topic started by: JustinG on July 05, 2007, 08:39:15 AM
-
Category(s): RECREATIONAL - Salmon
Subject: FN0424-RECREATIONAL - SALMON - Sockeye: Fraser River Non-tidal - Region 2 - No fishing for sockeye
Update: The non-tidal waters of the Fraser River from the CPR Bridge at Mission, BC upstream to the Highway No. 1 Bridge at Hope, BC are no fishing for sockeye.
DFO staff have observed fishing activity at Wellington and Grassy Bars and the vast majority of anglers at Wellington Bar were bar fishing while significant numbers of anglers at Grassy Bar were bottom bouncing.
Given the low forecast returns of Early Stuart sockeye and the potential for adverse migration conditions DFO requires FULL compliance from the recreational community to avoid using fishing methods that catch sockeye. The Sport Fish Advisory Committee for the Upper Fraser Valley advises that bottom bouncing is strongly discouraged during the migration of Early Stuart sockeye and while a no fishing for sockeye restriction is in place.
Recreational fishing opportunities for sockeye are anticipated on Summer run sockeye towards the end of July. DFO staff will determine these opportunities in consultation with the SFAB.
Notes:
Barbless hooks are required when fishing for salmon in tidal and non-tidal waters of British Columbia. This includes all species of fish in the Fraser River.
The term hatchery marked means a fish that has a healed scar in place of the adipose fin.
Sport anglers are encouraged to participate in the voluntary Salmon Sport Head Recovery program by labelling and submitting heads from adipose fin-clipped chinook and coho salmon. Recovery of coded-wire tags provides critical information for coast-wide stock assessment. Contact the Salmon Sport Head Recovery Program at (866) 483-9994 for further information.
Did you witness suspicious fishing activity or a violation? If so, please call the Fisheries and Ocean Canada 24-hour toll free Observe, Record, Report line at (800) 465-4336.
For the 24 hour recorded opening and closure line, call toll free at (866) 431-FISH.
Fisheries & Oceans Operations Center - FN0424
Sent July 5, 2007 at 0729
-
"DFO requires full compliance from the recreational
community to avoid using fishing methods that catch sockeye."
Couldn't they just say "no bottom bouncing on the fraser"?
I know what they "mean" but to be honest I could see certain legalese word picking lawyer type people saying they "tried" to "avoid" using other fishing methods but just couldn't help it.
-
Dennis, I agree!!!
But I think the reason they just dont say it is because to regulate gear and methods requires legislation. However, spot closures or complete can be done easily. This will be their next step. They are currently ;) not able to say NO bottom bouncing (snagging) but they can close the river and that will be the next step and skip the NO Bottom Bouncing (snagging) part entirely.
Too bad that it came to this. Would sort of be nice if Sport Anglers lead the way in conservation and cooperation!
http://www-ops2.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/xnet/content/fns/index.cfm?pg=view_notice&lang=en&DOC_ID=101794&ID=recreational
p.s. I dont mean to be ignorant or abrasive with my use of 'snagging' but it's not right to confuse this issue with bottom bouncing which is something else and still causes confusion today among new anglers or those not versed in this issue.
-
There you go. I wish they had worded the notice properly in the first place.
???
Nicole
-
hopeull folks will see which way this is heading and comply with this request, I would hate to see my Barfishing seaon ruined ;D
-
:-*
-
This morning's email from DFO.
On June 30 DFO conducted a vessel patrol and spoke to approx 16 vessels (29 anglers) at Grassy Bar, 2 of which were bar fishing, the remaining 14 were bottom bouncing. In addition, there was one person on shore bar fishing.
At Spaghetti Bar 16 vessels were checked, all of which were bottom bouncing.
An additional 9 vessels between Chilliwack and Hope were checked and all of which were bottom bouncing.
In the morning a drive past (by water) Landstrom showed approx 12 to 15 people fishing, all bottom bouncing.
On July 4th AM, 13 anglers were checked and all were bottom bouncing.
Given these reports it is going to be difficult to keep the Chinook directed fishery open. Hopefully the blitz this weekend and an enforcement presence will change some behaviour. If the reports from the w/e are not significantly improved we may be taking action on Monday to either close specific areas or put in place a "no fishing for salmon" restriction.
I am just curious if with all the number of anglers DFO observed on those two days (June 30 and July 4), DFO has a specific number of how many early run sockeyes were intercepted.
Thanks,
-
I still think they should have said that properly in the beginning...
They can't really go and close it right away, but NOW they have just cause if people don't comply.
Cheers,
Nicole
-
It would be a real shame to close the entire fishery down because of the flossing going on. But the only people we can truly blame is DFO. If they leave the door open even a crack, someone will open it. Using verbiage like strongly suggest and targeted methods leaves way too much room for people (as we are currently seeing). Until DFO makes it ILEGAL (and backs it with fines and enforcement) to floss, people will do it.
Keep in mind that probably a majority of fishers don't log on to fishingwithrod and look for these updates and dont get DFO's messages either...DFO needs to address this issue in the regulations at the beginning of a season. I bet many people buy licences just to floss the fraser so they should be addressing this issue at the beginning of the season not half way through.
-
:-*
-
Keep in mind that probably a majority of fishers don't log on to fishingwithrod and look for these updates and dont get DFO's messages either...DFO needs to address this issue in the regulations at the beginning of a season. I bet many people buy licences just to floss the fraser so they should be addressing this issue at the beginning of the season not half way through.
An important thing to keep in mind Gooey.
Not to be sour, but how many guys on this site said they're off to 'bounce' for Chinook regardless? To me the first paragraph about making this snaggery illegal is the only one that will work because there is an apparent lack of interest in compliance which probably applies accross the board from the forum goers to the ones who just buy a license for the Summer.
-
This is what we were saying time after time on the other thread and I wish more will comply in the days ahead to save our chinook fishery that we worked so hard to get open years ago.
If it closes those that continue to bb (snag) after this latest notice will be the ones to blame. :'( :o :( >:(
-
If the DFO thinks this will help the Early Stuart run, those fish are indeed in trouble. I don't know how signaling out the group that catchs by far the least amount of fish is considered scientific. :-\
-
If the DFO thinks this will help the Early Stuart run, those fish are indeed in trouble. I don't know how signaling out the group that catchs by far the least amount of fish is considered scientific. :-\
Agreed, but each group has to do their part.
It's a tough pill to swallow when nets go by, but it's by no means an excuse for sport anglers to do what they feel like either.
Actully, it's a pretty bitter pill watching that happen. >:(
-
That's not really the point troutbreath, we need to be responsible and own what we are supposed to uphold with sports fishing...
Do you dump garbage just because someone else gets away with it?
No, you do what is right cause it's your conscience you have to deal with.
Cheers,
Nicole
-
If the DFO thinks this will help the Early Stuart run, those fish are indeed in trouble. I don't know how signaling out the group that catches by far the least amount of fish is considered scientific. :-\
One also must remember changes are coming on the snag fishery that has caused this and many other of the problems these days with our sports fishing. This notice is I believe is just the beginning of what may take place this season and others that follow.
More and more people are turning away each day from participating in a fishery that does not see the fish actually make that choice, to chase and take your presentation.
As I said many times, I lobbied with other FRVSS executive members to get this sockeye fishery open and I also participated in it for several years but once I found out my hook and line was just a snagging tool to take my quarry I could not give it up quick enough.
My wish, more people will see it for what it is, give it up and return fishing to the good old days.
They were very good times and I feel they can be good again, I still have the faith. ;D ;D
-
You said it right Chris.
Those were indeed some of the best times i ever spent fishing.
We would set up camp at Bowmans for 5 days and that was the best vacation ive ever had to this day.
All the kidding around with the other barfishers and the general commoradery amongst those that you allways seen at the same bars.
Oh man i hope those days return.
Good times indeed. ;)
-
Has anyone considered that DFO's request not to floss is purely a positioning thing. What I mean by that is that DFO has a very strenuous relationship with a variety of aboriginal tribes that access the fraser runs. I imagine that having rec fishers out there flossing makes managing the these tribal fishers even more challenging. The first nations fishers probably have a low level of appreciation for the impact we have on early stuarts...they just see "us" flossing and say that they are out there fishing...so we should be too.
I don't know, its just a theory I have and considering how simple it would be just to simply ban flossing outside of a sockeye opening can't really take their request whole heartedly. While I haven't flossed the fraser outside of a sockeye opening more than a half dozen times over the past 5 years I do wish DFO would just take a definitive position on the issue and draw a line in the sand - make it clear to everyone and take away the temptation to floss.
-
I honestly just wish they would shut the entire river down for all fishing ( including Native netting ) until the early run has gone through
there should be NO fishing of any kind until then. There is plenty of time left after that for everybody to get their fill !!!
Maybe then we wouldn't have to listen and read about the same thing over and over again every year !!
TH
-
Why shut the river down when its obvious that barfishing is not a threat to the Sockeye?
-
:-*
-
It's a shame when legit fishing practices can be tossed aside without any thought just because non-legit ones are being shut down!! :-\
How's that for cutting off your nose to spite your face? Losing openings PERIOD is not that great. It's harder to get them back than to lose them!
This 'request' is going after the snagging. Dont drag the other poor methods (ultimately, sport angling itself) into it!
-
Why shut the river down when its obvious that barfishing is not a threat to the Sockeye?
If you really need to ask that question then you haven't been reading many posts lol
the way I see it there will always be arguments between supporters of both methods !! last year I caught more Sockeye Barfishing than I did BB, so did a few others... shut the puppy down and there will be nothing left to argue about and the fish will win ;)
TH
-
Rick, if this is the case, then two things.
WHAT ARE YOU USING? ;D ;D You could be rich!
And WHY do you snag them if you've figured out how to get them on a bar rod???
Im going to suggest that you and these few others are a very select few...I know someone who got two one day but that's RARE.
Scary post about other closures and concern about early Chinooks there Rod. If chinook runs are in trouble, then there's really no salmon to selectively target in the early summer!!! :o
-
I am not kidding about the numbers !! I know it is rare but two of them were caught whilst fishing with you're dad so I have proof lol
I mostly Barfished last year and I have to admit we had a hoot !! understand that I am not a diehard BB and I enjoy Barfishing and floatfishing and Flyfishing etc .. I just believe that the people that really enjoy BB should not be bashed constantly :)
if I was told I could never fish the Fraser again I would not even shed one tear
TH
-
So I guess I am going Barfing this weekend.... :D who wants to go? At least it is supposed to be a bit cooler and not 32 degrees!! ::) ;D ;D
-
Why shut the river down when its obvious that barfishing is not a threat to the Sockeye?
If you really need to ask that question then you haven't been reading many posts lol
the way I see it there will always be arguments between supporters of both methods !! last year I caught more Sockeye Barfishing than I did BB, so did a few others... shut the puppy down and there will be nothing left to argue about and the fish will win ;)
TH
Last year wasn't the year to judge the "average" sockeye catch rate while barfishing. The water was low and EXCEPTIONALLY clear(the most visibility I've ever seen in the Fraser) and it seemed the sockeye "bite" rate went up as a result. We even got some while reeling in when bouncing for them last year.. hooked "properly"(not outside the mouth). The point is, you can't compare apples(low clear conditions) to oranges(high dirty conditions) with hitting sockeye on a bar rig. Bar fishing IS exceptionally inefficient at catching sockeye.
As far as just "shutting it down", I would suggest as someone making a living at fishing the Fraser, it's a terrible idea. Write a law, then enforce it and all this will go away. Shutting the river down isn't a solution, it's a bandaid.
-
I agree johnny...as my first comment on this thread indicates, DFO needs to get off their asses and change the laws then enforce them. While we put up with a sockeye fishery and some of us participate in a chinook flossery...no wants flossing on the vedder for steelies, springs, coho, etc...DFO needs to take a stance on this for the entire recreational industry, not just the summer season on the fraser.
-
While there is lots of support for DFO to do what Gooey suggests, there is also an element in the angling ranks who are fighting hard to keep this fishery open and to "keep DFO out of their tackle boxes".
I might think if there was more consistant support from anglers things might move more quickly to fix the root of the problem instead of DFO having no way to manage it aside from closures.
I know guys want a chance at a sockeye but that shouldnt cloud the bigger picture. Keep in mind, the next two years for sockeye are going to be limited to no openings if predictions are right. If this IS the case, then what are guys fighting for? Are they fighting for nothing AND as a result, losing more at the same time?
-
That's not really the point troutbreath, we need to be responsible and own what we are supposed to uphold with sports fishing...
Do you dump garbage just because someone else gets away with it?
No, you do what is right cause it's your conscience you have to deal with.
Cheers,
Nicole
I don't dump garbage because of my conscience. I don't do it because it's the LAW! Now if the wording of the law said 'we recommend that you don't dump garbage' then I would. But seeing how it's ILLEGAL I don't do it. This notice is just as ridiculous as the other. Until it states that I am not allowed to bottom bounce and there is some sort of legal recourse against it, I will bounce till my hearts content.
-
Oh where's the logic?? Sockeye are sure an amazing fish!! They argueablly have the best fight, pound for pound, travel great distances avoiding thousands of dangers, and they also have the ability to do funny things (IMO) to people!
Tangled up, you'd litter our streets and rivers if it was lawful to do so? You'd jump off a bridge if someone just suggested you didnt? Im really sorry, but I have a tough time with the herd of sheep mentality. >:(
It's pretty obvious why they can only suggest no bottom bouncing; because they CANT enforce it! Guys who sit around waiting to be outright told will have to wait a couple more years. In the meantime, might as well hang up your snagging rods as DFO will have no choice but to shut the river down.
-
I respect many of you have a deep desire to protect the fish stocks. It is a noble goal. The only way to do so is to shut down the entire river for any group, Period. If you are concerned about the spring stock, then stop bar fishing too, not just bbing. If the natives are netting springs, what is the point to talk about fish conservation. This is all politics and personal agenda on biased fishing ethics to me. Think about the NET EFFECT of your actions.
Let's just say you stop spring-loving bbers (yes, they love this delicacy just like you bar-fishers) from getting their springs now. The NET EFFECT is that they will postpone their spring catches until sockeye season (not a bad idea with the high cost of gas). Many may want to catch a spring after they are done with 2 socs, causing much more unnecessary soc hookup and taking a spot too long. Sockeye will suffer for this. Crowding with people not willing to leave after two socs can lead to confrontation between fishers. But people who like spring delicacy will target spring whether you let them do it now or later when sockeye is thick. Think seriously, which time of the year is best to let the bb springers catch their springs w/o harming other stocks? It is the early season from June to mid July, when socs are few in the river.
Also imagine you stop bbers from even sockeye fishing or very short opening. The NET EFFECT is, most people who like sockeye delicacy will buy socs from illegal source (and we know where it is). I have not heard of one case, of all the people I know who like sockeye delicacy, that they buy from a store. Every one likes the $10-$15 price than $40-60. The net effect of a closed recreational fishery on socs is to encourage much more illegal poaching from the 'tradition' group, and they don't fish with traditional method any more. A few more nights of poaching or a few more days of defiant fishing by this group can wipe out a run. I don't even count the economic loss and job loss to all those who depend on this fishery.
As noble as your intent is, to shut down bbing for springs & sockeye for the sake of the fish can back fire in reality. The NET effect can be quite disastrous for the fish, like it or not. However, if your fanatic and zealous lobbying to shut bbing down is concealed behind personal agenda about your narrow vision on fishing ethics, envy of bb catches, or fishing utopia (like the good old days with very few fishermen around), then the net effect can be really ugly, for both the fish and your so called moral victory.
So, what is the net effect of fishermen stuck at home at those times of the year when they should be fishing? I leave the answer to some of you geniuses out there. ;D ;D
-
Good thoughts like to fish.
You have to draw a line in the sand somewhere. Having rampant snagging of our fish stocks is not going to preserve angling or angling opportunities. It has nothing to do with any personal gain. Snagging has no place in fishing. The sooner anglers stick to at least some core values the better IMO. We'll always debate fly vs gear, bait vs artificial etc, but some things NEED to be consistant.
As to the nets and people who will go buying fish, that's another issue. That's unlawful and it's people's responsibility to find a legal way to get fish to eat or to realize that life isnt always fair and they might have to go without fish.
I like money, does it make it right for me to break the law to get it? Or, can I work harder and get more. There is lots of money out there for those willing to go for it.
I like eating fish. I can go out and get one honestly, or I can go without. There is plenty of opportunity for those willing to get fish to eat.
There's no logic is letting anything happen because some will break the law to get it anyway. Not a great way to run a society!
Battle the nets and illegal sales seperately from anglers snagging fish. Mixing the two, even if a little related, make both legit issues harder to resolve.
-
So, what is the net effect of fishermen stuck at home at those times of the year when they should be fishing? I leave the answer to some of you geniuses out there. ;D ;D
I dunno! Gives you time to edit your post several times as I write my reply? :D :D :D ;D ;D ;D
-
Divorce lawyers get fat, social workers get over-worked, potato chips suppliers get a huge bottom line.... ;D ;D ;D
-
That's not really the point troutbreath, we need to be responsible and own what we are supposed to uphold with sports fishing...
Do you dump garbage just because someone else gets away with it?
No, you do what is right cause it's your conscience you have to deal with.
Cheers,
Nicole
I don't dump garbage because of my conscience. I don't do it because it's the LAW! Now if the wording of the law said 'we recommend that you don't dump garbage' then I would. But seeing how it's ILLEGAL I don't do it. This notice is just as ridiculous as the other. Until it states that I am not allowed to bottom bounce and there is some sort of legal recourse against it, I will bounce till my hearts content.
ATU,
We all know, yourself included what DFO means when they say "Selective Fishing Methods" (I'm like a few others - why don't they just say Bb'ing to make it crystal clear?) and avoid this back and forth arguing.
Any shop you walk into will tell you the same thing. Selective methods = no bb'ing with long leaders. I think for now it should be no bb'ing at all. Long or short leaders.
We need this early run to get to the reds. They already will have the nets to deal with why add the sportsman factor to the numbers killed (even though it wouldn't be a significant number). There are other ways to catch Springs.
It seems so simple to me. If we all do as requested, the Fraser will stay open for fishing. In a month from now if the numbers are there the Sockeye gong show will be open and people can choose how they want to harvest their meat.
-
"Battle the nets and illegal sales separately from anglers snagging fish. Mixing the two, even if a little related, make both legit issues harder to resolve."
The point was conservation, and what is causes of concern to the fish stocks. I don't think thats too confusing an issue or a little related. I just see this leading to more poaching of fish. There are people who I work with who never fish, yet make sure they have a freezer full of sockeye for $10 bucks a piece and don't care about the stocks or understand the issue at all. They just like nice cheep sockeye and have been buying them for many years from the same spot. Now people who can't fish for them will probably go the same route. I didn't used to buy a tidal license some years because of all the closures on the lower Fraser, and thats money you would hope/think would go toward the fishery. I doubt that now. The fuzzy logic of closing the fishery to sports fishing usually is more political than analytical.
I hope people do take to bar fishing as requested as they aren't asking too much from us anyway. I will be.
-
I don't dump garbage because of my conscience. I don't do it because it's the LAW! Now if the wording of the law said 'we recommend that you don't dump garbage' then I would.
Really? Ouch!
:(
Nicole
-
You hit the Nail right on the head LTF !!! it is not possible to argue with you're logic... allthough I know of a few that will try simply because they have blinders on !!
TH
-
I respect many of you have a deep desire to protect the fish stocks. It is a noble goal. The only way to do so is to shut down the entire river for any group, Period. If you are concerned about the spring stock, then stop bar fishing too, not just bbing. If the natives are netting springs, what is the point to talk about fish conservation. This is all politics and personal agenda on biased fishing ethics to me. Think about the NET EFFECT of your actions.
Let's just say you stop spring-loving bbers (yes, they love this delicacy just like you bar-fishers) from getting their springs now. The NET EFFECT is that they will postpone their spring catches until sockeye season (not a bad idea with the high cost of gas). Many may want to catch a spring after they are done with 2 socs, causing much more unnecessary soc hookup and taking a spot too long. Sockeye will suffer for this. Crowding with people not willing to leave after two socs can lead to confrontation between fishers. But people who like spring delicacy will target spring whether you let them do it now or later when sockeye is thick. Think seriously, which time of the year is best to let the bb springers catch their springs w/o harming other stocks? It is the early season from June to mid July, when socs are few in the river.
Also imagine you stop bbers from even sockeye fishing or very short opening. The NET EFFECT is, most people who like sockeye delicacy will buy socs from illegal source (and we know where it is). I have not heard of one case, of all the people I know who like sockeye delicacy, that they buy from a store. Every one likes the $10-$15 price than $40-60. The net effect of a closed recreational fishery on socs is to encourage much more illegal poaching from the 'tradition' group, and they don't fish with traditional method any more. A few more nights of poaching or a few more days of defiant fishing by this group can wipe out a run. I don't even count the economic loss and job loss to all those who depend on this fishery.
As noble as your intent is, to shut down bbing for springs & sockeye for the sake of the fish can back fire in reality. The NET effect can be quite disastrous for the fish, like it or not. However, if your fanatic and zealous lobbying to shut bbing down is concealed behind personal agenda about your narrow vision on fishing ethics, envy of bb catches, or fishing utopia (like the good old days with very few fishermen around), then the net effect can be really ugly, for both the fish and your so called moral victory.
So, what is the net effect of fishermen stuck at home at those times of the year when they should be fishing? I leave the answer to some of you geniuses out there. ;D ;D
Good one. Thanks for sharing your thought.
-
Thanks for the support. Thinking ahead, it is very likely our way of fishing will be affected by the fate of the Fraser fishery. If sockeye fishing is stopped, then the massive loss of license revenue will force DFO to cut funding on hatchery stocking programs. This will mean a lot less fish for all to catch. If this happens to coho & steelhead, what do you think potential poachers will do to the wild stocks? If they fish for days and not having much success because of the lack of stocked fish, what do you think when they luck out on a wild stock? Of course,Bonk! It is only human nature. Unfortunately a lot of newer fishers have not learned to care about fish stock like some of us guys who have been around a while. Their lack of skill to catch fish will be much worsened when there are not enough fish to fish with, so the temptation to retain a wild fish will be greatly amplified.
What about COs? I don't know where their salaries come from to say for sure. If this comes from the same pot as the license revenue, then they will be laid off in drones. You think they will fire some head honchos to save money? Don't kid yourself. The axe will fall on the field staff, newly hired COs. Then we will complain why no enforcement for all the violations.
This fishery issue and its funding are a intricate web interrelated, much like the food chain in eco system. There is no single cause & effect there. One wrong move, who knows what bad thing will follow? I say, keep the status quote. ;D
-
So we have no choice but to continue down the dark path. ::) ::)
Before the snagging was popular things were ok. Guys caught fish. The hatcheries were operating just as well or as poorly, depending on your view, as they do today. We still dont have enough CO's. We have LESS now than before the snagging started. So many of these 'bottom bouncers' who only use this method dont buy licenses anyway so dont try to pass it off as if DFO's going to cut things lose if license sales drop. Province wide, sales are down and continuing to drop anyway.
Sure, there's some economical benefit, but since when did money make things right? This path you want to travel is going to result in fishing closures and less fish quite shortly. How will that help all the benefits you talked about? It was hard enough to have openings and opportunity before. Having the gong show isnt going to brighten our image as we get closed down.
"Human nature" is a weak argument. Im not about to sacrifice sport angling just because some people are going to buy salmon unlawfully or whack a wild steelhead. Im sure it will stop a few from buying sockeye, but in the big picture it wont make a difference. FN guys did rip-roaring sales even during rec sockeye openings if who I talked to is any evidence. Guys bonk wild steelhead all the time.
Why not stop rolling over for criminals and poachers and do something about them? Or are these people just convenient to hide behind while you snag what ever your weakness might be at the moment... ;)
I think we're just going to wait and see. Changes are in the wind. ;)
-
We shouldn't be looking at the socks as a means for revenue. I wouldn't care if they shut the Fraser down to Sturgeon only. Can't catch socks sturgy fishin. ;D If the stocks are on a drastic decline protect them
-
I think Gord; what everyone is trying to get across is that no matter how many people BB , it is the nets that are causing the real problem... you shut down the river to BB and you will still have the same problems !! I believe that even without flossers , until you get those nets out of the river you are always going to have declining numbers !!! I honestly believe that banning one way of fishing is just a way for DFO to show that they are trying to do something, paint rotten wood and it will look pretty for a couple of weeks... but in the end you still have rot!!
TH
-
I think Gord; what everyone is trying to get across is that no matter how many people BB , it is the nets that are causing the real problem... you shut down the river to BB and you will still have the same problems !! I believe that even without flossers , until you get those nets out of the river you are always going to have declining numbers !!! I honestly believe that banning one way of fishing is just a way for DFO to show that they are trying to do something, paint rotten wood and it will look pretty for a couple of weeks... but in the end you still have rot!!
TH
Rick, I`d like to see you post some evidence to your accusations that First Nations nets are causing the real problems. I believe the B.C., international commercial and poaching fishing fleets salmon harvest numbers are exponentially higher than the First Nations wimpy numbers. The First Nations are just easily visable to everybody so they are an easy target.
Habit degradation and destruction due to logging, mining, industrialization, urbanization, pollution, hydro electric generation, all play major roles in the decline of salmon stocks as well.
I get frustrated and envious with First Nation privilege's in this country but I also see that I have to be realistic in not solely laying the blame on them for this problem. Show me the evidence and I will agree that First Nations are the ones to blame, until then it`s still the commercial fleet and all the other things I mentioned that are the salmons worst nightmare. The least of the salmons problems in my books are recreational fishers and First Nations, perhaps they are the salmons best allies.
Cheers
Nuggy
-
:-*
-
And Ive never disputed that for a second Rick. Check my posts and the letter's Ive written in regards to FN overfishing.
But this ISNT about how many fish are being taken. Sure, this is changing with concerns about the Chinook and low sockeye returns combined with DFO's requests. The root of the issue with this snagging is still what it's doing to Sport Angling. Anyone can see the problems. Check out the Keith Wilson Bridge starting in October right through steelhead season. Look at the garbage and abuse to the resource. Is THIS what we want for angling? Is THIS worth all the 'benefits' like to fish mentioned should they be such or not? Now I realize that when I talk about this snagging Im talking about the worst of the bunch. While this 'worst' is a very high %, these individuals are not on this site or at least are not engaged in the issue. Most of the guys in support of the snagging on here are happy to get their fish, clean up their mess and go home. While I think they are part of the problem and not the solution, I do acknowledge the right things done as it's only fair to do so.
I support DFO's and angler's efforts in regards to this issue because in the end it wont really matter if there are fish to catch or not if we're going to have a free-for-all.
p.s. once again, no offence at my use of 'snagging'. I realize it offends some, but the use of 'bottom bouncing' rubs me the wrong way too as I think it's inaccurate and tarnishes a legit angling method!
-
And Ive never disputed that for a second Rick. Check my posts and the letter's Ive written in regards to FN overfishing.
But this ISNT about how many fish are being taken. Sure, this is changing with concerns about the Chinook and low sockeye returns combined with DFO's requests. The root of the issue with this snagging is still what it's doing to Sport Angling. Anyone can see the problems. Check out the Keith Wilson Bridge starting in October right through steelhead season. Look at the garbage and abuse to the resource. Is THIS what we want for angling? Is THIS worth all the 'benefits' like to fish mentioned should they be such or not? Now I realize that when I talk about this snagging Im talking about the worst of the bunch. While this 'worst' is a very high %, these individuals are not on this site or at least are not engaged in the issue. Most of the guys in support of the snagging on here are happy to get their fish, clean up their mess and go home. While I think they are part of the problem and not the solution, I do acknowledge the right things done as it's only fair to do so.
I support DFO's and angler's efforts in regards to this issue because in the end it wont really matter if there are fish to catch or not if we're going to have a free-for-all.
p.s. once again, no offence at my use of 'snagging'. I realize it offends some, but the use of 'bottom bouncing' rubs me the wrong way too as I think it's inaccurate and tarnishes a legit angling method!
Gord, I have been sitting here watching all of this. It has become apparent to me over the course of this thread that you would much rather worry about a fishing techinque than worry about the declining fish stocks. I really hope this is wrong, but... look at the bright side, by the time you get everyone to fish the way you think they should, there will be no fish to fish for because your little group was busy trying to shut down flossing and not the netting. ;) SO good job on that.
Rick, I`d like to see you post some evidence to your accusations that First Nations nets are causing the real problems. I believe the B.C., international commercial and poaching fishing fleets salmon harvest numbers are exponentially higher than the First Nations wimpy numbers. The First Nations are just easily visable to everybody so they are an easy target.
Habit degradation and destruction due to logging, mining, industrialization, urbanization, pollution, hydro electric generation, all play major roles in the decline of salmon stocks as well.
I get frustrated and envious with First Nation privilege's in this country but I also see that I have to be realistic in not solely laying the blame on them for this problem. Show me the evidence and I will agree that First Nations are the ones to blame, until then it`s still the commercial fleet and all the other things I mentioned that are the salmons worst nightmare. The least of the salmons problems in my books are recreational fishers and First Nations, perhaps they are the salmons best allies.
Cheers
Nuggy
Nuggy there was a post up here somewhere that had all the count numbers for the last 4 years. I can't remember where it is, so if someone could help with that. You may be real surprised with the numbers. Keep in mind as well, the some "books" on number by some groups are not always truthfull. Your proof is in here and it was plain to see what the trend was. The natives are holding there own.
-
Fraser river Sockeye harvest figures from 200-2004. From the PSC website.
2004 total catch: 2,259,700 sockeye caught
1,326,400 commercial 59% of total catch
615,200 first nations 27% of total catch
52,000 recreational 2% of total catch
2003 total catch: 1,889,000 sockeye caught
1,043,000 commercial 55% of total catch
781,000 first nations 41% of total catch
65,000 recreational 3% of total catch
2002 total catch: 3,617,000 sockeye caught
2,218,000 commercial 61% of total catch
1,155,000 First nations 32% of total catch
126,000 recreational 3% of total catch
2001 total catch: 1,197,000 sockeye caught
297,000 commercial 25% of total catch
848,000 first nations 71% of total catch
34,000 recreational 3% of total catch
2000 total catch: 1,872,000 sockeye caught
955,000 commercial 51% of total catch
848,000 first nations 47% of total catch
24,000 recreational 1% of total catch
-
Gord, I have been sitting here watching all of this. It has become apparent to me over the course of this thread that you would much rather worry about a fishing techinque than worry about the declining fish stocks. I really hope this is wrong, but... look at the bright side, by the time you get everyone to fish the way you think they should, there will be no fish to fish for because your little group was busy trying to shut down flossing and not the netting. SO good job on that.
Hey Dave I was thinking the exact same thing. It seems he is only interested in one thing and that has nothing to do with the fish
-
Fraser river Sockeye harvest figures from 200-2004. From the PSC website.
2004 total catch: 2,259,700 sockeye caught
1,326,400 commercial 59% of total catch
615,200 first nations 27% of total catch
52,000 recreational 2% of total catch
2003 total catch: 1,889,000 sockeye caught
1,043,000 commercial 55% of total catch
781,000 first nations 41% of total catch
65,000 recreational 3% of total catch
2002 total catch: 3,617,000 sockeye caught
2,218,000 commercial 61% of total catch
1,155,000 First nations 32% of total catch
126,000 recreational 3% of total catch
2001 total catch: 1,197,000 sockeye caught
297,000 commercial 25% of total catch
848,000 first nations 71% of total catch
34,000 recreational 3% of total catch
2000 total catch: 1,872,000 sockeye caught
955,000 commercial 51% of total catch
848,000 first nations 47% of total catch
24,000 recreational 1% of total catch
Well doesn't that about sum it up...
::)
-
And Ive never disputed that for a second Rick. Check my posts and the letter's Ive written in regards to FN overfishing.
And Im starting to think some of your reading abilities are certainly more selective than your bottom snagging ability!! (see above) :P :P :P :P :P :P
Not to nit-pick, what have the guys who question my priorities done in regards to this themselves?
Ill say it one last time. If we're going to have a total gong snagging show, is saving angling opportunities going to be worth it? Ill fight to the end regardless (to conserve the fish) but at the end of the day, we need to have something to come home to. I sure hope it isnt the snagging meat festival we currently have and that's why Im also devoted to preserving at least some aspect of angling.
-
Just stating a view of what I have noticed Gord. No reason to start flingin.....
And what have I done? Everything I have the time and resources to do. Including educating people on how to effectively "bottom snag" so they can spend more time cleaning up after others or going home when their "snaggery" is done for the day. ;) Along with other things.....
-
I think Gord; what everyone is trying to get across is that no matter how many people BB , it is the nets that are causing the real problem... you shut down the river to BB and you will still have the same problems !! I believe that even without flossers , until you get those nets out of the river you are always going to have declining numbers !!! I honestly believe that banning one way of fishing is just a way for DFO to show that they are trying to do something, paint rotten wood and it will look pretty for a couple of weeks... but in the end you still have rot!!
TH
Rick, I`d like to see you post some evidence to your accusations that First Nations nets are causing the real problems. I believe the B.C., international commercial and poaching fishing fleets salmon harvest numbers are exponentially higher than the First Nations wimpy numbers. The First Nations are just easily visable to everybody so they are an easy target.
Cheers
Nuggy
Can you please point out where I ever said that it was only the First Nations nets that are the problem !!! All nets cause the problem
before you write something that accusing , read the post first !!
TH
-
Fraser river Sockeye harvest figures from 200-2004. From the PSC website.
2004 total catch: 2,259,700 sockeye caught
1,326,400 commercial 59% of total catch
615,200 first nations 27% of total catch
52,000 recreational 2% of total catch
2003 total catch: 1,889,000 sockeye caught
1,043,000 commercial 55% of total catch
781,000 first nations 41% of total catch
65,000 recreational 3% of total catch
2002 total catch: 3,617,000 sockeye caught
2,218,000 commercial 61% of total catch
1,155,000 First nations 32% of total catch
126,000 recreational 3% of total catch
2001 total catch: 1,197,000 sockeye caught
297,000 commercial 25% of total catch
848,000 first nations 71% of total catch
34,000 recreational 3% of total catch
2000 total catch: 1,872,000 sockeye caught
955,000 commercial 51% of total catch
848,000 first nations 47% of total catch
24,000 recreational 1% of total catch
Dave, are these figures strictly for Fraser River and Tributary salmon catches? If so where are the numbers from the salt chuck?
The Salt Chuck is where the vast majority of salmon harvest takes place and Fraser River fish are caught by commercial fleets in Washington State, British Columbia, Alaska and maybe even Russia and Oregon for all I know. And don`t forget the boats that lay out those nets in the ocean that are a mile long and slaughter everything in there path.
According to DFO stats above all user groups in the Fraser River and tributaries are having an impact on the resource. In this five year chart the commercial fleet took 1,330, 200 more fish than First Nations. On an yearly basis the commercial fleet in the Fraser River takes an extra 266,040 more than the First Nation totals. In one year the extra 266,000 sockeye that the commercial fleet catches above First Nations totals is equal to almost 5 years of the recreational harvest number combined.
Again this proves my point that the commercial harvest is greater than First Nations, and this is only in the Fraser River. Bring on the ocean harvest numbers and let`s se who`s really harvesting the majority of salmon.
We all have an impact on the resource, the blame game is getting crusty. Get out and do something if you are so concerned.
Cheers
Nuggy
-
I think Gord; what everyone is trying to get across is that no matter how many people BB , it is the nets that are causing the real problem... you shut down the river to BB and you will still have the same problems !! I believe that even without flossers , until you get those nets out of the river you are always going to have declining numbers !!! I honestly believe that banning one way of fishing is just a way for DFO to show that they are trying to do something, paint rotten wood and it will look pretty for a couple of weeks... but in the end you still have rot!!
TH
Rick, I`d like to see you post some evidence to your accusations that First Nations nets are causing the real problems. I believe the B.C., international commercial and poaching fishing fleets salmon harvest numbers are exponentially higher than the First Nations wimpy numbers. The First Nations are just easily visable to everybody so they are an easy target.
Cheers
Nuggy
Can you please point out where I ever said that it was only the First Nations nets that are the problem !!! All nets cause the problem
before you write something that accusing , read the post first !!
TH
Ummm, how about the first sentence where you say it is the nets that are causing the real problem... you shut down the river to BB and you will still have the same problems !!
-
I think Gord; what everyone is trying to get across is that no matter how many people BB , it is the nets that are causing the real problem... you shut down the river to BB and you will still have the same problems !! I believe that even without flossers , until you get those nets out of the river you are always going to have declining numbers !!! I honestly believe that banning one way of fishing is just a way for DFO to show that they are trying to do something, paint rotten wood and it will look pretty for a couple of weeks... but in the end you still have rot!!
TH
Rick, I`d like to see you post some evidence to your accusations that First Nations nets are causing the real problems. I believe the B.C., international commercial and poaching fishing fleets salmon harvest numbers are exponentially higher than the First Nations wimpy numbers. The First Nations are just easily visable to everybody so they are an easy target.
Cheers
Nuggy
Can you please point out where I ever said that it was only the First Nations nets that are the problem !!! All nets cause the problem
before you write something that accusing , read the post first !!
TH
Ummm, how about the first sentence where you say it is the nets that are causing the real problem... you shut down the river to BB and you will still have the same problems !!
Ummm how about I nevered mentioned First Nations in that sentence !!! when you figure out what is going on let me know... seriously what are you talking about ??? re read the sentence and tell me where I specified any race
-
I second Rick. There is no mentioning of whose nets they belong. He only thinks nets are the problem because the stats show that the two net-based groups are taking an average of 98% of the fish. Ouch! Why are we bonking each other non-stop for our meager 2% when it is split among tens of thousands of hard working recreational fishermen? By the way, I have no problem pointing the finger at the natives. The official record shows that they are holding their own with the commies. What about the unofficial record? Rod & Chris had done a report on the native fleet operating at Lower Fraser area. They found that there was hardly any monitoring or recording of catches. Many of us also have seen nets all over the river when there were no openings. Chris once reported that he counted hundreds (700-800?) of nets all the way to Boston Bar when he made a helicopter trip to survey the native nets. These catches were never counted or monitored. I am not opposed to their claim of needing fish for traditional purpose. But we cannot be blind to the greed factor by all the illegal sales of fish. The real threat to fish stock is that this group tends to defy DFO on closures, like they are doing now on the Stuarts. DFO must need such a large user group to behave reasonably in adhering to closures. Without that, there is no guarantee that a sensitive stock can be vastly overfished to the point of being wiped out. >:(
Some great points from Liketofish. I second Rick. His logics is so plain and true. To counter his logics really reflect a person's shortness of vision. If you care about fish stocks, think again.
Now be kind to your fellow fishermen. They and their 2% are not the group to hammer on when preserving fish stock is your goal. :)
-
Rodney, were those your fish? What's the point of the pictures?
-
I think Gord; what everyone is trying to get across is that no matter how many people BB , it is the nets that are causing the real problem... you shut down the river to BB and you will still have the same problems !! I believe that even without flossers , until you get those nets out of the river you are always going to have declining numbers !!! I honestly believe that banning one way of fishing is just a way for DFO to show that they are trying to do something, paint rotten wood and it will look pretty for a couple of weeks... but in the end you still have rot!!
TH
Rick, I`d like to see you post some evidence to your accusations that First Nations nets are causing the real problems. I believe the B.C., international commercial and poaching fishing fleets salmon harvest numbers are exponentially higher than the First Nations wimpy numbers. The First Nations are just easily visable to everybody so they are an easy target.
Habit degradation and destruction due to logging, mining, industrialization, urbanization, pollution, hydro electric generation, all play major roles in the decline of salmon stocks as well.
I get frustrated and envious with First Nation privilege's in this country but I also see that I have to be realistic in not solely laying the blame on them for this problem. Show me the evidence and I will agree that First Nations are the ones to blame, until then it`s still the commercial fleet and all the other things I mentioned that are the salmons worst nightmare. The least of the salmons problems in my books are recreational fishers and First Nations, perhaps they are the salmons best allies.
Cheers
Nuggy
A very good point and I agree 100%.It's what you don;t see that is the major problem. I saw the poaching last year on the fraser.
Hotrod
-
Ok Rick, so you didn`t specify First Nations nets, but thanks for NOT clarifying what you meant when you replied to me. You really seem to be pi$$ed or you are just having fun arguing.
This thread was started to inform people of the number of flosser/snaggers that were not complying with the DFO special request. These people not complying have know jeopardized the rest of us who want an opportunity at fishing this portion of the Fraser River at this time of the year.
If I am poor and hungry I will use any means I can to catch a fish and feed my family. I am not poor and hungry and I can buy fish at my supermarket for a cheap price. If you want to harvest fish why not just go get a set net our some dynamite. Why would you be so inefficient as to waste a whole day of your time, gas and fishing equipment cost to harvest your fish slowly one at a time throughout the day and season?
Cheers
Nuggy
-
Just stating a view of what I have noticed Gord. No reason to start flingin.....
And I shared the same (different view, same generous sharing tho). ;)
I see we're stuck on the pointing fingers game and ignoring my clear statement that I also share a deep concern with net overfishing but dont think it should be used to justify snagging.
I wouldnt continue to hide behind the nets and poachers guys. Carpet's going to get yanked right out from underneath you! The nets will remain but sport angling...who knows. They wouldnt be considering angling closure in the Fraser if it wasnt for the snagging and that's just going to be the beginning. Sure, there's logic in the net's abuse of the river; I dont argue with that statement at all. But it does not tie in AT ALL with sport anglers snagging fish unless you're looking for a scapegoat which logically, seems to be pretty much the case to me. ;)
-
Why would you be so inefficient as to waste a whole day of your time, gas and fishing equipment cost to harvest your fish slowly one at a time throughout the day and season?
Cheers
Nuggy
Because its 'legal' and the easiest way to catch a fish. Dynamite and nets are not legal. Im not saying anyone here would do this, with exception to like to fish perhaps ;D , but if there was a way to expolit a law which would allow the use of dynamite or a net to get fish, MANY would do it. And, we'd see the same arguement...
"My 5 sticks of dynamite do NOTHING compared to big drift nets who take up 38% of the total run when I only take 5%...and Im using 6 inch sticks that when tossed in certain water, I only get springs..." ;D :D ;D
Can you see it? I sure can!
Oh, around and around we go. Where does it stop? Nobody knows! :D :D
-
Have fun everyone with your petty arguing back and forth, I'm off to have a fabulously fun time bbing for some springs and enjoying the company of my friends. Don't bother asking for pics as they'll go up on the wall where all the other beautiful fish pics are. Any one with a brain can see where the real problem lies and its not with a small group of bbers. Shutting down one group to suit your own purpose will not solve the solution but alas, I am sure you know whats best. I'll not argue and will be on my Merry way and leave the bickering to those who know everything. One reason why I rarely post on this site. Have a great day everyone, I know we will. :D
-
Ok Rick, so you didn`t specify First Nations nets, but thanks for NOT clarifying what you meant when you replied to me. You really seem to be pi$$ed or you are just having fun arguing.
This thread was started to inform people of the number of flosser/snaggers that were not complying with the DFO special request. These people not complying have know jeopardized the rest of us who want an opportunity at fishing this portion of the Fraser River at this time of the year.
If I am poor and hungry I will use any means I can to catch a fish and feed my family. I am not poor and hungry and I can buy fish at my supermarket for a cheap price. If you want to harvest fish why not just go get a set net our some dynamite. Why would you be so inefficient as to waste a whole day of your time, gas and fishing equipment cost to harvest your fish slowly one at a time throughout the day and season?
Cheers
Nuggy
I was a lil po'd because the way you wrote you're reply made me sound like I am racist towards First Nations... this is not the case and I wanted to clarify that....
-
I'm off to have a fabulously fun time bbing for some springs and enjoying the company of my friends. Don't bother asking for pics as they'll go up on the wall where all the other beautiful fish pics are. Any one with a brain can see where the real problem lies and its not with a small group of bbers. Shutting down one group to suit your own purpose will not solve the solution but alas, I am sure you know whats best. I'll not argue and will be on my Merry way and leave the bickering to those who know everything. One reason why I rarely post on this site. Have a great day everyone, I know we will. :D
A perfect example of the problem ::)
-
Ok Rick, so you didn`t specify First Nations nets, but thanks for NOT clarifying what you meant when you replied to me. You really seem to be pi$$ed or you are just having fun arguing.
This thread was started to inform people of the number of flosser/snaggers that were not complying with the DFO special request. These people not complying have know jeopardized the rest of us who want an opportunity at fishing this portion of the Fraser River at this time of the year.
If I am poor and hungry I will use any means I can to catch a fish and feed my family. I am not poor and hungry and I can buy fish at my supermarket for a cheap price. If you want to harvest fish why not just go get a set net our some dynamite. Why would you be so inefficient as to waste a whole day of your time, gas and fishing equipment cost to harvest your fish slowly one at a time throughout the day and season?
Cheers
Nuggy
I was a lil po'd because the way you wrote you're reply made me sound like I am racist towards First Nations... this is not the case and I wanted to clarify that....
My apologies to you Rick, it wasn`t my intention to portray you as a racist towards First Nations in any way shape or form.
On that note I think I`m gonna have to bow out of some threads here.
Cheers
Dave
-
After reading so many posts from the anti gang, it is begining to dawn on me their tactics - ignore all the points from the bbers because they don't have good enough countering points except repeating the offensive term 'snagging' or 'snaggers' a million time. This is the same strategy used by PETA to shame people who fish, and do it enough time that it is beginning to have a brain-washing effect. They are now targeting kids, the young & uninformed about the cruelty of fishing by shaming them. No difference here in strategy. All these extreme idealogy views is really about the stonger minds imposing their views on the weaker, less-informed, or less-educated masses by repeated propaganda from influential authoratative honchos. Why not let people choose their methods of fishing allowed by DFO and every one fish in peace? After you push your points of argument, people can make their own decision to follow or not. But to add more pressure by the use of shaming, labelling or name-calling strategy repeatedly is totally uncalled for in a free society. Their relentless lobby for exclusion of the majority of fishers unless you bend to their way is totally undemocratic. That bar-fishing requires a boat in order to have a meaningful spot to fish amounts to further exclusion even for their converts. All that hazzle & disputes for the 2%?.
Their narrow definition of snagging is not even supported by DFO's own action. Liketofish's earlier post stating that the intent of flossing, by targeting the mouth, makes it clear that flossing is not snagging according to DFO's rule and that is why no one is ticketed. When they fail to explain DFO's acceptance of flossing, they summarily brush it off as 'us hiding behind DFO or legality'. I think perpetuating this thread only serve their purpose of repetition of their shaming strategy. They are not interested in genuine argument, but repeated shaming and defamification by labelling and name-calling. Even lies or untruths repeated 100 times will convert some believers. Winning points with this approach is a real shame. What a shameful strategy to do it to your fellow fishermen who only harvest the meager 2%. They paid high cost for fishing and sweat for their fish to bless their family, and still get hammered by people who holds extreme and narrow view about how fishing should be. Pathetic.
I am off this thread now, like Athezone, to stop this insanity. Fish in peace guys - but I am beginning to think many anti guys just fish in front of the screen. Why? Because there is not even one fishing report by the anti-gang on their 'legitimate' spring catches. Is their method really that ineffective or just some don't fish at all but pretending they do? ;D
My apology if my last post on this thread offend some of you in the anti camp, but considering the offensive shaming terms thrown at us through out this thread, it is peanut in return. :) If the anti camp thinks that their view deserves more respect because of their years of experiences, then show some class. Stay away from the shaming strategy and debate the points with respect. If you have no anwer to some points, say so respectfully without mentioning the 'snag' words non-stop.
Cheer and good fishing.
-
After reading so many posts from the anti gang, it is begining to dawn on me their tactics - ignore all the points from the bbers because they don't have good enough countering points except repeating the offensive term 'snagging' or 'snaggers' a million time. This is the same strategy used by PETA to shame people who fish, and do it enough time that it is beginning to have a brain-washing effect. They are now targeting kids, the young & uninformed about the cruelty of fishing by shaming them. No difference here in strategy.
Their narrow definition of snagging is not even supported by DFO's own action. Liketofish's earlier post stating that the intent of flossing, by targeting the mouth, makes it clear that flossing is not snagging according to DFO's rule and that is why no one is ticketed. When they fail to explain DFO's acceptance of flossing, they summarily brush it off as 'us hiding behind DFO or legality'. I think perpetuating this thread only serve their purpose of repetition of their shaming strategy. They are not interested in genuine argument, but repeated shaming and defamification by labelling and name-calling. Winning points with this approach is a real shame. What a shameful strategy to do it to your fellow fishermen who only harvest the meager 2%. They paid high cost for fishing and sweat for their fish to bless their family, and still get hammered by people who holds extreme and narrow view about how fishing should be. Pathetic.
I am off this thread now, like Athezone, to stop this insanity. Fish in peace guys - but I am beginning to think many anti guys just fish in front of the screen. Why? Because there is not even one fishing report by the anti-gang on their 'legitimate' spring catches. Is their method really that ineffective or just some don't fish at all but pretending they do? ;D
Steelhawk, the Anti Gang as you call them have a combined angling experience of probably hundreds of years. Many of the anti gang were the pioneers of a movement to open up retention for certain species of salmon for recreational anglers on the Fraser River. When I was young there was no retention of pinks, sockeye or chum in non tidal Fraser River and maybe even chinook closures. It is thanks to these folks who you think are piling up against you that you have an opportunity to retain any salmon at all in the non tidal Fraser River. I think you may be the one Steelhawk who reads the threads a little closer and learn your history a little better.
As for reports on chinook catches and what not....I don`t file reports any more for my own reasons.
Cheers
Nuggy
-
I missed the day of class where they taught the part about fisherman having to be ethical. I thought the point of fishing was to catch a fish by any means legal. Don't other 'sports' have rules in place, yet some teams or individuals go to the edge of the ethical earth to help themselves or their team win. Look at the Anaheim Ducks style of play. They intimidate their opponents with a pugilistic style of hockey and seem to be doing pretty well when it comes to hoisting their salmon..........I mean cup. Other coaches in the league (let's call them elitist/anti fighters) complain and name call till their hearts content, while B. Burke tells them to cry him a river. Nothing in the rules states what they/we do is wrong/illegal so suck it up and enjoy your day on the water, and fish by whatever means you can within the letter of the LAW!
-
I missed the day of class where they taught the part about fisherman having to be ethical. I thought the point of fishing was to catch a fish by any means legal. Don't other 'sports' have rules in place, yet some teams or individuals go to the edge of the ethical earth to help themselves or their team win. Look at the Anaheim Ducks style of play. They intimidate their opponents with a pugilistic style of hockey and seem to be doing pretty well when it comes to hoisting their salmon..........I mean cup. Other coaches in the league (let's call them elitist/anti fighters) complain and name call till their hearts content, while B. Burke tells them to cry him a river. Nothing in the rules states what they/we do is wrong/illegal so suck it up and enjoy your day on the water, and fish by whatever means you can within the letter of the LAW!
Sure that may be the point of fishing to some. To allot of us we consider fishing a sport. Flossing a fish is not a sport. Its hooking a fish that did not bite the presentation making it not sporting. Netting and flossing are even when it comes to sporting.
What makes me laugh is seeing those hero shots from people when they floss a big spring. Like they actually did something sporting to catch it. ::)
-
same ol' topic, year after year...BORING AND WASTE OF TIME
don't drink and drive....don't speed.....don't do drugs....blah, blah, blah... do what you want and if you get caught doing something wrong...pay the piper...
For some of you 'over the top' conservatives, check the history of the lower mainland....bottom bouncing or jigging the bottom have been done since 1952....nothing new. the difference now, the amount of people doing it.
until they change the legislation, this topic will never die.....just like the 'go green' movement. it's personal choice. sad, but brutally true.
-
HAHAH! Numerous good points made by pro-snaggers to which we ignore Steel Hawk??? :D :D :D (Sorry, but I did smile)
1) It's legal
2) The nets take more
That about all the points made to which many at least addressed if not shared some good thoughts in regards to them AND added many others.
Acceptance from DFO on this snagging??? Hmmm, I wonder why they've asked for SELECTIVE methods, noted that due to BOTTOM BOUNCERS (snaggers) they are not pleased with non-compliance and that they are considering river CLOSURE. This and the fact that the 'movement' towards regulating this snaggery is being fairly well recieved tells me otherwise. Wait a couple years as that's how long it takes to bring in gear restrictions. They wont waste their time trying to charge snaggers who 'target the mouth' because it's too hard to prove. But they will make it so it's harder to do it.
The only selectiveness Ive seen here is not the snagging ability but what some choose to read!
Blaydrnr, I find it good to share myself. Im not here thinking Im changing the ones who think otherwise. Im sharing my view and letting anyone who wants to make their own decision. You talking about bottom bouncing or snagging? (see the problem calling it what it isnt?) Bottom bouncing to get a BITE is an old tatic. You're right, the snagging bottom bouncing, while WRONG in my books, is a bigger problem as result of the numbers doing it. Why 1952 btw?
-
Well I'm back, my bro caught a 30LBer, and I caught a 24 LBer, and the ladies caught nothing but was a great time all around. Lots of springs caught, did'nt see one sockeye caught. Have fun everyone, we did. Its midnite and time to hit the hay, Live Well, Laugh Often, Love Always.
-
Propagada tactics by the same people every year. :-\
Hotrod
-
I missed the day of class where they taught the part about fisherman having to be ethical. I thought the point of fishing was to catch a fish by any means legal. Don't other 'sports' have rules in place, yet some teams or individuals go to the edge of the ethical earth to help themselves or their team win. Look at the Anaheim Ducks style of play. They intimidate their opponents with a pugilistic style of hockey and seem to be doing pretty well when it comes to hoisting their salmon..........I mean cup. Other coaches in the league (let's call them elitist/anti fighters) complain and name call till their hearts content, while B. Burke tells them to cry him a river. Nothing in the rules states what they/we do is wrong/illegal so suck it up and enjoy your day on the water, and fish by whatever means you can within the letter of the LAW!
Sure that may be the point of fishing to some. To allot of us we consider fishing a sport. Flossing a fish is not a sport. Its hooking a fish that did not bite the presentation making it not sporting. Netting and flossing are even when it comes to sporting.
What makes me laugh is seeing those hero shots from people when they floss a big spring. Like they actually did something sporting to catch it. ::)
So who decided it was 'SPORTfishing' instead of just fishing? I agree that netting and flossing could possibly be pooled together. You'll never see me post about a fish I caught well bb'ing. I, unlike some others know that it is not my skill and expertise that afforded me the ability to enjoy a sockeye feast every year, but a matter of luck of the draw and run size. For the life of me I just can't see myself sitting in a law chair waiting for the bell to ring on a bar rod. It just doesn't seem like fishing to me.
-
For the life of me I just can't see myself sitting in a law chair waiting for the bell to ring on a bar rod. It just doesn't seem like fishing to me.
Have you ever fished the ocean? It's equivalent to trolling.. only you don't have to stay in the boat. I'll never understand why people feel ok with trolling but somehow think bar fishing is boring.
There are those days where one gets tired of running for a rod because those dang bells keep ringing..... now THAT is fun!
As far as the comment about the pics with springs that have been flossed.. hate BB'ing all you want, but don't kid yourself, the person that plays the fish still has fun... the fish still do fight ya know. Not saying I BB for springs(I don't) BUT do know that a fish on is a fish on and to think there is no heat of the battle is silly. Besides, let's face it.. those that BB despite the request not to don't feel they can catch a fish any other way so they're likely somewhat new to fishing and would be as or more excited than more experienced fishermen because of that lack of having done it too many times. Hero shot? Yeah, doesn't surprise me at all.
-
The fact is its selfish to keep bbing, the river will close. When it does, you poachers wil be run out of town.
Dude - this kind of response is totally uncalled for.
You appear to be continually condoning the use of violence to "solve" your problems. If you continue to do this, you will no longer be able to voice your opininion on THIS forum. It is TOTALLY unacceptbale.
-
Have fun everyone with your petty arguing back and forth, I'm off to have a fabulously fun time bbing for some springs and enjoying the company of my friends. Don't bother asking for pics as they'll go up on the wall where all the other beautiful fish pics are. Any one with a brain can see where the real problem lies and its not with a small group of bbers. Shutting down one group to suit your own purpose will not solve the solution but alas, I am sure you know whats best. I'll not argue and will be on my Merry way and leave the bickering to those who know everything. One reason why I rarely post on this site. Have a great day everyone, I know we will. :D
I don't understand why you are advertising that you are going bb'ing when there is a specific request not to do so at this time.
We haven't fished the Fraser for Springs for many years. If I decide to again I'd be dusting off my bar fishing gear. Currently having to much fun fly fiishing some of the higher lakes for fat trout.
-
:-*
-
I don't understand why you are advertising that you are going bb'ing when there is a specific request not to do so at this time.
Most likely, as we have seen so often on the forums before, because he has been offended by those who are advocating the cease of bottom bouncing at this time. When a person wants another to stop doing something, it's probably a good idea to do so in a respectful manner, otherwise the objective would never be accomplished.
I agree with what you say. They don't get the proper approach thing. I have had some heated debates on another Forum regarding this but they just don't get it.
Having said all that, what does it matter how disrespectful some people are about this issue. You shouldn't continue to bb if that is the request. I'm sorry, because someone pi$$e$ you off you're going to do the wrong thing? Two wrongs don't make a right. ???
-
:-*
-
There are those days where one gets tired of running for a rod because those dang bells keep ringing..... now THAT is fun!
And those days like my brother had running for a big bite, on the way to the rod he tripped and broke his wrist!
He set the hook and was trying to reel with a broken wrist... What a trooper!
:)
Nicole
-
Nicole, would I remember that incident?
Im not coming back for more, but wanted to clarify something. I call the bottom bouncing or flossing 'snagging'. I tried to call it flossing but it didnt sit right with me as I dont have much patience for PC and believe strongly that things should be called what they are. I say snagging not to insult anyone, but to describe the action because it's the ACTION that's the main issue here. However, I will apologize to those who took offense and whom have a different view than mine on it.
Anyway, I want to give a genuine thanks to all who debated and shared on this topic. I think everyone showed a great measure of respect considering there's over 22 pages of talk that did not melt down into verbal abuse. While I know what I hope for in the end in this issue, I do hope that the best realistic and common sense solution is found. I also hope that as we progress in that, we can be a strong voice to address other just as if not more important issues facing angling and the fish resource.
Ill stop there before the tears really start to flow. ;D
-
the rivers going to close this week because of the bb'ers
-
the rivers going to close this week because of the bb'ers
It is a possibly because some people have chosen to ignore the request including some of our friends from across the border.
A decision I have been told will be made tomorrow once the reports are in how many were out snagging over the weekend.
I hope a spot closure is brought in to deal where the snagging is taking place as the first choose before a complete salmon closure.
If I was making the decision I would grant no sockeye opening this year to show they are serious when they make a request like they did this year. That would mean no sockeye opening for the next 2 years as well and that would put the end to this unsporting like fishery.
-
We were selective methods fishing at Grassy today. A DFO jet with two guys and two women checked everyone for barbs and licences. The politely asked the BB'ers to try bar fishing for the next two weeks if they had the equipment to do so, until the Stuarts go through and then an anouncement will be made that fishing can resume to normal again.
There was no confrontational action whatsoever. Again, DFO are just making a request - not a demand. BB'ing is not illegal so don't try intimidating someone into believing that BB'ing is illegal.
After seeing their hands on approach - I think they have convinced some anglers to try Bar fishing for the next two weeks.
So in my opinion, good on DFO for not trying to ram Bar fishing down everyones throat but instead try and change the mindset through hands-on public relations. I think this approach will go a lot further. Maybe DFO could do more in the way of public broadcasts and these positive face to face interactions.
So where does this bitterness and "hollier than thou" attitude come from these born again Bar fishermen that try this garbage of intimidation and running off at the mouth come from. Well it's because of the ability to name-call from behind the safety of a keyboard. Stop blowing this Bar vs. BB issue out of proportion.
If BB'ing really was illegal - DFO would have said so and would have been writing quite a few tickets today.
-
Ok I agree about not bb but what about all the netts out there?I think its not fair to say you cant fish like that..I believe there should be no fishing for all until the early socks are in..But there cant be a double sword on the issue on people allowed to fish with nets and the other have to be selective its all polictical. ps I dont bounce. You guys sould be against the netters and bitch about that not the sporties .
-
the rivers going to close this week because of the bb'ers
any more news on this???
-
Blaydrnr, I find it good to share myself. Im not here thinking Im changing the ones who think otherwise. Im sharing my view and letting anyone who wants to make their own decision. You talking about bottom bouncing or snagging? (see the problem calling it what it isnt?) Bottom bouncing to get a BITE is an old tatic. You're right, the snagging bottom bouncing, while WRONG in my books, is a bigger problem as result of the numbers doing it. Why 1952 btw?
Well actually, i was talking in general, not directly at you.
the problem is you agree that bottom bouncing to get a BITE is an old and acceptable tactic whereas bottom snagging isn't.....very true, the question is....how can you decipher who's doing wrong from the one's doing right...then turn around to label them in the same general category?....then wonder why some people get offended?
for the sake of the salmon, i wouldn't mind a river closure, if in fact their numbers and survival is at risk.
myself i don't bottom bounce for springs and i rarely retain them, but i've heard some valid points about selective fishing in areas where they allow netting or special privileges for certain groups, etc. its no wonder why people no longer share the same values.
as far as 1952.....it was the earliest date i came across where the method of 'bottom bouncing' was documented. i didn't want to exaggerate or mention a time line that i couldn't back up.
-
The difference is intent. Guys out on the Fraser with LONG leaders and looking to 'snag' or 'floss'. Why else does the leader length grow? Because it makes it easier to get the line to sweep through the mouth.
Traditional bottom bouncing is using a short leader and in select river conditions. The intent is a bite because otherwise, they wont get a fish!
If BB'ing really was illegal - DFO would have said so and would have been writing quite a few tickets today.
DFO would/should be most happy to make this technique illegal along with triple hook snagging because they are both the same thing when it comes to intent, harvest management and angler conduct. But we know it's not possible as this form of snagging is very sneaky. Those who hide behind the legal issue are only hiding from an inconvenient truth IMO. So instead, they're having to consider closing the river, CITING bottom bouncing (snagging) as the reason. I dont think Im better than anyone else who fishes. But if someone CHOOSES to snag fish, it's not my fault if it makes them feel that way about it. Take responsibility for your choices!
Again, purely my opinion, but I think it's pretty sad that anglers, especially those who consider themselves sportsmen, are unwilling to face the facts and basically say they'll wait for DFO to make it law even though they themselves admit the fish are not biting. If they're not biting what else can it be? So if it's snagging, why else are some guys bent out of shape about it? I doubt anyone here would like to watch a guy using the triple hook form of snagging, even if the guy was 'skilled' enough to hook it 'close enough' to the mouth. But the flossing kind of snagging is ok and surprise is expressed when someone objects and tries to explain that snagging of any kind is deadly to sport angling? I cant say this is just my opinion enough, but I just cant understand this mentality that spawns the good old saying "If someone jumped off a cliff you would too?"
Oh yea, back to the selective ideal. Likely the biggest reason guys are getting more chinooks than sockeye now isnt nothing to do with selectiveness. Right now, there are more chinook than sockeye in the system. Of course more guys will hook chinook, but this is nothing more than the laws of probability at work. I came to this conclusion from looking at the test fishing numbers. http://www-ops2.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/fos2_Internet/Testfish/rptdtfdparm.cfm?fsub_id=242. This shows that early in the season chinooks generally outnumber sockeye until well into August (in 2006). I think also that they use 8" mesh which would miss some sockeye but the ratio would remain similar throughout the season. I know some sockeye runs have a higher % of larger fish later in the season but probably not enough to sway the numbers that much.
I do agree with river closures needed. Conservation is #1. Too bad the nets will continue to run. >:(
In regards to sport angling, this form of snagging needs to be addressed but not as much for conservation concerns (although they're here and will grow) but for what it means for rec anglers.
;D
-
does anyone realize that this topic comes up every year and it gets beaten to death every year?
I just had to point that out if it wasn't already obvious. Ok, as you were........
-
I thought you were done debating ???
Sorry. :D
No fear tho, I am running out of steam. :P
-
I thought you were done debating ???
Sorry. :D
No fear tho, I am running out of steam. :P
Gord,
You're not going to run out of steam as long as we are on this topic. ;)
-
i believe they will decide today or tomorrow to close it down, that or spot closures are inevitable for a couple of weeks.
-
:-*
-
i believe they will decide today or tomorrow to close it down, that or spot closures are inevitable for a couple of weeks.
Again, where are you getting your info? :) How is a 16 year old more informed than the oldtimers that are putting all of their time in working on this. Or is just your hunch? :D
-
I see even though with the latest notice people are still flossing springs. These are the same people that complain about the netting but continue to floss their springs.Unbelievable.....
So those that are still doing it I ask why? Is it because of the meat? I mean it cant be for any other reason as their are plenty of other types of fishing you can do at this time of year.
-
Im gonna have to say flossing is for the meat..because why else would you do it
-
I think it is lack of confidence to catch fish the SPORTSMANS' way. Or complete ignorance haven't decided yet
-
i believe they will decide today or tomorrow to close it down, that or spot closures are inevitable for a couple of weeks.
Again, where are you getting your info? :) How is a 16 year old more informed than the oldtimers that are putting all of their time in working on this. Or is just your hunch? :D
im actually 18. i work in the industry, i get the scoop on it, ask around at tackle shops, they are very close to closing it down
-
I floss for the pure enjoyment of a day on the water with my brother and my boat, and the luxury of having a dinner plate of beautiful BC salmon. I believe in an active style of fishing rather that beer-fishing ala bar rig. Who in their right mind would think that sitting in a lawn chair waiting for the bell to ring is in any way sporting. You sit down all day long, shoot the breeze with your pals, talk about the damn snaggers and call yourself sportsman. Grab a dose of reality! Bar fishing is the laziest and farthest thing from sporting there is. You enjoy your day, I'll enjoy mine and we'll get along fine. Don't impose your so-called ethics on me. There is no such room for ethics in fishing. The act of fishing means you catch a fish by any means legal. If you don't like it do something to change the law. Other than that cry me a river so I can have a little more room to floss. If the fish are that endangered shut the whole system down to everyone, and I mean everyone. I will stay home because I don't break the law..............until then tight lines!
-
Same thing for me!Tight lines, ATU.
-
I floss for the pure enjoyment of a day on the water with my brother and my boat, and the luxury of having a dinner plate of beautiful BC salmon. I believe in an active style of fishing rather that beer-fishing ala bar rig. Who in their right mind would think that sitting in a lawn chair waiting for the bell to ring is in any way sporting. You sit down all day long, shoot the breeze with your pals, talk about the damn snaggers and call yourself sportsman. Grab a dose of reality! Bar fishing is the laziest and farthest thing from sporting there is. You enjoy your day, I'll enjoy mine and we'll get along fine. Don't impose your so-called ethics on me. There is no such room for ethics in fishing. The act of fishing means you catch a fish by any means legal. If you don't like it do something to change the law. Other than that cry me a river so I can have a little more room to floss. If the fish are that endangered shut the whole system down to everyone, and I mean everyone. I will stay home because I don't break the law..............until then tight lines!
I dont believe anyone is imposing their ethics on you. I believe people like myself are just voicing their opinions. You are entitled to your opinion just as we are. What you call sporting I call snagging. What you call not sporting, I say is a good time and when we do get a fish we know they actually bit the presentation. Oh and nobody is crying a river, but I do believe you will be crying a river if they shut the river down. What are you going to do if they do shut the river down?
I dont even know if I will even barfish myself this year. Too busy catching tons of interior trout to really care about the springs. When the pinks come in I will be out for them and its all on the fly.
-
SNAGGING is ethics??? ???
Ho boy, we're in big trouble if that's the case. ::)
As long as the fish BITES it's sporting. There are TONS of ways to make a fish bite.
Snagging isnt lazy btw? ::)
Look, I have it right here in my dictionary... "The angler was too lazy to try and make the fish bite, so he just snagged it instead." ;D :D ;D :D ;D :D
-
bbronswyk2000, I thought I clearly stated in my post that I don't break the law.
I don't think flossing is 'sporting' either. Who's your opponent, the fish? I'm out there with a 12' leader, what's he/she got? A jaw that opens and closes because of the turbidity of the Fraser? Where's the sport in that? I said I fish for the enjoyment of the day and the meat. If I want sport I go play hockey with an opponent that can give me at least a fighting chance!
Off to bed now, got some snagging.........I mean flossing to do in the morning. Good night and good luck to you all. Even the sportsman out there!
-
"As long as the fish BITES it's sporting. There are TONS of ways to make a fish bite."
As long as it's in the zone, it's legal. To me that's anywhere around the mouth area. There are tons of sharp hook manufacturers out there. Just trolling ::)
-
Right , wrong, ethical, unethical, whatever, whats wrong with whats going on is this, if I was told to quit using bait,or quit flogging Kitamats or even quit bar fishing or they'd shut the river down for everyone else to fish, I would grumble a little but I would immediately do what they requested, how selfish and absolutely thoughtless can these guys that are still out there flossing be that they will take the chance on getting all salmon fishing in the Fraser shut down just so they can go out and fish by their chosen method. I mean doesn't it strike you as absolutely disrespectfull of your fellow sportsman to deliberately go out and do something that will probably end up in a complete salmon closure. I'll leave at that I can't continue writing without resorting to name calling.
-
Nosey said it percfectly...its a pretty selfish attitude to risk an entire fishery because you are too lazy or inexperienced to get a fish to strike opposed to flossing it.
All Tangled Up, I am going to focus on you because you seem to be so proud of yourself and your flossing activities, in your last post, you basically interchange snagging and flossing: "Off to bed now, got some snagging.........I mean flossing to do in the morning." You also claim you don't break the law?!? Flossing and snagging are the same thing...its just a matter of enforcement. So I guess you are one of those guys that hasn't broken the law until they are charged?!?
And for the record, I make bouncing betties for retail shops and fishers alike!!! Does this mean I am hypocritical? Well, the way I see it is that DFO has allocated the sporties an allotment of sockeye in the fraser each year...they don't bite readily in the fraser and DFO PERMITS us to floss them so I sell betties and floss a few socks. But I have never been so delusional as to think flossing is anything but snagging and a lazy man's fishery.
-
Nice one Troutbreath! ;D
Just to put down my own downrigger (just kidding), I think there's an aspect of angling that may be over looked. For as long as I remembered, there was always the guy who HAD to catch a fish. Often these were the guys who did the Mennonite Shuffle once the fish got close to shore. The 'instinct' (if you will) to catch food or show off a catch is stronger in some than others. Im not surprised that once a method to increase the chances of catching a fish is discovered that these guys use it and defend it with a passion. Thus the "harvest within regulations" is born and the idea of how it could harm angling, the ideals of 'sport' or 'ethic's is hard to agree with. I also find it interesting that I see guys fishing sockeye and chinook with the bouncing betties on the Fraser and then see them on the Vedder. At a distance it looks ok, look, there's a float, but when you get a little closer you see they're fishing a 4 foot slot with about 6 feet of float and have close to a 3 foot leader. There's a lot of hook setting taking place here each drift. This is flossing as well (Ive observed these fish being beached... :o) but is shared as sport angling and skill when there is actually little. While I dont agree with it, there's nothing wrong with being aware of other perspectives and thoughts. It's too bad though, that when these point of views ruin a fishery for all. That's why I strongly believe all sport angling has to be on a level playing field at least when it comes to the fish biting. This is certainly where education and being willing to share with other's comes in. If guys can be taught angling skills that produces, then they may want to do it within what angling is about. That sort of means the responsibility is sort of on the shoulders of the seasoned/experienced anglers to share and help out. Sure, there will always be guys who are not interested, and that why we need regulations, but it doesnt hurt to try.
-
Just thought i would mention that the biggest fish you catch from the Fraser would most likely be by bar fishing. I've hooked some real beasts that almost took me water skiing. Most never made it to shore with some bending the hook straight and some breaking the hook shaft. These were chinook, not sturgeon. Got the blood pumping so bad I couldn't sprawl out in the lawn chair for a few minutes.
-
Flossing and snagging are the same thing...its just a matter of enforcement.
And for the record, I make bouncing betties for retail shops and fishers alike!!! Does this mean I am hypocritical? Well, the way I see it is that DFO has allocated the sporties an allotment of sockeye in the fraser each year...they don't bite readily in the fraser and DFO PERMITS us to floss them so I sell betties and floss a few socks. But I have never been so delusional as to think flossing is anything but snagging and a lazy man's fishery.
3 points I'll take the time to reply to.
1) The difference between flossing and snagging is not a matter of enforcement. It's a matter of a legal loophole. I can understand peoples frustration with this but just because we don't agree doesn't mean I am going to stop. The native population on the river that is out there netting and selling fish are the ones you should be directing your anger at. Even if my flossing technique and their nets caught the same amount of endangered sockeye, who's fish has a better mortality rate after being released?
2) I wouldn't necessarily call you a hypocrite, because you're the producer not the supplier. If anyone on this forum runs a shop/works in a shop and hates bottom bouncing so much, they should pull the betties off the shelf. You and I know this won't happen because of the allmighty dollar.
3) I half agree with your delusional thoughts. Yes flossing is snagging (with a legal loophole) but is anything but lazy. You've done it yourself. Don't you get tired of reeling in all that line every cast?
Time to go I hear my Calcutta calling me!
-
Just thought i would mention that the biggest fish you catch from the Fraser would most likely be by bar fishing. I've hooked some real beasts that almost took me water skiing. Most never made it to shore with some bending the hook straight and some breaking the hook shaft. These were chinook, not sturgeon. Got the blood pumping so bad I couldn't sprawl out in the lawn chair for a few minutes.
What's the point of bar-fishing if you can't land them(the bigguns)? I'll take the slightly smaller Spring from my boat that I have less problem netting.
-
ATU, I appreciate your honesty...admitting that the only reason flossing is practiced is because "It's a matter of a legal loophole" is a big step. Really it is, lots of people out there think these fish bite ::)
Anyhow, knowing its a legal loop hole that allows you to snag a fish and not get ticketed makes me treat this technique with a fair deal of respect and restraint...ie don't abuse this type of fishery because it would be very easy to shut down. I wish more people shared the same amount of respect for the fishery and the body that governs it.
I am curious, would you keep a coho or steelhead that is snagged in the back...you know if no one is watching and your not going to get a ticket then its no different than flossing a spring or a soc? ???
-
I am curious, would you keep a coho or steelhead that is snagged in the back...you know if no one is watching and your not going to get a ticket then its no different than flossing a spring or a soc? ???
Soc: Legal Loophole - hook in mouth
Steel/Coho: Illegal - hook NOT in mouth
Bad example. ;)
-
Just to add fuel to the debate.
Why is it the individual fisherman is always being picked on.
Good example: was down at Steveston public fish dock on Sunday, There were at least 4 boats selling sockeye on the dock, and these were small 2 to 4 lb sockeye typical of the early Stuart run everyone is concerned about. I counted over 100 sockeye while I was there. Now in three weeks of visiting the Fraser system, I’ve seen over 100 fisherman and seen only 1 sockeye hooked and it was released correctly in the water.
So I wish these elitists would go after the proper culprits and leave the average fisherman alone. If the river closes to salmon fishing then they are the ones to blame. They are a very vocal minority and will ruin it for everyone. They use the same tactics as the radical environmental groups fear mongering, scare tactics, sky is falling crap. Everything is exaggerated to the limit and distorted.
What they should be going after is to reduce the ocean harvest of the endangered species not the odd few that are hooked in the river and released.
Another comment
It is very interesting to note that on rivers around here leaving out the Fraser, I’ve seen the fly fishing guys (usually the elitist group snag just as many fish as the average float or bottom bouncing fisherman (proper technique, as shown on fishing TV shows). They call it accidental. They all are released in good shape just like everyone else. So its hypocritical to start yelling, preaching and screaming about snagging.
So as with a lot of things these days, the small minority of culprits, who do deliberately snag fish and keep them are targeted by the smaller elitist preacher types and the rest of us, the majority suffer the consequences of these actions. May be its time we got rid of both groups!!!
cheers
-
I thought some forum member with a numbered name is off the debate on this thread, but if you think he will spare the chance to shame and label us bottom bouncers as snaggers, you are delusional. ;)
Flossing is not snagging by DFO's definition. It lacks the intent to target other body parts other than the mouth. Intent is everything in enforcing a rule of law. That is why DFO never ticket anybody for flossing a fish. Fishing in itself does not originate from using a hook or requiring a fish to bite. That is a narrow view some members here are trying to jam down your throat and ask you to swallow it. Fish are netted, trapped, speared etc. everywhere else, including our Canadian provinces. So why the problem here? Because some individuals with a fanatic and narrow point of view about sport fishing are trying to impose their twisted views on you. >:(
If intent is not important, then killing some-one by self-defense will be considered murder. If intent is not important, then your exposure of your sensitive body parts in a fishing bar due to natural urge is a crime of public indecent explosure because you didn't use a washroom. Sometimes, some of us have to do this even within sight of ladies due to the specific bars. Well, because you do expose your part in a public place with ladies around, is it a crime? If you ignore the intent and say flossing is snagging, the same as using treble hooks and yanking those hooks violently to catch fish by any parts, then should we say your release of your natural urge in a public place is the same as those doing it in a public street or park? ;D So, should you turn yourself in after you have done the same in a public fishing bar? ??? Have anyone been charged for doing that while they are fishing? Should DFO officers be ticketing people for their public indecent explosure while fishing??? Do bar fishers hold their urge until they get home ;D ;D ???
Yes, I admit the fish may or may not bite when they are hooked in the mouth. Both you and I have no proof that when a Fraser fish is caught inside the mouth, it is done by flossing or by the fish biting it. You are not down there for every hookup, so how can you be so sure every fish is flossed. Fish cannot see it? Common, how do you know? The best fishing in the Cap is when it is high & yellowish, so is the Gold. My friend nailed 19 steelhead in its yellowish Canyon pools by bottom bouncing a small orange spin & glow with 2 ft leader. Why is it fish can see somewhere else in yellowish water but not the Fraser?
Even if a Fraser fish is flossed, so what? Legal. Keep it. If you think that you are justified to eat only a mouth-hooked biting fish, so be it. Do that if that suit your guilt conscience of killing the fish for meat. But there will always be people who thinks fishing is cruelty, and that everyone should be converted to a vegetarian. Will you? Why not? Doesn't a fish have a feeling and can feel pain just as much as you do even if you catch them biting? They are homing to spawn, their most noble calling, and you kill it on its way? Why should you be so justifed by whatever ethics you hold? So, where do we begin to draw the line in this messy game about ethics of fishing? If you are not careful, you will drift towards PETA's reasoning and got trapped. Isn't that a famous broadcaster recently announced that he is quitting fishing because he no longer see the justification.......?
I'll say, I am a recreational fisherman intending to hook a fish legally for fun and for dinner, just like most life-forms which like to eat a fish, no more no less. Save your narrow and extreme points about your idealogy or biased view about fishing from those of us who do not share your twisted idea, because in the eyes of other people who don't fish or who don't eat meat, you are unethical too, biting or not. ;)
Nice points, Glog. I am begining to sense that behind all this shaming game is the ugly personal agenda of exclusionism - booting the majority of fishers off the river so they can enjoy their good old days of fishing with their buddies. Why this suspicision? Because they keep on saying wanting to protect fish stocks, but they said nothing about those Stuart sockeyes being sold, and turn around stomping on us who have rarely encountered a sockeye, not to say killing one. It is not about fish stocks. It is about personal bias which they try to jam down your throat. :(
-
liketofish it is snagging. Its snagging the fish inside of the mouth and even the people that do BB admit it. Just because its legal does not mean that its ethical. Now I know what ethical means and ethics are an individual thing. My ethics determine what I will or wont do. I wont snag a fish on purpose just because its legal. I would have to live with that and I dont think I could.
I am not really preaching as I do believe everyone is entitled to their opinion and if you read all 9 pages you will see its quite a balanced debate of pro-flossers and anti-flossers. My real problem is that the DFO has asked that people practice selective methods during this time. BB'ing is not a selective method so people shouldnt do it. If they did not ask for this I would not be so vocal. I still would not be happy with people flossing springs but I would not really say anything about it.
Are those sockeye that were caught by netting from the ocean or from the Fraser?
-
Just thought i would mention that the biggest fish you catch from the Fraser would most likely be by bar fishing. I've hooked some real beasts that almost took me water skiing. Most never made it to shore with some bending the hook straight and some breaking the hook shaft. These were chinook, not sturgeon. Got the blood pumping so bad I couldn't sprawl out in the lawn chair for a few minutes.
What's the point of bar-fishing if you can't land them(the bigguns)? I'll take the slightly smaller Spring from my boat that I have less problem netting.
The joy of fighting such a magnificent creature! Landed or lost still a blast!
-
Just thought i would mention that the biggest fish you catch from the Fraser would most likely be by bar fishing. I've hooked some real beasts that almost took me water skiing. Most never made it to shore with some bending the hook straight and some breaking the hook shaft. These were chinook, not sturgeon. Got the blood pumping so bad I couldn't sprawl out in the lawn chair for a few minutes.
What's the point of bar-fishing if you can't land them(the bigguns)? I'll take the slightly smaller Spring from my boat that I have less problem netting.
The joy of fighting such a magnificent creature! Landed or lost still a blast!
I am so glad someone gets it. Also someone that is probably half most people age that are debating this.
-
the only people to blame is dfo and the bureacrats who manage them.....idiots. all this tension and bickering.
how hard is to just state NO BOTTOM BOUNCING or make it mandatory to have a maximum leader length? why not elimate the 'grey' area and just lay down a specific regulation? they did with the single barbless hook reg......NO ONE TO BLAME, BUT THEM.
screw the idea of morals and ethics and the holier than thou sh't.
no one ever follows the speed limit to a tee.
90% of the time people who drink will drive after a couple (even when the rcmp request that you don't drink and drive).
I'M SORRY TO SAY BOYS AND GIRLS THAT UNFORTUNATELY WE DON'T LIVE IN A PERFECT WORLD. SO IF DFO DECIDES TO CLOSE THE RIVERS BECAUSE THEY CHOSE TO BE VAGUE ...SO BE IT.
-
Sorry boys but changes are coming, time to start learning other methods to catch your fish or you will be buying them at the Stevenson docks. ;D ;D
I have been pleased to have landed 2 adult chinook and one jack the last few days short floating. It was sure good to see the Maple Leaf Drennan disappearing once again, after a bit of a dry spell.
I was going to bring my Maple Leaf DNE's along to give them the pleasure of going for a swim too, sorry Daniel. :-[
Getting back on topic, it is good to see the majority of anglers complying with this request as the Master reported to me that while out guiding for sturgeon on the weekend not much snagging was going on. Others have said the same although there is some area of concern yet. I guess another week before the Early Stuarts clear the Lower Fraser.
I have yet to see a sockeye taken but of course I have not been near the snagging areas.
l
-
Just thought i would mention that the biggest fish you catch from the Fraser would most likely be by bar fishing. I've hooked some real beasts that almost took me water skiing. Most never made it to shore with some bending the hook straight and some breaking the hook shaft. These were chinook, not sturgeon. Got the blood pumping so bad I couldn't sprawl out in the lawn chair for a few minutes.
What's the point of bar-fishing if you can't land them(the bigguns)? I'll take the slightly smaller Spring from my boat that I have less problem netting.
Uh, get in the boat and float downstream with it? That's what we always do... Good times!
I've seen big springs spool anglers, and I've seen huge springs hitting rods so hard the rod launches like a missle launcher in to the river... The whole setup, gone!
And then there was a spring that Chris G hooked for me that ran so hard, the composite mooching reel burned his hand... Of course upon seeing that I was reluctant to grab the rod from him ;)
Amazing power of those fish...
-
Just thought i would mention that the biggest fish you catch from the Fraser would most likely be by bar fishing. I've hooked some real beasts that almost took me water skiing. Most never made it to shore with some bending the hook straight and some breaking the hook shaft. These were chinook, not sturgeon. Got the blood pumping so bad I couldn't sprawl out in the lawn chair for a few minutes.
What's the point of bar-fishing if you can't land them(the bigguns)? I'll take the slightly smaller Spring from my boat that I have less problem netting.
Uh, get in the boat and float downstream with it? That's what we always do... Good times!
I've seen big springs spool anglers, and I've seen huge springs hitting rods so hard the rod launches like a missle launcher in to the river... The whole setup, gone!
And then there was a spring that Chris G hooked for me that ran so hard, the composite mooching reel burned his hand... Of course upon seeing that I was reluctant to grab the rod from him ;)
Amazing power of those fish...
;D ;D ;D Thats right Nicole they certainly were great days, days we will never forget and so glad we captured some of these moments on video, back as far as 1988.With changes now on the horizon hopefully our river will once again reagain some sanity. I know she (the river and other systems) hopes so as do many others. Thankfully that numbers are growing daily, hoping that sportsfishing once again becomes just that and lives up to its name.
-
:-*
-
Most of the recreational bbing fishermen I talk to are thinking that the Selective Method clause may be the result of the repeated lobbying by the bar-fishing group that bbers have been hooking sockeyes before its opening, and that DFO ignores the fact that most bbers do not hook any sockeyes in early season. It is more a political clause to please those lobbyists who privately really want to have the bars and the springs to themselves. How can they be serious to stop a group from fishing while the group exacts minimal harm to sockeyes and while DFO allows the natives to net fish at the same time. These nets kill many many more socs. This is the main reason that the bbers choose to fish selectively by avoiding socs rather than complying to stay out of the river while the bar-fishers are still fishing (and they hook socs too). I will say this, the minute the bar-fishers are off the river, I will be off too. Just fair.
-
Most of the recreational bbing fishermen I talk to are thinking that the Selective Method clause may be the result of the repeated lobbying by the bar-fishing group that bbers have been hooking sockeyes before its opening, and that DFO ignores the fact that most bbers do not hook any sockeyes in early season. It is more a political clause to please those lobbyists who privately really want to have the bars and the springs to themselves. How can they be serious to stop a group from fishing while the group exacts minimal harm to sockeyes and while DFO allows the natives to net fish at the same time. These nets kill many many more socs. This is the main reason that the bbers choose to fish selectively by avoiding socs rather than complying to stay out of the river while the bar-fishers are still fishing (and they hook socs too). I will say this, the minute the bar-fishers are off the river, I will be off too. Just fair.
Great logic ::)
So even though it is asked that you dont do it you are going to do it anyways. I sure hope you dont have kids because if thats the way you go about your business your kids will do the same.
Like I have said in the past the netting is a seperate issue and its not what is being discussed here. Be responsible as a fisherman because you are not the one doing the netting. If the netting being done is illegal than thats a big problem, but the netting being done is because they have openings. The people doing the netting are not on the forum and cannot give you any feedback. Have you written any letters regarding your concern about the netting? If not, than you are just justifying what you are doing with that excuse.
-
Oh, ethics and fairness of fishing is only limited to this forum? No wonder we have so much trouble. ;D
BB, be realistic and not just throwing out accusations. This netting thing is beyond average joes. It is native stuff and political. I wrote letters when it wouldl mean something. Years back when Harcourt's NDP government wanted to cut funding for the steelhead stocking program, I wrote to both Harcourt & Moe Shiota to complain and I actually had a reply from Shiota after they restored the funding. I also drafted a protest sign up letter & duplicated 300 copies of it at my cost to give them to tackle store for people to sign. Have you done anything like that? ;) If not, better shut up. :D
-
Oh, ethics and fairness of fishing is only limited to this forum? No wonder we have so much trouble. ;D
BB, be realistic and not just throwing out accusations. This netting thing is beyond average joes. It is native stuff and political. I wrote letters when it wouldl mean something. Years back when Harcourt's NDP government wanted to cut funding for the steelhead stocking program, I wrote to both Harcourt & Moe Shiota to complain and I actually had a reply from Shiota after they restored the funding. I also drafted a protest sign up letter & duplicated 300 copies of it at my cost to give them to tackle store for people to sign. Have you done anything like that? ;) If not, better shut up. :D
I write tons of letters and do a ton of volunteering. I have been fighting the bass limit for over 2 years here. As much as many of the letters do nothing their is always a glimmer of hope. For instance I wrote to get in a dock at Mike lake. I started over 3 years ago and guess what happened? They put in a brand new dock just this past year.
What accusations are you reffering too? I am not accusing anyone of anything that they have not already admitted too.
Yes the netting is beyond us but two wrongs dont make a right.
If fishing was just a meat fishery to me I would give it up and take up another hobby. I rarely keep any fish. I usually keep a bunch of pinks in odd years for smoking, chums for smoking as well, and a couple springs and coho for the BBQ. All my trout are released.
-
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. ;)
:D
Amen Brother!
-
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. ;)
:D
Amen Brother!
AMEN HERE TOO! LMAO!
Hotrod
-
Beautiful Rod! That beats my "how many anglers does it take" hands down. But, until you come right out and say...Id better not push my luck! ;D :D ;D
I thought some forum member with a numbered name is off the debate on this thread, but if you think he will spare the chance to shame and label us bottom bouncers as snaggers, you are delusional.
I think my attempt to express my good intent and lack of ill thoughts toward others was misunderstood. Poor 4x4 knows what he was talking about. ;D
Flossing is not snagging by DFO's definition
No one here that Ive seen disputes that. Myself, I point out that it's the SAME as snagging regardless of what the regs say because it's pretty plain to see that it's snagging. The only thing is that this snagging is very sneaky and outside the current regulations ability to enforce. Does it make this snagging any different than the snagging that the regulations can enforce? Not at all and that's the point Im trying to make. The SAME issues you have should snagging in general be legal occurs as a result of snagging. Maybe not by a select few as Gooey mentioned, but we have to be honest. It's a very high % of people who abuse this fishery. It's up to sport anglers to be able to think for themselves and not blindly follow regulations; especially when it's obvious it's just a loophole on something designed to regulate a dangerous fishing method. DFO has said as much as they can about this flossing. They CANT call it snagging themselves (although they all know it is and call it such around the coffee urn) but anyone can see they're treating it differently and are concerned with it and it's non selective nature.
QUESTION: Explain to me how this form of snagging is different even if the regs dont cover it! Isnt the intent the same? If the fish wont or cant bite, there's nothing left but to snag him!
Fishing in itself does not originate from using a hook or requiring a fish to bite
It does here.
Fish are netted, trapped, speared etc. everywhere else, including our Canadian provinces
That's everywhere else, so leave it there. Why does it have to be applied here?
Because some individuals with a fanatic and narrow point of view about sport fishing are trying to impose their twisted views on you
Trying to impose SNAGGING on sport angling and exploiting a lame loophole is pretty twisted and narrow minded to me!
So, should you turn yourself in after you have done the same in a public fishing bar? Huh Have anyone been charged for doing that while they are fishing? Should DFO officers be ticketing people for their public indecent explosure while fishing??? Do bar fishers hold their urge until they get home
Gimme a break. ::) I guess no one has taught you the simple trick of turning your back to everyone. And btw, that and the other examples are irrelevant to the topic.
Yes, I admit the fish may or may not bite when they are hooked in the mouth. Both you and I have no proof that when a Fraser fish is caught inside the mouth, it is done by flossing or by the fish biting it
Myself and others tested this fishery. Using bare hooks, a decent % were caught in a very convincing manner. But again, the intent is to FLOSS or why else the long leader. If you're looking for the mystery number that apparently bite, why not shorten the leader and act on it?
Why is it fish can see somewhere else in yellowish water but not the Fraser?
Because the Fraser is B-R-O-W-N! :D
So, where do we begin to draw the line in this messy game about ethics of fishing? If you are not careful, you will drift towards PETA's reasoning and got trapped.
Ten years ago, PETA wouldnt have had a chance. Is shudder at the thought of one of them standing on the Keith Wilson Bridge or Peg Leg and watching the blood bath. Public support for angling will plummet. Maybe instead of trying to blame the ones trying to make it so PETA CANT do this, why not clean up our acts instead?
I'll say, I am a recreational fisherman intending to hook a fish legally for fun and for dinner, just like most life-forms which like to eat a fish, no more no less. Save your narrow and extreme points about your idealogy or biased view about fishing from those of us...
Depending on ONE argument (its legal) is pretty narrow minded to me! ;)
I am begining to sense that behind all this shaming game is the ugly personal agenda of exclusionism - booting the majority of fishers off the river so they can enjoy their good old days of fishing with their buddies. Why this suspicision? Because they keep on saying wanting to protect fish stocks, but they said nothing about those Stuart sockeyes being sold, and turn around stomping on us who have rarely encountered a sockeye, not to say killing one. It is not about fish stocks. It is about personal bias which they try to jam down your throat.
You are most welcome in your opinions. Im not supporting anything that limits anyone from enjoying angling. I never said ONCE that YOU or anyone else cant pick up a fishing rod and utilize one of the DOZENS of methods to make a fish bite.
The nets are a different issue and you are right to be concerned about them. But quit hiding behind them...you can be seen right through them!!! :D
I respect your perspective on fishing Liketofish, but I feel it's the exact one that will be the demise of angling and that's why the effort to rein this in. Do you enjoy fishing where the fish bite Liketofish or is fishing about the catching? In other words, could I ever find you bar fishing or casting spoons? Im not asking so I can say you're wrong, Im just curious.
I'M SORRY TO SAY BOYS AND GIRLS THAT UNFORTUNATELY WE DON'T LIVE IN A PERFECT WORLD. SO IF DFO DECIDES TO CLOSE THE RIVERS BECAUSE THEY CHOSE TO BE VAGUE ...SO BE IT
They have no choice but to be vague as I say in one way or another in every post I make! Dont blame them, blame the guys who are not cooperating and who are showing DFO that some anglers lack the ability to be responsible for THEMSELVES.
Most of the recreational bbing fishermen I talk to are thinking that the Selective Method clause may be the result of the repeated lobbying by the bar-fishing group that bbers have been hooking sockeyes before its opening, and that DFO ignores the fact that most bbers do not hook any sockeyes in early season.
Sounds like a reliable, unbiased source you have there. ::) DFO knows that flossing (snagging) is non selective and that's why they want it shut down. The ONLY reason these snaggers dont hook many sockeye is because there are not very many of them in the system. Dont think you guys are being selective. Thank the Laws of Probability instead. ;D
DFO's been out on the water and they're watching for themselves. They have noted several sockeye hookups in their surveys.
Anyway, CG is right. ;) Nice fish btw!
-
Let the dogs run with the bone.....or in 2:40s case the bone runith the dog. Take a 4:20 2:40 and do a 180 on what you think people should do. I've seen worse fishing practices that I'm not even going to mention on here, so if some people end up snagging fish in the mouth, so what. By all means they were then caught legally, if you hook them by the sphincter let them go. And speaking about sphincters maybe the regs should state no using long leaders and bouncing betties to fish between these dates........ Troll troll troll :-*
-
Gord you want to know why everyone keeps bringing up the nets ?? the answer is simple !! BB has very little effect on the Survival of the early Sockeye run, Nets have a huge effect on the run !! take away BB and you will make little or no effect on what is happening !! take away the nets and the un will stay strong !! people are getting upset by what you say because of that simple logic ... DFO's request is unreasonable because it won't change anything !! why can't you understand that ??
You don't like BB !! you think it is snagging !! not everybody shares you're opinion !! get over it !! ;)
TH
-
2:40 That's pretty bold of you to say that you tested the flossing/biting method using bare hooks! Isn't that illegal? I'm sure you'll hide behind the excuse of being sanctioned by some government granted flossing study, or you just stuck a size 10 in your yap!
-
Gord you want to know why everyone keeps bringing up the nets ?? the answer is simple !! BB has very little effect on the Survival of the early Sockeye run, Nets have a huge effect on the run !! take away BB and you will make little or no effect on what is happening !! take away the nets and the un will stay strong !! people are getting upset by what you say because of that simple logic ... DFO's request is unreasonable because it won't change anything !! why can't you understand that ??
You don't like BB !! you think it is snagging !! not everybody shares you're opinion !! get over it !! ;)
TH
I agree with the nets statement but that's another topic and carries no weight with sport anglers snagging fish. But I also agree with DFO's choice because snagging has no place in fishing. Im not talking about conservation. Im talking about snagging. Rick, you yourself (I think, apologies if not) complain about the guys snagging steelhead next to you on the Vedder. These are the same guys you shared the Fraser with in July.
I think it's obvious that this is going to continue to grow and be a problem.
Instead of using nets to justify a questionable fishing opinion, why not focus on the nets in a way to bring them under control? Ill stand right next to you on that one. I have plenty of 'steam' to direct at nets and have put plenty towards it in the past.
Anyway, Im not telling anyone to stop. Of course I would like to see more sports anglers using some foresight and at least not doing it now. Taking a strong stand on snagging is even better IMO and that's why I dont don't it even if I'd remove all my garbage and bonk the first two sockeye that hit the rocks and make the fish bite in all other fisheries. Putting the brakes on this is done in other ways and Im pleasantly surprised at the progress made; not only in the general support that's growing to stop it. I just want the issue to be known and to share my ideas and concerns about it. We dont need more people picking up this method without having a chance to see both sides of it.
No one is being forced to read my posts, so Im not losing any sleep over your complaints Fishfreak. The topic is being freely discussed with limited to no insults or personal attacks. I approve of Rodney's choice.
Im not hiding behind anything. Sure, at the time I didnt know because fishing for fish that didnt bite and using snagging was new and unheard of to me, ATU. Ignorance is not an excuse though I freely admit that. If someone wants to charge me, Ill have my cheque book ready. ;D ::) ::) ::)
-
You are right Gord I do get sick of people standing next to me with the constant " RIP !!! " maybe that is a result of BB and maybe not !! I know there are a large number of "fishermen " that fish solely for the purpose of meat and alot of those people don't give a damn about any regulations... my point is that I don't think that BB really causes a great deal of loss in the Sockeye survival rate... I know that it bothers you and many others a great deal ... to me if it isn't causing a loss of fish I don't mind if people choose to fish that way, I think a good compromise would be to restrict leader length to 36 inches or less but I don't believe that constantly calling people snaggers is any way to fix a problem, after meeting you and learning through other people and posts I think you are an educated and decent person!! the way that you deal with certain subjects surprises me a little ...
TH
-
Maybe 2:40 thinks the same as me and sees no place for snagging period.
Why are people now snagging Chinook.
Is there a Harvest for Chinook now as well?
If the fish arent biting then i would say you are snagging.
In a river it is much to your advantage to use a shorter leader which keeps your hook on the bottom where the fish are.
But if your snagging then the long leader will help as it flosses them.
I cant believe there are still people out there that actually think they are legally catching these fish.
-
I'M SORRY TO SAY BOYS AND GIRLS THAT UNFORTUNATELY WE DON'T LIVE IN A PERFECT WORLD. SO IF DFO DECIDES TO CLOSE THE RIVERS BECAUSE THEY CHOSE TO BE VAGUE ...SO BE IT
They have no choice but to be vague as I say in one way or another in every post I make! Dont blame them, blame the guys who are not cooperating and who are showing DFO that some anglers lack the ability to be responsible for THEMSELVES.
that's the most ridiculous thing i've heard on this thread. their job is to enforce the regs implemented by the government. you say they have no choice and the responsibility lies on the angler.....then guess what? ..... the word 'selective' can be misinterpreted, misconstrued, (and of course) abused. yet, because 'they have no choice' but to be vague, they'll ultimately make 'a decisive' choice to close the river.
"single barbless hook"
"bait ban"
"within white triangle markers"
"one hour before sunrise...one hour past sunset"
"no fishing allowed"
"no retention"
the list goes on and on.....pretty specific regs, so to say they have no choice is a bit of a 'load'.
-
You are right Gord I do get sick of people standing next to me with the constant " RIP !!! " maybe that is a result of BB and maybe not !! I know there are a large number of "fishermen " that fish solely for the purpose of meat and alot of those people don't give a damn about any regulations
Ive done general surveys on the river. I dont just chat it up with fellow anglers just to serve my purposes; I enjoy visiting with others too, but I do listen to what they say. The guy ripping away with a deep float was introduced to salmon angling on the Fraser. He knows no other way. The guys I talk to who share this is a very high %. And since they're 'spoiled' it is really hard for them to change to a biting tactic when they're hooking fish frequently, even if in the back. I share the other way to fish respectfully. Case in point during FisherForever's fishing clinic. I guy was bottom bouncing in the canal. We started talking (of course, he only started fishing the Fraser that summer) and it lead to asking about my set up. I shared about it but I dont think he really was interested. Catching is the game or he'd have started fishing a long time ago. Anyway, I gave him a handful of floats, some roe and showed him how to tie up in case he wanted try it. When I drove by, I see he had taken off my set up and went back to the bouncing. Oh well, moral is to always try regardless.
... my point is that I don't think that BB really causes a great deal of loss in the Sockeye survival rate...
That's not the question. Every fish counts and sport anglers, regardless of impact, have to do their part. Sure, it's minimal compared to others, Ive never disputed that, but like Firstlight says, it isnt the point. Im not quite sure why we keep coming back to this?
to me if it isn't causing a loss of fish I don't mind if people choose to fish that way,
Then you might not oppose to the guy doing the same to steelhead? They're probably not doing much loss either...
Where does sport come into this Rick? If you're willing to take this stance, then you really dont have a leg to stand on when it comes to expressing annoyance towards the guy doing it on the Vedder.
I think a good compromise would be to restrict leader length to 36 inches or less
I agree, and it's coming! ;)
but I don't believe that constantly calling people snaggers is any way to fix a problem, after meeting you and learning through other people and posts I think you are an educated and decent person!! the way that you deal with certain subjects surprises me a little ...
This is the hardest part. I call it snagging because I feel it is and that there is nothing to gain by trying to call it something else. But I do realize some dont take kindly to it. A rock and a hard place. Thanks for the kind works btw. ;D
that's the most ridiculous thing i've heard on this thread. their job is to enforce the regs implemented by the government. you say they have no choice and the responsibility lies on the angler.....then guess what? ..... the word 'selective' can be misinterpreted, misconstrued, (and of course) abused. yet, because 'they have no choice' but to be vague, they'll ultimately make 'a decisive' choice to close the river.
"single barbless hook"
"bait ban"
"within white triangle markers"
"one hour before sunrise...one hour past sunset"
"no fishing allowed"
"no retention"
the list goes on and on.....pretty specific regs, so to say they have no choice is a bit of a 'load'.
"single barbless hook"
"bait ban"
"within white triangle markers"
"one hour before sunrise...one hour past sunset"
"no fishing allowed"
"no retention"
All the above are cited in the regulations and are at DFO's disposal to enforce.
Dealing with flossing (snagging) however is NOT. There are regulations pending to address this, but as Ive said numerous times, it takes about two years for a new regulation to be introduced and then placed in the book to be enforced.
In the MEANTIME, they can only rely on sport anglers to cooperate. You're right, that's a pretty silly thing to do and try to ask a large group to cooperate but they really dont have a choice. If they (anglers) dont cooperate, DFO can use other regulations that are currently in the books and this includes CLOSURE.
-
Good stuff 2:40 and now I donot have to post anything and can get back to fishing. ;D ;D
Happy that my sucess rate has now improved this last week ;D ;D ;D but of course it is enough of a reward just getting out in the great outdoors but this 36 degree heat means fishing early and again in the late evening.
Will make some wild blackberry jam now before returning to the river. As well may film some scientific work UBC is doing on some sockeye.
I have been told the Early Stuarts are in the Fraser for a bit longer yet but Early Summers are now showing too.
<Thread closed, please continue at the new thread (http://www.fishingwithrod.com/yabbse/index.php?topic=15169.0)>