Fishing with Rod Discussion Forum

Fishing in British Columbia => General Discussion => Topic started by: IronNoggin on April 16, 2019, 03:17:00 PM

Title: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: IronNoggin on April 16, 2019, 03:17:00 PM
Read it and weep:

http://seawestnews.com/sweeping-closures-in-british-columbia-for-2019-fishing-season/

https://www.timescolonist.com/news/local/federal-government-announces-tough-restrictions-on-chinook-fishing-1.23793196

(https://i.imgur.com/jRSbubT.jpg)
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: Blood_Orange on April 16, 2019, 05:04:04 PM
Desperate times call for desperate measures, although I'm certainly disappointed that things have gotten this bad.

I was in the process of booking a charter for next month, on the assumption they'd only cut it down to 1 fish per person per day. Will take a raincheck until the summer and hope that our favourite charter guy is still in business then.
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: firstlight on April 16, 2019, 11:19:44 PM
Anyone have any good Seal recipes?
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: wookie on April 17, 2019, 12:42:12 AM
They closed Chinook retention / salmon fishing on the Skeena last year and delayed opening the remaining salmon fishery until late July.
I was up there in August and many people I spoke to supported the decision. Others were only pissed they couldn't fill a freezer in 2018.
I'll survive for a year or two without Chinook.  I'll just have to learn to stomach more trout for a bit.

Although I sympathize with guides and such, unfortunately this happens with certain industries from time to time.  I would have loved to be a guide but questioned long term job-security ....sometimes people have to change jobs....it sucks but a part of life and a risk we take when we choose professions.  I recently changed jobs because my previous work was trending in the wrong direction.....

After hearing so many people speak of the good old days, where there used to be way more fish years ago compared to today, it seems to have been obvious for a long time that things were trending in this direction and that we would end here.......but that's just me...I seldom view rec fisherman release all salmon caught that they could otherwise keep in the name of conservation...a few but not many....and most likely because they wanted a fresher/claner fish to kill.

So to show outrage over a lack planning/action by DFO for some years, and a sudden closure/severe restriction is kind of silly, and its only an attempt to pass the blame onto others.  If it was known/believed that stocks were declining and not what they used to be, why did we continue to keep fish and not change our habits as rec fisherman? I'm guilty of this too btw...people have a tendency to pillage a resource until we can't, and then get pissed about it.

At least it looks like we get catch and release, so those who are out just for the love of the sport will be just fine....Nooks are the new Steelhead....be satisfied with a Chinook pics I guess.

Anyways, its late and I've had a shitty night, which may be reflected in my opinionated belligerent comments.  Cheers


Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: AaronWilde on April 17, 2019, 06:25:36 AM
I cant find the study now buy I remember reading in it that a large % of our adult Chinook are caught in Alaska waters before making it back to BC?
Also ive seen some gill nets drifting out in mission the othet day lol. Springers!!
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: Blood_Orange on April 17, 2019, 07:00:06 AM
Anyways, its late and I've had a shitty night, which may be reflected in my opinionated belligerent comments.  Cheers
Your comments don't come across as belligerent at all! Check Facebook comments if you want to see people being jerks :P
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: Hike_and_fish on April 17, 2019, 07:07:37 AM
I cant find the study now buy I remember reading in it that a large % of our adult Chinook are caught in Alaska waters before making it back to BC?
Also ive seen some gill nets drifting out in mission the othet day lol. Springers!!
I've seen the nets oit as well. I just assumed they were out for Oolies.
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: RalphH on April 17, 2019, 07:14:34 AM
I cant find the study now buy I remember reading in it that a large % of our adult Chinook are caught in Alaska waters before making it back to BC?
Also ive seen some gill nets drifting out in mission the othet day lol. Springers!!

the pan handle chinook fishery was shut down early last year to protect Canadian fish. Virtually all the fish there are 'Canadian' fish from Canadian spawning sites though in many cases the last mile or so of the river is in Alaska. Those numbers would also include the Yukon River where something like half the total number of return fish originate in Canada.
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures -WCVI Inshore?
Post by: Morty on April 17, 2019, 09:10:13 PM
Does anyone know for sure what the West Coast: Near Shore guidelines are?

Is it 2 per day currently and throughout the season?   or 2 per day after some closure period?
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures -WCVI Inshore?
Post by: CohoJake on April 18, 2019, 07:58:44 AM
Does anyone know for sure what the West Coast: Near Shore guidelines are?

Is it 2 per day currently and throughout the season?   or 2 per day after some closure period?
Good question - didn't it say something about "after stocks of concern have passed through" or something like that?
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures -WCVI Inshore?
Post by: Easywater on April 18, 2019, 09:50:21 AM
Does anyone know for sure what the West Coast: Near Shore guidelines are?

Is it 2 per day currently and throughout the season?   or 2 per day after some closure period?
The article in the first link (seawestnews) seems to show inshore hasn't changed from last year - 2 per day.
The map near the end of the article has the info.

Which makes sense since this is designed to protect Fraser Chinook.
Inshore fish are probably headed to their spawning river on the Island.
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: dobrolub on April 18, 2019, 10:11:00 AM
we'll close fishing off but

we'll continue clear cutting forests
we'll continue developing wet lands
we'll continue polluting rivers
we'll continue building dams
we'll continue using agricultural pesticides

we'll continue all other harmful practices that kill fish in millions... but, you can't take an extra fish out of the ocean.
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: wildmanyeah on April 18, 2019, 04:11:18 PM
Gibbs Delta Tackle
57 mins ·
Today our COO and SFI President Rob Alcock and the Sport Fishing Institute of BC sat down with Fisheries Minister Jonathan Wilkinson - Here is a re-cap of the meeting:

Understand that the Minister’s decision has been made and will not be reversed. What we were trying to achieve was a better understanding of his intentions and if there was flexibility or room to tweak some areas.

Opened the meeting with significant discussion expressing our extreme disappointment and betrayal. Followed by the immediate and long term effects of his actions.

Noted that his statement that “Pacific Chinook” were in a critical state was a lie and very misleading to the public. Many stocks are doing very well. His message basically told the world not to come to BC for fishing.

Accepting that he is not going to reverse the decision, how can we work with it to reduce damage.

A: As the stock of concern travels off shore on the west coast, we requested that a one mile surf line be applied to the west coast allowing communities like Port Renfrew and Tofino to have a fishery. This was well received and the open for discussion.

B: Would he consider changes or moving dates eg: open for Canada Day. Pretty hard no on this one.

C: No reason to close Georgia Straight inlets as there is no science indicating the stock of concern are there. Well received and under consideration.

D: Selective marked fishery. If we are allowed to fish but not retain wild salmon why would we not be able to keep a hatchery salmon should we catch one. This one has nothing to do with conservation in the ocean and is a FN issue. DFO wants to keep the nets out of the river until July 14 and if rec anglers are retaining “any” salmon... then FN has a constitutional right to as well. A selective marked fishery would require support from FN. This one is not off the table but will be a tough one to get approved.

E: How do they plan to implement the new 10 fish annual limit when many people have already purchased their license and it has 30 on it? This one was challenging for them. Not sure what they will do.

F: Lots of other discussion including no fin fish area from Otter to East Point should be open for Halibut etc. Other potential opportunities to reduce the damage.

We will be getting back together soon to review these possible changes and hopefully expect to see some variance orders to the regs.

Expect the Fisheries Notice to come out today with Variance Orders to follow for any changes.
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: IronNoggin on April 18, 2019, 04:17:29 PM
D: Selective marked fishery. If we are allowed to fish but not retain wild salmon why would we not be able to keep a hatchery salmon should we catch one. This one has nothing to do with conservation in the ocean and is a FN issue. DFO wants to keep the nets out of the river until July 14 and if rec anglers are retaining “any” salmon... then FN has a constitutional right to as well. A selective marked fishery would require support from FN. This one is not off the table but will be a tough one to get approved.

Now there is a complete load of horse$hit for you!
There are FN nets in the river, for a DFO sanctioned opening on "threatened" early ruin springs, right now, and open for seven days. WTF do they think they are fooling here??

In discussions with both Fisheries critics yesterday, it is quite obvious there will be no turning back from this.
At least this year, and likely for five.
I am uncertain what, if anything the Conservatives would do to lighten the impacts, but I have asked, and will post if / when I get a response.

Whole thing is a travesty.
Already (as in NOW) DFO is "letting" some Fraser Bands commence with a week's effort directed on early run (threatened) springs.
That sector is by far the most responsible for the downward spirals of most spring populations.
Area G (me) has conclusively shown that our impact in May is less than ONE percent Canadian origin, but we get yanked.
Many of the recreational fisheries can indicate the same, but they get yanked.
The FN's are told they will have to wait until July 15, but then they get targeted openings.  :o

And while this whole scenario is being developed, DFO quietly sneaks in a new branch, complete with RDG, support staff and funding.
Title of this new entity?
Reconciliation & Partnerships Branch.
I kid you not:

Via Email:

In direct response to Budget 2019 commitments to support our capacity to work with Indigenous groups and advance reconciliation, I am reaching out to you to share some news about planned organizational changes that we are making at Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Pacific Region, to help position us to build on our established relationships with Indigenous communities and organizations across the Region.

I am pleased to share with you that we are moving forward to create a new team in Pacific Region dedicated to work across our diverse departmental branches to advance reconciliation. The name of this new team -- Reconciliation and Partnerships (R&P) Branch -- reflects the outcomes we want to achieve. My hope is that R&P will provide the Region with strategic support as we continue our work of strengthening our relationships and translating the Government’s high-level reconciliation priorities into specific, concrete and coordinated actions in our day-to-day work.

“Partnerships” in the branch title name highlights the need not only to create partnerships with Indigenous communities to achieve our reconciliation objectives but also to work closely with our industry and recreational partners to ensure that these objectives are realized. Achieving reconciliation will require strong relationships between the Department and industry, governmental and non-governmental organizations and other bodies interested in resource management, all of whom play a role at helping to realize reconciliation.

In the upcoming months, our new Regional Director of R&P, David Didluck, will be seeking opportunities to meet sector advisory and management groups to discuss his work. Rest assured that your key DFO program contacts will not change. I look forward to building on our relationship through further engagement to advance reconciliation and partnerships through fisheries and aquatic management.

Rebecca Reid
Regional Director General
Pacific Region


Life, as I knew it, is over.   :-X

Nog
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: wildmanyeah on April 18, 2019, 04:20:06 PM
IT also doesn't jive with how Coho fisheries are managed
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: RalphH on April 18, 2019, 07:10:49 PM
IT also doesn't jive with how Coho fisheries are managed

maybe that's because the objectives are different
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: Hike_and_fish on April 18, 2019, 08:56:45 PM
I honestly could care less any more. But maybe this is what FN and DFO wants. Theres a small part of me that wants to hand everything over and give up. Let them sink the ship. I can honestly say with 100% honesty during this past Sockeye fishery on the Fraser I religiously fished Lower Mountain bar. Straight north from Island 22. I would head up at 5am in the dark with help from my chartplotter. Everytime there was an opening for the Chehalis band they were there drifting in the dark with set nets in behind moutain bar. Their opening did not start till 7 or 8 am and EVERYTIME there was beer cans in their boats, on the bar and PILES of Springs under the floor in their boats. I was offered a Spring EVERYTIME I went there and so was everyone else that fished that bar. 100% truth, they were handing out springs to EVERYONE. My good friend made a deal with one band member to buy some Spring. He walked out of the rez with 3 coolers full for $150. Their excuse for handing oit the Springs was "We cant keep them because DFO says we have to throw them back dead or alive". Now I get that this is their traditional land. But holy cow. Seeing that was a real eye opener. I hope theres no more salmon left. I kind of do. They dont deserve any.
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: firstlight on April 21, 2019, 10:20:03 AM
I honestly could care less any more. But maybe this is what FN and DFO wants. Theres a small part of me that wants to hand everything over and give up. Let them sink the ship. I can honestly say with 100% honesty during this past Sockeye fishery on the Fraser I religiously fished Lower Mountain bar. Straight north from Island 22. I would head up at 5am in the dark with help from my chartplotter. Everytime there was an opening for the Chehalis band they were there drifting in the dark with set nets in behind moutain bar. Their opening did not start till 7 or 8 am and EVERYTIME there was beer cans in their boats, on the bar and PILES of Springs under the floor in their boats. I was offered a Spring EVERYTIME I went there and so was everyone else that fished that bar. 100% truth, they were handing out springs to EVERYONE. My good friend made a deal with one band member to buy some Spring. He walked out of the rez with 3 coolers full for $150. Their excuse for handing oit the Springs was "We cant keep them because DFO says we have to throw them back dead or alive". Know I get that this is their traditional land. But holy cow. Seeing that was a real eye opener. I hope theres no more salmon left. I kind of do. They dont deserve any.

Well said.
Thank you.
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: wildmanyeah on April 21, 2019, 10:57:21 AM
https://www.pacificangler.ca/pacific-angler-friday-fishing-report-april-19-2019/

Vancouver Saltwater Salmon Fishing Report
Well it’s official.  The DFO and Fisheries Minister have made it non-retention for chinook salmon on the south coast.  They just shut down some of the best fishing I have ever seen in our local waters and what is very likely the best fishing on the entire coast right now.  That’s just our area.  Let’s not forget about the iconic sport fishing communities on the Island like Tofino, Ucluelet, Bamfield, Campbell River, Renfrew, and Victoria, just to name a few.  The result is thousands of people are going to lose their jobs and it is going to cost this province hundreds of millions of dollars.

So how did we get here?  Well it’s a complicated scenario and the road to this closure has a lot of ups and downs and twists and turns, but it goes something like this.  Chinook stocks are diverse.  Some come from the Fraser, some from rivers that empty directly into the ocean, some spend 2 years in the freshwater before they leave to the ocean, others out migrate right away, some spend their ocean life in local waters, some go way offshore.  So, as you can imagine, some stocks might be suffering while others are doing very well.  Large blanket closures are an ineffective way to manage such a diverse resource.

Enter interior Fraser chinook.  These fish spawn in the interior tributaries to the Fraser, and they hang out in these rivers for 2 years before out-migrating.  To say things are not going well up there is an understatement; less water, long hot summers, warm water, forest fires, siltation, are just a few of the issues these fish have to face for 2 years.  The end result is the survival rate is extremely low.  The few that do make it after 2 years then have to make it past the seals as they leave the Fraser.  Of all the out migrating salmonids, these 2 year old chinook smolts are some of the biggest, only second to steelhead smolts.  As a result, the seals focus on them, as they do steelhead smolts.  As many as 47% of them are consumed by seals.  The few that make it then head offshore to feed and return 2 years later.  In general, they come back around the south end of Vancouver Island and into the south arm of the Fraser, returning in the months of April, May, June, and July.  There is no doubt these fish need to be protected and we are all for that.  Sport fishing regulations have been in place to do so for many years, so much so that our exploitation rate for these fish is either at 0% or so small that it is negligible.

So, what about all these fish off South Bowen right now and over in Nanaimo and Gabriola?  Well these are not the fish I just described above.  DFO has a lot of DNA data that shows what fish we are catching, that is how we can be so certain.  This is a scientific fact, not speculation.  The fish we are we catching in these areas are from a variety of rivers where things are not as dire as the conditions seen in the interior of the province.  The chinook stocks from these systems are stable, and in some cases are at or near record returns.  There is no conservation concern for these stocks and a 2 per day limit is sustainable.  A 1 per day limit is certainly sustainable and acceptable from a scientific fisheries management viewpoint.  If you have been fishing these past 2 weeks you know how many fish are out there.

Then why did we get shut down?   This is the question you should be asking and I am going to tell you the politics behind it.  The reality is this.  The interior Fraser chinook need protection.  Sport fishing regulations have been in place to do so for many years as noted earlier, and commercial troll opportunities for these fish have been reduced heavily in the past and this year are non-existent.   The last piece of the puzzle is First Nations in river fisheries for these same fish.  You can’t carve any more meat off the bone from the recreational or commercial fleet, the rest has to come from First Nations in river fisheries.  This isn’t me speaking; this is the DFO science that was presented in a variety of meetings and forums.  The only way to put more of these fish on the spawning beds is to stop in river netting of these fish.  Hence the recent closures and reduced opportunities for First Nations over the coming months as per the announcement yesterday.  I hope you are connecting the dots here and asking yourself this question.  So why is a sustainable fishery like we see off South Bowen, for non-interior Fraser chinook, which are experiencing good to excellent survival rates, closed?  You should also be asking yourself why this fishery is closed when it has absolutely nothing to do with these interior Fraser chinook.  Well we asked these very questions to the Minister and DFO these past few days.  The answer we received was this. Despite the fact our current local chinook fisheries have no impact on these interior Fraser chinook, they have to close the recreational fleet on a grandiose scale so they can reduce First Nation in river harvesting opportunities for interior Fraser chinook.  We pointed to their science that shows we aren’t catching those fish and asked if we could have 1 a day, the answer was no.  We asked if we could keep a hatchery only, which has absolutely 0 effect on Fraser fish as these fish are from the USA, the answer was no.  In short, the answer is the recreational fleet has to be closed first, and then they can take fisheries measures for First Nations second.  That precedent was set in a case that is often referred to as the Tommy Case.  Let me make this clear.  If there is a conservation concern, I will be the first to put the rods away, and if anyone has a right to the first harvest of those fish, I agree it should be First Nations for ceremonial and food fish purposes.  I get that if we are fishing for the same fish.  What I don’t agree with and what I don’t get, is the DFO shutting down one distinct fishery and user group so they can shut down another user group on totally different fish.  This is ludicrous and political, this is not scientific, and this is mismanagement of the resource at the highest level.  So, I think it is important that we are all very clear that this Minister just shut down the entire south coast so they can attempt to reduce First Nation in river impacts on interior Fraser chinook.  On our home waters that means they just shut down South Bowen, Thrasher, Nanaimo, which are all experiencing amazing fishing (for non-interior Fraser stocks), just to have the opportunity to keep First Nations nets out of the Fraser to save interior Fraser stocks.   You can see my frustration.  Unfortunately, I don’t think it is going to do much to help these fish.  DFO needs emergency hatchery production for these fish, the habitat needs some help, and we need to deal with the seals.  None of that is happening anytime soon from what I can see.  Since the DFO has sacrificed the whole south coast, I hope they plan on making sure the Fraser is net free until July 14.  I hope fisheries like this have now been closed 2019 Open Times for the Mid & Upper Fraser River First Nations Fisheries  – Week 16.  I will give the DFO the benefit of the doubt on this one and assume that is the case; I certainly hope so for the fish.  In the meantime, diverse and sustainable recreational fisheries remain closed and the south coast marine fishery and economy has been cut off at the knees.

If you think this management strategy is unacceptable, you need to let DFO know.  Send an email to these people and let them know this is not acceptable.  Let them know how it is affecting you and let them know how you are going to vote next election.

Hon Jonathan Wilkinson Minister Jonathan.Wilkinson@parl.gc.ca

Rebecca Reid, DFO Regional Director General, Pacific Region Rebecca.Reid@dfo-mpo.gc.ca

We have had a lot of calls asking if you can still go fishing.  The answer is YES.  The regulations say non-retention of chinook, so you can still fish.  You will have to practice catch and release on chinook.  Fishing is nothing short of amazing right now.  Here is a picture from a charter yesterday and fishing was fantastic.  Of course, if you head out now it is catch and release, but that is still a lot of fun.
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: greyghost on April 21, 2019, 04:27:42 PM
I honestly could care less any more. But maybe this is what FN and DFO wants. Theres a small part of me that wants to hand everything over and give up. Let them sink the ship. I can honestly say with 100% honesty during this past Sockeye fishery on the Fraser I religiously fished Lower Mountain bar. Straight north from Island 22. I would head up at 5am in the dark with help from my chartplotter. Everytime there was an opening for the Chehalis band they were there drifting in the dark with set nets in behind moutain bar. Their opening did not start till 7 or 8 am and EVERYTIME there was beer cans in their boats, on the bar and PILES of Springs under the floor in their boats. I was offered a Spring EVERYTIME I went there and so was everyone else that fished that bar. 100% truth, they were handing out springs to EVERYONE. My good friend made a deal with one band member to buy some Spring. He walked out of the rez with 3 coolers full for $150. Their excuse for handing oit the Springs was "We cant keep them because DFO says we have to throw them back dead or alive". Know I get that this is their traditional land. But holy cow. Seeing that was a real eye opener. I hope theres no more salmon left. I kind of do. They dont deserve any.
We as well fished that area all season! Thought I was having a summer long nightmare but nope it’s the truth! Well said
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: Steelhawk on April 22, 2019, 09:45:25 AM
If anything, to the politicians, votes and perhaps civil unrests will carry more weight than any meetings or appeals. Just vote the liberals out from this province in the next election. Those communities in the most affected areas should start a media campaign to expose DFO and it's unfair treatment to BC coastal communities, and sacrificing the livelihood of tens of thousands of ordinary Canadians just to appease FN. You need to create an atmosphere and stereotype that the current federal Liberal Party is unfriendly and insensitive to the struggling BC families. Talk to the media people now. Have them interviewing these affected families and communities to be on prime time news, especially focusing on the effect on kids and young people. Let them talk their fear about their future, about having to face losing homes, jobs, and probably having to leave their devastated communities and their friends. Let the province, and the country hear about their sufferings just because federal liberals don't care a dime about sacrificing them in order to appease FN for doing the right thing, in the first place, to protect their own endangered Fraser interior springs. Only political pressure of such nature and scope will get the attention of Trudeau and he can then tell his fishery minister to not f... up BC and the voters too much. Lol. Time to organize some public protests, even protest fisheries, by these communities and invite the media. If this can't stop or changetheir decision, at least make the liberals pay a heavy political price. Make next election a anybody but Trudeau election!!! With the recent SNC-Lavalin scandal still stinging his poor rating, Trudeau doesn't need BC to add to his poor public image or rating. Lol.
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: Steelhawk on April 22, 2019, 10:23:50 AM
we'll close fishing off but

we'll continue clear cutting forests
we'll continue developing wet lands
we'll continue polluting rivers
we'll continue building dams
we'll continue using agricultural pesticides

we'll continue all other harmful practices that kill fish in millions... but, you can't take an extra fish out of the ocean.

The same thing DFO allows chum fisheries and so many net openings on the Fraser and you can't do even c&r on the Fraser coho until the prime coho season is over. Sporties are often sacrificed for political reasons.
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: armytruck on April 22, 2019, 12:31:04 PM
My concern is .What about enforcement , are there more officers going to be out making sure there are no double dippers out there . That's a lot of water to cover out there . 
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: Hike_and_fish on April 22, 2019, 02:24:01 PM
If anything, to the politicians, votes and perhaps civil unrests will carry more weight than any meetings or appeals. Just vote the liberals out from this province in the next election. Those communities in the most affected areas should start a media campaign to expose DFO and it's unfair treatment to BC coastal communities, and sacrificing the livelihood of tens of thousands of ordinary Canadians just to appease FN. You need to create an atmosphere and stereotype that the current federal Liberal Party is unfriendly and insensitive to the struggling BC families. Talk to the media people now. Have them interviewing these affected families and communities to be on prime time news, especially focusing on the effect on kids and young people. Let them talk their fear about their future, about having to face losing homes, jobs, and probably having to leave their devastated communities and their friends. Let the province, and the country hear about their sufferings just because federal liberals don't care a dime about sacrificing them in order to appease FN for doing the right thing, in the first place, to protect their own endangered Fraser interior springs. Only political pressure of such nature and scope will get the attention of Trudeau and he can then tell his fishery minister to not f... up BC and the voters too much. Lol. Time to organize some public protests, even protest fisheries, by these communities and invite the media. If this can't stop or changetheir decision, at least make the liberals pay a heavy political price. Make next election a anybody but Trudeau election!!! With the recent SNC-Lavalin scandal still stinging his poor rating, Trudeau doesn't need BC to add to his poor public image or rating. Lol.

The prrof is out there that these decisions and the recent reconciliation movement is not just the decision of the current federal government. however, I will definitely NOT be voting for the federal Liberals this coming election. I made that decision a long time ago. I say he goes back to Cuba and rules his REAL fathers country ;)
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: Steelhawk on April 22, 2019, 03:10:46 PM
My concern is .What about enforcement , are there more officers going to be out making sure there are no double dippers out there . That's a lot of water to cover out there .

The real problem of the closure or reduction of quota is not about catching people out there, but for the tourism fishing based communities is the their tourist clients ain't coming to BC due to all the negatives. Yea, with few coming to fish, that will be a lot of waters to cover to find fishing boats out there. Lol.
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: GordJ on April 22, 2019, 06:21:36 PM
Steelhawk, you mention voting out the Liberals, who do you suggest that we elect? The Conservatives who had control of the fisheries for the previous term? It’s pretty easy argument that they let the fishery get into this shape.
I’m not, in any way, insensitive to the economic ramifications of this shutdown but I don’t see the logic in letting the fishery decline just to give us one more shot at catching a spring before they’re gone. Why not try a little healing before we pronounce the fishery dead?
I know that people will lose their livelihoods and business and homes but this is inevitable if the fish are all gone.
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: skaha on April 22, 2019, 07:54:16 PM
--does not matter what party you vote for...what is important is that you make it clear to your candidate of choice that fisheries are of significant importance to you. Further ask them in both public and private forums, meetings, gatherings what they intend to do to other than look into it. The federal election is on the way. get out and ask questions whenever possible.
--don't accept fisheries policies that do not include a plan for recovery  and forget the promises to fix everything by 2050...results based promises are meaningless without progressive steps some of which should start today! what are they doing today!
--I don't expect my garden to appear at harvest time if I don't tend the soil and plant something today and other things next week and so on thus will have some short and long term crops. lettuce soon and potatoes later in the year. I don't expect to harvest without getting to work now.
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: Steelhawk on April 22, 2019, 09:08:06 PM
Steelhawk, you mention voting out the Liberals, who do you suggest that we elect? The Conservatives who had control of the fisheries for the previous term? It’s pretty easy argument that they let the fishery get into this shape.
I’m not, in any way, insensitive to the economic ramifications of this shutdown but I don’t see the logic in letting the fishery decline just to give us one more shot at catching a spring before they’re gone. Why not try a little healing before we pronounce the fishery dead?
I know that people will lose their livelihoods and business and homes but this is inevitable if the fish are all gone.

You are missing the point of my post. As the minutes of the meetings with DFO show in an earlier post, the fishery minister is obviously insensitive to evening opening fisheries of stocks or areas where the endangered Fraser stock don't hang around. But instead, appeasing FN in order to get them off the water, the minister is willing to endanger the way of life of tens of thousands of people, families which in one way or another depends on this tourist based fishing for eons of time. The blanket closure is done for political reason at the sacrifice of so many just so that some nets on the Fraser are not there in the water too soon. It is not not being fair to these Canadian families. If we don't get to fish, no big deal. There is another river or lakes to spend time or simply go travel somewhere to enjoy fishing. But when these families (or their clients) don't get to fish, they will have to face where to find some income to pay mortgage and foods. Those communities will suffer big time both financially and emotionally. Hardship will breed family problems with social consequences. Did the minister care a bit about these people. If he does, he would be more flexible. But not according to those minutes published earlier. Such an insensitive approach towards struggling BC families and communities just to appease FN to cooperate should be exposed to the public via the media, and such politicians who allow such thing to happen should pay for it with their political life. The conservatives may not have a better management of the fisheries, but they are not the one to issue such blanket closure that totally send these coastal communities into chaos and crisis.
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: GordJ on April 22, 2019, 10:28:13 PM
Those thousands of people that you are talking about won’t have a livelihood if there are no fish. This action is one that is incomplete but it is the best solution that any government has proposed yet. The practices of every government before this has brought about this situation.
As far as the lifestyle “changes” for all those affected goes, it is not very different from the fallers, elevator operators or asbestos miners situation was when the world changed. As devastating as this will be it is unavoidable if there are no fish. The status quo is unsustainable those people can’t continue to find employment in a dying industry.
To suggest that the previous regimes cared more about the people or resource than the first one to provide any action is not, in my opinion, accurate. Sometimes you have to amputate part of the leg to save the body and that line has gone far enough up the leg that the decision to get rid of the less healthy parts is the humane one.
I agree that the Indian opening is a sore spot but, in my opinion, that is less important to me than the overall benefit from the larger restrictions.
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: Steelhawk on April 22, 2019, 11:27:08 PM
You obviously haven't read the minutes in full to realize what they were saying. There are areas with plenty of fish not of Fraser origin and the hot fishing of those in the waters confirm such situation. Those appealing to the minister are trying to have these areas open to some fishing but the answer is flat no, and the reason give is that, once again, sporties have to be all off the water (even though they are not affecting the Fraser stock) so that FN can agree to have their nets delayed. This has nothing to do with 'there is no fish', but that FN somehow has turned the recreational sector as ransom for their agreeing to protect their own endangered stock, and that is the problem that they don't even care that if they don't protect those early runs, they will be history. DFO is 'scared' of FN for whatever reason. They can't stand firm on the ground that they are the government body entrusted with the funding and the science to determine what stocks are at risk and what kind of action (save for a blanket closure) will help those endangered stock without having to bend to FN's demand that all other people can't fish even in areas without the endangered stock. So DFO is in a way turning into a political lobbying organization of sort, lobbying with their feared 'master' just to get them to do something that should have been non-negotiable. Why should DFO cave in on matters as conservation which is their top mandate? And why DFO should take 'orders' from FN on what to do in regards to measure of conservation, such as postponing the netting on the Fraser? That is the question to answer.
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: Hike_and_fish on April 23, 2019, 07:49:57 AM
Isnt the true definition of Racism to favor one group of people while treating others with a lack of ? For the federal government to offer up special treatment and preferential treatment to FN is inherently racist. Government sponsored racism. So my new Canadian friend is told this is a free country but yet he cant fish for Salmon but another ethnic group can.  Now I understand that the Federal government in the past made bad decisions because the Catholic Church told them to but I dont see how this is my fault. Holding citizens hostage because of the past errors from Catholic Church is plain wrong.
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: CohoJake on April 23, 2019, 09:45:26 AM
No, it is not racist to prioritize the rights of indigenous people to continue in what remains of their way of life before it was destroyed by colonists.  When the whole common law system of property ownership is based on who had possession first, but then the colonists say "well, except if it was one of those indigenous 'savages', they don't count", that set up the legal battles that still occupy both US and Canadian courts (and elsewhere in the world as well). 

The political dichotomy that I see in Canada is very similar to what I see in Washington State - the Liberals/Democrats are the only party that really cares about the rights of indigenous people, but they are also the only party that really cares about the environment, climate change, endangered species, and the survival of wild salmon.  The Conservatives/Republicans care about neither (I realize I am generalizing here for the sake of argument, please don't take offense if you are a conservative who cares about the environment).  This sets up an interesting problem where the conservative politicians don't care about over-harvest or habitat in general, because they don't support regulation and government spending, while the liberal side cares about preventing over-harvest but also about making sure the tribal/FN fishers get enough to maintain their way of life (which may be idealized but I would argue is still legitimate). 

The salmon harvest seasons and quota setting process in Washington appears to be somewhat more transparent than in BC, but the same issues are at play.  The legal entitlement of treaty tribes to 50% of all harvested salmon means that some rivers have been netted into oblivion so the state can continue to offer ocean sport fishing opportunities.  Don't forget that FN fishers and Treaty Tribes are generally the last ones to have access to  a particular run of salmon, and they generally don't have the luxury of being able to target runs that are heading to other states/countries/systems (with the exception of the Lummi tribe which conducts reef-netting and gill-netting on a limited harvest of Fraser sockeye and pinks when the quotas allow).  The up-river indigenous populations are the most restricted in the runs available for them to target. 

If I was working for DFO, my greatest fear would be court decisions that result in the BC FN having substantial harvest rights set in stone, because it will undoubtedly be at the expense of other users/harvesters.  I would tread very carefully and I would cater to the FN fishers exactly as DFO is doing here.

One other thing that has only been touched on - don't forget this is a multi-party negotiation, and there are far more players than just the Fraser river FN bands and the BC sport sector.  It has already been stated earlier in this thread that the good fishing off of Thrasher etc. right now is not for Fraser river fish, but for Washington bound fish.  Well guess what?  Seasons and quotas have been substantially cut down here too, partly to allow for the SRKWs and partly to allow endangered stocks to improve their escapement.  Marine Area 7, which runs from approximately the southern tip of Vancouver Island North to the international boundary is completely closed to salmon fishing for the month of August.   There are very few opportunities for BC fish to be intercepted in Washington, but major opportunities for California, Oregon and Washington fish to be harvested off of Vancouver Island as well as the Puget Sound fish that are caught near Victoria, Nanaimo and Vancouver.  And yes, I know, Alaska harvest screws everybody, I'm not happy about that either, but Alaska chinook harvests have been substantially restricted this year as well.
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: Hike_and_fish on April 23, 2019, 11:02:36 AM
By definition it is rascit.

FYI my family had their land stolen from the Soviets a long time ago. No reparation, no treaties and certainly no land to go back to.

I stand by what I said above. It is by definition racist to to favor one ethnic group over another. There is no changing that.
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: IronNoggin on April 23, 2019, 11:09:27 AM
... This action is one that is incomplete but it is the best solution that any government has proposed yet.

This statement shows well just how far off the mark you are in your understanding of the situation.

The Federal government caved into demands from FN's that all others be swept from the water and so used both the recreational and commercial sectors as negotiating points to service that particular form of blackmail. In Area G's May fishery, interception of Canadian Origin fish has been proven over decades to consist of less than one percent - and exponentially lower than that in the case of Fraser stocks of concern. The same can be said for many of the recreational fisheries. The largest and most continuous removals of these threatened / endangered stocks are via the in-river FN fisheries.
Paying the blackmail by forcing thousands off the water will do nothing to improve the fishery for the FN's nor anyone else.
The government understood that when it proceeded.
The FN's did as well, and now some are publicly stating they will not comply.

This was / is not a case of adhering to nor addressing conservation, it is rather a case of paying blackmail to one sector at the cost of all others. Period.

Quote
... Sometimes you have to amputate part of the leg to save the body and that line has gone far enough up the leg that the decision to get rid of the less healthy parts is the humane one.

Also well off the mark. Here's a close analogy:
YOU are sitting at your desk one day, when in walks a fed or two. Clear out your desk, you are leaving and you may not come back. When you demand to know why, the answer is "a select group of folks who happen to be more entitled than you (in our opinion) has decided they don't like you nor your employment. No, you really don't effect what they do at all, but we decided to cater to their demands. You are simply collateral damage. Now hurry up and please move along now".

No compensation even considered.

Many of those they are forcing off the water are in their 60's or more, and as such do not represent "good candidates" for retraining or re-entry into the work force.
Again, the government is completely aware of that.
Again they could give a rat's behind regarding whose lives, families and communities they put in jeopardy.
And for that, I fully intend to ensure they are held accountable.

For you see, I am one of those affected.
We may well lose our house.
Already relations with my Lady are beyond strained.
Life, as I built it and knew it is basically over.
With one stroke of the government pen.
That will realize no benefit to the resource whatsoever.

But they have given me something they did not count on.
Time.
Time to do whatever I can to ensure the public understands just what the reality of this situation is.
And time to do my damnest to ensure they pay in full at the polls this coming fall.

Extremely Upset,
Matt
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: clarki on April 23, 2019, 11:28:17 AM
Hike and Fish, you keep saying "by definition". Your definition, perhaps.

Can you offer up any recognized third-party definition of racism that supports yours?

A quick google search of "racism" showed various definitions with the word "superiority" commonly being used. Nothing about the federal gov'ts policies construes a superiority, or inferiority, of races.

I get that you disagree with the policies and that your family suffered unjustly at the hands of an oppressive regime, but it's inaccurate to describe this gov'ts policies as "racist"         
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: Hike_and_fish on April 23, 2019, 11:57:10 AM
Hike and Fish, you keep saying "by definition". Your definition, perhaps.

Can you offer up any recognized third-party definition of racism that supports yours?

A quick google search of "racism" showed various definitions with the word "superiority" commonly being used. Nothing about the federal gov'ts policies construes a superiority, or inferiority, of races.

I get that you disagree with the policies and that your family suffered unjustly at the hands of an oppressive regime, but it's inaccurate to describe this gov'ts policies as "racist"       


rac·ism

/ˈrāˌsizəm/

noun

prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one's own race is superior.

Preferential treatment for one race over another is discrimination. Since this is strictly race bassed it falls into the definition of Racism. The "We were here first" diarrhea that keeps being repeated is tied to the superior  aspect of the definition of racism. We were here first. That makes us better than you.

It's quite alright to admit that its reverse racism. I would even go further and suggest by placing Canafians into ethnic groups and giving us labels is a major source to most of the hatred in this this country. When we all identify as Canadians I think itll be a better country. My 2 cents
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: clarki on April 23, 2019, 01:37:47 PM
We have differing "cents" that aren't likely to converge over a discussion on a fishing bulletin board. Cheers   
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: Hike_and_fish on April 23, 2019, 02:09:31 PM
We have differing "cents" that aren't likely to converge over a discussion on a fishing bulletin board. Cheers

My cents are based in a solid framework of equality and forward thinking. White guilt ( the sickness plaguing some Caucasians in this land ) is feeding the victim mentally that those who live on reservations seem to have.
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: RalphH on April 23, 2019, 06:08:25 PM
it could be arguably called discrimination though it is becoming increasingly regarded as repugnant to say discrimination can provide benefits to a group that has otherwise been so culturally and socially discriminated against. Various types of discrimination are justifiable and I think the argument it is so in this case is far stronger. BTW First Nations have been given priority access to salmon in Canada for reasons that had and have nothing to do with race. It has more to do with  history and the promises of previous governments. Truth is most first nations in Canada don't enjoy the specific right. It is only common in BC and those FNs in BC who don't live close to waters with salmon largely don't get much of it. Doesn't sound like racism in that light either.

BTW a large part of my family lost their land to 'The Soviets' as well. Years after they were mostly happy to be among the lucky who survived.

Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: dobrolub on April 23, 2019, 07:28:44 PM
according to definition of racism this is not racist. it just feels pretty damn racist to me.

I can't fish because I am not an indian. Wasn't my choice when I was born, don't remember being asked, don't remember signing any papers to agree not to be an indian.

This day and age, I can make a lot of choices... I can identify as a women, as a men, become transgender, childfree, smoke marihuana. Just can't be an indian. Yeh, that sounds pretty racist to me.



Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: RalphH on April 23, 2019, 09:04:45 PM
oh you can fish! There no question about that! ;D
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: IronNoggin on April 24, 2019, 10:15:48 AM
... Various types of discrimination are justifiable and I think the argument it is so in this case is far stronger...

Methinks you might be singing a different tune were it your butt getting kicked to the curb.

Nog
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: bravo252 on April 24, 2019, 11:53:36 AM
Old and intersting article.

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/british-columbia/no-one-followed-the-bc-black-market-salmon/article625576/
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: IronNoggin on April 24, 2019, 11:59:40 AM
Old and intersting article.

Interesting that the very same fellow the article focuses on is now saying he & his people will not comply...   >:(

Nog
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: RalphH on April 24, 2019, 04:53:25 PM
Methinks you might be singing a different tune were it your butt getting kicked to the curb.

Nog

happens everyday
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: Robert_G on April 24, 2019, 09:03:52 PM

rac·ism

/ˈrāˌsizəm/

noun

prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one's own race is superior.

Preferential treatment for one race over another is discrimination. Since this is strictly race bassed it falls into the definition of Racism. The "We were here first" diarrhea that keeps being repeated is tied to the superior  aspect of the definition of racism. We were here first. That makes us better than you.

It's quite alright to admit that its reverse racism. I would even go further and suggest by placing Canafians into ethnic groups and giving us labels is a major source to most of the hatred in this this country. When we all identify as Canadians I think itll be a better country. My 2 cents

100% agree with you.

Anyone who thinks what is happening with our salmon fisheries ISN'T racism needs to go back to grade school and learn what racism really is.
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: Hike_and_fish on April 25, 2019, 07:41:02 AM
Thanks.

We're  not the only ones. You get out there and talk with folks who fish or dont and the vast majority will agree as well. The feds are scared of FN groups. The more they roll over, the more power they gain. It's a viscous cycle.
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: Rodney on April 26, 2019, 10:05:08 AM
What the saltwater rec sector experienced this year is what the Lower Fraser rec sector has experienced and urged the SFAB to do something about it for the past dozen or so years now.

The decisions made for this year are already done, no amount of screaming is going to make a difference now. Moving forward, all you can do is to press for Fisheries and Oceans Canada to explore options for openings next year. It'll be very difficult to have anything reopen even if a new government is voted in after October.
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: IronNoggin on April 26, 2019, 11:19:04 AM
... It'll be very difficult to have anything reopen even if a new government is voted in after October.

My read is that should the current government be re-elected, we will face even more restrictions down the road (this after consulting with DFO and both fisheries critics). What we see now is locked in stone for the next five years at bare minimum.

On the other side of the coin, the Conservatives have suggested they will seek to find a fair and equitable resolution to these matters should they take over.

Good enough for me. At this point I am committed to do whatever I can to destroy the LIEberal's chances in BC. Tit for Tat as it were. Only fair after they have destroyed my livelihood IMHO.

Nog
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: sumasriver on April 26, 2019, 11:32:46 AM
[quote author=IronNoggin
On the other side of the coin, the Conservatives have suggested they will seek to find a fair and equitable resolution to these matters should they take over.
Nog
[/quote]

haha and i have a bridge for sale you may be interested in.........
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: IronNoggin on April 26, 2019, 11:43:55 AM
haha and i have a bridge for sale you may be interested in.........

Whatever.   ::)

First time in his entire reign I have heard anything I can agree with slip out of Horgan's yap:

“Their livelihoods are now compromised because of these decisions and I know the federal government understands that,” Horgan told CTV. He went on to say, “I would love to see a compensation package for those that are being adversely affected but at this point I haven't seen that.”

https://bc.ctvnews.ca/plan-to-help-chinook-salmon-orcas-dismissed-as-unfairly-targeting-sports-fishermen-1.4392094

Doesn't mean I will ever change my mind and vote for him, but I do find it interesting that a Lefty actually Gets It.

BTW: The Feds are ducking and running as hard as they can from any thoughts or considerations of compensation. While they quite often immediately jump to the aid of those their gross incompetence pushes off fisheries in the east, out here we are simply collateral damage.

In another turn, certain well placed academics at UBC are now calling for whales to be granted the dame rights as humans. I kid you not:

Scientists and environmental lawyers agree that whales need the legal rights of personhood to give them a voice in courts and legislatures, and to secure their continued survival and well being.

https://nationalpost.com/pmn/news-pmn/why-the-southern-resident-killer-whales-should-have-the-same-rights-as-people

And The Circus Continues...

Nog
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: RalphH on April 26, 2019, 11:58:10 AM
If abstractions like corporations are 'persons' under the law, why not a real living thing like a whale. What would salmon management and conservation be like if salmon were persons under the law?
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: IronNoggin on April 26, 2019, 12:22:24 PM
If abstractions like corporations are 'persons' under the law, why not a real living thing like a whale. What would salmon management and conservation be like if salmon were persons under the law?

Should have expected that from you...  ::)
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: Steelhawk on April 27, 2019, 01:06:48 AM
If abstractions like corporations are 'persons' under the law, why not a real living thing like a whale. What would salmon management and conservation be like if salmon were persons under the law?

That would mean the end of fishing for you and me, Ralph. When that happens, your act of fishing is considered homicide when you kill a fish. That will mean all organizations promoting fishing will be shut down, including this site and you won't have any avenues to express your unconventional ideas about fishing. Lol.
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: Steelhawk on April 27, 2019, 01:58:20 AM
If there are only 75 southern resident orcas left, why not tag them and have funding to feed them with catches from the other abundant Chinook stocks just to buy some time. Then increase hatchery production on Chinooks and allow seal cull to reduce their impact. Instead DFO rather let billions of the recreational sector lost with serious socioeconomic consequences. Funding the orcas feeding will be peanut money compared to the huge impact on coastal communities. Simple math! They can even pay whalewatching operators to do the feeding so they can make more income. Good for both humans and the whales. This can last till their population stabilizes. But if only DFO have the ball to stand up to their feared FN masters.
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: RalphH on April 27, 2019, 07:52:41 AM
If there are only 75 southern resident orcas left, why not tag them and have funding to feed them with catches from the other abundant Chinook stocks just to buy some time.

sounds like a cartoon. Reality is captured KWs often refused food for months. A significant portion refused food for so long they had to be released. Yet you mock me for 'unconventional ideas'.

Quote
That would mean the end of fishing for you and me, Ralph. When that happens, your act of fishing is considered homicide when you kill a fish. That will mean all organizations promoting fishing will be shut down, including this site and you won't have any avenues to express your unconventional ideas about fishing. Lol.




would it? What's more important the continuation of a species or a genus of species (like salmonids) or your right to fish? Mostly you conventionally display little interest in the survival of salmon as anything but your play thing. Your knee jerk jerk reaction to anything is more hatchery production despite the fact hatchery production of anadromous salmon species has miserably failed to meet. Survival rates for hatchery raised chinook barely match or are even lower than wild fish.

I simply asked whay might it be like and what benefits for the fish? What if humans were forced to provide them the water, environment and sustenance necessary for them to thrive?  After all corporations are 'persons' Yet they are sold, broken up and cease to be everyday and no one is charged with homocide.
But the box you've long trapped you mind inside is unable to peer out from it's imposed darkness. It's conventional thinking that has gotten us to where we are now.

Like it or not personhood for some animals may not be all that far off. Don't forget that 100+ years ago conventional thinkers scoffed at the idea of of personhood for women, non-whites and the mentally impaired. What once were 'stranger things' have happened.


Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: Steelhawk on April 27, 2019, 08:38:18 AM
Did I say the whales be captured and raised in aquarium? No sir. I said as an urgent measure to save the whales from starvation and continue to die off, as a temporary solution to save them, is to track the known family pods down. If only a few members are tagged, like they do for tracking some great white sharks, then it is easier to find their location. They don't have to be fed constantly but during time or season when the Chinooks number is low in their resident waters. This supplemental feeding on the high seas will not harm the whales. The boats can drop the Chinooks from a distance in front of the approaching pods and so this won't encroach the pods.

This supplemental feeding can be funded cheaply if the whalewatching operators who are out there looking for them already agree to help with supplemental funding. Why shouldn't they? Their livelihood depends on the welfare and abundance of these whales and the tagging can help them locate the pods all along the coast easily. They may even do it for free if provided with the Chinooks. Even the coastal communities who, if allowed to fish for the non threatened Chinook stocks can provide some of their Chinooks to be used for feeding. It is a viable alternative during this urgent period if trying to save the whales.

This is only a creative idea to save the whales, by the collaboration of user groups who have a keen interest in the welfare of these whales, much more doable and feasible than your proposal to treat fish with human status and rights, Ralph. And this doesn't have to cost BC billions and devastate so many coastal communities. It is worth considering, at least as a temporary measure before the Fraser Chinooks rebound. Unfortunately if FN groups do not comply, as some already say so, and DFO seem fearful of FN to confront them, the Fraser Chinook stocks may never rebound.
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: Robert_G on April 27, 2019, 09:00:11 AM
Like it or not personhood for some animals may not be all that far off.

And no doubt the idea of it will be, or already has been bred from the left. Only a bleeding heart libtard could conceive this level of stupidity.

Don't forget that 100+ years ago conventional thinkers scoffed at the idea of of personhood for women, non-whites and the mentally impaired. What once were 'stranger things' have happened.

Interesting you use the term 'conventional thinkers'. Because you could go back all the way to biblical times, and see that the Lord taught nothing other than that all human beings are equal in God's eyes. What you suggest may have been a 'thing', but it was actually a product of evil men.....not the truth of how humanity was intended.
However.....nowhere does it suggest that animals are equal to people.....in fact the opposite is clearly taught, and if laws get made that put animals as equals with human beings....God help us all....
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: Rodney on April 27, 2019, 10:31:50 AM
The challenges Southern resident killer whales face go beyond the lack of food and there are many factors that influence their feeding behaviours. This isn't as simple as harvesting a few salmon and feeding them like you'd do at Sea World. To begin understanding what the challenges are, you should do some research on just how many fish each animal consumes per day, then you'll actually have appreciate and understand why your suggestion would not work.
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: IronNoggin on April 27, 2019, 10:38:09 AM
The misnomer that the Southern Killer Whales are in immediate peril is just that. A lie.
It has been widely sponsored by ENGO's, and swallowed up hook, line & sinker by the Agenda driven DFO.

The current population of ~ 75 is well withing historic population fluctuation parameters, and DFO is damn well aware of that.
But they have seized upon the ENGO propaganda as it well meshes with their ongoing plans. Plans which btw do not include recreational nor commercial fishers on the West Coast.

Get informed people!
I expect folks like Ralphie to continue his uninformed spiels here. Simply can't change the spots on many leopards.
That said, the vast majority of you have no excuse for buying into the horsse-pucky.
Do a little research yourself. Your eyes will soon be opened as to what is really afoot here.
Making whales have the same "rights" as humans is the latest ENGO drive, and bought into / spearheaded by lefty legal beagle academics who drool openly at the idea of pushing that forward. Fool's Errand at best.

For any that have an open and inquiring mind, I strongly suggest this is a good place to start:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Zz8aEAg7dI

Senior Science in action here folks, removing the blinders The Dino so hungrily wishes you to wear.

For those without the inclination to inform themselves, I suggest removing yourself from future contributions in this regard.
Exposing your ignorance in the matter simply points out your own biases to any that can see...

Nog
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: DanL on April 27, 2019, 10:59:32 AM
The misnomer that the Southern Killer Whales are in immediate peril is just that. A lie.
It has been widely sponsored by ENGO's, and swallowed up hook, line & sinker by the Agenda driven DFO.

The current population of ~ 75 is well withing historic population fluctuation parameters, and DFO is damn well aware of that.

...

For any that have an open and inquiring mind, I strongly suggest this is a good place to start:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Zz8aEAg7dI

The first 7 minutes of that video directly addresses the historical killer whale numbers.

The next time there is a news report about orcas, pay attention to the wording they use. I guarantee you that they will always add the term "endangered" or similar when reporting on killer whales.  It's quite subliminal, I never really noticed it, but after it was pointed out in the video, it really sticks out once you look for it. However it's now well engrained in the public opinion.

If you recall recently that orca who pushed around her dead calf for two weeks, the news outlets piggy-backed that very well with the endangered population angle. Good luck fighting that. Especially against a public who sees commercial and sport anglers as simply lobbying to harvest salmon for their own economic or personal benefits.
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: RalphH on April 27, 2019, 12:47:26 PM
Did I say the whales be captured and raised in aquarium? No sir. I said as an urgent measure to save the whales from starvation and continue to die off, as a temporary solution to save them, is to track the known family pods down. If only a few members are tagged, like they do for tracking some great white sharks, then it is easier to find their location. They don't have to be fed constantly but during time or season when the Chinooks number is low in their resident waters. This supplemental feeding on the high seas will not harm the whales. The boats can drop the Chinooks from a distance in front of the approaching pods and so this won't encroach the pods.

This supplemental feeding can be funded cheaply if the whalewatching operators who are out there looking for them already agree to help with supplemental funding. Why shouldn't they? Their livelihood depends on the welfare and abundance of these whales and the tagging can help them locate the pods all along the coast easily. They may even do it for free if provided with the Chinooks. Even the coastal communities who, if allowed to fish for the non threatened Chinook stocks can provide some of their Chinooks to be used for feeding. It is a viable alternative during this urgent period if trying to save the whales.

This is only a creative idea to save the whales, by the collaboration of user groups who have a keen interest in the welfare of these whales, much more doable and feasible than your proposal to treat fish with human status and rights, Ralph. And this doesn't have to cost BC billions and devastate so many coastal communities. It is worth considering, at least as a temporary measure before the Fraser Chinooks rebound. Unfortunately if FN groups do not comply, as some already say so, and DFO seem fearful of FN to confront them, the Fraser Chinook stocks may never rebound.

Feeding free wild whales is absolutely an unbaked idea. What are you going to feed them? How do you know they will recognize this as food? So once the whales have been habituated to feeding foods from humans how do they get 'turned off this again? The unanswerable questionS just go on and on (like the proposal for a seal cull or harvest).

Large sharks have to captured to be tagged something would not be practical with Killer Whales. It also has a good probability of injury and/or death.

As for granting fish human rights... you don't even understand the meaning of 'person' in law I didn't even propose granting fish status as persons.So you are sticking words in my mouth. I just asked what could this mean.

IN, it seems to me you are uninformed. The legal definition of a 'person' in law does not make them human or give them human rights:

from the Wex Legal Dictionary: "Legal person refers to a human or non-human entity that is treated as a person for limited legal purposes."

https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/legal_person
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: IronNoggin on April 27, 2019, 01:00:27 PM
... The unanswerable questionS just go on and on (like the proposal for a seal cull or harvest) ...

Speaking of "unbaked"  (https://www.tnof.ca/styles/default/xenforo/smilies/ROFLMAO.gif)

The ONLY questions left regarding the pinniped harvest are related to politics (sorry, but the science is now complete and accepted by DFO) and in your own little mind Ralphie.

Have a great weekend!  ;)

Cheers,
Nog
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: Hike_and_fish on April 27, 2019, 03:18:08 PM
The misnomer that the Southern Killer Whales are in immediate peril is just that. A lie.
It has been widely sponsored by ENGO's, and swallowed up hook, line & sinker by the Agenda driven DFO.

The current population of ~ 75 is well withing historic population fluctuation parameters, and DFO is damn well aware of that.
But they have seized upon the ENGO propaganda as it well meshes with their ongoing plans. Plans which btw do not include recreational nor commercial fishers on the West Coast.

Get informed people!
I expect folks like Ralphie to continue his uninformed spiels here. Simply can't change the spots on many leopards.
That said, the vast majority of you have no excuse for buying into the horsse-pucky.
Do a little research yourself. Your eyes will soon be opened as to what is really afoot here.
Making whales have the same "rights" as humans is the latest ENGO drive, and bought into / spearheaded by lefty legal beagle academics who drool openly at the idea of pushing that forward. Fool's Errand at best.

For any that have an open and inquiring mind, I strongly suggest this is a good place to start:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Zz8aEAg7dI

Senior Science in action here folks, removing the blinders The Dino so hungrily wishes you to wear.

For those without the inclination to inform themselves, I suggest removing yourself from future contributions in this regard.
Exposing your ignorance in the matter simply points out your own biases to any that can see...

Nog

Well said
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: Hike_and_fish on April 27, 2019, 03:21:38 PM
I'd like to see so.e data on the effects of Fukushima and the Pasific Ocean food chain. Is it still leaking ? And what effects it has had on the local Salmon populations. Things seem to have taken a dive when this happened.
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: Steelhawk on April 27, 2019, 05:32:23 PM
It seems from Nog's provided link that this whole episode of saving the whales from a dwindling number due to shortage of food is a bloody lie as the numbers fluctuated over the years. So DFO basically use the whales as an excuse to shut down these poor coastal communities because FN want them to shut down all other sectors in order for them to comply with DFO's request to postpone their netting on the Fraser which is intended to save their own endangered stock. This really illustrates to what extent DFO will do to sacrifice other unrelated groups just to get FN to get in line. So what hope is there for Fraser sports fishing groups to lobby DFO to open Chinooks when FN demand that for them to stop netting sockeye we must stop fishing Chinooks too. No chance!
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: skaha on April 27, 2019, 08:07:47 PM
-although the number if resident killer whales are within what one could perceive as normal fluctuation over the years...they are still in trouble.  The reason being the number of females available due to age and health to produce enough calves. everyone seems to be keying on spinning the same information to the extreme of their own views. there are many possible reasons why the whales are not producing offspring. We don't need to embellish nor diminish the plight of the whales. why can't we get to the truth of what is going on? Is it true that to get a deal with FN, DFO had to shut down the fishery (even those not connected to the problem) or dis someone in DFO decide that this is what had to happen?  Why can't FN representatives clear the air?...we (FN) didn't ask for that or we needed concrete proof that DFO was serious before we are willing to go and try and convince our members we have to in good faith close our fishery.
--Are there no honest brokers, no arbitrators that can be trusted...we have to work together in good faith or we're all going to sink with the ship together.
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: RalphH on April 28, 2019, 07:58:04 AM
sorry, but the science is now complete and accepted by DFO

Cheers,
Nog
Still they have all but categorically said no.

You also flip between 2 scientists who disagree; Trites and Walters. Walters the closest person the Pinnepid 'Balance Society has to a friend described seals as a 'proximate' cause of salmon decline. I hope you know the meaning of that too. Oh and let's not forget there no one who will buy those hundreds and thousands of seal carcasses. As Dr Walters said: 'there is no value in them'.

It's just more half baked nonsense passed off as a magic bullet.
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: IronNoggin on April 28, 2019, 10:21:12 AM
... Is it true that to get a deal with FN, DFO had to shut down the fishery (even those not connected to the problem) or dis someone in DFO decide that this is what had to happen?  Why can't FN representatives clear the air?...

That is exactly what DFO representatives said in the meetings, FN written comments and submissions very well show, and the Minister himself publicly stated. In DFO's case, of course they largely failed to mention the fact that many they did shut down had negligible impact on the noted stocks of concern.

Still they have all but categorically said no.

LOL! Ya Think??

Stay Tuned...  (https://www.tnof.ca/styles/default/xenforo/smilies/wink.gif)

Nog
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: Rodney on April 30, 2019, 11:40:34 AM
https://www.bcmindreader.com/s/Respond/359f8e1b-c444-4fbb-b99e-de03f9cf4a7f?_view=d
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: IronNoggin on May 09, 2019, 03:15:30 PM
Something smells fishy

Nothing infuriates me more than when a politician claims to be "following the science" and then goes against it—when he/she claims to be fighting for the environment while at the same time cutting funding to the very programs that support it.

On Wednesday, May 1, I travelled to North Vancouver along with other Whistler and Squamish residents to attend a protest organized by Whistler local Dave Brown against the recent extensive closures of recreational salmon fisheries in our waters.

The turnout was beyond expectations with more than 200 supporters and multiple TV and radio crews in attendance in front of (federal) Fisheries Minister Jonathan Wilkinson's office.

Speakers representing recreational fishermen and women, charter companies and local businesses expressed their support for protecting salmon populations, but their dismay at the lack of science-based decisions and real action in addressing the issues.

As a former environmental scientist and a recreational fisherman, it was deeply frustrating to have our Liberal Fisheries Minister ignore his own department's science and make a decision to completely shut down retention of Chinook salmon on the majority of the South Coast of B.C. until July 31.

This decision will do little to protect the early Fraser Chinook populations of concern; Department of Fisheries and Oceans' (DFO) own DNA data shows recreational anglers catch 0.63 per cent of these Chinook stocks while there are numerous other healthy Chinook populations in our local waters, that should be open to retention.

This spring, the Chinook salmon fishing has been nothing short of spectacular prior to this closure. This closure is severely impacting B.C. coastal communities and business—the very people who care deeply about healthy salmon populations. This is a missed opportunity to put in place a concrete, funded plan that would actually help the Fraser River Chinook populations, rather than (only) giv(ing) the appearance of doing something.

Interestingly, the public fishery in B.C. is a $1.1-billion industry and the largest economic contributor of all the fisheries, supporting 9,000 jobs. However, we catch less than 15 per cent of halibut and 10 per cent of salmon coastwide, and less than four per cent of total fish harvested in B.C.

I want to see Fisheries Minister Wilkinson put into action a recovery plan for early Fraser Chinook that includes Chinook predator control, habitat protection and rehabilitation, key hatchery enhancement as well as adequate funding for fisheries officers and habitat staff.

Attacking recreational anglers under the guise of conservation is a thinly veiled attempt at gaining political favour that inflicts serious harm to the B.C. economy and coastal communities, does not enhance the early Fraser River Chinook salmon stocks and side steps the need to take real and meaningful action.

Be very wary when your elected officials claim to be "following the science."

Mark Steffens // Whistler

https://m.piquenewsmagazine.com/whistler/letters-to-the-editor-for-the-week-of-may-9/Content?oid=13827008 (http://"https://m.piquenewsmagazine.com/whistler/letters-to-the-editor-for-the-week-of-may-9/Content?oid=13827008")
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: IronNoggin on May 09, 2019, 03:16:57 PM
WELL Worth The Watch!!

https://www.facebook.com/robert.alcock.88/videos/10155999435322307/

Nog
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: TNAngler on May 10, 2019, 08:43:44 AM
Wait, so if whales are given rights as humans, and salmon do.  If a whale eats a salmon can it be charged with murder?  And I thought politics in the US was bad but you guys are screwed up up there, lol, sorry.
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: IronNoggin on May 10, 2019, 02:54:22 PM
Two more in river Chinook FN openings for five days each just ending. Or are they?

https://www.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/fm-gp/fraser/docs/abor-autoc/UpperFraser/UMFOpenTimes-eng.htm
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: Hike_and_fish on May 10, 2019, 04:24:56 PM
Two more in river Chinook FN openings for five days each just ending. Or are they?

https://www.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/fm-gp/fraser/docs/abor-autoc/UpperFraser/UMFOpenTimes-eng.htm

You change the language and you change the perception. Indians become Natives become First Nations. Because they were here first. First to the start of the line, first to Benefit.

The public has become conditioned to accepting giving FN groups more because.... well..... First Nations. Your evil ancestors stole their land. You should feel guilty. They were here first.
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: buck on May 10, 2019, 06:47:15 PM
Obviously DFO’s conservation concern for early run Fraser Chinook is a farce.
We should use First Nations tactics, if they are fishing we are fishing.
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: Robert_G on May 10, 2019, 06:58:03 PM
Don't worry guys....there are lots of meetings and protests going on.....and in 30 years of this, we all remember all the times we've been able to influence DFO.....
Oh wait......that number is freaking 'ZERO'.....We can't influence DFO, because they don't give a you know what about us....not 30 years ago, and not today....nothing has changed....and nothing will.
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: clarki on May 10, 2019, 09:32:44 PM
Don't worry guys....there are lots of meetings and protests going on.....and in 30 years of this, we all remember all the times we've been able to influence DFO.....
Oh wait......that number is freaking 'ZERO'.....We can't influence DFO, because they don't give a you know what about us....not 30 years ago, and not today....nothing has changed....and nothing will.
Is it freaking zero? My mind is fuzzy on the details but didn't DFO listen to recreational anglers and open the previously closed Fraser River sockeye fishery to recreational angling in the mid 1990s?
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: Robert_G on May 10, 2019, 09:56:22 PM
Is it freaking zero? My mind is fuzzy on the details but didn't DFO listen to recreational anglers and open the previously closed Fraser River sockeye fishery to recreational angling in the mid 1990s?

Yes and no. I mostly remember the time you are mentioning and it is a complicated explanation....but they did NOT outright give us what we asked for....and by the time they reopened it the sockeye were mostly in spawning colors. We were shutdown during the prime of the late Adams run...and it was ALL politics....no science behind it whatsoever.

Edit.....I'm pretty sure you were talking about the 1994 season.
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: IronNoggin on May 11, 2019, 03:25:50 PM
(https://scontent.fyvr4-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/60351044_10156006663747307_320577995355979776_n.jpg?_nc_cat=109&_nc_ht=scontent.fyvr4-1.fna&oh=6d22f9fa3615ad99af81ba8cdddc5d3b&oe=5D65CC80)

 :o
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: Blood_Orange on May 11, 2019, 04:57:22 PM
(https://scontent.fyvr4-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/60351044_10156006663747307_320577995355979776_n.jpg?_nc_cat=109&_nc_ht=scontent.fyvr4-1.fna&oh=6d22f9fa3615ad99af81ba8cdddc5d3b&oe=5D65CC80)

 :o

Looks like Long Liner Seafoods at Granville Island. Did you post the photo because there aren't open commercial opportunities, or because the price is high, or because they use the word "rare" in poor taste? Genuinely asking, not trying to stir up arguments ;)
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: IronNoggin on May 11, 2019, 06:38:19 PM
Looks like Long Liner Seafoods at Granville Island. Did you post the photo because there aren't open commercial opportunities, or because the price is high, or because they use the word "rare" in poor taste? Genuinely asking, not trying to stir up arguments ;)

Posted because there is NO Legal Source Whatsoever at this point.

Nog
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: Robert_G on May 11, 2019, 06:44:15 PM
Posted because there is NO Legal Source Whatsoever at this point.

Nog

100% agree

Too many people here on this forum simply don't get it.
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: wildmanyeah on May 11, 2019, 07:17:23 PM
the only legal source they could of came from is the Albion test fishery, that may be the case i'm sure will find out pretty fast.
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: Robert_G on May 11, 2019, 09:31:37 PM
the only legal source they could of came from is the Albion test fishery, that may be the case i'm sure will find out pretty fast.

7 Chinook since the test fishery started.....so I'm thinking.....no
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: AaronWilde on May 11, 2019, 10:29:23 PM
Saw a boat/net drift by above mission bridge today. Good old conservation of the Springs lol. *stirs pot*  ::) ;D
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: wildmanyeah on May 12, 2019, 07:08:41 AM
Take pictures!!!!!
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: Blood_Orange on May 12, 2019, 09:48:32 AM
That's assuming the tag on the case is truthful. Could the fish at Long Liner have come from Washington? Or Alaska? Has anyone called them to ask where they got the fish? Has anyone contacted DFO? The media? If there are definitely no legal ways to have gotten the fish, seems pretty straightforward to get them to stop selling it.
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: Hike_and_fish on May 12, 2019, 09:55:20 AM
Its Canada. You have to buy wild protine, not kill it yourself. Didnt you people know ?
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: IronNoggin on May 12, 2019, 10:39:58 AM
This just in:

(https://www.sportfishingbc.com/forum/index.php?attachments/upload_2019-5-12_9-40-22-png.45361/)
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: Wiseguy on May 12, 2019, 11:54:08 AM
That's assuming the tag on the case is truthful. Could the fish at Long Liner have come from Washington? Or Alaska? Has anyone called them to ask where they got the fish? Has anyone contacted DFO? The media? If there are definitely no legal ways to have gotten the fish, seems pretty straightforward to get them to stop selling it.
I called them and they confirmed they are indeed Fraser River chinooks.
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: IronNoggin on May 15, 2019, 03:13:20 PM
Now up to SIXTEEN Openings. This time the Lower. The 24 hour canyon opening will be nothing short of a slaughter.

https://www-ops2.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/fraserriver/firstnations/PDFs/CeremonialOpeningTimes.pdf
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: IronNoggin on May 15, 2019, 04:16:05 PM
Just posted this on Wilkinson's FB Page:

Hasn't even been a month, yet SIXTEEN openings you have let, many of them a week's long duration, on the most endangered runs of Chinook the Fraser has??!! That works out to nets in the water more often than not since you told us all that was the EXACT reason you were forcing everyone else off the water!? You are indeed "raising the bar" as you so eloquently put it. In the highest achievable level of HYPOCRISY possible that is.

Nog
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: IronNoggin on May 15, 2019, 05:10:24 PM
Make that SEVENTEEN (see previous link above) as another canyon 24 hour opening was just announced.

Starting to get the gist of this bull crap yet?

Nog
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: redside1 on May 16, 2019, 08:01:50 AM
let's all remember that there first has to be enough for conservation and then there has to be enough for FN's fsc alloment (whatever that is) and then finally after there is enough for them the sports and commercial sector get to fish.
DFO has decided that there is only enough for conservation and FN's to fish at this time. Welcome to the court ruled world we now live in.  If they wantedto , FN's could have also pushed and had the entire coast shut down because someone in the haida gwaii may catch a Fraser chinook that should have been gill netted in the Fraser at a later date.

I received this in an email a little while ago

The reason it’s closed to recreational fishing is this 2018 court decision which ties dfo’s hands:

https://www.mandellpinder.com/ahousaht-indian-band-and-nation-v-canada-attorney-general-2018-bcsc-633-case-summary/

Apparently the federal government spent 19 million in legal costs fighting this case but lost.

Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: wildmanyeah on May 16, 2019, 09:04:29 AM
let's all remember that there first has to be enough for conservation and then there has to be enough for FN's fsc alloment (whatever that is) and then finally after there is enough for them the sports and commercial sector get to fish.
DFO has decided that there is only enough for conservation and FN's to fish at this time. Welcome to the court ruled world we now live in.  If they wantedto , FN's could have also pushed and had the entire coast shut down because someone in the haida gwaii may catch a Fraser chinook that should have been gill netted in the Fraser at a later date.

I received this in an email a little while ago

The reason it’s closed to recreational fishing is this 2018 court decision which ties dfo’s hands:

https://www.mandellpinder.com/ahousaht-indian-band-and-nation-v-canada-attorney-general-2018-bcsc-633-case-summary/

Apparently the federal government spent 19 million in legal costs fighting this case but lost.

1. The court case is limited to WCVI
2. The goverment did not loose the case, The current Liberal government decided as part of their Reconciliation plan is that they would no longer fight the case in court.
3. Most of the Coast is shut down right now so not sure what hole you have been living in but your a little late to this party.
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: IronNoggin on May 16, 2019, 10:52:01 AM
In both terms of fisheries and wildlife management, CONSERVATION comes first. That VERY much applies in this case. If the early run stocks of chinook are in as bad shape as we understand them to be, then no-one should be removing ANY of them at all. Period.

The Minister publicly stated the restrictions he imposed were emplaced specifically such that the FN's would be throttled back and allow more of these fish to hit the spawning grounds. Sure as hell looks like "business as usual" for them now that everyone else has been booted to the curb. And to hell with "conservation" along the way...

Ticked,
Nog
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: Rodney on May 16, 2019, 12:42:22 PM
lol... Unfortunately you're all barking up the wrong tree here. It might be a shock to those who are now impacted by the closures for the first time, but this approach has been going on within the Lower Fraser River in all salmon fisheries for over a decade now. Closures due to conservation concerns, but limited FN openings are still available as they are prioritized once conservation requirements are "met".

The management measures this year did say all Lower Fraser First Nations communal fisheries will also be closed until mid July, with the exception of some limited ceremonial fisheries, which are the openings you are seeing right now. The term "limited" is probably interpreted quite differently by every group. ;)

As/if stocks get lower, closures like this would just keep expanding. The Fraser itself is not even open for catch and release at the moment, so it wouldn't surprise me if there will be a push for fishing closures (no catch and release) rather than just retention closures like you are seeing right now in the inside waters. It also wouldn't surprise me that closures are implemented in waters further north if Lower Fraser First Nations decide those fisheries are impacting the early Fraser chinook stocks.
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: IronNoggin on May 16, 2019, 02:58:54 PM
lol... Unfortunately you're all barking up the wrong tree here. It might be a shock to those who are now impacted by the closures for the first time, but this approach has been going on within the Lower Fraser River in all salmon fisheries for over a decade now. Closures due to conservation concerns, but limited FN openings are still available as they are prioritized once conservation requirements are "met".

Conservation concerns are FAR from being "met" Rod, and you of all people should know that.
What is playing out is a complete travesty, and goes against the very grain of DFO's mandate.
You also understand that... Not?

And yeah, this has been going on for one hell of a long time.
And very much one of, if not THE leading cause for these stocks continuing downward spiral.

Like ya bud, but that spin simply doesn't fly...   ;)

Nog
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: IronNoggin on May 16, 2019, 03:09:56 PM
This post is for any that suggest the FN's have a "right" to these endangered fish.
They do not.
Conservation trumps all (or is supposed to).

NO FN has the so-called right to fish any run into extinction.
And NO government has any call openly supporting them to do so.
What we are witnessing now is a complete travesty on both parts!

Any that wish to educate themselves as to just how low some of the numbers are, have a read:

http://www.frafs.ca/sites/default/files2/Day%201%202019%20Fraser%20River%20Chinook%20Conservation%20Measures.pdf

And before anyone suggests that is somehow validation for DFO's draconian moves, you best come armed with DNA and tag numbers that show just how many of these endangered fish are caught in MOST of the areas shut down. Good luck with that, as that data doesn't exist. In fact the data does exist which well indicates to the contrary (a fact which Wilkinson WELL knows...)

Nog
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: Rodney on May 16, 2019, 03:44:18 PM
Conservation concerns are FAR from being "met" Rod, and you of all people should know that.
What is playing out is a complete travesty, and goes against the very grain of DFO's mandate.
You also understand that... Not?

And yeah, this has been going on for one hell of a long time.
And very much one of, if not THE leading cause for these stocks continuing downward spiral.

Like ya bud, but that spin simply doesn't fly...   ;)

Nog

Matt, don't get me wrong. I'm fully agreeing with your points, I'm just saying what is happening has been an ongoing issue in the Lower Fraser sector for over a decade. The same concerns have been brought up to DFO and SFAB without any results. I'm just chuckling now that the closures have expanded for the same reason and those who did not pay attention before are in shock by it.
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: IronNoggin on May 16, 2019, 03:53:50 PM
... I'm just chuckling now that the closures have expanded for the same reason and those who did not pay attention before are in shock by it.

Perhaps that was due to the FACT we were busy collecting scientific data to PROVE we were not impacting those stocks.
And we foolishly thought that DFO would run with science.
Big Mistake.

And while you are "chuckling" by the way, I am running out of things to sell to keep the roof over our heads.
So pardon me if I don't share your humor one whit!   >:(

Nog
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: Rodney on May 16, 2019, 03:59:22 PM
Perhaps that was due to the FACT we were busy collecting scientific data to PROVE we were not impacting those stocks.
And we foolishly thought that DFO would run with science.
Big Mistake.

And while you are "chuckling" by the way, I am running out of things to sell to keep the roof over our heads.
So pardon me if I don't share your humor one whit!   >:(

Nog

Matt, chuckling not as in laughing at your situation, but chuckling at how absurd the situation is. You're not in the only who is having financial challenges due to these management actions.
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: avid angler on May 16, 2019, 11:34:13 PM
There has probably been less openings this year then any other year by this time. The only positive outcome of these closures is it will actually bring to light just how often nets are in the water on the Fraser.

Most people haven’t paid attention for a long time because of how long it’s been since theirs been a chance in hell at an in river recreational opportunity before August. As sport anglers we need to be down the governments throats about mismanagement of wild stocks at all times. Not just when we have nothing better to do because there is no open fisheries to shut people up and keep them happy.
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: redside1 on May 17, 2019, 10:03:21 AM
1. The court case is limited to WCVI
2. The goverment did not loose the case, The current Liberal government decided as part of their Reconciliation plan is that they would no longer fight the case in court.
3. Most of the Coast is shut down right now so not sure what hole you have been living in but your a little late to this party.

Half the coast is closed not most. Unfortunately it's the half that has most of the fishing population of BC.
Also not late to the party,  Been involved at different levels for a long time, just usually don't post on many forums due to comments about people living in holes and ones of similar nature.
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: wildmanyeah on May 17, 2019, 10:16:35 AM
Half the coast is closed not most. Unfortunately it's the half that has most of the fishing population of BC.
Also not late to the party,  Been involved at different levels for a long time, just usually don't post on many forums due to comments about people living in holes and ones of similar nature.

Thank you for your service
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: chris gadsden on May 22, 2019, 08:02:47 AM
https://vancouversun.com/opinion/op-ed/owen-bird-minister-isnt-doing-enough-quickly-enough-to-protect-chinook-salmon?fbclid=IwAR3pOTBA5QoEg9Nm4BcMVaJAh7X7cDRfRVYYeJCIVMQeAXyH-D9ZwRPqHLs
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: RalphH on May 22, 2019, 09:11:01 AM

2. The goverment did not loose the case, The current Liberal government decided as part of their Reconciliation plan is that they would no longer fight the case in court.


exactly why did Justice Humphreys release a judgement in this case if the Federal Government decided to "no longer fight the case..."? Do you know how the legal system works? Do they teach that in high school today?

Most of you legal egg-spurts seem to have missed that it has been FOC/DFO, the Federal Government's insistence on fighting such issues in court right up to the SOC that has created this mess over the last 30+ years. Invariably they lost and entrenched FN rights and allocation priorities in the Constitution. If the Government, voters and the fishing communities had taken a path to negotiating agreements acceptable to all we wouldn't be where we are now in terms of how the resource is managed and allocated.

Now we all eat crow , not salmon.
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: wildmanyeah on May 22, 2019, 09:17:19 AM
exactly why did Justice Humphreys release a judgement in this case if the Federal Government decided to "no longer fight the case..."? Do you know how the legal system works? Do they teach that in high school today?

Most of you legal egg-spurts seem to have missed that it has been FOC/DFO, the Federal Government's insistence on fighting such issues in court right up to the SOC that has created this mess over the last 30+ years. Invariably they lost and entrenched FN rights and allocation priorities in the Constitution. If the Government, voters and the fishing communities had taken a path to negotiating agreements acceptable to all we wouldn't be where we are now in terms of how the resource is managed and allocated.

Now we all eat crow , not salmon.

Go back and read the media release surrounding the judgment.  Also who was the Attorney General at the time.  The judge has to render a verdict even if the crown prosecutes decide to give up.

Also Ralph one more shot at me like that and you will be going on the ignore list
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: RalphH on May 22, 2019, 11:47:34 AM
again you misrepresent the facts:

- the specific case falls under the management of the The Minister of Fisheries (then Dominc LeBlanc) not the AG. Judy Wilson-Reybold,  the then AG has since stood out as refusing to interfere in such cases at the cost of her job. Regardless she did not have any direct involvement in the case.

- the press release was issued after Justice Humphreys released her judgement

-  the specific judgement included rulings that were not advantageous to the Plantiffs (the Ahousat et al) such as :

Quote
Humphries J.... re-characterized the right as a right to “a small-scale, artisanal, local, multi-species fishery, to be conducted in a nine-[nautical] mile strip from shore, using small, low-cost boats with limited technology and restricted catching power and aimed at wide community participation.”

the decision to not contend an appeal at a higher court level makes some sense in that the ruling offers a workable compromise that doesn't give broad sweeping rights and allocations to the plantiffs.

 
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: IronNoggin on May 22, 2019, 11:59:59 AM
-  the specific judgement included rulings that were not advantageous to the Ahousat (the Plantiffs) such as :

Fine In Theory, not so much in application.  ::)

That Band (and others) run standard 40 foot trollers in this particular fishery.
And they go pretty well wherever (and largely whenever) they want.
Many times we have witnessed DFO haling them when they have been FAR outside of their nine mile area, and without exception they refuse to answer or comply. DFO does nothing in response whatsoever.

Certainly NOT living up to the intent of the ruling by any means...

Nog
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: IronNoggin on May 27, 2019, 01:18:07 PM
Funding denial comes on the heels of fishing closures

The letter is misleading in that every hatchery request was denied, Saunders said.

The denial of funding comes on the heels of other announcements by the federal government this spring that have severely limited salmon fishing in the region and have dealt lethal blows to several fishing charter businesses in the region.

“When the fishing closures were announced, I can tell you that I lost $250,000 in donations for the project. People were just at rock-bottom and it was hard to generate any enthusiasm for our project. I can’t imagine what this latest announcement is going to do,” Saunders said.


https://www.sookenewsmirror.com/news/federal-government-actions-hurt-sooke-hatchery-fundraising-efforts/
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: RalphH on May 27, 2019, 03:59:29 PM
of course the article doesn't mention how the Charters Creek or any other hatchery met the requirements and goals of the British Columbia Salmon Restoration
and Innovation Fund

Quote
Funding focus

The British Columbia Salmon Restoration and Innovation Fund focuses on 3 areas, which are:

    innovation to encourage the development of new technologies to:
        increase productivity
        help meet conservation and sustainability objectives, including the protection and restoration of wild BC stocks, including Pacific salmon
    infrastructure to encourage capital investments in new products, processes or technologies to support the:
        advancement of sustainable fishing practices
        protection and restoration of wild BC stocks, including Pacific salmon
    science partnerships to support collaborations with academia and other research institutions to:
        improve our knowledge and understanding of impacts to wild stocks
        develop sustainable fishing practices

Funding is available for projects that meet the eligibility and assessment criteria in BC. Current priorities for the fund are:

    restoration, protection and maintenance of healthy and diverse salmon populations and their habitats
    improved performance and sustainability of the commercial and recreational fisheries
    improved sustainability of the aquaculture industry to ensure the protection and conservation of marine ecosystems and wild fish populations


https://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/fm-gp/initiatives/fish-fund-bc-fonds-peche-cb/index-eng.html
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: IronNoggin on May 28, 2019, 11:10:48 AM
Reaching there Ralphie. But then again, no surprises.   ;D
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: RalphH on May 28, 2019, 01:20:16 PM
LOL

A local politician is quoted at the end of the article:

“I believe that our hatchery is the most important development in restoring the hatchery run..."

The fund requirements and goals clearly identify the protection and restoration of wild stocks including Pacific Salmon. Hatcheries don't produce wild salmon.

When the fund was announced, the capital investments identified were things that would improve wild salmon returns were , as examples removal or improvements to culverts, irrigation gates and so for forth that would increase both downstream and upstream migration success.

A far as the 1/4 million dollars of promised donations that benefactors later bailed on...shame on them!
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: IronNoggin on May 28, 2019, 01:37:50 PM
... The fund requirements and goals clearly identify the protection and restoration of wild stocks including Pacific Salmon. Hatcheries don't produce wild salmon.

Yep, the ol' Wild Salmon Policy. Translation: Do Nothing & Hope for the best.
How's that working out for YOU, me or anyone else (specifically including the resource here) for that matter?
Not much of a laughing matter there Ralph.

Nog
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: RalphH on May 28, 2019, 05:47:14 PM
Oh I wasn't laughing about the matter. The matter is not funny.

Pretty clear that since their inception about 40 years ago, hatcheries haven't reversed the decline in our salmonid populations, wild or otherwise. Many feel it's quite the opposite.
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: wildmanyeah on May 28, 2019, 06:20:09 PM
 ::)
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: RalphH on May 29, 2019, 06:24:30 AM
I think rivers like the Smith in California, the Rogue in Oregon and to an extent the Cowichan where there is a hatchery, are examples of a primarily wild salmon policy working and working well. Hatcheries have there place but I don't think the evidence supports the practice of their use to super enhance otherwise degraded runs of wild fish or of introducing species not native to the area of even particular watersheds.

I'd also say the article indicates an ignorance of the funds goals or it's process. There is the mistaken belief than the Federal and Provincial money in the fund are somehow separate, which they are not! The Charters Creel hatchery start up didn't get funding via their application because it does not meet the objectives of the fund. They need to target funding sources that will support there operation specifically .
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: wildmanyeah on May 29, 2019, 08:02:59 AM
I think rivers like the Smith in California, the Rogue in Oregon and to an extent the Cowichan where there is a hatchery, are examples of a primarily wild salmon policy working and working well. Hatcheries have there place but I don't think the evidence supports the practice of their use to super enhance otherwise degraded runs of wild fish or of introducing species not native to the area of even particular watersheds.

I'd also say the article indicates an ignorance of the funds goals or it's process. There is the mistaken belief than the Federal and Provincial money in the fund are somehow separate, which they are not! The Charters Creel hatchery start up didn't get funding via their application because it does not meet the objectives of the fund. They need to target funding sources that will support there operation specifically .

This is true somewhat but there are many upper fraser chinook creeks and tributaries that seen less than 10 individual spawners some with less then 2 and some non at all. These tributaries are pretty much extipulated, So If they were to recover in our live time they would need some sort of hatchery transplants correct?

How is the no hatchery enhancement working out for steelhead populations???
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: RalphH on May 29, 2019, 09:15:45 AM
I think you  mean extirpated.

Hatcheries on the east coast of the Island did not stop the decline in many streams. Enhancement on some local streams like Norrish and Kanaka did very little. Many streams that were the target of hatchery enhancement historically had marginal runs in terms of fishing success in any event. Many other streams are doing so so to pretty good without hatchery enhancement. Hatchery enhancement is also expensive. The dollar value simply is not there.
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: wildmanyeah on May 29, 2019, 09:35:34 AM
Enhancement on some local streams like Norrish and Kanaka did very little.

coho and chum? Before the hatchery was put on Kanaka it never had a chum or coho run. Now it has a decent run for both given its size. It actually also had a decent run of pinks before they decided to kill them off.

Or steelhead? it seems there is a big difference between species on how they respond to hatchery enhancement.

How about whonnack creek?  Dispite no pressure and no hatchery enhancement its steelhead population has crashed.

I get it your a steelhead guy so all hatchery are bad, that has been the motto coming out of the steelhead camp for years. 

The upper Fraser Chinook has not seen much enhancement and most of its hatchery programs were stopped years ago, by your account it should be beaming with fish now that the hatchery are gone.  What gives?

You also did not answer my question how are we going to bring back Chinook populations to some of the upper Fraser river tributaries without hatchery support or transplants. Your solutions seems to be do nothing?
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: wildmanyeah on May 29, 2019, 09:59:28 AM
I think rivers like the Smith in California, the Rogue in Oregon and to an extent the Cowichan where there is a hatchery,

https://www.cheknews.ca/volunteers-race-to-save-salmon-in-drying-cowichan-river-564508/

Where would cowichan be without the hatchery as a backup?  is it still going to be the star child in 4 years?
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: RalphH on May 29, 2019, 11:50:57 AM
this isn't unique to the Cowichan. In fact it happens on almost all west coast spate streams. I have often taken the time to catch fry etc trapped in small puddles as water receeded and return them to the stream.

As to your question; what would the Cowichan be like without wild salmon and only a hatchery? Is that where we want to go?

For me hatchery fish can't replace wild fish. I'd prefer a world without hatchery fish if it were possible. However I am also sure we will never see a world where every river and stream get hatchery supplements for chinook, coho and steelhead. It's only practicable to do this for a small %.

Quote
coho and chum? Before the hatchery was put on Kanaka it never had a chum or coho run. Now it has a decent run for both given its size. It actually also had a decent run of pinks before they decided to kill them off.

Why did I see coho and chum there in the early 70s before the hatchery? Why did the local published fishing guides describe Kanaka as having good coho and jack fishing in the fall?

Big swings in fish returns is common. I don't believe Whonnock ever had a large population of steelhead.
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: wildmanyeah on May 29, 2019, 01:25:10 PM
Kanaka got seeded before 1970, 1970's is tho when they killed off all the pinks tho.

Early 1900's kanaka was only know for its rainbow trout fishing. Where's that now?

Thats the hatchey's fault a suppose?

I am not saying we need to replace wild fish, no we need to keep wild runs stong, However I am saying the runs that are gone, or now experiencing genetic bottle necking because in the past they have been over fished and there is so few fish back.

That we now need to look at hatchery enhancement to bring fish back.

What is your solution to get rid of all the hatcheries and do nothing?  How do we bring back some of these runs that have so few fish? hope and pray?

You also say big swings are common? so then its not the hatcheries causing declines?  Or are we just still reading the steelhead weekly magazines that say everything about hatcheries is bad.

They have been taking eggs for sublimating to salmon stocks for over 100 years yet you say only 40 years? You old Ralph but I guess not that old.

"The Pacific salmon fishery and salmon stocks have been actively managed since the late 1800s. In the early days harvest rates in some cases reached unsustainable levels. Salmon hatcheries were one method to support harvest while sustaining natural stocks; however, due to funding pressures during the Great Depression, all federal salmon hatcheries in B.C. were shut down and did not return until the 1960s"
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: RalphH on May 29, 2019, 02:42:42 PM
Your posts are often (such as in this case) riddled with such bad syntax and spelling it's hard to understand what you mean precisely.

I have a few comments:

- 'rainbows' ( as in 1900) could mean cutthroat or it could mean steelhead smolt or it could mean both. Mis-identification of species is common today let alone over 100 years ago.

- exactly where did you find evidence Kanaka was 'seeded' with whatever prior to 1970?

- who 'killed off' Kanaka's pink salmon population in the 70s? Are saying there was a determined effort to wipe them out?

- hatchery enhancement has not worked that well. There is good evidence that it leads to degraded genetics for both wild and hatchery fish. It also leads to increased exploitation of wild fish. I am certainly not suggesting all hatcheries be closed down. However suggesting hatcheries are the way back to wild salmon abundance is contra to the best evidence available today and counter intuitive.

- hatcheries are subject to disasters and serious mistakes that can result in the loss of large numbers of fish. In 2017 the Big Qualicum Hatchery lost almost all it's coho stock during a power outage. (https://www.pqbnews.com/news/qualicum-hatchery-loses-thousands-of-fish-in-storm/) In the 70s the Capilano Hatchery lost all it's collected brood stock when chlorinated water was erroneous diverted to the hatchery water intakes.

- Early Federal hatcheries (say before WW2) were also not successful. They also did not enhance any species other than sockeye. There was never any evidence they increased fish returns in any event and were also quite primitive. Fry were not fed nor was there an attempt to use broodstock from the same race of fish. Hatcheries were mostly operated hundreds of miles away from the fishes natal streams. Mostly they were raised close to Vancouver (there was a hatchery in New Westminster and there is archival material available) and fry dumped directly into the lower Fraser.

- I didn't say hatcheries were causing declines. I never suggested closing them all down. You'll never win a debate by putting words in a person's mouth or using strawman arguments.

- I don't read 'steelhead weekly'. I don't think I have ever seen a copy.

Up a  few posts ago I pointed out that the British Columbia Salmon Restoration and Innovation Fund is focused on wild salmon not hatchery enhancement hence that probably explains why no applications to the fund were successful. Of course someone has to spin this out to 'Ralphie' is opposed to all hatcheries.

Hatcheries do one thing well - they increase the survival rate of egg to fry dramatically. After that it's at best a mixed bag with some serious long term short comings.
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: wildmanyeah on May 29, 2019, 02:51:18 PM
Your posts are often (such as in this case) riddled with such bad syntax and spelling it's hard to understand what you mean precisely.

I have a few comments:

- 'rainbows' ( as in 1900) could mean cutthroat or it could mean steelhead smolt or it could mean both. Mis-identification of species is common today let alone over 100 years ago.

- exactly where did you find evidence Kanaka was 'seeded' with whatever prior to 1970?

- who 'killed off' Kanaka's pink salmon population in the 70s? Are saying there was a determined effort to wipe them out?


Just what the hatchery manager told me, They killed off all the pinks because they thought they competed with more valuable stocks. He said in the early 2000's they started to return again and in 2015 kanaka had over 100 pinks return. Largest on recorded record.

As far as some of my other information it comes from "Sessional Papers of the Dominion of Canada" .



Up a  few posts ago I pointed out that the British Columbia Salmon Restoration and Innovation Fund is focused on wild salmon not hatchery enhancement hence that probably explains why no applications to the fund were successful. Of course someone has to spin this out to 'Ralphie' is opposed to all hatcheries.

Hatcheries do one thing well - they increase the survival rate of egg to fry dramatically. After that it's at best a mixed bag with some serious long term short comings.

Thanks for clarification


- Early Federal hatcheries (say before WW2) were also not successful. They also did not enhance any species other than sockeye. There was never any evidence they increased fish returns in any event and were also quite primitive. Fry were not fed nor was there an attempt to use broodstock from the same race of fish. Hatcheries were mostly operated hundreds of miles away from the fishes natal streams. Mostly they were raised close to Vancouver (there was a hacthery in New Westminster and there is archival material available) and fry dumped directly into the lower Fraser.


So how do we even no whats "wild" if we have poor records of what they did, were they enhanced, how stocks were moved around ect...When it comes to chinook reading old books there was not a lot of wild runs.  Yet today we have 100's of enhanced chinook runs. Not to metion all the tradition old chinook fishing runs were all dammed, Campbell river, seymour ect? what are we to do there remove the hatches? what would be left?  all the good habitat is behind a dam
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: RalphH on May 29, 2019, 03:57:45 PM
here is some information on early hatcheries from Pacific Salmon by RJ Childerhouse p29

Quote
During the period 1875 to 1925 hatcheries proliferated in North America...with experience it was realized that ff fry were protected longer and fed or fed and released at a larger size more would survive. Early diets consisted of ground fresh fish, salt fish, beef liver or hearts In some cases carion was suspended over ponds so that maggots would drop into the ponds...Attempts at rearing fish led to other problems, primarily disease [still a big problem]. When the mortality rate rose dramatically, the fish would be released before anymore died on site. The fish so produced were of poor quality and most failed to survive.

The practice of large egg takes and hatchery rearing continued into the 1930s. Then investigations by biologists of the Fisheries Research Board of Canada showed the annual release of millions of hatchery bred fry was making no detectable contribution to the catch of sockeye salmon nor was there any noticeable increase in the numbers of spawners returning to their home streams.

The section goes on to briefly describe how in Washington, Oregon and California some fish culturalists continued to refine hatchery methodology. After WW2 the introduction of improved hatchery diets and anti-biotics reduced fish mortality. By the 1960s hatcheries were "producing spectacular results with coho and chinook". Plus steelhead I presume.

Not talked about too often in this context is the role of anti-biotics and I think most people are aware of the issues around liberal use of such drugs.
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: TNAngler on May 30, 2019, 08:55:04 AM
Not to get in the middle of whatever this is but I do have a unique insight into hatcheries.  For the most part, the hatchery system itself is horrible.  However, if done correctly, hatcheries can be a huge benefit to a system.  I have seen pretty much no gov't hatcheries that are run correctly though.

For history, my dad ran a private hatchery in Washington for a number of years raising coho.  There were many differences between what we did and what the state run hatcheries did.  First and foremost, it was a labor of love and not a job.  My two brothers and I and my dad would go out three or four times a day, cleaning the eggs out.  If there was one moldy egg, it got removed.  If you look at the state hatcheries, they just let that one egg die but then the mold spreads to all the other eggs around and you lose a bunch of eggs.

Second, we raised them in boxes until the egg sacks were gone.  We did not however then transfer them to concrete pools after this.  We transferred them to numerous ponds that drained into the creek system.  We would still feed them for a couple weeks after transferring, a little less each day but before too long, they were finding their own food, used to predators, and growing.

When they migrated out of the creeks and started their trip downstream, they were probably 3 times the size of the same fish raised at the state hatchery.  When they came back, they were as big and strong as wild salmon.  10-12 pounds easily.  And there were a bunch that made it back to the entrance to the creek.

Sadly, there was a net placed across the mouth of the creek and so we only got to see the fruit of our labor getting caught in the net and no spawners made it back that we found although we were told some people saw some spawning at some point.

If hatcheries acted as just a place to hatch eggs and then released them into the wild, I think the result would be much different.  You get fish that are prepared for predators and eating, not being fed.  Also, if it gives any indication, the state run hatchery our last year raised roughly 1.5 million at quite a cost.  We raised 750K at no cost to the state other than the cost of the eggs and a bag of food.  Yes, we paid a cost in time, equipment (egg boxes, totes, airators, etc) but it was nowhere near the cost the hatchery had.
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: CohoJake on May 30, 2019, 09:16:16 PM
Looking at a system where governments have tried to solve the problem with hatcheries, it doesn't look good:

https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/environment/chinook-bust-on-the-columbia-spring-returns-worse-than-forecast-on-northwests-largest-river/ (https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/environment/chinook-bust-on-the-columbia-spring-returns-worse-than-forecast-on-northwests-largest-river/)

Spring Chinook returns on the Columbia system are at 30% of the 10-year average.  There are concerns that brood stock goals won't be met on some tributaries even with an almost complete shut-down of all fishing.  The returns of Jacks are way down as well, which means that next year isn't expected to be any better.

On the local Skagit tributary that I fish for spring Chinook that opens on June 1, there are only 100 fish at the hatchery so far when normally there are 250 or more by now.  The broodstock origin is native, so you can bet the wild fish are suffering as badly. 

Every indicator I have seen tells me these shut-downs are warranted.  The hatchery marked fish that are being caught and released off of Vancouver Island and near Vancouver are mostly headed for the Columbia and other Washington rivers, where broodstock goals may not be met.  In Washington, when returns are iffy, we don't get a catch-and-release season, we get a complete closure (such as when quotas are met on winter Chinook fishing). 

The Fraser has some habitat degradation, but it is nowhere near having 8 dams for salmon to cross 2 times in their lives.  Not to mention having seals and sea-lions stack up at fish ladders on the lower dams making a huge dent in the up-river returns. 

Hey, for what it's worth, the Albion test net has 9 chinook so far, last year at this date it had 1.
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: wildmanyeah on May 31, 2019, 01:42:46 PM
Looking at a system where governments have tried to solve the problem with hatcheries, it doesn't look good:

https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/environment/chinook-bust-on-the-columbia-spring-returns-worse-than-forecast-on-northwests-largest-river/ (https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/environment/chinook-bust-on-the-columbia-spring-returns-worse-than-forecast-on-northwests-largest-river/)


Every indicator I have seen tells me these shut-downs are warranted.  The hatchery marked fish that are being caught and released off of Vancouver Island and near Vancouver are mostly headed for the Columbia and other Washington rivers, where broodstock goals may not be met.  In Washington, when returns are iffy, we don't get a catch-and-release season, we get a complete closure (such as when quotas are met on winter Chinook fishing). 


Should probably tell that to your fellow country men in South East Alaska , The SEAK commercial troll fishery got an increase in quota this you and they fish mostly WCVI and Southern US bound fish.
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: CohoJake on May 31, 2019, 02:23:20 PM
Should probably tell that to your fellow country men in South East Alaska , The SEAK commercial troll fishery got an increase in quota this you and they fish mostly WCVI and Southern US bound fish.

Link please?  Last I saw SEAK was very restricted - but that was a couple months ago.  Also, I agree Alaska fisheries are part of the problem.
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: wildmanyeah on May 31, 2019, 02:28:47 PM
Link please?  Last I saw SEAK was very restricted - but that was a couple months ago.  Also, I agree Alaska fisheries are part of the problem.

"The harvest breakdown calls for 112,000 chinook salmon in areas outside of Southeast Alaska. The catch for the Southeast troll fleet, which is determined by a treaty with Canada, will be 101,300 kings, or an increase of 5,600 fish."



http://www.alaskajournal.com/2019-04-10/fish-factor-salmon-harvest-projection-takes-big-leap-2018

FISH FACTOR: Salmon harvest projection takes big leap from 2018
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: Rodney on June 05, 2019, 01:28:24 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-iaUahXWmn4
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: ribolovac02 on June 06, 2019, 07:56:20 AM
Great video
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: IronNoggin on June 07, 2019, 04:13:41 PM
FORTY-ONE FN in-river Openings to date on the most threatened runs of Chinook the Fraser has since Wilkinson imposed the restrictions.

http://www.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/fm-gp/fraser/docs/abor-autoc/UpperFraser/UMFPrevOpenTimes-eng.htm

https://www-ops2.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/fraserriver/firstnations/HTMLs/CeremonialOpeningTimes_Previous.html

In addition to an ongoing full blown FN Troll Fishery (with no numbers cap) in Area G waters that the latter were forced off of due to "conservation concerns".

https://www-ops2.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/fns-sap/index-eng.cfm?pg=view_notice&DOC_ID=221391&ID=all

And on top of that, the letter the Minister sent around today no longer even attempts to disguise the re-allocation aspect:

“In addition, new restrictions in commercial and recreational fisheries are intended to support increased availability of not at risk Summer 41 Chinook for First Nations fisheries harvest opportunities during August and September.”

https://www.sportfishingbc.com/forum/index.php?attachments/fraser-river-chinook-management-letter-june-2019-final-pdf.45727/

Rather obvious to anyone with eyes this is a complete travesty.

Nog
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: Robert_G on June 07, 2019, 06:06:03 PM
It was obvious what was going on the minute it happened. What is surprising how naïve people are here and the trust they misplace in corrupt people in government.
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: CohoJake on June 07, 2019, 06:19:54 PM
I'm sure you all saw this one: https://www.nationalobserver.com/2019/06/05/features/he-lives-share-his-salmon-faces-tighter-regulations-and-waning-fish-stocks (https://www.nationalobserver.com/2019/06/05/features/he-lives-share-his-salmon-faces-tighter-regulations-and-waning-fish-stocks)

Pretty obvious the tribes are asking to take over commercial fishing, and DFO is obliging.  If I owned a commercial license, I would be suing DFO right about now.  FN may have a constitutional priority to ceremonial and subsistence fishing, but if their rights to commercial harvest also have priority, it makes a commercial license worthless.  I don't necessarily object to the idea of giving commercial licenses to FN only, but I think the existing license holders need to be bought out of something that is worthless through no fault of their own.

In Washington, 50% of harvest is allocated to treaty tribes, and that includes treaty commercial harvest.  At least having explicit agreements makes it clear what everyone is getting (or should be getting).
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: wildmanyeah on June 07, 2019, 06:39:04 PM
I'm sure you all saw this one: https://www.nationalobserver.com/2019/06/05/features/he-lives-share-his-salmon-faces-tighter-regulations-and-waning-fish-stocks (https://www.nationalobserver.com/2019/06/05/features/he-lives-share-his-salmon-faces-tighter-regulations-and-waning-fish-stocks)

Pretty obvious the tribes are asking to take over commercial fishing, and DFO is obliging.  If I owned a commercial license, I would be suing DFO right about now.  FN may have a constitutional priority to ceremonial and subsistence fishing, but if their rights to commercial harvest also have priority, it makes a commercial license worthless.  I don't necessarily object to the idea of giving commercial licenses to FN only, but I think the existing license holders need to be bought out of something that is worthless through no fault of their own.

In Washington, 50% of harvest is allocated to treaty tribes, and that includes treaty commercial harvest.  At least having explicit agreements makes it clear what everyone is getting (or should be getting).

I did not, Thanks for sharing
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: Hike_and_fish on June 07, 2019, 10:01:16 PM
I hope they fish it to extinction. Honestly, most of them couldn't manage their way out of a wet paper bag
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: wildmanyeah on June 08, 2019, 11:00:49 AM
June 7, 2019
Via e-mail only
First Nations Chiefs, Councillors and Fisheries Representatives;
Sport Fishing Advisory Board
Commercial Salmon Advisory Board
Marine Conservation Caucus
Re: 2019 Fraser River Chinook Conservation Measures
On April 16, the Government of Canada announced new fisheries management measures to conserve
Fraser River Chinook (see news release: https://www.canada.ca/en/fisheriesoceans/news/2019/04/government-of-canada-takes-action-to-address-fraser-river-chinook-decline.html).
Following the announcement, the Department has received questions seeking further clarification on the
announced measures. This letter provides further information on the management approach, conservation
objectives and expected outcomes.
In November 2018, the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC) assessed the
status of 16 Southern British Columbia (BC) Chinook Designatable Units (DUs). Of these, 13 DUs are Fraser
River Chinook: 7 are assessed as Endangered, 4 as Threatened, 1 as Special Concern and only 1 was deemed
Not at Risk (for details see: https://www.canada.ca/en/environment-climate-change/services/committeestatus-endangered-wildlife/assessments/wildlife-species-assessment-summary-nov-2018.html). In
addition, productivity of many of these populations has declined to the point where fewer offspring are
returning compared to the parent generation and the populations will continue to decline even in the
absence of fishery mortalities unless conditions improve.
Concerns are particularly acute for Fraser River Chinook populations in the Spring 42, Spring 52, and
Summer 52 management units which contain most of the at risk stocks (i.e. 7 Endangered, 3 Threatened
and 1 Special Concern). These populations have been affected by very poor productivity, which has resulted
in steep declines in spawner abundance. For example, only 490 natural origin Chinook returned to the
Nicola River (which are in the Spring 42management unit) in 2018 from a parental generation of 7,122
Chinook. The poor return of wild origin Nicola Chinook in 2018 increases the concern that productivity for
Spring 52 and Summer 52 Chinook returning in 2019 could also be very poor as these fish went to sea in the
same year as Nicola Chinook and may have been exposed to similar freshwater and marine conditions.
DFO is taking the COSEWIC assessments very seriously and has announced highly precautionary fishery
restrictions intended to provide a high degree of protection to at risk Fraser Spring 42, Spring 52 and
Summer 52 Chinook returning in 2019. The management target is to reduce overall Canadian fishery
mortalities on these populations to near 5% (note: actual outcomes may vary around this target given
uncertainties in the data). Expected fishery mortalities are not intended to be a management target and
the objective is to allow as many fish to pass through to the spawning grounds as possible. Fishery impacts
are expected to include incidental Chinook mortalities in Fraser River Chinook and Sockeye test fisheries,
limited Chinook retention or bycatch retention in Fraser River First Nation FSC fisheries, release mortalities,
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: wildmanyeah on June 08, 2019, 11:01:08 AM
and incidental mortalities during Chinook-directed fisheries beginning after July 15. For Summer 41 and Fall
41, the precautionary fishery measures that have been announced are expected to substantially reduce
Canadian fishery mortalities on these management units by at least 25%.
Achieving these conservation objectives is our highest priority and requires significant actions in
commercial troll, recreational and First Nations fisheries in times and areas where at risk Fraser Chinook
may be encountered. Fraser Spring 42 and Spring 52 Chinook return to spawn from early March through late
July, with migration peaks in June through the lower Fraser River. Summer 52 Chinook have later timing and
return to the Fraser River to spawn from late June to August with a peak in late July.
While conservation of at risk Fraser Chinook is the primary objective in managing the resource, the
Department is also committed to respecting Constitutional and Treaty obligations to provide priority for
First Nations harvest opportunities for Food, Social and Ceremonial and Treaty obligations after
conservation requirements are met. Conservation measures will constrain First Nations Chinook harvest
opportunities while at risk Fraser Chinook or other stocks of concern (e.g. Early Stuart Sockeye) migrate
through fishing areas. Prior to July 15th, the Department is permitting very limited Fraser River FSC fishery
opportunities to harvest small numbers of Chinook for ceremonial purposes which is consistent with the
overall management objective for fishery mortalities near 5% for these stocks. In addition, new restrictions
in commercial and recreational fisheries are intended to support increased availability of not at risk
Summer 41 Chinook for First Nations fisheries harvest opportunities during August and September. These
restrictions include an extended closure of the commercial troll fishery in Northern BC until August 20
which is intended to pass through not at risk Summer 41 (South Thompson) Chinook that typically comprise
20-30% of troll harvests to the Fraser River. The Kamloops Lake commercial demonstration fishery targeting
South Thompson (Summer 41) Chinook will also be closed. Recreational salmon fisheries in southern BC will
remain at reduced limits of 1 Chinook per day after the Chinook non-retention period ends (i.e. after July 14
or July 31 depending on area) and recreational fisheries in the Fraser River will remain closed until at least
August 23.

A general summary of fisheries management measures for the 2019 fishing season are outlined below and
in tabular format in Appendix 1:
Commercial fishing: Commercial troll fisheries be Chinook non-retention until August 20 in Northern BC,
and will not open until August 1 on the West Coast of Vancouver Island to reduce impacts on Fraser
Chinook stocks to very low levels and to support salmon allocation priorities. The Kamloops Lake
commercial demonstration fishery targeting South Thompson (Summer 41) Chinook will be closed.
Recreational fishing: Management measures are identified where at-risk Chinook stocks may be
encountered, including:
• Non-retention of Chinook in Queen Charlotte Strait, Johnstone Strait and Northern Strait of Georgia
until July 14; a daily limit of one (1) Chinook per person per day from July 15 until August 29, and
two (2) Chinook per person per day from August 30 until December 31.
• Non-retention of Chinook in the Juan de Fuca Strait and Southern Strait of Georgia until July 31;
retention of one (1) Chinook per person per day from August 1 until August 29, and two (2) Chinook
per person per day from August 30 until December 31.
• West Coast Vancouver Island offshore areas (seaward of 1 nautical mile from the surfline) will have
non-retention of Chinook until July 14 followed by a limit of two (2) Chinook per day from July 15 to
December 31. West Coast Vancouver Island inshore waters will remain at two (2) Chinook per day.
• Fraser River recreational fisheries will remain closed to salmon fishing until at least August 23. After
that date, opportunities for species other than Chinook will be informed by in-season abundance
and other conservation issues (Coho, Steelhead, etc.). Reduced Fishing opportunities may be
3
provided in tributary areas during times and locations at-risk Chinook stocks would not be
encountered.
• An overall reduction in the total annual limit for Chinook that can be retained per person in tidal
waters from 30 to 10.
For up to date regulations in specific areas, please see our BC sport fishing guide online at:
http://www.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/fm-gp/rec/index-eng.html. .
First Nations fisheries: First Nations food, social and ceremonial fisheries and domestic harvest by treaty
nations will be restricted to Chinook non-retention until July 15 with the exception of limited opportunities
to harvest small numbers of Chinook for ceremonial purposes in the Fraser River until July 15. For
additional information on the limited First Nations fisheries opportunities that have been authorized in the
Fraser River please see: http://www.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/fm-gp/fraser/abor-autoc-eng.html.
The 5 Nations (Ahousaht, Ehattesaht, Hesquiaht, Mowachaht/Muchalaht, and Tla-o-qui-aht) rights-based
commercial fishery will be delayed until July 15 in areas seaward of 1 nautical mile from the surfline on the
West Coast of Vancouver Island. Fishing may be authorized in areas shoreward of 1 nautical mile from the
surfline. Information on openings will be posted by fishery notice at: https://www-ops2.pac.dfompo.gc.ca/fns-sap/index-eng.cfm.
The Department encourages anyone who observes a violation—including suspicious activity and possible
impacts to fish or marine ecosystems—to contact the toll-free 24-hour Observe, Record and Report (ORR)
line at 1-800-465-4336. Reports made to the ORR line are forwarded immediately to fishery officers. To
report a fisheries violation, more information is also available on DFO’s web-site: http://www.pac.dfompo.gc.ca/fm-gp/rec/ORR-ONS-eng.html.
An assessment of the effectiveness of these management measures will be completed in the post-season.
For the management units that have coded wire tag (CWT) indicators, Canadian fishery mortalities will be
used to assess performance against the management objectives. However, current CWT indicators are not
available to project fishery mortalities for the Spring 52 and Summer 52 Chinook. As a result, information on
run timing, historic CWT recoveries, and genetic stock identification was used to implement measures in
times/areas where these stocks may be encountered. A planned Canadian Science Advisory Secretariat
(CSAS) review of the available information to quantify impacts of commercial, recreational and First Nations
fisheries on Fraser Chinook, including Spring 42, Spring 52 and Summer 52 Chinook, is planned for review in
July 2019, which is anticipated to provide a methodology that can be used to assist with assessing the
fishery impacts for these stocks in the post-season.
Despite the difficulties expected from these new fishery management measures, they are necessary to
respond to the serious declines in these important Fraser Chinook populations. The challenges facing at-risk
Fraser River Chinook salmon stocks are multi-faceted. The road to recovery requires a long-term view and
the collaboration of First Nations, multiple levels of government and all interested parties. DFO will be
following up with First Nations, the Province of BC and stakeholders to establish a process to address a
broad range of issues that are impacting Chinook stocks, including: land and water use issues; fish habitat
issues; the role of hatcheries to support rebuilding and the potential for mark-selective fisheries targeting
hatchery-origin fish; how predation by seals and sea lions may be affecting Chinook salmon; and other
concerns. Establishing a process to have these important discussions will play a vital role in determining
how best to steward this resource going forward and what options may exist to further address the social,
cultural and economic importance of these Chinook stocks. This will require everyone to work toward
identifying mutually-beneficial solutions and ensuring conservation objectives are met to provide for future
opportunities. Further information will be provided on this process in the near future.
4
The Department would like to acknowledge the strong commitment to conserving Fraser Chinook
populations expressed by all First Nations, recreational and commercial harvesters and thank you for your
cooperation to protect and rebuild these important populations for the future.

DFO Pacific Salmon Management Team
DFO.PacificSalmonRMT-EGRSaumonduPacifique.MPO@dfo-mpo.gc.ca.
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: IronNoggin on June 08, 2019, 11:57:31 AM

Victor says salmon was once so abundant, there would be three or four fish barbeques in the community every weekend throughout summer.


And they wonder where the fish went??

“I can tell you, our value on the fish is much more than any recreational or commercial fish they catch,” he said.

So the fish sold roadside out of the back of a truck is more valuable than troll or recreational caught? Really??

But if they catch one fish that’s Fraser-bound, that’s enough. You compromise the constitutional priority, in my mind.”

Locked down the entire South Coast damn near, while recognizing the majority of those fisheries had no impact.
Under threat that they would fish the stocks of concern into extinction should they not get their way.
And now whine for even more...

Victor says that to uphold constitutional priority, DFO shouldn’t allow any fisheries, catch-and-release or otherwise, until after Indigenous fisheries have theirs.

He also says that Canada should consider giving control of commercial fishing to Indigenous Peoples, who have fished the same populations for millennia.


Bottom Line: We want it ALL, and we want it NOW!   :(

https://www.nationalobserver.com/2019/06/05/features/he-lives-share-his-salmon-faces-tighter-regulations-and-waning-fish-stocks
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: rln on June 08, 2019, 10:32:05 PM

Victor says salmon was once so abundant, there would be three or four fish barbeques in the community every weekend throughout summer.


And they wonder where the fish went??

“I can tell you, our value on the fish is much more than any recreational or commercial fish they catch,” he said.

So the fish sold roadside out of the back of a truck is more valuable than troll or recreational caught? Really??

But if they catch one fish that’s Fraser-bound, that’s enough. You compromise the constitutional priority, in my mind.”

Locked down the entire South Coast damn near, while recognizing the majority of those fisheries had no impact.
Under threat that they would fish the stocks of concern into extinction should they not get their way.
And now whine for even more...

Victor says that to uphold constitutional priority, DFO shouldn’t allow any fisheries, catch-and-release or otherwise, until after Indigenous fisheries have theirs.

He also says that Canada should consider giving control of commercial fishing to Indigenous Peoples, who have fished the same populations for millennia.


Bottom Line: We want it ALL, and we want it NOW!   :(

https://www.nationalobserver.com/2019/06/05/features/he-lives-share-his-salmon-faces-tighter-regulations-and-waning-fish-stocks
Maybe DFO should just let Victor fish like usual. That way when he gill nets the last one out of his traditional power skiff, he will then have nothing left for the future generations of First Nations to fish for. Problem will have been solved.
The rest of society then can do habitat and enhancement work in other streams that don’t drain into the Fraser River and have a sport fishery and commercial fishery on those stocks.
Interesting how too many First Nations appear to want to live like it’s still the time period before the European settler arrived and also have all the amenities of the 21 first century.
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: Hike_and_fish on June 09, 2019, 06:22:20 AM
Maybe DFO should just let Victor fish like usual. That way when he gill nets the last one out of his traditional power skiff, he will then have nothing left for the future generations of First Nations to fish for. Problem will have been solved.
The rest of society then can do habitat and enhancement work in other streams that don’t drain into the Fraser River and have a sport fishery and commercial fishery on those stocks.
Interesting how too many First Nations appear to want to live like it’s still the time period before the European settler arrived and also have all the amenities of the 21 first century.

^ this
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: RalphH on June 09, 2019, 07:52:20 AM


In Washington, 50% of harvest is allocated to treaty tribes, and that includes treaty commercial harvest.  At least having explicit agreements makes it clear what everyone is getting (or should be getting).

Well hind sight is always 20/20. I remember when the courts ruled on the Treaty rights (there was no agreement) in Washington State and sport anglers, there and here, acted as if the sky had fallen. Several years later the SCOC clarified what FN rights are here in BC. Jake while in the recent past you've written about the down side of having an allocation vs the tiered system with the ultimate priority being conservation, here in BC it is  clear many anglers wish we had what you have. Better to have 50% of almost nothing than nothing at all (LOL). Still I don't recall anyone in the BC angling community back in the 70s and 80s saying we need to make a fair deal we can all live with to the protect the future of the sport. Far from it, I heard a lot of other reprehensible things but never that.

Once again the sport angling community is looking to the wrong people to lead it and aiming for it's foot. There is no way the current issue can be won with the kind of false and hateful rhetoric smeared over internet chat sites or Facebook pages. As usual the entire angling community looks like a bunch of buffoons.
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: wildmanyeah on June 09, 2019, 08:32:43 AM
Maybe DFO should just let Victor fish like usual. That way when he gill nets the last one out of his traditional power skiff, he will then have nothing left for the future generations of First Nations to fish for. Problem will have been solved.
The rest of society then can do habitat and enhancement work in other streams that don’t drain into the Fraser River and have a sport fishery and commercial fishery on those stocks.
Interesting how too many First Nations appear to want to live like it’s still the time period before the European settler arrived and also have all the amenities of the 21 first century.

Victor is just a lieir

"“Last year, I had literally no fish at all,” he says, citing short supply and high prices.

In the past, his stepbrother and nephew have given him fish to smoke through the winter. Last year, two friends sold him fish at a lower price.

“Because they’re such good friends, they took a loss on their sales,” he said. “They knew how much I relied on it and needed it… They are literally life savers.”"

So despite Lower fraser First nations harvesting 400,000 sockeye for FSC he did not receive any for his smokehouse? because they ended up on the market because
prices were high? is that what he is saying? Where did the 30 thousand chinook, 40 thousand coho and 75 thousand chum end up? Perhaps he's better off having a conversation with his chief then DFO.

(https://i.imgur.com/5762Wbk.png)
(https://i.imgur.com/zRKJUeX.png)
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: StillAqua on June 09, 2019, 08:45:33 AM

Once again the sport angling community is looking to the wrong people to lead it and aiming for it's foot. There is no way the current issue can be won with the kind of false and hateful rhetoric smeared over internet chat sites or Facebook pages. As usual the entire angling community looks like a bunch of buffoons.

I agree. At best, the false or misleading attacks are ignorant. At worse, they are inciting hate against FNs. Yes, FNs have a constitutionally protected right to FSC salmon that you don't have.  It's part of the how our society evolved over the last 250 years. Grow up and get over it. FSC fisheries aren't the problem.

DFO is trying to manage Chinook and multistock fisheries while wedged between COSEWIC assessments for Chinook and orcas, US-Canada salmon treaty co-management issues and SCOC guaranteed Aboriginal Fisheries rights, against a background of declining Chinook ocean survivals. Nobody is happy and everybody has lost something. Which usually means it's a reasonable compromise.
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: Hike_and_fish on June 09, 2019, 10:52:32 AM
The Steelhead numbers are interesting. Where were they headed ? The Stien ? Nahatlatch? Chehalis?  Big Silver ? The Thompson? Or some other small system that once held Steelhead. Did they make it ? Who knows. Hopefully they did.
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: IronNoggin on June 09, 2019, 11:31:53 AM
... Which usually means it's a reasonable compromise.

And if that is your assessment of the overall situation in the matter under discussion, I will simply have to assume you either do not understand all of the background, or have become rather delusional. Perhaps sipping a little too much of ol' Ralphie Boy's Kool Aid??

Nog
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: Rodney on June 09, 2019, 12:15:47 PM
The personal attacks are unnecessary just because Ralph and StillAqua have different POVs to the situation. That's not how you get people to understand and appreciate your side of the story.
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: rln on June 09, 2019, 07:44:41 PM
Not really sure if it matters or not but has anyone ever done the math of fish allocated per First Nations person?
Seems to me that less than 100,000 people are allocated multiple millions of fish depending on the year.
Maybe the numbers should be reviewed to see if they should increase or decrease to take into account the number of hungry people like Victor out there barely getting by.
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: Rodney on June 09, 2019, 08:31:26 PM
Awhile ago, I actually did that calculation based on last year's catch data and population data gathered from the Census. The allocated number for each individual is actually not as high as what most people think.

What I'm more interested in, and have been trying to find this out for a long time and could never get a straight answer, is whether the allocated quota is a fixed number that does not change from year to year, or relative to the run size. Are we expecting a fixed number of fish being allocated to First Nations' FSC fisheries first, regardless whether it is 10k, 100k, or 1 million after spawning escapement is met. Or, are we looking at a % of the run being allocated, then the rest can be distributed to the other sectors?

If it is fixed and based on the number of people, and as the population of First Nations continues to increase, how is that sustainable? Even if you take away harvest pressure from the other two sectors, it can't possibly last forever.
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: wildmanyeah on June 10, 2019, 09:16:21 AM
It varies based on species, sockeye, pink and chum I believe they get allocated a % of the returns. That % changes based on run size. For specific individual ceremonial gatherings I know at one time were were allocated 1 sockeye per 6 people attending.  I also know areas like the Skeena, they are allocated for chinook a hard number of 15,000 pieces, that does not change based on run size. IMO that's a bit silly

Most things tho however are negotiated in season on a nation to nation basis.

A new change this year because they are keeping first nations fishing to a minimum right now later in the season they will get more quota. To free up more quota they are keeping recs out of the river to august 23. So that more is simply a reallocation, nothing to do with conservation.

"In addition, new restrictions
in commercial and recreational fisheries are intended to support increased availability of not at risk
Summer 41 Chinook for First Nations fisheries harvest opportunities during August and September."

As Rod points out publicly its a pretty big black hole of information and I think all it does by not proving that information is cause animosity. For example are the nets out of the river allocated 3 chinook or are they allocated 1000? no one knows.  Now I read on FB that for there First Fish of the year ceremonies this year each FN band is being allocated 3 Chinook.

Not sure if you could even get that information though an FOI request.
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: RalphH on June 10, 2019, 10:58:52 AM
the Fraser Chinook catch statistics to date (2019) certainly don't back up the sky is falling rhetoric tossed around so frequently.

Per the Stats Canada 2016 survey BC's FN population is around 300,000 and overall people who indicated they were FN increased by 3.8% over 2006. One of the biggest factors in that growth is the number of people who identify themselves as FNs, so it is not 'pure' population growth.

Overall FN fertility rates among women have declined rapidly since the 1970s though it is still above the national average at about 2.7 for women with Status vs 1.5 for the general population. Under current population trends the FN female population for the entire country will increase by about 170,000 by 2036 to 801,000.

As First Nations communities gain access to improved education and health care the same trends that have been seen among women world wide will in all probability take effect; as women gain control of their lives and bodies fertility rates drop and will will likely come in line with the national average.
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: Hike_and_fish on June 10, 2019, 01:15:11 PM
Not really sure if it matters or not but has anyone ever done the math of fish allocated per First Nations person?
Seems to me that less than 100,000 people are allocated multiple millions of fish depending on the year.
Maybe the numbers should be reviewed to see if they should increase or decrease to take into account the number of hungry people like Victor out there barely getting by.

It's a good point. I know a few people in two bands in the area ( family lives on rez in North Van ) that dont eat Salmon at all. Trust me when I say that there are MANY bands along the Fraser that are from from broke and starving. It's a front for those bands. Salmon is just an extra  source of income.
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: StillAqua on June 11, 2019, 02:44:51 PM
What I'm more interested in, and have been trying to find this out for a long time and could never get a straight answer, is whether the allocated quota is a fixed number that does not change from year to year, or relative to the run size. Are we expecting a fixed number of fish being allocated to First Nations' FSC fisheries first, regardless whether it is 10k, 100k, or 1 million after spawning escapement is met. Or, are we looking at a % of the run being allocated, then the rest can be distributed to the other sectors?

Don't feel badly Rod. Even the Cohen Commission couldn't get that info. Here's a section of the Cohen Report that describes the process. It's for all salmon, not just Chinook or sockeye.

"Allocation to Aboriginal fisheries

DFO manages allocations in the Aboriginal fishery by providing a given Aboriginal organization access to a certain number of fish, whether presented as an absolute number or calculated as a percentage of the TAC. According to Kaarina McGivney, former regional director, Treaty and Aboriginal Policy and Governance Directorate, having allocations is important because they facilitate fisheries management. She said that having an agreed amount of access provides some stability and understanding for fisheries management.

DFO states that Aboriginal fishing allocations are reached by negotiation with Aboriginal organizations. In these negotiations, DFO staff are provided with “mandates” setting out the maximum number of fish and funding that may be agreed to at a given negotiation. Since 2007, the mandates associated with the FSC fisheries of individual British Columbia Aboriginal groups have been determined by the regional director general. Before that, they were set in Ottawa. Mandates associated with the economic opportunity fisheries continue to require approval from the minister. According to Barry Huber, Aboriginal affairs advisor, BC Interior, DFO, mandates are reviewed annually and can be adjusted if necessary.

Mr. Huber also told me that mandates are not disclosed to Aboriginal groups, as doing so would detract from the negotiations under way. He said that each negotiator needs flexibility, and laying all the “chips on the table” at the start is not a good way to negotiate because it “forces you to be positional right off the bat.” At the end of the negotiations, the agreement reached may include fewer FSC fish or less funding than is stipulated in the mandate, though most are at the top of mandate levels.

The Aboriginal Fisheries Framework contains an articulation of the overall percentage of the available salmon harvest that is to be allocated to First Nations. The actual percentage was not disclosed to the Commission. When I ordered that this percentage allocation be disclosed, I was provided a certificate from the clerk of the privy council certifying that the information and related documentation was a cabinet confidence.

Despite not knowing the percentage of salmon allocated to First Nations in the Aboriginal Fisheries Framework, I did hear evidence on  how this percentage is used. According to  Ms. McGivney, the percentage allocation covers both FSC fishing and Aboriginal communal fishing for economic purposes. The percentage is to be achieved on average, over a number of years, recognizing that, in years of low salmon returns, the Aboriginal FSC fishery may form a higher percentage of the catch.

According to DFO’s Aboriginal Fisheries Framework, on a year-to-year average, Aboriginal FSC and economic opportunity fisheries are allocated approximately 30 percent of the total salmon harvested in British Columbia. In contrast, the First Nations Panel on Fisheries recommended in its 2004 report, Our Place at the Table: First Nations in the B.C. Fishery, that the government immediately transfer a minimum of 50 percent of all fisheries to First Nations, with the potential that the total may reach 100 percent in some fisheries."
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: redside1 on June 11, 2019, 03:01:30 PM

According to DFO’s Aboriginal Fisheries Framework, on a year-to-year average, Aboriginal FSC and economic opportunity fisheries are allocated approximately 30 percent of the total salmon harvested in British Columbia. In contrast, the First Nations Panel on Fisheries recommended in its 2004 report, Our Place at the Table: First Nations in the B.C. Fishery, that the government immediately transfer a minimum of 50 percent of all fisheries to First Nations, with the potential that the total may reach 100 percent in some fisheries."
[/quote]
`
depending on the volume of fish available, 30%-100% is a pretty decent number.
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: wildmanyeah on June 11, 2019, 03:36:24 PM
Don't feel badly Rod. Even the Cohen Commission couldn't get that info. Here's a section of the Cohen Report that describes the process. It's for all salmon, not just Chinook or sockeye.

"Allocation to Aboriginal fisheries

DFO manages allocations in the Aboriginal fishery by providing a given Aboriginal organization access to a certain number of fish, whether presented as an absolute number or calculated as a percentage of the TAC. According to Kaarina McGivney, former regional director, Treaty and Aboriginal Policy and Governance Directorate, having allocations is important because they facilitate fisheries management. She said that having an agreed amount of access provides some stability and understanding for fisheries management.

DFO states that Aboriginal fishing allocations are reached by negotiation with Aboriginal organizations. In these negotiations, DFO staff are provided with “mandates” setting out the maximum number of fish and funding that may be agreed to at a given negotiation. Since 2007, the mandates associated with the FSC fisheries of individual British Columbia Aboriginal groups have been determined by the regional director general. Before that, they were set in Ottawa. Mandates associated with the economic opportunity fisheries continue to require approval from the minister. According to Barry Huber, Aboriginal affairs advisor, BC Interior, DFO, mandates are reviewed annually and can be adjusted if necessary.

Mr. Huber also told me that mandates are not disclosed to Aboriginal groups, as doing so would detract from the negotiations under way. He said that each negotiator needs flexibility, and laying all the “chips on the table” at the start is not a good way to negotiate because it “forces you to be positional right off the bat.” At the end of the negotiations, the agreement reached may include fewer FSC fish or less funding than is stipulated in the mandate, though most are at the top of mandate levels.

The Aboriginal Fisheries Framework contains an articulation of the overall percentage of the available salmon harvest that is to be allocated to First Nations. The actual percentage was not disclosed to the Commission. When I ordered that this percentage allocation be disclosed, I was provided a certificate from the clerk of the privy council certifying that the information and related documentation was a cabinet confidence.

Despite not knowing the percentage of salmon allocated to First Nations in the Aboriginal Fisheries Framework, I did hear evidence on  how this percentage is used. According to  Ms. McGivney, the percentage allocation covers both FSC fishing and Aboriginal communal fishing for economic purposes. The percentage is to be achieved on average, over a number of years, recognizing that, in years of low salmon returns, the Aboriginal FSC fishery may form a higher percentage of the catch.

According to DFO’s Aboriginal Fisheries Framework, on a year-to-year average, Aboriginal FSC and economic opportunity fisheries are allocated approximately 30 percent of the total salmon harvested in British Columbia. In contrast, the First Nations Panel on Fisheries recommended in its 2004 report, Our Place at the Table: First Nations in the B.C. Fishery, that the government immediately transfer a minimum of 50 percent of all fisheries to First Nations, with the potential that the total may reach 100 percent in some fisheries."

Wow the government invoked cabinet privilege, I had no idea. Thanks for the info 
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: CohoJake on June 11, 2019, 03:45:13 PM
Wow, the process is muddy everywhere.  In Washington we have a lawsuit ongoing over whether the North of Falcon meetings (the name given to the annual meetings to determine salmon quotas) were subject to our state's Open Public Meetings act.  The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife has responded that they can't open the meetings to the public because they are negotiating with essentially a foreign government (the Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission).  Sounds a whole lot like "cabinet privilege".
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: StillAqua on June 11, 2019, 06:25:48 PM
According to DFO’s Aboriginal Fisheries Framework, on a year-to-year average, Aboriginal FSC and economic opportunity fisheries are allocated approximately 30 percent of the total salmon harvested in British Columbia. In contrast, the First Nations Panel on Fisheries recommended in its 2004 report, Our Place at the Table: First Nations in the B.C. Fishery, that the government immediately transfer a minimum of 50 percent of all fisheries to First Nations, with the potential that the total may reach 100 percent in some fisheries."

`
depending on the volume of fish available, 30%-100% is a pretty decent number.

Just so you know, when the First Nations Panel talks about transferring a percentage of fisheries to FNs, they aren't referring to fish but to buyouts of commercial fishing licences and quotas. Basically, they want to take a larger share or completely take over some commercial fisheries.
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: TNAngler on June 12, 2019, 08:24:47 AM
So, if there is insufficient fish one year, then their "quota" can carry over to future years.  So, if there are many years with very few fish they just rack up huge IOUs and so then if there is a bigger year....  Yeah, we all see where this is going.
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: RalphH on June 12, 2019, 10:50:13 AM
So, if there is insufficient fish one year, then their "quota" can carry over to future years.  So, if there are many years with very few fish they just rack up huge IOUs and so then if there is a bigger year....  Yeah, we all see where this is going.

no the quota system recognizes that since FNs have 1st priority after conservation needs there will be years were FNs take the bulk or even all the fish harvested.  in years of higher abundance when the other 2 sectors get to take fish the FN % will drop to a much lower level. On average the FN allocation will run 30% or more though keep in mind they take fewer fish in years they take a high %.
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: wildmanyeah on June 12, 2019, 11:15:31 AM
So, if there is insufficient fish one year, then their "quota" can carry over to future years.  So, if there are many years with very few fish they just rack up huge IOUs and so then if there is a bigger year....  Yeah, we all see where this is going.

That indeed does seem to be the case because they are not getting enough quota (despite it being 100%) from early chinook stocks they have restricted other sectors other to avoid later returning chinook so they can harvest more.  Not sure about year to year but in season that certainly seems to be the case.

"Conservation measures will constrain First Nations Chinook harvest
opportunities while at risk Fraser Chinook or other stocks of concern (e.g. Early Stuart Sockeye) migrate
through fishing areas. Prior to July 15th, the Department is permitting very limited Fraser River FSC fishery
opportunities to harvest small numbers of Chinook for ceremonial purposes which is consistent with the
overall management objective for fishery mortalities near 5% for these stocks. In addition, new restrictions
in commercial and recreational fisheries are intended to support increased availability of not at risk
Summer 41 Chinook for First Nations fisheries harvest opportunities during August and September. These
restrictions include an extended closure of the commercial troll fishery in Northern BC until August 20
which is intended to pass through not at risk Summer 41 (South Thompson) Chinook that typically comprise
20-30% of troll harvests to the Fraser River. The Kamloops Lake commercial demonstration fishery targeting
South Thompson (Summer 41) Chinook will also be closed. Recreational salmon fisheries in southern BC will
remain at reduced limits of 1 Chinook per day after the Chinook non-retention period ends (i.e. after July 14
or July 31 depending on area) and recreational fisheries in the Fraser River will remain closed until at least
August 23."
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: Robert_G on June 12, 2019, 04:48:26 PM
I read these posts and from the years involved with the situation....I really want to see some good news....something positive....
Unfortunately, the obvious forgone conclusion in the same no matter how you look at it. There is no good news.
The days of the middle class Caucasian male like myself who actually pays taxes, who wants to take his kid out to harvest a salmon for a Sunday barbeque is pretty much over. Its so freaking sad and pathetic that things have come to this.

The fact that we are run by a government and leaders who cater to special interest groups instead of sharing the remaining opportunities (no matter how small they may be) with all user groups....it really shows what type of country we live in....a country that our government says is one of the best in the world (sadly there is still quite a bit of truth to that)...but instead governs with discrimination and racism (you have to be a certain race or special interest group to enjoy certain things our country has to offer)....and can be bought by the highest bidder.....etc, etc.
Canada may be one of the safest and wealthiest countries in the world, but what we have in strengths, we cancel out by severely lacking in ethics, morals, honestly, fairness, justice, etc, etc.

If someone can find one ounce of positive news for the family guy described in my first paragraph.....please share it....thanks in advance.


Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: Rodney on June 12, 2019, 05:21:12 PM
Middle class Caucasian male?

What about the upper class Asian male like me? lol...
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: ByteMe on June 12, 2019, 07:21:38 PM
This might be an easier solution than to have to settle on land claims for the next 25yrs...........my grandsons might be living on the plains by then if they choose the later :'(
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: TNAngler on June 13, 2019, 11:30:28 AM
no the quota system recognizes that since FNs have 1st priority after conservation needs there will be years were FNs take the bulk or even all the fish harvested.  in years of higher abundance when the other 2 sectors get to take fish the FN % will drop to a much lower level. On average the FN allocation will run 30% or more though keep in mind they take fewer fish in years they take a high %.

If 100% of the quota does not meet their needs, they run a deficit that will be made up in future years.  So FN takes all of the fish in low years but it is not enough so when we get to higher abundance years, they have to be pretty darn good before the percentage isn't 100%.  We aren't seeing those anymore.  Bye bye non-FN fishery.  May it RIP.
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: spoiler on June 13, 2019, 11:54:41 AM
here's a few numbers for everyone to ponder.....
current population of BC is 5,020,302
current aboriginal population of BC is around 200,000
that represents less than 4% of our population.
anyone see a problem with 4% of our population dictating our salmon fishery?
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: RalphH on June 13, 2019, 06:28:47 PM
Not all BC FNs either have a say in how the salmon fishery is run or are entitled to take salmon or receive it through the band fishery administration.

for decades the commercial sector had the major 'say'. the last few years employment in harvesting for all fisheries has been around 5,000, processing 3,000 or less.

Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: avid angler on June 14, 2019, 07:04:29 AM
It's a good point. I know a few people in two bands in the area ( family lives on rez in North Van ) that dont eat Salmon at all. Trust me when I say that there are MANY bands along the Fraser that are from from broke and starving. It's a front for those bands. Salmon is just an extra  source of income.

You sure about that? Judging by his physique I would say Ken Malloway lives off a strict diet of sockeye and wild nuts and berries 😶
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: Dave on June 14, 2019, 10:43:19 AM
You sure about that? Judging by his physique I would say Ken Malloway lives off a strict diet of sockeye and wild nuts and berries 😶

LOL!!
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: IronNoggin on June 19, 2019, 01:10:02 PM
Unfortunately due to mechanical difficulties (damn front differential) I was unable to attend today's scheduled meeting with Conservative MP Calkins (Federal Standing Committee on Fisheries) & Staff.

However two of our Directors did make it there.They both suggested the discussions were very positive, and that Blaine was both attentive and supportive.They also noted that he still requires some additional education regarding fisheries matters in BC, but was quick to grasp what they laid out in that regard for him.

I believe we both have an ally in MP Calkins. I will be following up directly with him in the next couple of days as a consequence. Although it was disappointing MP Doherty could not make this trip, his schedule at this point simply precluded that. I will be following up with Doherty in the next few days as well.

Overall the impression was that there is genuine concern, and a willingness to work with both the recreational and commercial troll sector in moving forward. Hell of a different impression than Wilkinson and the lieberals have left us with.

On the related matter, the so-called Impact Study has been settled - frankly it does not exist. I will be following up on that issue as it is a rather serious offense of lying to a government committee by Department of Fisheries and Oceans Paul Gillis, Director General, Strategic Policy.

Cheers, Nog
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: big_fish on June 19, 2019, 01:18:00 PM
Of course they are all attentive and interested lol... They all want to be elected.
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: IronNoggin on June 19, 2019, 01:20:31 PM
Of course they are all attentive and interested lol... They all want to be elected.

Yep. And the other side acts exactly like it wants to be defeated.
Something I (among many) are aiming to accommodate.  ;)

Cheers,
Nog
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: IronNoggin on June 21, 2019, 06:13:44 PM
The fishing restrictions imposed by the federal Fisheries Department this spring has already had a devastating effect on businesses, according to a survey conducted by the Port Renfrew Chamber of Commerce.

https://www.sookenewsmirror.com/news/fish-closure-in-port-renfrew-has-endangered-more-than-40-per-cent-of-businesses/
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: Blood_Orange on June 22, 2019, 10:04:39 PM
I called them and they confirmed they are indeed Fraser River chinooks.
Long Liner Seafood at Granville Island still selling fresh "Fraser River Chinook" at $50 per pound, as of Sat Jun 22/2019. Same price tag in the fish case as in the May 11/2019 post earlier in this thread. Did anyone better educated on commercial fisheries than me ever figure out how they're legally buying and selling them?
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: wildmanyeah on June 22, 2019, 10:54:04 PM
Long Liner Seafood at Granville Island still selling fresh "Fraser River Chinook" at $50 per pound, as of Sat Jun 22/2019. Same price tag in the fish case as in the May 11/2019 post earlier in this thread. Did anyone better educated on commercial fisheries than me ever figure out how they're legally buying and selling them?

They are from the Albion test fishery 
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: IronNoggin on July 01, 2019, 04:48:42 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=68eW47BEkE8&t=2s
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: avid angler on July 01, 2019, 05:36:36 PM
Wildmanyeah is right. They have a contract with the Albion for the first 100 fish I believe
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: IronNoggin on July 04, 2019, 12:24:52 PM
A little slow out of the gate, but finally a report of some nature:

https://rachelblaney.ndp.ca/chinook-public-fishery-report (https://rachelblaney.ndp.ca/chinook-public-fishery-report)

Unfortunately the Minister and his government could not care any less.    :(

Nog
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: IronNoggin on July 07, 2019, 11:47:13 AM
There are three segments of Jill Bennett's CKNW show that pertain to this matter:

Jason Benelli speaking in regard to the development of the situation, and the impacts on the recreational sector:

https://globalnews.ca/pages/audio-vault-cknw/?fbclid=IwAR1RrCxMqkzWGjLNphHt913hvyPVuHeQwdvRDyrI-4MYHUiMt5k96Cwu3kc

Jason Tonelli - July 6, 8:00 am, 15:20 time stamp

Minster Wilkinson's response wherein he publicly and on record LIES about the FN openings in the Fraser - simply said there have been none. DFO's own website indicates 94 in river FN gillnet openings since the restrictions were imposed (representing an effort of 587 gillnet days).
In typical politico diversion, he also refuses to answer several of the pointed questions, and deflects to other topics (just like his boss).

https://globalnews.ca/pages/audio-vault-cknw/?fbclid=IwAR1RrCxMqkzWGjLNphHt913hvyPVuHeQwdvRDyrI-4MYHUiMt5k96Cwu3kc

Wilkinson's Response: July 7, 7:00 am, 06:00 time stamp

Finally an open call-in session on the same topic:

https://globalnews.ca/pages/audio-vault-cknw/?fbclid=IwAR1RrCxMqkzWGjLNphHt913hvyPVuHeQwdvRDyrI-4MYHUiMt5k96Cwu3kc

Call / write in: July 7, 8:00 am, 33:20 time stamp

WELL Worth a listen if this subject is of interest.

Nog
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: wildmanyeah on July 07, 2019, 12:13:09 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/JVupH1J.png)
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: IronNoggin on July 07, 2019, 01:02:46 PM
DFO's site actually provides proof of their own Minister's LIES:

https://www.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/fm-gp/fraser/abor-autoc-eng.html

https://www-ops2.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/fraserriver/firstnations/HTMLs/CeremonialOpeningTimes_Previous.html

Disgusting.
Nog
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: redside1 on July 07, 2019, 09:49:07 PM
a very poor job of Wilkinson's handlers briefing him on what's been going on.
Crazy to think an elected official would down outright knowingly lie like it appeared he did on a public forum like radio.
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: Hike_and_fish on July 07, 2019, 10:22:40 PM
a very poor job of Wilkinson's handlers briefing him on what's been going on.
Crazy to think an elected official would down outright knowingly lie like it appeared he did on a public forum like radio.

Oh yeah ?

To me....... it's crazy ( at least in my line of work ) that he didnt fire his handlers afterwards.

Please spare me. He know what's going on and if he truly doesnt, he need to shut up
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: IronNoggin on July 08, 2019, 11:16:10 AM
Please spare me. He know what's going on and if he truly doesn't, he needs to shut up

IF he actually did not know, why? He is the Minister after all, and should be aware of such openings, especially in light of just how sensitive this matter is. Total Incompetence if this is the case.

If on the other hand he is aware (more likely IMHO) then he should step down immediately.
A Minister, lying publicly about his own portfolio, has no place at the helm whatsoever.

Nog
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: Hike_and_fish on July 08, 2019, 11:40:49 AM
IF he actually did not know, why? He is the Minister after all, and should be aware of such openings, especially in light of just how sensitive this matter is. Total Incompetence if this is the case.

If on the other hand he is aware (more likely IMHO) then he should step down immediately.
A Minister, lying publicly about his own portfolio, has no place at the helm whatsoever.

Nog

I agree. However him and every other cabinet minister seems to tow the party line. Those that doesnt get tossed out. Every minister regurgitates the same message. He lies and so does the Prime Minister. SNC Lavalin
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: dobrolub on July 08, 2019, 09:18:48 PM
https://youtu.be/kxgeevlRElw?t=284

more on identity politics and its dangers:

https://youtu.be/_iudkPi4_sY?t=1242
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: wildmanyeah on July 09, 2019, 06:16:51 AM
He met with recreational fishers where these topics were discussed.

He told them in person that it was essentially closed, but they could apply for a permit to catch a few fish for a funeral or wedding...

He lied plain and simple on the radio. He knew that they could apply for limited openings.
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: RalphH on July 09, 2019, 06:42:39 AM
https://youtu.be/kxgeevlRElw?t=284

more on identity politics and its dangers:

https://youtu.be/_iudkPi4_sY?t=1242

Had to chuckle when Peterson referred to the 19th Century,when slaves were an 'identity' in the US and though the average monthly salary was less than $2 per capita most of the richest men (i.e. John D Rockefeller) in modern history made their fortunes. Then he implied war was only bad for men as if women and children didn't suffer in war time until recently. He also got the definition of equity wrong.
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: dobrolub on July 09, 2019, 07:43:06 AM
War is a horrible thing. And they are mostly started by those in power who should very carefully consider consequences of instilling an ideology.

He talks loud and clear that identity politics is a bad idea, because it creates grounds for dividing people into groups and arming these people with ideology, false beliefs and false sense of entitlement.

In this case it's an entitlement to fishing. But it will not stop at that. Extrapolate for yourself and you can see how horrible this can become. I already heard an interview of one liberal writer who was suggesting that the houses we live in indeed are built on a land that once belonged to natives. Extrapolate from that!
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: wildmanyeah on July 09, 2019, 08:20:47 AM
Fish is the chosen option for reconciliation. I would not worry about land that is within a municipality or city limits. '

Crown land, well that is a whole different story  https://www.sac-isc.gc.ca/eng/1544732060186/1544732109441#chp1

https://www.aadnc-aandc.gc.ca/eng/1327090675492/1327090738973
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: RalphH on July 09, 2019, 08:54:58 AM
Identity, identity politics,war etc...they have been around as long as the human race and Jordan Peterson isn't going to make them go away by denying the identity of other people. I am not discounting what he says. I think he is valuable critic but I don't believe he has a 'solution' to the human condition.

Fish is only one aspect of reconciliation for FNs in some parts of BC. Pretty much meaningless in most of Canada.
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: IronNoggin on July 10, 2019, 12:32:26 PM
Open Letter from the Sport Fishing Institute (SFI) to Wilkinson:

https://mailchi.mp/8c7db2691b7e/sfi-member-update-071019?e=d242420a33

Pretty much nails it from the recreational aspect.

Cheers,
Nog
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: IronNoggin on July 12, 2019, 04:38:42 PM
This government has totally lost it's mind:

Today, the DFO held a press briefing to announce what they billed as “Additional Fisheries Management Measures for Fraser River Chinook stocks, following the recent landslide near Big Bar, north of Lillooet, BC.”

For those sport fishermen planning on fishing the areas opening for retention starting July 15, the announcement boils down to one thing, and one thing only: non-retention of Chinook over 80 cm both wild and hatchery.


https://islandfishermanmagazine.com/dfo-no-retention-of-chinook-over-80-cm/
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: Big Green Machine on July 12, 2019, 05:17:08 PM
Wilkinson will simply say there have been no commercial or recreational openings on the Fraser because he knows he can deflect to the Supreme Court rulings on FSC fish openings. Of those more than 90 openings, there have not been a significant number or ‘reported’ catches. Yet there are instances of nets in the river during unopened times that have been reported. I imagine that the DFO is thinking if the ‘official’ FSC openings are reporting low numbers they may be extrapolating the data to the illegal nets to justify a non response. However, at the end of the day, he needs to come clean and simply say, this decision I political, not based on science. The over 80cm hatchery fish we cant retain, are they really headed to the upper Fraser???
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: IronNoggin on July 13, 2019, 12:42:21 PM
“First Nations food, social, ceremonial, fisheries already in place below the landslide will not be affected,”  Thomson says.

"We fully support the call from the Fraser Salmon Management Council that all recreational and commercial fisheries fishing Fraser River salmon stocks immediately stop and any contemplated recreational and commercial fishery, including catch and release, not take place until after it is determined that all salmon have safe access around the slide area and that any such openings only be considered after conservation and First Nations priority needs are met,” says Grand Chief Stewart Phillip in a release.


https://www.citynews1130.com/2019/07/12/fraser-river-fishing-restrictions-in-place-after-rockslide-threatens-spawning-salmon/

The Agenda is quite clear here...

.................................................

“Gerald Michel is lands and resources co-ordinator with the Xwisten Indian Band, located downriver from the slide.

His community, already worried about declining salmon stocks, curtailed fishing last week after learning of the slide, Mr. Michel said. The slide has added to worries about the impacts of fish farming on wild stocks,” he said.


https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/british-columbia/article-rock-slide-along-bcs-fraser-river-cuts-off-salmon-spawning-route/

Interesting. Even the FN's are clear that Wilkinson was LYING when he said no such fisheries had or were taking place...

Nog
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: SPEYMAN on July 13, 2019, 10:07:22 PM
Maybe if B.C. supported the Trans Mountain Pipe Line the Feds would be more favorable to the fishing.
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: redside1 on July 15, 2019, 12:00:30 PM
Maybe if B.C. supported the Trans Mountain Pipe Line the Feds would be more favorable to the fishing.

pipeline is not relevant for salmon regulations. What is relevant is the federal government is now in a consulting process with Fraser first nations and this 80cm max and nothing larger no matter if it is wild or hatchery came from that process.
here is their point of view on what should happen for all fisheries that consume salmon.

https://www.ubcic.bc.ca/fraser_river_salmon_state_of_emergency_bc_first_nations
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: 96XJ on July 15, 2019, 03:24:04 PM
Quoting from the article

Grand Chief Stewart Phillip, President of the Union of BC Indian Chiefs, stated “The Big Bar rockslide is an extreme crisis for our sacred salmon, and we have a responsibility to look after them. We fully support the call from the Fraser Salmon Management Council (FSMC) that all recreational and commercial fisheries fishing Fraser River salmon stocks immediately stop and any contemplated recreational and commercial fishery, including catch and release, not take place until after it is determined that all salmon have safe access around the slide area and that any such openings only be considered after conservation and First Nations priority needs are met.”

The last line sums its up - doesn't matter the health of the stocks , as long as we get ours
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: rln on July 15, 2019, 05:17:08 PM
Fish 80cm or smaller do manage to swim through the Chinook gill nets in the Fraser so at least the FN’s are allowing something for the others to catch since they will not gill many of those
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: RalphH on July 15, 2019, 06:56:31 PM
Quoting from the article

Grand Chief Stewart Phillip, President of the Union of BC Indian Chiefs, stated “...any such openings only be considered after conservation and First Nations priority needs are met.”


the courts long ago as in decades ago, the specified legal priorities are:

First - Conservation - minimum escapement numbers to maintain viable stocks

Second -  FN FSC fisheries

Third: commercial fishery openings

Fourth: Recreational Fishery openings

So Chief Phillip is just repeating the long established rules that DFO has to follow.
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: SPEYMAN on July 15, 2019, 09:47:29 PM
The Federal Govt. will not leave B.C. unpunished for closing down the pipeline. They are now playing politics with a B.C. resource. Prawn limit reduced. Chinook closure, how much clearer can they make it.
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: RalphH on July 15, 2019, 09:50:33 PM
The Federal Govt. will not leave B.C. unpunished for closing down the pipeline. They are now playing politics with a B.C. resource. Prawn limit reduced. Chinook closure, how much clearer can they make it.

if that were true why would they choose such an approach that affected such a small % of BC population and doesn't target those leading the opposition to the pipeline?
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: 96XJ on July 16, 2019, 08:31:19 AM
the courts long ago as in decades ago, the specified legal priorities are:

First - Conservation - minimum escapement numbers to maintain viable stocks

Second -  FN FSC fisheries

Third: commercial fishery openings

Fourth: Recreational Fishery openings

So Chief Phillip is just repeating the long established rules that DFO has to follow.

I understand that , but my point was , if they are concerned about the health of the salmon stock , they should say that

A statement saying something along the lines of " the federal government should do all they can to clear the slide for the health of the salmon stocks AND for all that use the resource  " would go a long way in my eyes showing that they actually care not just about themselves 
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: RalphH on July 16, 2019, 08:59:35 AM
that is what Chief Phillip said if not in the same words.
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: 96XJ on July 16, 2019, 10:55:20 AM
that is what Chief Phillip said if not in the same words.

Most know the rules that DFO have established  , I guess i don't read it the same way ,  even though he is concerned about the " fragile future " of the stocks , he thinks FN should be able to fish to their allotment and i guess they are allowed , IMO it does not show stewardship of the resource

All good Ralph - just reading it different
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: IronNoggin on July 16, 2019, 02:22:55 PM
And in the latest chapter in this ongoing travesty, DFO is now letting the Musqueam Band have an opening on July 21, Below Port Mann Bridge, for CHUM Salmon. Right. No chum in the system for months to come. Who the hell do they think they are fooling??

https://www-ops2.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/fraserriver/firstnations/HTMLs/CeremonialOpeningTimes_Previous.html

Don't know why they bother with their smoke & mirrors routine, the number of openings on Chinook prior to this one are more than obvious in that last link...

Nauseating!
Nog
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: DanL on July 16, 2019, 02:45:33 PM
... DFO is now letting the Musqueam Band have an opening on July 21, Below Port Mann Bridge, for CHUM Salmon.

A chum opening? Does that mean that other species by-catch would have to be released?
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: Hike_and_fish on July 16, 2019, 08:07:47 PM
A chum opening? Does that mean that other species by-catch would have to be released?

That early ?
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: redside1 on July 17, 2019, 08:58:01 AM
by announcing a chum opening, Wilkinson will not have to lie in the future on live talk radio when discussing the number of chinook targeted FSC or other gill net openings.
it was most likely a typo and should have read chinook but one never knows with DFO nowadays.
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: stsfisher on July 17, 2019, 11:00:17 AM
by announcing a chum opening, Wilkinson will not have to lie in the future on live talk radio when discussing the number of chinook targeted FSC or other gill net openings.
it was most likely a typo and should have read chinook but one never knows with DFO nowadays.

It does say Chinook today.
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: IronNoggin on July 21, 2019, 03:31:02 PM
The Department of Fisheries and Oceans, a federal ministry based out of Ottawa, has been in charge of British Columbia salmon for too long. They have dropped the ball, utterly and completely. It is time to bring salmon management back to BC.

https://islandfishermanmagazine.com/ifm-op-ed-fix-dfo/
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: IronNoggin on July 23, 2019, 01:03:46 PM
Feds trolling Vancouver Islanders with lack of salmon plan

MP Rachel Blaney takes aim at coastal fisheries restrictions

https://www.vancouverislandfreedaily.com/opinion/column-feds-trolling-vancouver-islanders-with-lack-of-salmon-plan/
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: Hike_and_fish on July 23, 2019, 06:22:42 PM
Feds trolling Vancouver Islanders with lack of salmon plan

MP Rachel Blaney takes aim at coastal fisheries restrictions

https://www.vancouverislandfreedaily.com/opinion/column-feds-trolling-vancouver-islanders-with-lack-of-salmon-plan/ (http://"https://www.vancouverislandfreedaily.com/opinion/column-feds-trolling-vancouver-islanders-with-lack-of-salmon-plan/")

Broken link
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: IronNoggin on July 23, 2019, 06:47:51 PM
Fixed
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: IronNoggin on July 26, 2019, 01:43:57 PM
Government of Canada Signs Historic Reconciliation Agreement with B.C. Coastal First Nations

News provided by

Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Pacific Region
Jul 26, 2019, 16:02 ET

VANCOUVER, July 26, 2019 /CNW/ - There is no relationship more important to the Government of Canada than the one with Indigenous peoples. We are committed to advancing a renewed relationship with Indigenous communities based on the recognition of rights, respect, cooperation, and partnership. Canada is working to modernize and strengthen nation-to-nation, government-to-government structures, and through this, to support the First Nations-led development of new economic opportunities, including in the fisheries.

Today, the Minister of Fisheries, Oceans and the Canadian Coast Guard, the Honourable Jonathan Wilkinson, the Minister of Crown-Indigenous Relations, the Honourable Carolyn Bennett, Chief Marilyn Slett, President of the Coastal First Nations, along with representatives from the other six Nations, participated in a signing ceremony of the Coastal First Nations Fisheries Resources Reconciliation Agreement. This agreement will advance economic opportunities and collaborative governance, as well as expand community-based commercial fishing access in traditional territories for the seven Nations represented by Coastal First Nations.

This agreement will facilitate an enhanced role in collaborative governance, and in fisheries management and decision-making processes for the Coastal First Nations, whose territories make up 40 per cent of British Columbia's coastal waters. Moving forward, this will enable better access to existing fishing licenses and quota through a voluntary relinquishment process – creating jobs and generating income for these north and central coast communities. This will also allow for the development of new partnerships and enhanced relationships with the private sector to get the fish caught in these communities to market.

In real terms, the agreement could result in a significant job creation in the communities and a substantial increase to household incomes in these communities from the growth of community-based commercial fishing operations. The economic growth projected from the agreement means more people will be able to stay in their communities to work, secure a good, stable, income to support their families, and re-invest the profits generated from fisheries back into the community.

Coastal First Nations will have better access to existing commercial fishing licenses and quota, and an enhanced role in fisheries governance. However, as with all fisheries in Canada, overarching management and associated decisions remain with the Department of Fisheries and Oceans. We will continue to work with communities and stakeholders not represented by the Coastal First Nation to include their views and concerns into all fisheries management decisions.

When we change the dial from a top-down approach to engagement with First Nations and fisheries access, to a focus on the co-development, co-design, and co-delivery of resource management, the result is a move toward self-determination, and real, sustainable prosperity for Canada's First Nations.

Quotes

"This historic agreement is the result of years of collaborative work to strengthen relations between the Government of Canada and Coastal First Nations members. The agreement marks a critical step forward and underscores the government's commitment to ensuring the growth and sustainability of community-based fisheries. In partnership with Coastal First Nations, we are advancing collaborative fisheries management on the north and central coast of our province to best support the prosperity of these coastal communities."
The Honourable Jonathan Wilkinson, Minister of Fisheries, Oceans and the Canadian Coast Guard

"Fish are central to the culture and livelihood of many First Nations on the coasts. That is why it is so important to work collaboratively and conclude agreements such as this one that advance fisheries management and recognize the critical partnership role that First Nations communities like Coastal First Nations need to play. Increasing access to economic opportunities on the north and central coasts supports healthy and self-reliant coastal First Nation communities."
The Honourable Carolyn Bennett, Minister of Crown-Indigenous Relations

"This agreement will get families and fishers back on the water and re-establish a small boat fleet in our communities. By working together – on a nation-to-nation basis - we will provide opportunities for our communities to fully participate in the fishing economy; create new jobs and investments; and increase economic opportunities and build capacity."
Chief Marilyn Slett President, Coastal First Nations

Quick Facts

    The seven participating Coastal First Nations are the: Heiltsuk Nation, Kitasoo/Xai'xais First Nation, Metlakatla First Nation, Nuxalk Nation, Wuikinuxv Nation, Gitga'at First Nation and Gitxaala Nation. They are located in the central and north coasts of British Columbia.
    In June 2018, the Prime Minister signed the Reconciliation Framework Agreement for Bioregional Oceans Management and Protection with 14 BC Coastal Nations, including these 7 Coastal First Nations. This Framework Agreement promotes a more coordinated and efficient approach for the governance, management, and protection of oceans in the Pacific North Coast, including marine ecosystems, marine resources and marine use activities.
    The goals of the Agreement signed today include, increased commercial fishing opportunities; community based fisheries capacity for First Nations on the north and central coasts of British Columbia; and the establishment of a collaborative governance and management arrangement that will involve other First Nations and stakeholders.
    The Coastal First Nations Fisheries Resources Reconciliation Agreement will provide support for First Nations access to fisheries licenses and quota while also leveraging income generated through a corporate fishery model to support community-based fisheries.
    Increased access to licenses and quotas for the Coastal First Nations will come from existing licenses that are currently issued to retired or soon to retire fishers and operators.

Associated Links

    Coastal First Nations
    Reconciliation Framework Agreement for Bioregional Oceans Management and Protection

Stay Connected

    Follow Fisheries and Oceans Canada on Twitter, Facebook and YouTube.
    Subscribe to receive our news releases and more via RSS feeds. For more information or to subscribe, visit http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/media/rss-eng.htm

SOURCE Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Pacific Region

[​IMG]
For further information: Jocelyn Lubczuk, Press Secretary, Office of the Minister of Fisheries, Oceans and the Canadian Coast Guard, 343-548-7863, Jocelyn.lubczuk@dfo-mpo.gc.ca; Media Relations: Fisheries and Oceans Canada, 613-990-7537, Media.xncr@dfo-mpo.gc.ca; Matthew Dillon-Leitch, Director of Communications, Office of the Minister of Crown-Indigenous Relations and North Affairs, 819-997-0002, Matthew.dillon2@canada.ca; Media Relations: Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada Media Relations, 819-934-2302, RCAANC.media.CIRNAC@canada.ca; Guujaaw, Special Advisor, Coastal First Nations, 250-637-1190; Bessie Brown, Communications Manager, Coastal First Nations, 604-696-9889

Related Links
www.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca

https://www.newswire.ca/news-releas...with-b-c-coastal-first-nations-851817220.html
...................................................................................................

Apparently conveniently forgetting about the families and fishers in the already established small boat fleet.
You know, the ones the gov has basically brow beat into bankruptcy. Guess we're starting to get a glimpse of just WHY that happened...
Oh, right, quota has to come from somewhere...   ::)

Nog
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: IronNoggin on July 26, 2019, 02:01:38 PM
Posted to Wilkinson's FB Page:

Apparently you conveniently forgot about, or simply chose to ignore the families and fishers in the already established small boat fleet.
You know, the ones YOU have basically brow beat into bankruptcy. Guess we're starting to get a glimpse of just WHY that happened...
Oh, right, quota has to come from somewhere...
You are a very sad individual when it comes to looking after both the resource, and the stakeholders in your own province sir (using that latter term rather loosely at this point). Rest assured, we have taken notice, and are taking it upon ourselves to ensure we will no longer have to endure any more of your horse-pucky politics nor mismanagement on such a grandiose scale.

Nog
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: redside1 on July 26, 2019, 03:11:58 PM
I like this part the best
"The goals of the Agreement signed today include, increased commercial fishing opportunities;"

time to sell the sports fishing ocean boat while it still has value.
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: Hike_and_fish on July 26, 2019, 03:25:19 PM
Nog

I like reading your posts. However, I feel that you are targeting the wrong individual here. What you are complaining about goes beyond the minister. It is clear policy set out by the federal government as a whole. From the PM's office. The minister is just a messenger.
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: IronNoggin on July 26, 2019, 03:33:49 PM
... What you are complaining about goes beyond the minister. It is clear policy set out by the federal government as a whole. From the PM's office. The minister is just a messenger.

No. He is a PUPPET and nothing more. Period.

Nog
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: Hike_and_fish on July 26, 2019, 09:14:09 PM
No. He is a PUPPET and nothing more. Period.

Nog

I'm not really arguing anything you're saying. A messenger and a puppet are more or less the same. I'm confused as to why I was corrected.
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: IronNoggin on July 27, 2019, 12:46:33 PM
I'm confused as to why I was corrected.

Didn't mean to come across as "correcting", more adding to your description was all.
He is a fool IMHO, one far to willing to buy into anything his boss directs him to.
And he will be gone come October - mark my words on that one!

Cheers,
Nog
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: Robert_G on July 27, 2019, 09:31:36 PM
And he will be gone come October - mark my words on that one!


I don't think I have ever seen someone so sure of themselves and yet at the same time soooo wanted that person to be 100% right.
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: Hike_and_fish on July 27, 2019, 09:58:48 PM
Its irrelevant if they go or not. It really is. Truth be told Canada did sign a binding UN agreement that started this whole Truth and reconciliation movement. Quotas will still swing their way and it will be business as usual. Mark my words. The Minister ( if voted out ) will most likely find a well paid job in the private sector and laugh all the way to the bank. He wont lose an ounce of sleep at night. By no means am I a supporter. I am simply stating what will be the truth.
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: Roderick on July 30, 2019, 04:11:20 PM
The thing about being an elected politician (AKA puppet) is that no matter what you do someone hates you, and if you are really doing your job right everyone hates you.  Believe me, the FN hate the politicians just as much if not more then you do.  If you need a job Nog, run for office and make the changes you want.
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: IronNoggin on August 11, 2019, 10:22:13 AM
https://www.facebook.com/andrewesaxton/videos/2463013400434382/
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: halcyonguitars on August 11, 2019, 01:11:15 PM
Lols. As if voting conservative will fix things. We should stay off politics.
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: IronNoggin on August 11, 2019, 01:38:25 PM
As if keeping Pierre's Idiot Child and his merry band of complete Incompetents in power will result in ANYTHING positive for fisheries resources and those who rely on them...   ::)

Ignore politics to your peril.   ;)

Nog
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: halcyonguitars on August 11, 2019, 01:45:37 PM
No fan of Trudeau et al.

But I did note in the partisan ad you posted that there was no mention of any proposed solutions, alternatives, options, etc, just 'JT is a dork vote for me instead'...

Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: armytruck on August 12, 2019, 07:51:44 AM
Long Liner Seafood at Granville Island still selling fresh "Fraser River Chinook" at $50 per pound, as of Sat Jun 22/2019. Same price tag in the fish case as in the May 11/2019 post earlier in this thread. Did anyone better educated on commercial fisheries than me ever figure out how they're legally buying and selling them?
166 Chinook so far  ::) . Just a guess but , that would be over a ton of chinook . Lets say an average 15 lb. fish . @ $50 Per. pound .
$124,000 bucks for some lucky retailer . Or would part of those proceeds go to some kind of Salmon foundation of sorts ? . 
Title: Re: Draconian Fisheries Closures
Post by: Blood_Orange on August 12, 2019, 08:38:59 AM
166 Chinook so far  ::) . Just a guess but , that would be over a ton of chinook . Lets say an average 15 lb. fish . @ $50 Per. pound .
$124,000 bucks for some lucky retailer . Or would part of those proceeds go to some kind of Salmon foundation of sorts ? .

They were selling fillets for $50/lb. If the fish averaged 15 lbs then you'd get around 8lbs of fillets from each. If Long Liner received and sold all 166 fish then they'd wind up with around 1328 lbs of fillets. 1328 lbs of fillets at $50/lb makes for a gross of $66 400. The net income (har har) on those sales would be $66 400 minus the price paid for the fish.

Still a nice profit I'd imagine, but nowhere near 6 figures.