Fishing with Rod Discussion Forum
Fishing in British Columbia => General Discussion => Topic started by: alindsey on August 20, 2021, 09:55:36 PM
-
Can someone explain to be the logic behind DFO's decision to allow retention of 4 Pinks/day in Howe Sound, yet limit Squamish anglers to not only C&R but also deny them the ability to fish the Cheakamus or Mamquam? I really don't get it, but I really want to think it makes sense some how some way.
-
To add, I'm not trying to be negative. Just from a biological perspective, if someone could enlighten me on DFOs decision that would be awesome.
-
There is no logic.
-
I asked the very same question two years ago and there was no answer. So, I concluded that dfo must work in mysterious ways. Have faith, brother. :P
FWIW, if the return is poor to the point of being a conservation concern, every one of us should do the right thing and not fish for Squamish bound pinks at all, DFO and their incomprehensible policies be damned.
-
well. the pink from Howe sound is edible than pink in the river. For your table and health sake
-
Most of the pinks caught in the Western end of Howe Sound are not heading north for the Squamish.
-
I would think most of the furry creek area fish is heading to Squamish.
-
I asked the very same question two years ago and there was no answer. So, I concluded that dfo must work in mysterious ways. Have faith, brother. :P
FWIW, if the return is poor to the point of being a conservation concern, every one of us should do the right thing and not fish for Squamish bound pinks at all, DFO and their incomprehensible policies be damned.
x2
-
I would think most of the furry creek area fish is heading to Squamish.
well obviously ...eh?
if you look the limit of 4 salmon in aggregate for all species applies to the entire coast. For the most part the retention limit is restricted below 4 for only coho and chinook. Retention of pinks is not allowed for most rivers in the Province. Maybe by logic it should be 20 - that is 4 x 5 species. Excuse me for I am being sarcastic.
In another thread I pointed out that there is a local fisheries council for the Squamish system and it seems to be them that recommends what the retention limit is there. Prior to 2019 it was 2 even in a high return years like 2013. In 2019 it was 2 and following the poor spawning success for that year ( people including the OP have been reading some the other threads on this topic haven't they? No?) it makes sense to reduce it to zero IMO. Better yet, close it.
-
I think you might misunderstand what I post. yes I agree they should close it.
-
Been viewing some nice looking Pinks getting caught on the Squamish river on social media. Glad it’s open for catch and release. Recreational anglers have already lost too many fishing opportunities.
-
they closed it for at least 2 cycles after the 2005 train derailment chemical spill that wiped out fish in the Cheakamus. They even closed the north end of Howe Sound. Did you regret that loss as well?
-
@RalphH Imo its less the fact that there is zero retention that doesnt make sense to me, but more the fact that they have coupled that with strict limits as to where you can fish.
-
they closed it for at least 2 cycles after the 2005 train derailment chemical spill that wiped out fish in the Cheakamus. They even closed the north end of Howe Sound. Did you regret that loss as well?
The only thing I regret is your bad attitude.
-
It's the same bonehead logic that placed 6 DFO officers at Centennial Beach yesterday staffing some info booth with stuffed killer Wales. Peak salmon fishing season and 6 officers are chatting it up with families on their day off.
-
The only thing I regret is your bad attitude.
Lol. that makes no sense. Like a lot of other guys your responses mostly reflect a sort of doctrine and not much thinking. Personally I don't enjoy watching poor catch and release procedure as I saw from one video taken just a few weeks ago. I haven't been up there this summer. Can't justify the gas money.
I'd say c&r is better than a limit of 2 in this specific case. I'd also agree the northern end of the Sound should either be c&r or have a lower limit of 2 than the standard 4.
As to why DFO hasn't implemented something like that? Ask DFO. I have heard but can not confirm they don't really monitor the health of the pink salmon stocks in the Squamish though others do. Without some sort local or user group requests, the standard bag limit will apply. In tidal water that's 4. In river that's zero.
So I suggest people email, write or call them and ask to drop the limit of 4 in Areas 28-4 and 28-5... be sure to copy the Minister & the Provincial Minister.
cheers my friends.
-
It's the same bonehead logic that placed 6 DFO officers at Centennial Beach yesterday staffing some info booth with stuffed killer Wales. Peak salmon fishing season and 6 officers are chatting it up with families on their day off.
Ya that's BS.
One DFO officer was out at Furry on Friday am checking barbs and licenses. I had two nice chats with him (when he checked me and later when he was filling out notes and paperwork when I was leaving).
One bonehead with a pretty nice levelwind and $ rod was ticketed, the officer couldn't tell me why but listed what the fines were for fishing without a license and not pinching your barb ;)
-
What are the fines?
-
Wasn't there a time you were allowed to use barbed hooks in saltwater?
-
yes but then there was a time we could use barbed hooks in streams and kill wild steelhead.
-
yes but then there was a time we could use barbed hooks in streams and kill wild steelhead.
Haha I know I know...but my questions was when did the regs change for saltwater.
-
What are the fines?
think its 500 bucks now, ouch
Fishing for a specified species of fish other than with specified gear or by a specified method 500
-
Haha I know I know...but my questions was when did the regs change for saltwater.
I think it was around 30 years ago.
-
I think it was around 30 years ago.
thanks! that sounds about the last time I was on the local saltwaters.