Fishing with Rod Discussion Forum
Fishing in British Columbia => Fishing-related Issues & News => Topic started by: troutbreath on August 04, 2009, 01:21:51 PM
-
Halt sport fishery to save sockeye: Crey
Sports fishing on the Fraser River.
Tyrone McNeil
Buy Surrey Leader Photos Online
By Jeff Nagel - BC Local News
Published: July 31, 2009 4:17 PM
Updated: August 04, 2009 10:42 AM
Sport angling on the Fraser River should be shut down quickly to prevent a catastrophe for returning sockeye salmon, says Sto:lo fisheries advisor Ernie Crey.
Anglers on the river aren't currently allowed to target sockeye, but some catch them either accidentally or deliberately by snagging them while officially fishing for other species, like sturgeon or chinook salmon.
Crey says the species can't afford to take any more hits this season in light of what's already shaping up to be a low return, coupled with dangerously high river temperatures that may kill many of the sockeye that do arrive before they can spawn.
"DFO should, with some reasonable notice, tell anglers to get off the water until we get a better understanding of the sockeye numbers overall," Crey said.
Biologists had forecast a healthy run of 10.6 million sockeye this summer, but so far the Pacific Salmon Commission says the runs are all coming in much lower than expected.
The commission warned the hot dry weather and low stream flows in the Interior may prove deadly to returning sockeye.
The river reached a temperature of 20.7 degrees on July 30 – 3.4 degrees higher than normal and above the 20-degree threshold that triggers high death rates in salmon.
And it's projected the water temperature may climb further to 21.4 degrees by Aug. 8 – a record for that date.
The last time the water got this hot, Crey says he witnessed disoriented sockeye swimming around in circles that could easily be picked up by hand.
"They made no effort to swim away," he said. "Their instinct for survival was completely sapped by the warm river water."
Commercial fishing has so far been blocked and aboriginal food fisheries remain closed after a very brief opening earlier in July.
Crey said he doesn't believe there can reasonably be new openings for any sector unless counts of returning sockeye improve dramatically.
Wayne Goeson, an area director with the B.C. Federation of Drift Fishers,
agreed the sockeye plight this year is a huge concern.
"Rule number one is get the fish on the spawning beds," he said.
But Goeson said he doesn't believe a general angling closure on the lower Fraser is necessary to protect sockeye.
"As long as people aren't targeting sockeye, it shouldn't be a problem," he said.
Find this article at:
http://www.bclocalnews.com/surrey_area/surreyleader/news/52221957.html
-
I had posted it a while ago under sockeye study. Of course this is another reason why the study should be cancelled!!!
I am going to a BBQ with Stephen Harper this afternoon in Surrey, maybe I should discuss it with him. ;D ;D ;D
-
My 3 bits worth would be to shut down the river to all (including First Nations and Commercial) for a period of time - not just the sport fisher-people... :'(
But of course - one can only dream of a future with abundant Salmon in the rivers with our current set of Politicians.
Btw Chris - what are they serving at the BBQ - Sockeye ??
-
Crey says this everytime sportfishing is allowed and they can't net fish for sale. Except this time he threw in the part about flossing Sturgeon which basically shows he's a hole with water in it turned sideways to make a tunnel.
-
Wait till friends and neighbours say they can't buy sockeyes from the natives in the back lane before I believe anything Crey says. ;)
They are the one who create this problem in the sockeye run, and now they want the sporties to bear the blame for their sins. ???
-
Crey is a hypocrit. He and his people should set a shining example first. :-X
-
Self serving scumbag!
-
Yup, close the river to the group that has the least impact on the sockeye so that another group can keep fishing for them 24/7 unchecked. Beauty! ::)
Maybe we should just dam the Fraser and sell electricity. Think of the advantages.
We have wiped out many other species throughout history - what's another few in the grand scheme of things? >:(
Besides, those fish farms can sure produce enough fish to feed everyone.
-
I wonder how many sockeye he's got in the smoker? Sporties have none. Something tells me the government and fisheries will fall for this hook line and sinker!!!! I'm expecting an upper river closure soon unless huge numbers pile in and this cooler weather trend keeps up!!!
-
Is too bad we dont get the medias ear like Ernie does.
When Ernie farts the media are there with there nostrils wide open and taking it all in.
-
when was the last time you caught a sockeye while sturgeon fishing? lol
-
Is too bad we dont get the medias ear like Ernie does.
Have ya tried?
-
If this gains any steam we have too!
-
I had posted it a while ago under sockeye study. Of course this is another reason why the study should be cancelled!!!
I am going to a BBQ with Stephen Harper this afternoon in Surrey, maybe I should discuss it with him. ;D ;D ;D
I did get to welcome Stephen Harper to British Columbia and shake his hand. As you can see in the video I filmed at www.youtube.com/watch?v=6mfD0O8RoRE I had no opportunity to speak to him. ;D ;D Of course he is surrounded by security people, maybe it was my Leaf Hat that had then eying me up most of the time. ;D ;D02
However I had a good talk with MP John Cummins discussing the gravel issue on the Fraser and other fishing related topics.
-
Scary video Chris :) Looked like a lynching til Harper showed up then the crowd seemed to lighten up a little. Could have sweared I heard you say "welcome to BC Steven" instead of "you fish killing swine dog". ;D
-
God, what a biased article! No mention of the thousands of fish the natives caught legally, or the suspected thousands more caught illegally.
In this ridiculously overly politically correct society of ours there is no way that the truth could be told either without it coming off as racist.
-
when was the last time you caught a sockeye while sturgeon fishing? lol
lol thats what i was thinking, i'm still waiting ;D
scary article. As already mentioned, its also my opinion FN want the sporties shut down so that they have free reign and no one else on the river to observe and report their poaching. Not saying all fn are poaching, but many are fishing outside of their already loose regs.
-
I was fishing up in hope a few days ago and saw a boat come by, drop its net, pull in a few sockey then hand bomb them to a guy on an ATV on shore. What joke.
If all this illegal fishing is happening why aren't there more DFO officers to regulate?
Did you report it?
-
That is a good question, if no report is made then complaining about it is useless!
-
watched earlier this year, a fn member catch a 4-5 ft sturgeon in his net, toss it in his boat, and quickly take off up river to unload it.
yes it was reported but said sturgeon was quickly brought to shore and unloaded so an officer can't prove anything.
funny how they are trying to give the sport fisher a bad name though in the paper. Not saying all sport fishers fish legally either but from what i have seen one group abuses the stocks more than the other.
-
Well I think people should be writing letters to the editors of your local paper that has printed this story. here is the one I sent to my editor here in Maple Ridge.
Dear editor
As usual around this time of year when the sockeye are returning to the Fraser river to migrate to their home rivers to spawn we see Mr Ernie Crey giving us his verbal diarrhea on how the river should be closed to sport fishing because they have a big impact on the survival of the sockeye. Last year there was a study done that was funded by the government on the mortality rate of sockeye that where caught and then released 24 hours later. This study showed that the mortality rate was less then 1% of the fish that where caught. I believe that the impact of the illegal drift netting that goes on between Chilliwack and Hope has a far higher impact on the sockeye then the sport fishing community does. Yes these infractions by these people that are drift netting are reported but nothing comes of it. Most of these people drift netting are doing it under the cover of darkness making it tough for DFO to enforce. So Mr Ernie Crey maybe you should put less effort in keeping the sport fishing community that reports these infractions off the river but put more effort in fighting the illegal netting that goes on.
-
Well, I can confirm the same...I was fishing from the shore on Seabird Island bar on Monday, and the FN small boat with its net and a few guys was drifting down the Fraser....BTW, I got 1 sockeye over 3 days of fishing for chinook on Fraser (fish unhooked carefully in the water wit NO any damage). Fraser is almost a dead river, no fish, a few chinook, minimum sockeye....
In another occassion, I did report poaching/illegal fishing on Chehalis River (coho) last year and finally rec'd a repply from DFO syaing that they are aware of illegal practices over there and are doing their best....over a week of fishing on Chehalis, no DFO showed up......who, ho,ho !!!!
I am REALLY wondering what other action we can do in order to preserve our BC fishing and fish.
-
Why is it that with other environmental issues, such as energy consumption, solid waste recycling, and water use, it is an accepted understanding that "every little bit counts"? Turn the tap off when you brush your teeth, recycle your newspapers, lightsw out when you leave a room. And yet with the salmon fishery, the vast majority of sports anglers continue to point the finger at First Nations, commercial fishermen, fish farms etc, as an excuse to not do their part? Crey is correct in that any sport caught sockeye is as good as dead, and this is in a year where we are seeing a catastrophic collapse due to factors outside of human influence. Yes, you are correct in that the nets are having a negative impact. That doesn't excuse you when you carefully release a sockeye that you flossed and watch it swim away. It's a dead fish at this point. Do your part guys, avoid catching any sockeye at all costs right now!
-
That doesn't excuse you when you carefully release a sockeye that you flossed and watch it swim away. It's a dead fish at this point.
I do not fish the fraser at all during this time of year and unless they can prove that the sport fisheries has a big impact on the mortality of the sockeye it should remain open to any method that DFO says is legal. It is illegal for the natives to be drift netting at night and drifting netting when it is closed for them to be fishing. If they close it for one then it should be closed for all.
-
Crey is correct in that any sport caught sockeye is as good as dead,
??? what a load of bull.
-
??? what a load of bull.
FYI, HLABT's work field is on Fraser River sockeye so he has extensive knowledge on the species. Whether you agree or disagree with his opinion, it is unnecessary to insult it. A better approach would be to express why you disagree with him.
-
Crey is correct in that any sport caught sockeye is as good as dead...
...release a sockeye that you flossed and watch it swim away. It's a dead fish at this point.
There was a study last year (and ongoing this year) that indicated the opposite is true.
The study showed that flossed & released Sockeye have a very low mortality rate.
The drop in tempurate in the Fraser is going to make a big (good) difference in the health of the migrating Sockeye.
Edit: to add that snag cuts on the side of Sockeye would definately be detrimental.
-
Why is it that with other environmental issues, such as energy consumption, solid waste recycling, and water use, it is an accepted understanding that "every little bit counts"? Turn the tap off when you brush your teeth, recycle your newspapers, lightsw out when you leave a room. And yet with the salmon fishery, the vast majority of sports anglers continue to point the finger at First Nations, commercial fishermen, fish farms etc, as an excuse to not do their part? Crey is correct in that any sport caught sockeye is as good as dead, and this is in a year where we are seeing a catastrophic collapse due to factors outside of human influence. Yes, you are correct in that the nets are having a negative impact. That doesn't excuse you when you carefully release a sockeye that you flossed and watch it swim away. It's a dead fish at this point. Do your part guys, avoid catching any sockeye at all costs right now!
Didn't FN did the finger pointing first?
-
Still waiting to hear a good reason from a member of the flossing/snagging crowd as to why they keep on fishing while faced with a poor sockeye return and high water temperatures. The most common excuse I keep hearing is that DFO says it is legal ...kind of similiar to people yacking on their cellphones while flying down the highway. Just because the government says it is right dont make it right. The same crowd that is hiding behind DFO regs right now would be jumping and screaming calling DFO a bunch of idiots if the river got opened up to the FN before them . It is embarassing to be part of a sport fishery that has basically been labelled a bunch of snaggers by a FN fisherman....sockeye openings/closures seem to affect the flossing crowd only to the point of whether or not they can crush in a fishes skull with a rock. DFO says it is legal to snag springs and then catch and release the sockeye after all ...so to hell with common sense lets just go have some fun and carrying on with the same fishing practices . This is not the year to experiment with catch and release for sockeye, this is the year to leave them alone and let them carry on to spawn....or you can keep on fishing , DFO says it is legal
-
May be you can start by answering why do we fish for salmon, knowing many systems have extreme low return.
-
The most common excuse I keep hearing is that DFO says it is legal ...kind of similiar to people yacking on their cellphones while flying down the highway. Just because the government says it is right dont make it right.
You are right that just because the government says it is right..... doesn't neccessarily make it right. It's also admirable to see individuals such as yourself put themselves out there to defend what they believe is right.
You must know that individuals that wish to bb will likely continue to bb. Your shouting only divides the sports community when we should be united. For instance, I believe you could be more effective in convincing members in the fishing community of your points, if you stop referring to them as "members of the flossing/snagging crowd".
By the way how did you choose the name "wacker"? ;D
-
Rodney, just because HLABT works on the Fraser does not make him an expert on hook release mortaility. To say that every fish caught by sport anglers is a dead fish is far fetched and mis leading. I'm try to be polite because I feel stronger words could be used at this point.
Erni creys credibility is on a scale of 1 to 10 is 0 in my books. Wasn't he the one who was charged with running a massive poaching ring where reefer trucks were seized on a washington Native Rserve? Correct me if I am wrong. Yes the media and some on this forum actually responded to his crys and supported his plea for a closure on sport fishing.
The low sockeye counts are a great excuse to for those anglers who are against BB to start up the anit bb crap once again. Maybe we should be holding those fishery mangers accountable who refuse to regulate the Fraser as many have asked for. How many times have we as a community asked DFO managers to regulate the Fraser, define regulations, and make it so that we are clear on what is legal and ethical. Instead, they do nothing but make way off predictions then the rest begine their anit-bb campaine.
The Fraser is very close to being completely closed to fishing. For me and many others who fish the Fraser, this type of managment is unexceptable. There are other methods used to catch salmon on the Fraser and if needed, selective fishing should be considered long before closures. Regulations need to be put in place so that during times like these, regulations can be adjusted to suite stock predictions.
Below is a copy of my media reslease
The current disappointing returns for Sockeye Salmon are a serious concern for all BC Anglers. Vic Carrao, President of the Fraser Valley Angling Guides Association (FVAGA) states “These poor results are more than a concern. In a year where the Guiding Industry has been hard hit by a Global recession the very livelihood of our members is on the line.” Nonetheless Carrao say that the FVAGA is committed to ensuring a sustainable fishery in the Fraser Valley and completely understands and supports the need to close the Sockeye fishery until return numbers improve. However the recent calls to take all Sport Fishers off the Fraser River and close all fisheries is an overreaction that cannot be justified.
Recreational Fishers catch only a small percentage of the Sockeye when the fishery is open. According to statistics reported by the Pacific Salmon Commission in 2004, Recreational fishers caught 1.4% of the Sockeye run compared to 21.8% for First Nations and 25.7% for Commercial Fishers. While the Sport Fishers impact on the fish resource is minimal their impact on the BC economy is significant. Approximately 400,000 licensed anglers spend $400 million on freshwater fishing in B.C. each year employing approximately 3500 people according to a 2007 BC Government Study.
The FVAGA position is that the DFO needs to ignore panicked calls based on speculation and suspicion and focus on science based conservation. They believe closing the Fraser to all fishing is a knee jerk reaction that does not address the real issue. Dr. Carl Walters of UBC in a presentation at this years “State of the Salmon” Conference stated “Declines have not been reversed by closing the fisheries (overfishing was not the problem).” In addition since the Sockeye fishery is closed any Sockeye inadvertently caught will be released and carry on to spawn; recent studies have shown that released salmon suffer a mortality of less than 2%. The FVAGA believe that shutting down the river to all fishing is not only unnecessary from a conservation perspective it will decimate a local tourist economy at a time that it is barely holding its head above water.
For further info Contact
Vic Carrao
President, Fraser Valley Angling Guides Association
sts@guidebc.com
-
Rodney, just because HLABT works on the Fraser does not make him an expert on hook release mortaility. To say that every fish caught by sport anglers is a dead fish is far fetched and mis leading. I'm try to be polite because I feel stronger words could be used at this point.
Vic, my comment was mainly directed to the response to HLABT, which we are seeing too often on the web. It doesn't necessarily suggest that I agree with HLABT. I was just pointing out that his opinion needs to be respected when responding, a communication style that most participants in this discussion no longer wish to adopt.
I've slowly distanced myself from these discussions because most of the time it's simply rhetorical bantering based on personal agenda instead of constructive criticisms based on factual information. I'm sure that you also feel the same. I don't desire to do the research and work behind the scene only to have the credential damaged by annonymous individuals who can make a misinformed remark with nothing to lose.
-
FYI, HLABT's work field is on Fraser River sockeye so he has extensive knowledge on the species. Whether you agree or disagree with his opinion, it is unnecessary to insult it. A better approach would be to express why you disagree with him.
if this is his field,
then lets see the data that can suport such a statement.
"any sport caught sockeye is as good as dead"
that is ridiculous, no mater how you read it.
you cannot convince me that a 5min intervention with a spring fisherman is the reason the fish will die.
-
understood but stating HLABT has extensive knowledge leads one to believe that what he says is true. I can say that is is far from it and if he has any proof that what he says is true, I would be interested in reading it. I call BS.
-
well, I can see a lot of "maybe", "we could", "something should be done", but no constructive points to really take an action to change the BC fishery management . Guys, you are right that everybody has its own small and personal agenda. One doesn't like flossing, another doesn't like FN guys, other wants to have his salmon barbecue on the weekend and a guide wants to have his clients entertained....
We have to be united in order to save our wild salmon and the Fraser, regardless whether we are rec fishermen, FN , commercial guides....we have to make our Government gouys accountable beacuse what they have ben doing and showing off 'till now is simply mismanagement and you don't have
to have any studies conducted in order to see the results of their terrible mismanagement. Period.
We cannot do anythign abotu the water temperature, but we can:
*
-
well, I can see a lot of "maybe", "we could", "something should be done", but no constructive points to really take an action to change the BC fishery management . Guys, you are right that everybody has its own small and personal agenda. One doesn't like flossing, another doesn't like FN guys, other wants to have his salmon barbecue on the weekend and a guide wants to have his clients entertained....
We have to be united in order to save our wild salmon and the Fraser, regardless whether we are rec fishermen, FN , commercial guides....we have to make our Government gouys accountable beacuse what they have ben doing and showing off 'till now is simply mismanagement and you don't have
to have any studies conducted in order to see the results of their terrible mismanagement. Period.
We cannot do anythign abotu the water temperature, but we can:
*
The SDA under Bill Otway and others tried this for many many years, working very hard for the rec angler. They had some success but angler apathy and lack of monetary support finally saw the SDA fade away.
-
If you worry about sporties' impact on sockeye stock, then drop your rod, whether it is bf rod or bb rod. There are other better things to do than the 'violent' sport of fishing. Both groups off the water. No need to santify your method as safe if you care so much about saving each sockeye. A bf caught sockeye is sure more dead than a bb one. No doubt about that. ;) For stock conservation, I am more concern if DFO will let FN fish the heck they want for the so called food & ceremony purpose weeks after weeks like last year. That is where you should focus your attention if you want to save the sockeye stock. Go chain yourself to some FN boats. Blowing steam at BBers as if they are going to ruin the sockeye stock is an overkill. There is a hidden agenda to belittle bbers. Just another bbing-hate attempt to me. Those of us who were at the bb bars know very few sockeyes hooked so far, and unlike springs, bb caught sockeye don't fight you much until they are very near shore. They just come in as you reel in your line, and the fight is only very brief before you release them. They probably dispense more energy running away from seals than the brief fight. That may explain the high survival rate of the study. I can't say the same with a bf caught sockeyes, as they have to fight pulling the weight of a heavy lead slab. Try strap lead on your waist and swim or stay afloat and you know what I mean.
-
Nuggy, the study that took place last year has scientific base or it would not have been used. Just about every mortality study done is done this way with pen held fish. When a group does not like the out come of a study they start attacking the study and asking for more study's. Unfortunately there is no money available to conduct a radip tagged study so this is all we have.
I am not for or against bb, I can run our business just fine without it, but this type of managment should be unexceptable to all anglers regardless of gear choice.
Dr. Carl Walters of UBC in a presentation at this years “State of the Salmon” Conference stated “Declines have not been reversed by closing the fisheries (overfishing was not the problem).”
Yet we still sit here and think that closing the fishery is going to save fish. Don't buy into Erni "Poacher" Crey's call for the sport fishery to close, all he wants is us off the river so they can continue to run drift nets 24/7. unreported.
tight lines
-
the study that took place last year has scientific base or it would not have been used. Just about every mortality study done is done this way with pen held fish. When a group does not like the out come of a study they start attacking the study and asking for more study's.
Vic, I read this paragraph and had to walk away from the computer for a bit, washed some dishes while thinking about if I should reply to this or not. Look what you've done to my Saturday morning. ;) On one hand I really do not want to get into the technical aspect of this issue too in depth because I suspect the number of people who read and participate in these threads is limited. The same people come back year after year and almost make me think that they have turned this into a hobby on its own. On the other hand, I feel that I have an obligation to ensure that people are not ill-informed if I am to host a public resource on the internet. I'm replying because I have high expectations from a number of forum participants and will expend the time to reply when needed.
What alarms me is that science has become so mainstream that it is now a religion on its own. This has had positive impacts, such as the green movements in recent years, but it takes away a lot of integrity that science once had. It has become a powerful ammunition that advocates (note, not suggesting you) use to sway public's opinion. No disrespect to anyone, but swaying the opinion of individuals without a scientific background is easy and it has a cascade effect that's almost impossible to stop once those ideas are planted in people's mind.
One should realize that scientific papers are not conclusive. In the scientific community, studies undergo peer reviews and critiques. This is done not because others dislike the results obtained in the study, but it is done to determine if the methodology used to obtain those results and the statistical interpretation of those results are done correctly. While there are the usual participants who are against the sockeye sportfishery dismissing the study completely, there are also individuals who have a scientific background making some constructive criticisms on the study. Again, in an internet discussion forum where most do not reveal their identity and background, it is difficult to decide whose words should be taken seriously at first. On the other hand, outspoken advocates of the sockeye sportfishery, who mostly have not looked at the study in depth, dangle the result of this study in front of you before you have a chance to blink.
A mortality study of caught and released sockeye salmon is needed because as long as the Fraser River is opened for sportfishing, incidental catches during sockeye salmon closures will occur. Quantitative facts allow fishery managers to make sound decisions instead of half guessing on what might be happening in the water. Some suggest that the second part of the study should not be conducted due to warm water temperature, my response would be to look at the large picture. Data obtained from caught and released sockeye salmon at a higher water temperature than last year's lead to comparative studies of caught and released sockeye mortality at various water temperature. This information would be beneficial for managers who need to make conservation measures when discharged water temperature rises.
Results from last year's study were pretty uniform to what is already known. Fish that are hooked externally survive better than fish that are hooked internally because it minimizes the chance of servere loss of blood. This is why in some parts of the world, treble hooks are used rather than single hooks as a management measure in catch and release fisheries. Managers and anglers rather see externally injured fish rather than dead fish. This is also why some have started pegging their trout bead a few inches above the hook so the fish is hooked outside the jawline rather than in its oral cavity. It may contradict the traditional definition of fishing, but from the practical aspect, it serves a better purpose in catch and release fisheries.
That being said, these results cannnot be viewed as definitive proof that the number of sockeye salmon dying from catch and release is minimal. The results presented are simply demonstrating temporary mortality, due to the fact that these fish were held for 24 hours in a channel that has a similar discharge velocity of the Fraser River around Chilliwack. Scientific studies create models of the real scenario, they do not paint the whole picture. Factors such as predation of released fish during its recuperation, recapturing by other sportfishermen and nets, mortality in higher stream velocity, spawning performance are not being considered. This is not suggesting that study designers intend to disregard these and flaw the results. Budget constraints and the inability to create these scenarios prevent them to factor these in. Nevertheless, they are significant factors that can skew what we are actually trying to find, which is how many caught and released sockeye salmon can arrive at their natal streams and spawn successfully.
This is why the study is planned for five years and it is premature to use one year's result to conclusively suggest the sockeye salmon that anglers catch and release are perfectly fine. This type of false sense of security is not good for the fish, and not good for anyone.
By this point of the post, most might suggest that I am against the sockeye sportfishery. At the same time, others might suggest I am for the sockeye fishery based on my view on the difference between external and internal injuries of caught and released fish. For or against, if only it is that simple, that black and white, there wouldn't be these long winded debates at all.
If there is one message to take away from this long post, it is that anglers should have some reservation on the unnecessary impact of the fish that they need to release. Do I need to be by-catching a certain number of sockeye salmon when exclusively targeting chinook salmon? Would the sockeye salmon that I release make it to their natal streams and spawn successfully? Maybe, maybe not, one would never know, but remember that these doubts may have significant impacts on the resource when it can be avoided. Would barfishing, which has a much smaller possibility of intercepting sockeye salmon, be a good alternative for targeting chinook salmon?
This isn't an attempt to persuade seasoned bottom bouncers who apparently can avoid incidental catches of sockeye salmon. Those who do so regularly have already made up their mind and will continue to do what they believe it is right. That's fine, it's legal by definition, so those who think otherwise do not have the authority to stop you. Information such as this is intended for entry-level anglers who are unfamiliar with the biological background of this fishery. On the other hand, it is unnecessary for seasoned barfishermen to resort to name labelling as a way to promote their interest. What an insult to education, as some like to justify their behaviour.
-
There are constant complaints that harvest of sockeye salmon by First Nations continues while it is prohibited for recreational fishermen. We live in a country where certain laws may seem unfair to you, but that's the way it is and should be respected. Finfish management in BC involves meeting conservation requirement first, followed by allocated quota for First Nations, then recreational fishermen and commercial fishermen. Contrary to what the media has sensationalized this already hot topic, sockeye salmon are not going extinct. There simply are only enough fish to meet spawning escapement and some First Nations' harvest. Catching and releasing sockeye salmon because First Nations are harvesting them is a terrible justification of one's action. In the end, the angling community is only shooting itself in the foot by not respecting these constitutional rights and giving more ammunition to individuals such as Crey.
What Crey has done in the media is unacceptable and it creates a stir among the angling community as he intended. It further divides two main user groups and escalates problems on the river. Then again, how does one dispute his claims when there are in fact sockeye salmon caught and released by recreational fishermen. The problem with this community is that it lacks a leader who is well aware of all the issues and has the ability to represent the whole angling community in the public's eyes.
Recreational fishermen should also have more understanding on First Nations' fishery. While we condemn the generalization Crey has made, the same type of generalization of First Nations is widespread on this forum whenever illegal netting is brought up. It is important to realize that not all First Nation fishers are fishing illegally. In fact, only a small percentage do not play by the rules, just like a small percentage of recreational fishermen. The difference is the amount of impacts caused by these violators in the two sectors. One poaches with nets, while the other poaches with a hook. People should also realize that since 2004/2005, the frequency of illegal netting has dropped significantly due to more enforcement by DFO and better cooperation between many bands and DFO. Believe it or not, they also want to see more harvestable fish in future years. Raving about illegal netting on the internet has no benefit to anyone, it in fact hinders the dialogue process between sportfishing representatives and First Nations. Want to make a difference? Join a sportfishing group that forms a collective voice with representatives who can express your concerns.
It is baffling to see so much negative attention focused on one species simply because of its commercial value while so much more of BC's freshwater fisheries are being omitted. It almost seems as anglers prefer to dig ourselves in a hole of pessimism. Ths year's summer Fraser River chinook salmon run, particularly the Shuswap watershed stock (expected run size is 150k) is stronger than average so quality angling opportunities are available despite of the closure of one species. Judging by how well the coho salmon fishing is in the sea, this fall's coho salmon fishery in the Fraser Valley should also be better than average. Coming back from a country where one stream's annual salmon quota for recreational fishermen is 120 fish, I'd say fishing is pretty good here.
There goes two hours of my Saturday morning, I'm going to catch some peamouth chub now. :)
-
Dude, you are just having a conversion with yourself in your posts. Please try and quote who you are talking about as you just seem to be blowing smoke for the most part.
Cheers
Nuggy
Dude, I don't have to quote anybody. I know what I am talking in regards to what sockeye fight is all about. Sporties bbing just will not deplete the fish to the point of killing it. The study proved that. With all the talk of fish dying as a result of c/r, it is just empty talk. I made it a point of keenly looking for dead sockeyes floating down the river. Not one dead sockeye in my 5 trips that I saws floating on the surface. If c/r sockeyes will die as some bb haters claim, why we don't see massive dead fish floating down? You may be blowing steam out of your own imagination, but I base on my observation on the spot and many of my co-bbers can support my claim of seeing no dead sockeyes drifting down. Even if there are a few, you cannot blame them on bbers. How can you be so sure they don't come from the nets. I already heard of friends buying sockeyes from natives. Don't tell me that they are not fishing, legally or illegally.
So stop being a computer fisherman, dude. Go to the fishing bars and see for youself. Rant all you want. Just not supported by facts. As far as few sockeye being hooked by bbers, it was based on my 5 trips but I have stopped fishing since 2 weeks ago after having 3 springs on my card. So my obeservation on sockeye accident catch was based on the condition I observed 2 weeks ago. There should be more hookups now. It should be up to the individuals to decide whether he should or should not stop. If he cannot avoid sockeyes, then perhaps he should stop. However, to blame sockeye run being ruined by bbers is just blowing smoke in the air - just out right lies. If you care so much about hurting the last sockeye, you should really consider hanging up your bar rod, as it is no guarantee that you won't hook & kill that sockeye. I don't see the point of targetting bbers in this sockeye issue when one illegal drift net will kill many times more sockeyes than that of the 'possible kill' that all recreational c/r sockeyes (bf included) will inflict. Just another attempt to bash bbers to me in the big picture of stock conservation. Why not march in front of the bands known for illegal netting and bring the media along so you can shame them publicly. That will do much more for the fish stock than hammering your bellow sporties who happen to prefer fishing a method different from yours.
Enough has been said already by both sides. It is no point to keep on hammering the same things year after year. I am off this thread and will enjoy other more interesting reads. So, to each his/own. Fish in peace.
-
Rodney, great post. I don't have much time right now and hope to make one more post but for now, i just want to say thanks for taking the time to post.
-
The latest from the Chilliwack Progress.
Chilliwack Progress
Fraser sport fishery closure ‘overreaction’
Halt sport fishery to save sockeye: Crey
Sockeye fishery may be a flop – again
Published: August 10, 2009 5:00 PM
Disappointing sockeye returns on the Fraser River are a major concern for recreational anglers and fishing guides in B.C.
But “panicked” calls from First Nations leaders to take sport fishermen off the river and shut down all fisheries is a “clear overreaction,” said Vic Carrao, president of the Fraser Valley Angling Guides Association.
“In a year where the guiding industry has been hard hit by a global recession, the very livelihood of our members is on the line,” he said in a press release.
They’re committed to ensuring “a sustainable fishery” in the Fraser Valley and the group “completely understands and supports” the rationale for keeping the sockeye fishery closed until numbers improve.
However, anglers catch only “a small percentage” of the sockeye when the fishery is open, Carrao said.
He cited 2004 statistics from the Pacific Salmon Commission in 2004, which showed that sport fishers caught 1.4 per cent of the sockeye run, compared to 21.8 per cent for First Nations and 25.7 per cent for the commercial sector.
“While the sport fishers’ impact on resources is minimal, their impact on the economy is significant,” Carrao argued.
About 400,000 licensed anglers spend $400 million on freshwater fishing in B.C. each year employing about 3,500 people, according to a 2007 study by the province.
But Ernie Crey, fisheries advisor to the Sto:lo Tribal Council, said he couldn’t buy the minimal sockeye impacts argument, or the economic one. He wasn’t in any way convinced, especially since the final results of the ongoing sockeye mortality study are not even in yet.
The guiding group is asking “everyone to accept, as an article of faith, that anglers are not injuring and killing sockeye before the facts garnered from the study are in,” said Crey.
But for many Sto:lo leaders, conservation of the sockeye runs should “take precendence over the tourist trade.”
It only makes sense to be extra cautious, Crey said.
“Besides, if the anglers don’t help conserve sockeye now, there won’t be much of a tourist trade based on the sport fishery in the future.
“Are folks in the salmon charter business suggesting we blow away the sockeye runs to meet their short-term goal of having a profitable season? Strange logic.”
Crey said he was highly disappointed to see the sport fishery “still blazing away” on the Lower Fraser River this weekend.
“I saw dozens and dozens of anglers’ cars and trucks along the highway between Hope and Chilliwack,” Crey said. “DFO has closed our fishery to sockeye, including the dry rack fishery. However, DFO continues to allow countless sockeye to be snagged and injured by the sport fishery crowd.”
They’re still demanding prompt action.
“I think it’s well past the time to throw a flag down on the sport fishery. I hope and expect that DFO will take prompt action to curb the sport fishery until we know what is going on with summer sockeye.”
But despite demands to close the recreational chinook fishery on the Fraser for the good of the sockeye, DFO officials are still holding firm at this point.
“We are monitoring the environmental conditions in the river and other factors,” said DFO area director for the Interior, and Fraser panel chair Barry Rosenberger last week. “They are taken into account when we make those decisions.”
Demands to shut down the recreational fishery peaked when river temperatures shot up above 20 degrees Celsius, and were being considered by DFO management officials last week.
The plan was to look at sockeye encounter impacts by chinook fishers.
“They specifically asked us to close the chinook recreational fishery for the protection of sockeye. But on that recreational fishery, the sockeye encounter rates are generally low,” said Rosenberger.
He pointed to last year’s early results from a sockeye mortality study, which indicated that the “instantaneous” mortality rate was just above one per cent.
“We’re looking to move this forward by getting all the data together on sockeye mortality,” Rosenberger added.
Temperatures on the Fraser were forecast to drop to around 18 degrees by mid-week.
jfeinberg@theprogress.com
-
But Ernie Crey, fisheries advisor to the Sto:lo Tribal Council, said he couldn’t buy the minimal sockeye impacts argument, or the economic one. He wasn’t in any way convinced, especially since the final results of the ongoing sockeye mortality study are not even in yet.
Although it is suggested that a minority of FN members engage in illegally catching sockeye for black market sales, based on the numbers of fish being sold in the back alleys of lower mainland towns this is something that everyone should be concerned with. Crey would have perhaps a small bit of credibility if there was any evidence that he did not support this illegal activity.
I still maintain that the eyes of the sporties on the river is essential to try and limit their illegal netting. The small amount of sockeye sustaining fatal injuries as a result of incidental sockeye encounters is likely a very small percentage of the number of sockeye being caught for illegal sales. This guy is looking for every angle he can to get sports fishermen off the river!
-
When I went to the BBQ last week for Harper I talked to John Cummins as I said. I suggested as far as this F/N situation goes why does FOC not give them a number of fish what FOC feels they should have and need. Then they could do whatever they want with them, sell, eat, give away or barter. That would cut down on some of the enforcement issues. The kicker would be that there must be independent people counting the fish to get an accurate number of pieces being taken. Also any of them fishing out side the regulations set down would face loss of fishing privileges as well as fines. Seems a simple system to me but maybe being close to 70 I am missing something. :-\
Cummins said they had worked on this but I believe he said a number of bureaucrats did not go for it.. ??? ::)
-
When I went to the BBQ last week for Harper I talked to John Cummins as I said. I suggested as far as this F/N situation goes why does FOC not give them a number of fish what FOC feels they should have and need. Then they could do whatever they want with them, sell, eat, give away or barter. That would cut down on some of the enforcement issues. The kicker would be that there must be independent people counting the fish to get an accurate number of pieces being taken. Also any of them fishing out side the regulations set down would face loss of fishing privileges as well as fines. Seems a simple system to me but maybe being close to 70 I am missing something. :-\
Cummins said they had worked on this but I believe he said a number of bureaucrats did not go for it.. ??? ::)
I think it's a great suggestion, however I see enforcement to be the issue. It's impossible to monitor the river 24/7. However, as long as sport fishermen are on the river in large numbers a least 15 of the 24 hours are being covered.......
As far as the bureaucrats not going for it.... then the politicians should fire them! Who is in charge anyway????
-
When I went to the BBQ last week for Harper I talked to John Cummins as I said. I suggested as far as this F/N situation goes why does FOC not give them a number of fish what FOC feels they should have and need. Then they could do whatever they want with them, sell, eat, give away or barter. That would cut down on some of the enforcement issues. The kicker would be that there must be independent people counting the fish to get an accurate number of pieces being taken. Also any of them fishing out side the regulations set down would face loss of fishing privileges as well as fines. Seems a simple system to me but maybe being close to 70 I am missing something. :-\
Cummins said they had worked on this but I believe he said a number of bureaucrats did not go for it.. ??? ::)
Since when did bureaucrats make policies ? That's a good idea Chris. DFO can give them the fish caught in the test fishery.
-
I think it's a great suggestion, however I see enforcement to be the issue. It's impossible to monitor the river 24/7. However, as long as sport fishermen are on the river in large numbers a least 15 of the 24 hours are being covered.......
As far as the bureaucrats not going for it.... then the politicians should fire them! Who is in charge anyway????
Ask your MP Chuck and see what he says and please let us know what he says.
-
Since when did bureaucrats make policies ? That's a good idea Chris. DFO can give them the fish caught in the test fishery.
Ask your MP and see what he says.
-
Hi Boys,
Great suggestions, however I think the point is really that DFO does not want to face a challenge regarding native fisheries in court. Even with the illegal drift netting, the challenge FN could/would make is that they are still allowed to fish as long as sporties are on the river (depends how you read the judgments). If a judge sides with them, a case law precedent would be established and DFO could lose any/all legal leverage in setting regulations for FN, and that's only within Canadian law. As far as international law goes, remember that most FN bands haven't signed any treaties yet and they could possibly win in court (in the type of cases mentioned above) what they would otherwise need to bargain for in treaty negotiations (as far as fish quotas/access). In fact depending how you look at it, DFO really has no say over FN as they are still in nation to nation negotiations and DFO is part the Canadian national government's infrastructure and as sovereign nations, FN do not (yet, at least) recognise Canadian Law and can claim (as I'm sure they're doing) complete rights over the entire river and all of it's fish as a starting point in treaty negotiations. If/when FN settle treaties, DFO will start enforcing the law (or maybe after the Olympics ::)) I don't like any of this, but it's the only explanation I can think of that makes any sense to me in this whole fisheries mess.
-
Hi Boys,
Great suggestions, however I think the point is really that DFO does not want to face a challenge regarding native fisheries in court.
I think you may have hit the nail on the head. There is a bigger picture that we are not being allowed to see. On a political level our "leaders" are trying not to rock the FN boat so that the public doesn't notice the mess they have gotten us in. There is no chance that the politicians will do the right thing, as the political repercussions would likely result in them losing their jobs.
I fully support the FN keeping their traditions and even expanding their rights, to fishing and hunting whenever and whatever they want and even selling their catch. However only on the condition that they be limited to using only traditional fishing and hunting tools. Traditionally they were able to sustain themselves using those techniques, why is it that today they allowed to use drift and set nets and motorized boats? The traditional customs card is something they have been allowed to exploit to a totally illogical level. And yet our leaders play along.... for what reason?
That's why we as sportsfishermen must be united and stop the bickering about issues that divide us We need to give our politicians some reasons to stop ignoring us. While writing your local MP is a good thing to do, it likely has minimal impact probably because few people do it. On the other hand politicians today are very internet savvy. I'm sure they have staff members reading this forum and others like it, measuring the sentiment and deciding whether it is an issue that they need to address.
The politicians will only react to whatever presents the greatest risk to them losing their jobs. Right now the sports fishermen present no threat to their jobs.
-
IThat's why we as sportsfishermen must be united and stop the bickering about issues that divide us
This will never happen as it is similar trying to get people to agree what religion is correct and what what political party is the best. This is just life as people will always have different views on an array of subjects.
-
Hi Boys,
Great suggestions, however I think the point is really that DFO does not want to face a challenge regarding native fisheries in court. Even with the illegal drift netting, the challenge FN could/would make is that they are still allowed to fish as long as sporties are on the river (depends how you read the judgments). If a judge sides with them, a case law precedent would be established and DFO could lose any/all legal leverage in setting regulations for FN, and that's only within Canadian law. As far as international law goes, remember that most FN bands haven't signed any treaties yet and they could possibly win in court (in the type of cases mentioned above) what they would otherwise need to bargain for in treaty negotiations (as far as fish quotas/access). In fact depending how you look at it, DFO really has no say over FN as they are still in nation to nation negotiations and DFO is part the Canadian national government's infrastructure and as sovereign nations, FN do not (yet, at least) recognise Canadian Law and can claim (as I'm sure they're doing) complete rights over the entire river and all of it's fish as a starting point in treaty negotiations. If/when FN settle treaties, DFO will start enforcing the law (or maybe after the Olympics ::)) I don't like any of this, but it's the only explanation I can think of that makes any sense to me in this whole fisheries mess.
You are exactly right here! The land or anything has not been ceded to or sold to anyone and FN still have authority!
Hotrod
-
I say SHUT HER DOWN!!!!
Here's a quote from our very own Mr Gadsden
"With the low returns of sockeye now forecast and with extreme water warming I think this study should be suspended for this year as each and every sockeye possible should be given the best chance possible of reaching their natal streams.
Regards and thanks for this consideration.
Chris "
If this is true that every fish counts then what the hell are the bar fishers doing pointing fingers at the bottom bouncers??? Sockeye DO get caught on bar rods although not as frequent as bbing.
In my opinion if you aint part of the solution you are part of the problem. Simple solution to avoid hooking sockeye close the river to all anglers, then let the natives enjoy the last of the runs.
-
Right on Lucky.
That is the point. For bbers, the sin of seemingly harming a c/r sockeye is something they bonk your head over & over again, but when it comes to bfers, they won't give up the world for their chance to fish even if the sockeye caught by bf will have to fight much harder by pulling a big chunk of lead. And about deliberately using a lighter line for the lead so that they can seek more thrill of fighting a lead-free fish, thereby dumping these big lead slabs all over the bar, I don't see any bfers regret a bit over it. This is always about 'me-right-you-wrong', do-it-my-way-or-don't-fish attitude. But can bfers see their own wrongs? If so, why do they keep fishing? I honestly feel that there is more chance that the big lead will harm a sockeye more, whether during the fight, or during casting where the big lead has a high chance of hitting sockeyes in the head due to shorter casting by bfers than bbers. If bbers have to stop even when last year's study proves their c/r fish had a high rate of survival, should'nt there be a study done on how much bfers can harm sockeye by casting their huge lead slabs? Just to be fair. ;)
-
This will never happen as it is similar trying to get people to agree what religion is correct and what what political party is the best. This is just life as people will always have different views on an array of subjects.
Not true. All fishermen (commericial included) are interested on the big picture of fish stock conservation and that it is wrong that DFO & politicians are keeping a blind eyes to a special privileged group by allowing them to use potent fishing methods not part of their tradition, by allocating way more than fish than an individual's daily consumption (therefore encouraging illegal sales of fish), and by not willing to confront that group's frequent defying of the law.
We are not interested in starting fights over the narrow vision of fishing ethics interpreted by some individuals above and beyond what DFO has intended. But we are interested and united to fight over matters of real concern.
Chris, with your influence and your care for sockeye stock, perhaps you should call up the fishermen brothers up in arm against illegal fishings by FN. If you bring the media and want to show our strength in opposing the unfair fishing practice of this group, there will be a lot of us bbers who will join you. How about a demonstration of sort.
But we will not be interested in your bf clinics. ;D
-
If you bring the media and want to show our strength in opposing the unfair fishing practice of this group, there will be a lot of us bbers who will join you. How about a demonstration of sort. ;D
The media is interested in sensational stories that will sell newspapers, or boost air-time ratings so they can sell advertising. Do not forget for even one minute that these are profit seeking enterprises. There will need to be human blood shed before our big media gets serious about this. "Brothers in ARMS" may be more accurate than you realize.
And get the press to look at how well the First Nations managed the Upper Fraser Valley elk heards.
-
Chris, with your influence and your care for sockeye stock, perhaps you should call up the fishermen brothers up in arm against illegal fishings by FN. If you bring the media and want to show our strength in opposing the unfair fishing practice of this group, there will be a lot of us bbers who will join you. How about a demonstration of sort.
I will let you do it this time as a number of us gave up considerbale time and effort with the SDA working on this for a number of years. As I said the other day angler apathy and lack of monetary support saw it cease to operate. New and younger blood could maybe have more success with new voices for the government to listen too. I believe by the opinions stated here by some members you should have a number of people that will help you out. Let us know when you have a group formed to tackle this issue as I will be willing to donate some funds. Keep us posted.
-
And this definitely is my last post on the subject for 2009 so please donot ask me any further questions. I also respect the opinions of all that post on this subject and hold no animosity to anyone. I must add, finally FOC has spoken with the notice that was sent out today and put on a lot of vehicles at Island today 22. It is now in the hands of the anglers if they wish to co operate or not. I know they will be having boats out on the water this week observing what is going on and if the results are not favorable the river could be closed for salmon angling for a unknown period. I hope everyone enjoys the rest of the Summer, time to write The Journal on today's trip. ;D
-
Has anyone used some math to project the impact that the sports fishermen have on the sockeye?
Here's some numbers that I'd like to throw out there... Feel free to correct em..... ;D
Currently the sockeye C&R study is experiencing a less than 2% mortality rate. That's 2 fish out of 100 die as a result of an encounter with a C&R fisherman.
But the C&R fishermen don't encounter every fish that is going up the river. Let's say they encounter 2% of the total number of sockeye entering the Fraser. (In 2008 I believe 1.5 million sockeye entered the Fraser. DFO projections were 16,000 caught in the brief recreational opening and a projected 17,000 were C&R'd, a total of 33,000 or just over 2%. Personally I believe DFO projections are very high... ) http://www.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/fraserriver/recreational/creelsurveyPDFs/2008Creel/2008LFraserCreelReport.pdf (http://www.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/fraserriver/recreational/creelsurveyPDFs/2008Creel/2008LFraserCreelReport.pdf)
So let's assume that C&R fishermen can take responsibility for the death of .04% of the sockeye entering the Fraser river (2% x 2%).
That means that if 1,000,000 sockeye enter the Fraser system in 2009 at a .04% mortality rate that's 400 fish that don't make it to the spawning beds....
Why is there such a fuss about the sport fishermen's impact on the sockeye ???
-
Yes, a drfit net set by 2 guys can catch many times more than that in a day/night, legal or illegal. All the fuss about bbing killing the fish stock. Just think they are stopping thousands of Fraser bbers and their rights to enjoy fishing for the entire Fraser season for something 2 drift net guys can catch or exceed in one day. We must be so insignificant in the minds of those who want to shut us down. Pathetic.
-
Chilliwack Progress
Stop bottom bouncing to save sockeye: DFO
Sockeye salmon.
DFO PHOTO
Buy Chilliwack Progress Photos Online
Email Print Letter to Editor Share
others also read...
Chilliwack Progress
Sockeye study starts up again at Grassy Bar
Pikeminnow removal starts at Cultus Lake
Johnson named a ‘Salmon Hero’
Fraser Valley
Chinook strong, sockeye struggling
Shutting down all fishing unnecessary
Fight the illegal netting
Text By Jennifer Feinberg - Chilliwack Progress
Published: August 14, 2009 8:00 AM
Updated: August 14, 2009 9:41 AM
0 Comments Anglers are being asked to avoid using the fishing method known as bottom bouncing on the Fraser River — or else.
A fishery notice issued from Fisheries and Oceans Canada on Tuesday is aimed at protecting sockeye runs given the dismal numbers this season and higher-than-average water temperatures.
"If sockeye encounters are not reduced to ensure the adequate passage of sockeye, then further actions such as spot closures or a 'no fishing for salmon' restriction may be implemented," reads the notice. "The first principle of selective harvesting is to avoid catching non-targeted stocks. This means that anglers should use methods that do not catch sockeye."
The bottom bouncing technique on the Fraser generally involves casting with a two- or three-ounce weight called a 'bouncing betty' and the use of a longer leader.
Sport fishermen are being asked to employ more "selective" methods, which are specifically defined by Fisheries as: bar fishing, trolling spoons at creek mouths, float fishing, pulling plugs or fly fishing.
Vic Carrao of the Fraser Valley Angling Guides Association said the consequence of the DFO request to avoid bottom bouncing on the Fraser to avoid sockeye could be "devastating" for anglers and guides.
"It's ridiculous. In the past the recreational has always taken the high road on issues such as conservation," he said. "What we've suggested is coming up with a definition for sockeye fishing, which could be 'bottom bouncing with a leader in excess of one metre.
"So when conservation concerns come up, they would simply say, no sockeye fishing. It takes the politics out of it and makes it clear."
He argued that bottom bouncing is a legitimate fishing method used widely across North America.
"If leader length is the issue, let's define it as such. But this is not about conservation one bit. They're trying to say we need every sockeye to get through, but how does that explain the lack of enforcement on illegal netting and drifting that we still see going on from Mission to Hell's Gate?
"So how can they realistically come to the recreational community now and ask us to fish selectively and not bottom bounce?"
The sport fishers are always the first ones taken off the river and the first to be asked to modify the way they fish, Carrao stated.
"And we understand that. But we are also a large contributor to the local economy. Our impact is huge but we're the last to get opportunities."
He thinks that DFO's estimate of sockeye mortality at 10 per cent is way too high, even using the most generous numbers in the calculations.
"We truly believe our impact on the resource is negligible, but we still want to closely work with DFO, and have those discussions to make the right management decisions for the future."
jfeinberg@theprogress.com
-
We definitely need to come up with a solution by working with the DFO to better define "bottom bouncing". Although it has been a challenge to do so and we're not there yet persistence will eventually pay off. Maybe it takes a catastrophe like this to finally get it done because we're going to find ourselves in the same position next year, and the year after, and after, if things don't change.
Since we're not there yet I would suggest that the FVAGA lead by example and comply with the request. I would look at them in a more positive light (and maybe give them my business) if they would step up and say they will stop bb'ing because they are committed to the long term health of the salmon industry. It doesn't mean they can't bring up things such as illegal netting, better definition of bb'ing, etc. However, until they take some ownership (albeit they are a fraction of a percent of the problem) they're still a part of the problem.
Also, why can't guides take out clients and bar fish? They don't have a problem getting people to go sturgeon fishing and the technique is very similar. Throw out lines and get the fish to bite the hook. I'm asking this question because I don't know the answer. Are the clients so committed to bb'ing that they won't hire a guide if the can't do it?
-
We definitely need to come up with a solution by working with the DFO to better define "bottom bouncing". Although it has been a challenge to do so and we're not there yet persistence will eventually pay off. Maybe it takes a catastrophe like this to finally get it done because we're going to find ourselves in the same position next year, and the year after, and after, if things don't change.
Since we're not there yet I would suggest that the FVAGA lead by example and comply with the request. I would look at them in a more positive light (and maybe give them my business) if they would step up and say they will stop bb'ing because they are committed to the long term health of the salmon industry. It doesn't mean they can't bring up things such as illegal netting, better definition of bb'ing, etc. However, until they take some ownership (albeit they are a fraction of a percent of the problem) they're still a part of the problem.
Also, why can't guides take out clients and bar fish? They don't have a problem getting people to go sturgeon fishing and the technique is very similar. Throw out lines and get the fish to bite the hook. I'm asking this question because I don't know the answer. Are the clients so committed to bb'ing that they won't hire a guide if the can't do it?
Put yourself in the guides shoes for half a minute.
You have clients that have hired you, so they could have an opportunity to catch a fish. You take them out on a local bar and throw out the bar rigs and sit down with your clients to watch your rods..... Over the course of the afternoon people all around you are catching fish by bottom bouncing, but you and your clients are not....
What would you say to your clients? Remember you need them to tell their friends so that they will call you up and pay you to guide them. This is how you earn your living.... you have little kids to feed.... ???
BB'ing has an effect on the mortality of the fish, approximately .04% of them are estimated to die as a result of C&R. Why is so much thought and discussion going into such a small part of the problem. It's seems like the equivalent of taking a sieve and putting most of your effort into plugging one of the holes. Even if you plug it you've still got 99.96% of the holes that are still leaking.... :(
-
I completely agree that BB'ing shouldn't be the focal point of these discussions. However, since it is if the Association came out and said they're going to comply with the request then the discussion is over. We can then move to tackling the real problem. It's such an easy request I can't believe people are fighting it to the death. Once it stops the govt will need to point the finger somewhere else. Then, maybe we'll get somewhere.
I understand guides need to make their clients happy and put food on table for their kids. I'm trying to look long term from a guides perspective, not short term. The way its looking the government will shut down salmon fishing. The Association has the power to drive change. It's very difficult and in the short run it will have a negative impact on their business. However, if the Association ceased BB'ing today and set an example others will follow. Most people learned from guides and look to them for their expertise on how to catch fish.
-
DFO in such a bad year for sockeye has to look and act like they are doing something for fish conservation. They are looking for a scape goat so the pulbic think that DFO is doing something about the problem. But bb is not the problem and is proven by the study that our impact is minimal.
From the current observation, I don't see more than 100 sockeye hooks per popular bb bars. Say there are 10 such bars, the total daily c/r is 1000 fish. If we use 2% mortality rate as in the study, that means 20 fish. Does that number justify shutting down so many fishermen's right to fish? The test nets take that many fish per day just in Albion. What about all along the coasts. Can't we just shut down one test nets so they will keep people fishing the way they enjoy. Don't give me all that crap about thinking for the last sockeyes. I only concern about the total stock survival. If we are worrying about 20 sockeyes (if that) per day, we shouldn't allow any fishing on the river, period, and in all sections of the river. Conservation is the top mandate in priority. If we are talking about our 20 fish will threaten the stock, then the other group which will take tens of thousands should not fish, period. Don't the rights of individuals to exercise their freedom of choice of past times count in this country if their actions are not going to harm the stock in a bad way? We are tax contributing citizens of this nation. Don't we deserve any merits? ???
Like I always say, we are always singled out for all the problems or sins of other user groups, and we bear the blunt of DFO actions because we are the easiest group to dicate to. Whether the problems are FN over-harvesting, fish farm, ocean survival, environment degradation, even predation by seals (how about all those pike minnows or sqwauh fish?), etc etc. It doesn't matter, we will be the group targeted for action because we are not united, we don't fight back, and we don't vote politicians out of office like the NRA in America. We end up seeing less and less fishing opportunities as a group. Pathetic. >:(
-
FYI, HLABT's work field is on Fraser River sockeye so he has extensive knowledge on the species. Whether you agree or disagree with his opinion, it is unnecessary to insult it. A better approach would be to express why you disagree with him.
Rodney: after reading what all have to say re Mr Crey and his opinion about FN's right to food fish and how some FN people who are poor will not receive their protein from fish sources this year --perhaps he could explain why Pinks,coho,and chum are not considered in his statements only highly saleable Sockeye are desireable as "Food Fish " Just an open question -- No sarcasm intended-- Tight lines
This will never happen as it is similar trying to get people to agree what religion is correct and what what political party is the best. This is just life as people will always have different views on an array of subjects.
Chris: I think some of us have already decided which political process & party are best-- I didn't get invited to see Mr. Harper-- so far they've not helped the sportfisher one Iota - However Mr. Crey seems to forget that fighting over the last fish in the River only means his people will be forced to eat NO fish protein that much sooner. would'nt it be more prudent to sit down & talk about the problem now -while we collectively still can??? --Tight lines
Put yourself in the guides shoes for half a minute.
You have clients that have hired you, so they could have an opportunity to catch a fish. You take them out on a local bar and throw out the bar rigs and sit down with your clients to watch your rods..... Over the course of the afternoon people all around you are catching fish by bottom bouncing, but you and your clients are not....
What would you say to your clients? Remember you need them to tell their friends so that they will call you up and pay you to guide them. This is how you earn your living.... you have little kids to feed.... ???
BB'ing has an effect on the mortality of the fish, approximately .04% of them are estimated to die as a result of C&R. Why is so much thought and discussion going into such a small part of the problem. It's seems like the equivalent of taking a sieve and putting most of your effort into plugging one of the holes. Even if you plug it you've still got 99.96% of the holes that are still leaking.... :(
Heyzeus Buddy!!!-- we've been fighting for years to keep Gov'ts out of our tackle boxes--- next it'll be no spinners , plastic artificials, roe, Lead-- And don't get me started on that P.E.T.A bunch ! Let common sense rule and Teach, Teach ,Teach those that there are better ways --it's that or throw away the rods & grab the Golf Clubs --- Tight Lines
Hi Boys,
Great suggestions, however I think the point is really that DFO does not want to face a challenge regarding native fisheries in court. Even with the illegal drift netting, the challenge FN could/would make is that they are still allowed to fish as long as sporties are on the river (depends how you read the judgments). If a judge sides with them, a case law precedent would be established and DFO could lose any/all legal leverage in setting regulations for FN, and that's only within Canadian law. As far as international law goes, remember that most FN bands haven't signed any treaties yet and they could possibly win in court (in the type of cases mentioned above) what they would otherwise need to bargain for in treaty negotiations (as far as fish quotas/access). In fact depending how you look at it, DFO really has no say over FN as they are still in nation to nation negotiations and DFO is part the Canadian national government's infrastructure and as sovereign nations, FN do not (yet, at least) recognise Canadian Law and can claim (as I'm sure they're doing) complete rights over the entire river and all of it's fish as a starting point in treaty negotiations. If/when FN settle treaties, DFO will start enforcing the law (or maybe after the Olympics ::)) I don't like any of this, but it's the only explanation I can think of that makes any sense to me in this whole fisheries mess.
There it is in a NUTshell folks-- sounds crazy but it's true--- anybody seen a Sparrow or a Judge Bolt lately?
-
Not sure how that is relevant to my post that you quoted. The question you asked should be directed at Crey, because it's not going to get answered if it is only asked on this discussion forum like many other questions.
Pink and chum salmon are usually scheduled for economy opportunity openings for Lower Fraser First Nations between September and November.
-
Not sure how that is relevant to my post that you quoted. The question you asked should be directed at Crey, because it's not going to get answered if it is only asked on this discussion forum like many other questions.
Pink and chum salmon are usually scheduled for economy opportunity openings for Lower Fraser First Nations between September and November.
Rod: You'd be surprised who reads this column and why. FYI this question has been directed to Mr. Crey in other venues and he has not answered-- it is included here for input and data only--- Cheers-- Tight lines
-
Still doesn't answer why you directed it to me by quoting my post that has nothing to do with what yo are asking.
And no,I wouldn't be surprised by who maybe reading this discussion. With 5000 visitors per day and available to anyone who has access to the internet, it could be anyone. Maybe Mr Harper is sitting at home reading it right now too. ::)
-
Still doesn't answer why you directed it to me by quoting my post that has nothing to do with what yo are asking.
And no,I wouldn't be surprised by who maybe reading this discussion. With 5000 visitors per day and available to anyone who has access to the internet, it could be anyone. Maybe Mr Harper is sitting at home reading it right now too. ::)
Rod: My mistake sometimes we all go off on tangents-- the target was incorrect the point wasn't --in my opinion however I don't think Mr. Harper or any of his crew reads anything from BC---- Cheers :o
-
I don't think Mr. Harper or any of his crew reads anything from BC---- Cheers :o
Ha! ;)
No problem. I wasn't offended or anything, was just curious. Cheers.
-
I completely agree that BB'ing shouldn't be the focal point of these discussions. However, since it is if the Association came out and said they're going to comply with the request then the discussion is over. We can then move to tackling the real problem. It's such an easy request I can't believe people are fighting it to the death. Once it stops the govt will need to point the finger somewhere else. Then, maybe we'll get somewhere.
I understand guides need to make their clients happy and put food on table for their kids. I'm trying to look long term from a guides perspective, not short term. The way its looking the government will shut down salmon fishing. The Association has the power to drive change. It's very difficult and in the short run it will have a negative impact on their business. However, if the Association ceased BB'ing today and set an example others will follow. Most people learned from guides and look to them for their expertise on how to catch fish.
Emac , we have come out and said it infact we are the first ones and even last year we helped distribute flyers and posted it on all of our websites.
You guys must remember that the FVAGA has 70 members, there are over 150 licensed guides in the valley. We do not control them, they do as they wish. We had an emergancy meeting when the request came out and our members voted 95% in favor of supporting DFO. The definition was proposed 2 years ago, the suggestion cam from a meeting with our members, moved forward to SFAC then to SFAB, DFO dropped it.
I would like to write more right now but I just can't, i don't have the time.
Keep this in mind, the same day they closed the river to sport fishing above the Aggasiz bridge, there was a full on drift net fishery below Port Mann Bridge, we counted 27 nets, above the bridge was loaded with boats drifting. I would guess over 50boats in total. Most are using 8 inch mesh for chinook but guess what, if you run the net strait you get Chinook, if you "S" cureve the net, you get everything. You don't think they know that.
We saw hundreds of sockeye being taken including sturgeon. Now you honestly tell me we as recreational anglers are the problem.
For tyhose of you that understand the real issue, forget bb, if you want to ever fish the Fraser again, its time to stand up and be counted. Write your MP today, I really mean today because we are done fishing the Fraser if we don't.
Hope to see you on the water,.
-
::)Yup, blame the bb'ers, no wait, blame the sporties in general for the devastating drop in the sockeye numbers. They, of course, are the main culprits here. The sporties must have been flossing 24/7 out there in the salt chuck to kill off this many fish ::) Mr. Ernie Crey, you win...will you put in a good word for us sporties with DFO and allow us a day or two of fishing? Pretty please? If we don't get time on the water, I guess we'll just have to order some from the pick up truck guy.
-
From the native persepective the fish are theirs, and if DFO askes them to curtail nettign from 100,000s down to 10.000s, then sport fishermen must go from 100s or 1000s down to zero. The governement supports them in this thinking so the future Fraser sport fishery is bleak imo, BB or o BB.
I live in Steveston and walk by lots of old fishboats that seldom leave the docks. They used to gillnet the Fraser regularly, today there is still regular gillnetting, buts it is always natives. Some of the older fishermen complain lots about how this came about, but it is the reality, and everyone knows there is no going back. The same trend is in the works for the sport fishery. If there is some way to keep a sport fishery on the Fraser, it might involve some method of the natives making some money off it.
-
I cant speak for others but as many of you know i am against Bottom Bouncing as we see it on the Fraser etc., but not once have i said or anyone else ive read say that bouncers are the cause of any fish decline.
It is the method that i dont agree with,period, and nothing to do with fish stocks.
I do agree that as a group we will have to use our collective selves to form any kind of a front.
Unfortunately the problem isnt just in the river itself but who knows where these fish could be ending up?
Hey look at the bright side.When they dam the Fraser our hydro costs should be next to nothing. ::)