Fishing with Rod Discussion Forum
Fishing in British Columbia => General Discussion => Topic started by: IronNoggin on July 01, 2018, 11:17:11 AM
-
DFO is about to ram yet another series of closures for fishing through. Fin Fish Closures from Long Beach, South Bank, Big Bank, Rats Nose all the way to Swiftsure. This based upon both sketchy information, and in even larger areas, no information at all.
Time to tell DFO we won't sit idly by while they take the "don't confuse me with facts" approach and adopts "assumption based science" once again.
“B.C.’s tidal water recreational fishery, combined with the freshwater fishery, is the largest and most valuable in Canada, valued at $18 billion annually. DFO issues over 350,000 tidal licences per year collecting $7.3 million in fees and the fishery employs around 8,400 British Columbian’s (as of 2012).”
· Area SRKW Refuge Recreational Fin Fish Closures will cause significant socio-economic harm destroying jobs and economic spin off activities in small coastal communities like Ucluelet, Port Alberni, Bamfield, Port Renfrew, Sooke and Victoria.
· Killer whales are only very rarely present on LaPerouse Bank, and there is no documented evidence from passive acoustic monitoring to clearly demonstrate this is actually critical habitat. DFO science is making an assumption that because areas of LaPerouse Bank are important areas for commercial and recreational Chinook fishing that they area similarly important to killer whales.
· According to Passive Acoustic Monitoring (PAM), killer whales are only present on Swiftsure Bank 43% of monitored days between May to September – broad Area Refuge closures impact recreational fishing opportunity during significant periods where the whales are not present.
· There is no comparative analysis that demonstrates the effectiveness of Area Closure vs a mobile “bubble” strategy
· More effort is required to scientifically determine if indeed there is any less benefit to be achieved using a “bubble” strategy which is less impactful – striking a balance between protection and economic activity
External review of the critical habitat section of the draft Amended Recovery Strategy for the Northern and Southern Resident Killer Whales in Canada:
http://www.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/consultation/sara-lep/killerwhales-epaulards/index-eng.html (http://www.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/consultation/sara-lep/killerwhales-epaulards/index-eng.html)
Deadline for feedback is July 11.
Nog
-
If this is about the noise and disturbance of fishing boats to killer whales - I don't see how this is really much of a problem. I haven't fished the salt in years, but every time I have, if the whales come through, the bite turns off for a day and you need to find somewhere else to fish. I like the mobile bubble idea - assuming it is what it sounds like - and assuming it can be successfully pulled off in real time.
-
If this is about the noise and disturbance of fishing boats to killer whales - I don't see how this is really much of a problem.
No. It is about Total Fin Fish Closures (NO FISHING) running basically from Long Beach (near Tofino) right around the bottom of the Island towards the Fraser River. A long term dream Agenda from Parks Canada. They have sought DFO backing, and believe they now have a way to proceed to realize this. It will negatively & directly effect many many coastal communities. DFO's own biologists advise against area closures, and to instead employ the "bubble" type restrictions. Of course the whale watchers fought that tooth and nail. And the Political Masters at DFO now over-rule their own scientists in a desperate attempt to appear to be doing something... As their biologists note, such closures "will have no significant positive impact".
What would have the type of results desired (from the biologists) would be ramping hatcheries up, getting on with major habitat improvements, and reducing the overpopulated pinniped predators. DFO sees that as too expensive / controversial, so is seeking to impose do-nothing closures instead. Shameful.
Draconian at best! :(
Nog
-
No. It is about Total Fin Fish Closures (NO FISHING) running basically from Long Beach (near Tofino) right around the bottom of the Island towards the Fraser River. A long term dream Agenda from Parks Canada. They have sought DFO backing, and believe they now have a way to proceed to realize this. It will negatively & directly effect many many coastal communities. DFO's own biologists advise against area closures, and to instead employ the "bubble" type restrictions. Of course the whale watchers fought that tooth and nail. And the Political Masters at DFO now over-rule their own scientists in a desperate attempt to appear to be doing something... As their biologists note, such closures "will have no significant positive impact".
What would have the type of results desired (from the biologists) would be ramping hatcheries up, getting on with major habitat improvements, and reducing the overpopulated pinniped predators. DFO sees that as too expensive / controversial, so is seeking to impose do-nothing closures instead. Shameful.
Draconian at best! :(
Nog
Yes, you are right, we need all of what you are saying more than closures. From a bang for your buck perspective, it is hard to justify pouring money into hatchery production or habitat restoration when ocean survival has been so dismal, and the only thing that may help that is pinniped control. Of course, nobody has mentioned the impact of the northern pods of killers whales that are thriving and are making a huge dent in the chinook populations - especially bigger and older fish. What we really need is a substantial event that changes ocean conditions like a volcanic eruptions in Asia. I have come to believe more and more that sport fishers need to align themselves with the First Nations and the Treaty Tribes (in Washington) to work toward common goals of seal/sea lion control, increased hatchery production, and habitat restoration. Habitat restoration is crucial to increasing carrying capacity of rivers, and is often the biggest limiting factor in natural production.
-
the long term problem with low hatchery productivity is indicative ocean survival may be the major hurdle faced. In BC at least there are many streams with good habitat. It could be better for sure. Most of the available evidence is pinnepeds are mostly a local problem and seems to be worst for hatchery production. So if a lot of money is invested in that and it doesn't work or produces unexpected negative results - which the chances are it will since that is typical with predator culls, what then?
-
... what then?
What would you suggest then Ralph? (http://forum.flybc.ca/style_emoticons/default/Idunno.gif)
Sit idly by & do nothing?
Buy into these nonsensical closures?
What??
Wondering...
Nog
-
the closures may be nonsensical but then so might predator culls.
The pinnepids issue has become highly politicized. Those who have done this have developed an attitude within the sport fishing community that there is an either or choice available - if we can have a cull then we can fish as if nothing is different. This is likely a serious error. You can't have the cake and eat it too.Closures even the nonsensical ones are the most passive approach most likely to get desired results without unexpected negative paybacks.
-
the closures may be nonsensical but then so might predator culls.
Might? (http://forum.flybc.ca/style_emoticons/default/Idunno.gif)
The pinnepids issue has become highly politicized. Those who have done this have developed an attitude within the sport fishing community that there is an either or choice available - if we can have a cull then we can fish as if nothing is different. This is likely a serious error.
And with that I agree.
Predation is certainly not the sole limiting factor effecting chinook populations.
Were such a program to have the best effect, it would necessarily have to work in conjunction with sweeping habitat mitigation / enhancement projects, as well as other directed programs to give the chinook an immediate "boost" in population numbers.
Even then, I would strongly suggest that we would have to certainly limit our take of the chinook until such time as their populations become more robust.
This approach was what their own biologists suggested, while at the same time advising against area closures (which in their own words "would have little positive effect").
Closures even the nonsensical ones are the most passive approach most likely to get desired results without unexpected negative paybacks.
That is simply not what DFO Science recommends, and in fact is exactly what they recommended against Ralph.
And btw, while the closures may look "passive" to those on the outside, for those of us who live, work & play here, they are anything but.
I am strongly opposed to such disruptive mechanisms when their own science team suggests the overall result is unlikely to produce the desired results...
Can you imagine the West Coast of the Island being closed from Long Beach (Tofino) right down & around to the Fraser?
Parks has always wanted this, and with DFO support they can see a distinct possibility of achieving what they have previously not been able to do so (because local and public opinion disagreed with them). Again, this is not a conservation driven issue, it is purely Political.
Comment deadline July 11...
Cheers,
Nog
-
Hi Everybody, Long time no chat. Hope you are all well.
In answer to this thread ...have you heard about Agenda 21?
It's the U.N. mandated blueprint on how North America is going to be managed.
Part of the management will involve using conservation and environmental concerns as reasons to dictate how natural resources will be managed. That's what this whole deal is about.
-
If this goes ahead, does that mean no more fishing in tidal water from Tofino to Victoria area? What happen to all the folks who depend on this fishery for livelihood? Even all the hotels, lodges and restaurants will be in trouble. They better promote enough whale watching tourism to cover for that loss. Lol. Even there will be less ferry travels when fishermen shun the island. This is too big a problem for DFO to handle. This is not just fishing, but a political problem when people turn on the politicians for letting this blanket closure to happen.
-
If this goes ahead, does that mean no more fishing in tidal water from Tofino to Victoria area?
Yes
What happen to all the folks who depend on this fishery for livelihood? Even all the hotels, lodges and restaurants will be in trouble.
They do not count. They are being considered "collateral damage" by the current government.
And Parks Canada gets their dream of presiding over one of the largest marine parks in the world.
This is too big a problem for DFO to handle. This is not just fishing, but a political problem when people turn on the politicians for letting this blanket closure to happen.
It is FAR beyond DFO's capabilities to address. So much so they are taking the easiest way out possible, and denying everything their own scientists are trying to tell them. And yes, there will be considerable backlash if this proceeds.
The Trudeau government obviously thinks the risk is minimal...
Sad Days... :(
Deadline for comment July 11...
Nog
-
Can you imagine the West Coast of the Island being closed from Long Beach (Tofino) right down & around to the Fraser?
Parks has always wanted this, and with DFO support they can see a distinct possibility of achieving what they have previously not been able to do so (because local and public opinion disagreed with them). Again, this is not a conservation driven issue, it is purely Political.
Comment deadline July 11...
Cheers,
Nog
Can I imagine? Yes I can. I myself have been laid off or lost employment due to changes in economic conditions why is this different? Any one remember the East Coast cod collapse?
That Parks (I assume you mean Parks Canada) wants the closure to extend from the Pacific Rim Park to the mouth of the Fraser is about as credible as blaming it on the idiotic Agenda 21 Conspiracy theory.
-
Off topic but just wondering if anyone has ever agreed with Ralph on this forum ever, or even like the guy for that matter
-
Off topic but just wondering if anyone has ever agreed with Ralph on this forum ever, or even like the guy for that matter
I strongly agree with most of what Ralph says even though I tend not to engage in political nonsense on internet forums. He makes his points far more eloquently and patiently than I could. Just because Ralph is the only one speaking out doesn't mean he's the only one who agrees with what he's saying 8)
-
Yada yada yada, and then sanction the fn to have a demonstration fishery where they openly encourage them to sell the fish?
I give up!!!
-
I strongly agree with most of what Ralph says even though I tend not to engage in political nonsense on internet forums. He makes his points far more eloquently and patiently than I could. Just because Ralph is the only one speaking out doesn't mean he's the only one who agrees with what he's saying 8)
Agree
-
... That Parks (I assume you mean Parks Canada) wants the closure to extend from the Pacific Rim Park to the mouth of the Fraser is about as credible as blaming it on the idiotic Agenda 21 Conspiracy theory.
You must have missed entirely their previous two proposals wherein they suggested the establishment of a marine park from Long Beach down to Renfrew I guess.
Soundly defeated both times, and rightfully so IMHO.
With this latest initiative, they may actually realize success (finally) beyond their wildest dreams.
Cheers,
Nog
-
(https://i.imgur.com/Wkt2NDi.jpg)
From page 61 of the Killer Whale Recovery Strategy, designed in cooperation with DFO & Parks Canada:
http://www.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/consultation/sara-lep/killerwhales-epaulards/docs/2018-killer-whales-epaulards-eng.pdf
For this post I won't bother (yet) pointing out the many discrepancies in said Strategy...
Area proposed for this closure (does not reflect inside closures already in place, nor ones proposed for the areas north of Vancouver Island).
(https://i.imgur.com/VJgqzpl.jpg)
Starting to get the picture??
Wondering...
Nog
-
This closure would devastate the coastal communities of Port Renfrew, Bamfield, Port Alberni, Ucluelet and Tofino and every recreational and commercial fisherman who earns their livelihood or enjoys their recreational pastime in what is considered one of the greatest accessible salmon and halibut fishing grounds in North America.
http://www.timescolonist.com/opinion/letters/fishery-closure-would-be-devastating-1.23358161
Yep...
-
If this goes ahead, does that mean no more fishing in tidal water from Tofino to Victoria area? What happen to all the folks who depend on this fishery for livelihood? Even all the hotels, lodges and restaurants will be in trouble. They better promote enough whale watching tourism to cover for that loss. Lol. Even there will be less ferry travels when fishermen shun the island. This is too big a problem for DFO to handle. This is not just fishing, but a political problem when people turn on the politicians for letting this blanket closure to happen.
simply, expected to go away, or if FN , buy a nature guiding licence from the Band .(Non FN need not apply) .It is expected that FN will manage the area in it's entirety. Or that is what we were told by an Elder when over in Tofino last week, whether it is bluster or not, it fits with http://www.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/consultation/gwaii-haanas/index-eng.html ..
-
Fisheries and Oceans Canada has already forbidden fishing from June 1 to Sept. 30 between Otter Point in Sooke and Port Renfrew, as well as areas in the southern Gulf Islands, to assist southern resident killer whales. Also, the overall catch of chinook has been reduced 25 to 35 per cent.
First, ask the folks in Sooke and Renfrew just how their closures were implemented. :o
EXACT same process as is being applied here.
Second, there is no way in hell those current closures will ever result in a "25 to 35 per cent" reduction in the recreational spring harvest. ::)
Simply more smoke & mirrors from DFO...
http://www.timescolonist.com/news/local/island-towns-fearful-over-fishing-closures-1.23361351
Nog
-
“Here is a chart illustrating a proposed fin fish closure by DFO. Please take a moment and respond on the link below with your feedback,” writes Hicks in his post (see below). “I have expressed my opinion that our Southern Vancouver Island Coastal Communities, recreational fishers and commercial fishers will be devastated. Never thought I would see this day!”
https://sooke.pocketnews.ca/director-hicks-calls-on-all-to-respond-to-a-fed-fishing-closure-call-for-feedback/
Nog
-
Responded.
Thanks to IronNoggin for bringing this to the forums attention.
-
Deadline for comments is TOMORROW Folks!!!
Cheers,
Nog
-
I was wondering when I would see that type of response. Good news that affected businesses are standing up together via chamber of commerce, to let DFO know how devastating that closure will be. Take note SPORTSFISHERS, you want some success at bargaining tables then become “one “. A UNION OF B.C. SPORTSFISHERMAN” is now needed, we need to do this as soon as possible whatever way possible
-
No kidding we need to stand up like a union to all the wrong & ridiculous decisions of DFO. I responded too, telling them they need to do culls on the over-populated seals and sea lions instead of the 'culls' on the fishing communities and families along the vast areas affected. I tell them we see more and more seals each year, not just in the ocean, but high up the Chilliwack Vedder, the Harrison, the Stave etc. I told them that in those tiny eco space in the rivers, salmon and steelhead don't stand a chance against the seals. Even when we go crabbing in an inlet like Deep Cove, our uncaged baits constantly got stolen by seals. They are everywhere, driven by hunger because of over-population in the ocean. DFO needs to eliminate the real source of the problem to save the whales. But you and I know they often target the 'helpless' sporties first, because we don't fight back. If they do culls on the seals, they have to face the challenge from the animal right groups which are more vocal and united than the fishermen. So perhaps that is why they put the knife on the 'defenseless' fishing communities first. If we have a union of sort, then there will be more bargaining power, and the politicians or head honchos will have to worry about the votes.
-
Well said steelhawk
-
Thank you Steelhawk!
Deadline for Comments is TODAY!!
Cheers & Thanks Folks!
Matt
-
Need a motion in parliament to make 1 $ union fee on every fresh water licence sold to go to union fee, then we elect a president who is well versed in B.C. fisheries issues, pay him /her a salary and get a board of directors , raise money for a lawyer to fight this and other crucial attempts to destroy our heritage! Only way a united voice will ever be formed . Was hoping BCWF would of solved this years ago and got this done yet we all are on some form of club/ website / group Fractured and singular voiced
-
There are a great many things that are much more harmful than anglers in this matter.
DFO knows that, but chooses time and time again to follow the path of least resistance, and fire on the low hanging fruit that it can influence without actually doing anything constructive nor positive. They have followed this pattern for so long now they do not know any other way it seems.
I'd like to offer a firm Thank You to those from here who took a few minutes out of their lives to provide help in the way of comment.
Your efforts are sincerely appreciated!!
This fight is far from over, simply Round One is winding down is all.
The negative effects of this proposal are both wide in scope, and completely unacceptable.
We will continue to fight this every inch of the way, and the groundswell of support for that pursuit is growing daily.
No one can predict if we will carry the day or not.
But we sure as hell are going to give it our best shot!
Again, Thanks Folks!!
Cheers,
Nog