Fishing with Rod Discussion Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Author Topic: 2011 Chum return numbers  (Read 23498 times)

Easywater

  • Old Timer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 998
Re: 2011 Chum return numbers
« Reply #30 on: October 25, 2011, 04:33:46 PM »

I would have to say that the Japan earthquake and tsunami contributed greatly to the amount of fish around this year.

Image the hundreds (thousands?) of boats that didn't go out this spring and summer to catch fish near Alaska.

Japanese fishing facts:
- There are around 200,000 fishing vessels in Japan
- Japan is largest fish-eating nation in the world, consuming 7.5 billion tons of fish a year
- Sixty-six percent of the fish consumed in Japan is domestically caught

All species of salmon seem to be doing well this year - Chum still remain to be seen as they are saying there are large schools of them off-shore still.
Even if they don't come back in huge numbers, there are a number of factors that could reduce their numbers other than ocean survival.
Logged

Dave

  • Old Timer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3377
Re: 2011 Chum return numbers
« Reply #31 on: October 25, 2011, 06:54:55 PM »

I would have to say that the Japan earthquake and tsunami contributed greatly to the amount of fish around this year.

Image the hundreds (thousands?) of boats that didn't go out this spring and summer to catch fish near Alaska.
That’s an interesting theory Easywater, one I’d sure like to know more about.
Do you or any other reader have more information on this?
Logged

Dogbreath

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 443
Re: 2011 Chum return numbers
« Reply #32 on: October 25, 2011, 08:04:07 PM »

That’s an interesting theory Easywater, one I’d sure like to know more about.Do you or any other reader have more information on this?
Interesting is one way to look at it-I'd say skewed/off base and uninformed would be more accurate.

First the Sendai area-the one devastated by the tsunami-is relatively small-certainly the rest of the Japanese fleet didn't stay home.

Secondly what proof is there that Japanese boats are targeting Salmon 'off Alaska' somewhere?

It's true that there was no Herring Roe fishery here in BC this year-the economic upset felt in the Japanese economy meant poor conditions for a product that largely regarded as a luxury-also there are a number of other source for the product now the market has changed and BC producers have to respond.

Click Here to see that things have changed in/around Sendai substantially since the disaster.
Logged

Easywater

  • Old Timer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 998
Re: 2011 Chum return numbers
« Reply #33 on: October 26, 2011, 09:35:32 AM »

Secondly what proof is there that Japanese boats are targeting Salmon 'off Alaska' somewhere?

It's been going on for some time.
1986: http://www.japanlaw.info/lawletter/feb85/dov.htm
A division of the US Commerce Department issued a report stating that Japanese fishing boats had been systematically violating fishing agreements with the US in order to catch larger than authorized amounts of fish. The North Pacific Fishing Management voted 11-0 to order Japanese fishing boats out of Alaska waters, and asked the US government to enforce it.

More recently: http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread733129/pg1
When the Japan Tsunami hit it wiped out a lot of the Japanese fishing vessels that had been hogging up all the Salmon before they got a chance to enter our rivers [in Alaska].  Over the past few years the fish had been dwindled down to almost nothing pushing our own fishing industry into debt. Anglers and Subsitence fishing was scarce.........BUT this year that all changed, and now Alaskan Rivers are flowing with Fish again.

1987: http://www.culturalsurvival.org/ourpublications/csq/article/japanese-salmon-fleet-threatens-yukon-native-economy
Japanese success in ocean salmon fishery requires a well-equipped fleet that covers thousands of ocean miles. This fleet is comprised of a floating processing ship, called a "mothership," 600 feet long, crewed by 300 people. Each mothership is supplied with salmon by 42 catcher boats, each 140 feet long, with a crew of 35. At night, each catcher boat launches 12 miles of plastic fishing nets

http://www.worldfishing.net/features101/new-horizons/japan-faces-challenges-recovering-from-disaster
Worst hit were fishing towns in Iwate, Miyagi and Fukushima prefectures where nearly all fishing ports were destroyed along with storage facilities, processing plants and many fishing boats.

The three prefectures sold Yen 13.4bn (US$162m) worth of fish through Tokyo’s Tsukiji fish market alone last year, much of it tuna caught by tuna longline fishing fleets. Few fish have been caught by the prefectures’ fleets since the tsunami struck.

Miyagi Prefecture is the worst affected with all 142 of the prefecture’s fishing ports being destroyed by the tsunami. Miyagi is Japan’s second largest fisheries producer with the prefecture’s fishermen recording an annual catch of about 380,000 tons.

More than 12,000 of Miyagi’s 14,000 fishing vessels were lost, according to prefectural fishery officials, as the tsunami struck when most boats were in port.

Iwate Prefecture’s fishing industry also was badly affected with the tsunami destroying 108 of the prefecture’s 111 fishing ports. According to Iwate Prefectural government, some 9,672 of the prefecture’s fish boats were destroyed by the tsunami.

Nearly all of Iwate’s fish markets, fishery processing plants and marine culture farms were destroyed as well with total damages to the prefecture’s fishing industry estimated at Yen 371.5bn at the start of September
Logged

rjs

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 367
  • work is over rated !!!!
Re: 2011 Chum return numbers
« Reply #34 on: October 27, 2011, 08:57:34 PM »

maybe this is why ???

Angler Conservation Groups Echo Call for Industry/DFO Change

Vancouver, B.C.–The recent disclosure by B.C. fisheries environmental groups of some 1.7 million pounds of north coast chum salmon “discards” from commercial fisheries seeking pink salmon is simply the tip of the wasteful by-catch iceberg say the Steelhead Society of B.C, the North Coast Steelhead Alliance and the B.C. Federation of Fly Fishers. Steelhead are also an unfortunate part of this commercial by-catch. The effect of this doesn’t just waste steelhead, but it significantly reduces the vitality of a world-renowned steelhead sport fishery and the economy that surrounds it.


http://blogs.vancouversun.com/2011/10/14/harper-tories-undoing-bcs-hard-work-on-skeena-river-system-conservationists-warn/
Logged

JPW

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 109
Re: 2011 Chum return numbers
« Reply #35 on: October 27, 2011, 09:19:46 PM »

maybe this is why ???

... some 1.7 million pounds of north coast chum salmon “discards” from commercial fisheries seeking pink salmon...

That seems like an unbelievable amount of waste!  >:(.  I don't understand how this kind of behaviour is considered acceptable in any industry; it really puts the faults of the recreational fishery in perspective. 
Logged

rjs

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 367
  • work is over rated !!!!
Re: 2011 Chum return numbers
« Reply #36 on: October 27, 2011, 09:50:48 PM »

That seems like an unbelievable amount of waste!  >:(.  I don't understand how this kind of behaviour is considered acceptable in any industry; it really puts the faults of the recreational fishery in perspective. 


yes... then dfo plays dumb and says to us sporties that we can't fish them.... they don't know why the such low returns !!!

Logged

living_blind

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 110
    • My Band - Kilmore Place
Re: 2011 Chum return numbers
« Reply #37 on: October 28, 2011, 11:54:19 AM »

1.7 million pounds divided by an average single fish weight of 12 lbs. (as an estimate) = 141,666 fish. Unbelievable amount of waste.
Logged

JPW

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 109
Re: 2011 Chum return numbers
« Reply #38 on: October 28, 2011, 12:04:47 PM »

1.7 million pounds divided by an average single fish weight of 12 lbs. (as an estimate) = 141,666 fish. Unbelievable amount of waste.

It seemed bad at 1.7million pounds, but now that you've put it in terms of fish it's just depressing!  How does this get fixed?  Is it a matter of changing the current government, petitioning the commercial industry?  Something needs to give and I don't want it to be the salmon!
Logged

VAGAbond

  • Old Timer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 538
Re: 2011 Chum return numbers
« Reply #39 on: October 28, 2011, 12:24:11 PM »

In FN 1058 for the Stave, DFO says
Quote
At this point, we have seen no evidence in the Fraser River of the large pulse
of Chum Salmon that appeared in Johnstone Strait the week of October 10th,
despite DNA results from the Johnstone Strait test fishery identifying a
substantial contribution of Fraser River chum in that fishery. The weekly
percentage of Fraser River chum from the DNA results through October 14th
ranged from 36% to 56% over the 5 weeks that were analysed.


It would be interesting if contributors to this forum could update us on the their local Rivers so we can understand what is happening around Georgia Strait.

I checked the Squamish yesterday and no sign of any Chum so where is that pulse through Johnstone Strait going?

The Stave has lots of Chum.

Little Qualicum has been closed.  Still no fish?

The Puntledge has had good Chum runs of late.   This year?


What is the present status of the Chehalis and Chilliwack?

Have the folks at Brown's Bay seen any more pulses since the week of Oct. 10?

Logged

Dave

  • Old Timer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3377
Re: 2011 Chum return numbers
« Reply #40 on: October 28, 2011, 01:59:11 PM »

Saw quite a few chums this morning on the Vedder; definitely more in this system now than a few days ago.
Logged

bkk

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 278
  • Good fishing is earned by hard work.
Re: 2011 Chum return numbers
« Reply #41 on: October 28, 2011, 02:04:50 PM »

Squamish system is a total bust. Chum are few and far between and coho have been very poor!
Logged

clarki

  • Old Timer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1971
Re: 2011 Chum return numbers
« Reply #42 on: October 28, 2011, 03:34:49 PM »

Squamish system is a total bust. Chum are few and far between and coho have been very poor!

Not good news for the bald eagles...again
Logged

chris gadsden

  • Old Timer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13880
Re: 2011 Chum return numbers
« Reply #43 on: October 28, 2011, 03:52:25 PM »

Saw quite a few chums this morning on the Vedder; definitely more in this system now than a few days ago.
The closer the rivers are to the fish farms equals less chum. ;D

chris gadsden

  • Old Timer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13880
Re: 2011 Chum return numbers
« Reply #44 on: October 28, 2011, 03:54:13 PM »

Landed 2 bucks this morning in 30 minutes of fishing, one was very bright but they both were below average in size and weight.