Fishing with Rod Discussion Forum
Fishing in British Columbia => General Discussion => Topic started by: troutbreath on December 02, 2007, 09:38:33 AM
-
Make mine a Harvey Wallbanger :)
Another dismal season forecast for salmon
DFO gloomy over Fraser, Skeena and Island runs
Scott Simpson
Vancouver Sun
Saturday, December 01, 2007
Things are going from bad to worse for Pacific salmon.
Just weeks after the close of an exceptionally poor year, a 2008 forecast by the Department of Fisheries and Oceans suggests that opportunities for sport, commercial and aboriginal food fishing will be exceptionally rare in the Fraser River, the Skeena, and the west coast of Vancouver Island.
Sockeye in 2008 will be at the low ebb of their four-year cycle of strong and weak runs and the department suggests about two million of the prized red-fleshed salmon could come back to the Fraser this year.
That's no better than the disastrous season just past, in which the Fraser commercial fleet was entirely excluded from the sockeye fishery and got only a brief, late-season opening for low-grade chum.
Prospects for chinook, the most sought-after Pacific salmon for its combination of size, sporting qualities and taste, are equally grim for many runs.
In an interview on Thursday, DFO division manager Brian Riddell said he expects even the constitutionally protected aboriginal fishery for food, societal and ceremonial purposes will take a hit.
He said the department has already held discussions with the commercial and recreation-tourism sectors of the fishery and they're aware that "they are going to be looking at some reductions."
He said the debate is focusing on whether to shut the fishery down entirely for those sectors, or provide a few limited opportunities.
"What is the least problematic or negative response you could take? You could take a major cut for one year and get good recovery -- economically that might make very good sense but that's always an extremely tough decision to make."
Cheam First Nation member Ernie Crey, a former member of the Fraser Panel of the Pacific Salmon Commission, is warning aboriginal fishermen to lower their expectations.
"What I am trying to tell the Fraser tribal nations is that in order to preserve our right to fish, we will need to conserve the Fraser's salmon runs," Crey said in an interview.
He also said it would be unfair of the fisheries department to let the process drag out until next spring, both for aboriginals and for fishing guides and charter boat operators -- and called for decision in the near future on chinook fishing in 2008.
"DFO needs to throw the flag down on the play right now. It's not wise, it's not fair to let things drift closer to May 1 and let the charter operators and the anglers think that come May 1 they are going to be back in the water fishing for chinook.
"It's not fair to the charter operators because they do a lot of advertising. A lot of them are building a business and a way of life around the fishery."
Conservationist Craig Orr, executive director of Watershed Watch Salmon Society, said "there are some grave, grave concerns for the future of chinook."
"We have to have a full commitment from government on the wild salmon policy. We are seeing some lip service around it but we're not seeing enough funding," Orr said in an interview.
Sportfishing Defence Alliance spokesman Bill Otway said he's not convinced the fishery will be as weak as DFO predicts.
In an interview, Otway said he expects enough fish coming back to the Fraser to support recreational fisheries for both sockeye and chinook.
Otway also suggested it would be prudent for the department to take a more proactive approach to preserving weaker stocks through the use of artificial enhancements such as hatchery fish.
ssimpson@png.canwest.com
© The Vancouver Sun 2007
-
I wouldn't mind seeing the fraser SHUT DOWN for a couple of cycles. I think not only will the fish stocks improve, but also the fishing experience will be better as I think that a 2 year break on the fraser may cause a reduction in number of flossers.
-
This will also be the perfect time to bring in some new regs for the fraser and other systems. ie: leader restrictions or just an out right ban on flossing(not trying to start another flossing debate) .
-
I wouldn't mind seeing the fraser SHUT DOWN for a couple of cycles. I think not only will the fish stocks improve, but also the fishing experience will be better as I think that a 2 year break on the fraser may cause a reduction in number of flossers.
i'd prefer to just see flossing banned or leader restriction on the fraser period, and put a zero retention reg on chum and pink... That will clear everyone out pretty quick.
Cheers,
Nicole
-
Interesting article.
I Hope they put restrictions on the fraser however It would suck to have "the whole river" shut down. I enjoy barfishing and hope that will still be an option!
-
Shut it down for one whole chinook cycle which would be 4-5 yrs...to allow the fry to come back eventually to spawn. That would give the pinks 2 cycles to improve their numbers again and the sockeye, chum, and coho at least one. The start it back up with catch and release only for the first year and go from there depending on the numbers. To do it for only one or even two years only lets the fish that were born of that cycle year to come back. What about the other years? Do you want it to go the way of the pinks...only coming back every second year?
You've got to ask yourself the BIG question...why do you fish? Is for the sport or the meat? If it's both and you want to kill fish... hit the rivers that have hatcheries, fish the chuck for fish where there's a retention for salmon, or go to stocked lakes for trout.
If we bite the bullit now we may have fish for the future to fish for and possibly harvest...it's got to be about conservation at this sad point in time as drastic as this idea may sound. They need to do this for the Thomson steelhead, as well. That's my rant for the day.
-
So, what are you going to do about the ocean??
The Fraser Chinook are only in trouble in regards to the early run.
The early run is being taken by one group and all the rest of us only take 1% of them.
That one group you have no control over now or in the future.
Shut it down for one whole chinook cycle which would be 4-5 yrs...to allow the fry to come back eventually to spawn. That would give the pinks 2 cycles to improve their numbers again and the sockeye, chum, and coho at least one. The start it back up with catch and release only for the first year and go from there depending on the numbers. To do it for only one or even two years only lets the fish that were born of that cycle year to come back. What about the other years? Do you want it to go the way of the pinks...only coming back every second year?
You've got to ask yourself the BIG question...why do you fish? Is for the sport or the meat? If it's both and you want to kill fish... hit the rivers that have hatcheries, fish the chuck for fish where there's a retention for salmon, or go to stocked lakes for trout.
If we bite the bullit now we may have fish for the future to fish for and possibly harvest...it's got to be about conservation at this sad point in time as drastic as this idea may sound. They need to do this for the Thomson steelhead, as well. That's my rant for the day.
-
Looking into past escapement data no shutting down ever improves wild stock numbers. The only result with shutdowns would be less funding since no one's there to complain.
The only improvement seen in the numbers is when enhancement program, hatchery jump starts are initiated.
-
Looking into past escapement data no shutting down ever improves wild stock numbers. The only result with shutdowns would be less funding since no one's there to complain.
The only improvement seen in the numbers is when enhancement program, hatchery jump starts are initiated.
What about the Thompson. They closed that river down for a number of years to chinook fishing to improve the numbers and it worked......and when they eventually reopened it they only allowed the retention of jacks, then jacks with chinook only in certain areas on a limited number of days during the week.
Old Black Dog...If the Fraser was only in trouble with the early run why were the counts so poor for all the other runs? Even if the excuse was that this year was the low end of the cycle the numbers were STILL much lower than expected. Next year will really tell the story.
As far as the ocean is concerned... blame global warming.....from what I've been told every year the feed moves further and further north to cooler waters. Take a look at the Alaskan fishery....its booming; the fish are getting bigger and so are their numbers because of the amount of feed up there and they get tons of pressure in their major river systems, as well as commercial openings.
I just hope the government finally steps in and does the right thing if a complete closure is called for on the Fraser to stop all fishing. Lip service isn't going to work if a user group doesn't abide by it...they need to heavily penalizes any or all of the user groups if they decide to poach a fish (or a netful).
-
Oh I guess you haven't noticed. The chinook that's opened up for retention is mostly from Nicola R. Which is hatchery enhanced. Before chinook enhancement program on the Thompson R./tributaries system, chinook count stayed roughly the same level year after year. It's only after hatchery enhancement work that the chinook count starts to go up. It's amazing why some people still think closing a river system will help bring stock level back up without active programs. When you have 0 fish returning no matter what the survival rate it it's still 0.
Fraser R. and it's tributaries have long been plagued by industrial, development, flooding problems. With many water systems' returning spawning salmon decreased to a couple thousand successful spawning pair count has decreased to the point that leaving nature to take it's course in increasing it's population is simply a dream. Even at best survival rate, to increase the salmon population back to pre-1915 would take.... well let's just say you and I and our great grandkids would be long dead. From past decade, we can safely conclude best survival rate would not be reached, so.. with the habitat distruction, less than favourible ocean survival rate, those couple thousand fish will most likely to die off before any population growth occur.
-
Oh I guess you haven't noticed. The chinook that's opened up for retention is mostly from Nicola R. Which is hatchery enhanced.
You're right...totally forgot about the enhancement projects on the Spius and Coldwater systems.
-
I'm just frustrated that the government would not put more funding into habitat, stock enhancement programs. They just find excuses to postponed any reaction required to enhance salmon stock.
Currently we have 3 sectors utilizing these fish resources, namely Commercial, FN, Recreational sectors. If Tsawassen treaty is implemented province wide, Commercial and Recreational sectors will no longer be an issue.
To the government that's a good news. "To please one is easier to please all."
-
Guess the hatchery on the Thompson might have had an effect?
The ocean has had a huge effect that and fresh water environment.
Looking into past escapement data no shutting down ever improves wild stock numbers. The only result with shutdowns would be less funding since no one's there to complain.
The only improvement seen in the numbers is when enhancement program, hatchery jump starts are initiated.
What about the Thompson. They closed that river down for a number of years to chinook fishing to improve the numbers and it worked......and when they eventually reopened it they only allowed the retention of jacks, then jacks with chinook only in certain areas on a limited number of days during the week.
Old Black Dog...If the Fraser was only in trouble with the early run why were the counts so poor for all the other runs? Even if the excuse was that this year was the low end of the cycle the numbers were STILL much lower than expected. Next year will really tell the story.
As far as the ocean is concerned... blame global warming.....from what I've been told every year the feed moves further and further north to cooler waters. Take a look at the Alaskan fishery....its booming; the fish are getting bigger and so are their numbers because of the amount of feed up there and they get tons of pressure in their major river systems, as well as commercial openings.
I just hope the government finally steps in and does the right thing if a complete closure is called for on the Fraser to stop all fishing. Lip service isn't going to work if a user group doesn't abide by it...they need to heavily penalizes any or all of the user groups if they decide to poach a fish (or a netful).
-
Yes both fresh and marine condition would effect survival rate. If more funding becomes available more habitat enhancement/nutrient enrichment projects can be initiated. With hatcheries help to put in 1 full cycle (4 years) to jump start stock rebuilding effort. There will be more fish around to come back to spawn. Continuous hatchery input may not be good for wild stocks for long run, but for starting population rebuild it is a good program to have.
-
Actually, I think if we were to truly examine where and how the bulk of the harvesting is taking place we may find as recreational fisherman/women we are actually rather insignificant, so lets get to where we should be focusing the limitations.
If a fleet of gill netters or seiners sitting at the mouth of the Fraser harvesting/catching is truly the reason, then so be it, why should the recreational fisherman be penalized because of the profiteering of a few. What is the percentage of catches. How much do we as recreational fisherman/women, really impact on the returns.
I don't think I would be too far out suggesting we may get maybe 5% of the runs, when they are open, maybe, but probably not even close to 5%.
Shut down the commercial fleets if you want to make a real difference, and bravo to Cheam First Nation member Ernie Crey, maybe coming from one of their own, we can help them take some responsibility for the declining stocks, and not continue fishing, just because "ITS OUR RIGHT", but in the end directly contribute to the collapse of this great fishery. Hey, we all know how much was sold beside the local boat launches during sockeye this past closed season.Thats not even including the tractor trailers transporting it eastward. It's about time some real vision was shown in fisheries, and not just pandering to those who who claim the rights to fish, white, red, or yellow, lets get it together here!!!!
-
Well said bcguy, i couldnt agree with you more :) :) :) i think we have to put all of our needs/attitudes aside, stop blaming and start working on a solution.
-
I wasn't aware that the pinks or chum were in decline or endangerment, seemed to be a very healthy run of pinks this year, and chum....well do I need to say more LOL.
But I guess if there was a complete ban, there would be no question about targeting specific species, with others, namely sockeye, caught by mistake.
I really hope we don't get bogged down in bureaucracy, and me, me, me, before the changes are made, and our salmon end up going the way of cod
Tough times, require tough measures...so be it, time to just suck it up and get this dealt with!!!!
I wouldn't mind seeing the Fraser SHUT DOWN for a couple of cycles. I think not only will the fish stocks improve, but also the fishing experience will be better as I think that a 2 year break on the Fraser may cause a reduction in number of flossers.
I'd prefer to just see flossing banned or leader restriction on the Fraser period, and put a zero retention reg on chum and pink... That will clear everyone out pretty quick.
Cheers,
Nicole
-
Looking into past escapement data no shutting down ever improves wild stock numbers. The only result with shutdowns would be less funding since no one's there to complain.
This doesn't make any sense!!
Closing a river for fishing doesn't improve fish stocks??!!
Don't know where you got that!
-
This doesn't make any sense!!
Closing a river for fishing doesn't improve fish stocks??!!
Don't know where you got that!
Likewise, where did you get the idea that closing down will help? Give me a system that improved because of shutdown.
-
It's a pity that your license money and conservation stamp funds don't actually go to where they would do some good. To get the real facts from this government would be like cloning Jesus from blood DNA in the holy grail. ::) There are lots of factors influencing the salmon and other fish stocks but overfishing by commercial type operations has usually caused the most damage, follwed by habitat destruction. You don't need to be a scientist to get that picture after awhile of living on the planet.
If they close the salmon to sport fishers you would think that monies used to improve habitat etc. from license sales would be detrimental. But in fact I doubt, and would love to be proved wrong that license money is actually going to those things. It probably goes into general revenue, for minister retreats and lunchions for all anybody could tell. You get your winter Olympics, some sh*ty mascots and highway to Whistler. You don't get money for fish or other wildlife. These guys like world class gladhanding not environmental issues. Others say leader length and bottom bouncing are destroying the fishery are either elitist, totally misinformed or being misinforming. I don't think flossing fish is ethical but neither is hunting animals with guns (or polluting habitat). I've done both and don't judge people if thats what turns there crank as long as it doesn't wipe out the fishery, kill all the animals etc.
Shutting down the fishery on the rivers also leaves them wide open to poaching because some people who make their living through sport fish charters etc would not be there to report violates. Or hunters and guides to report poachers.
I post some of these newspaper articles so that you can be informed of issues that affect what we appreciate and hope to see other generations enjoy and appreciate. I hope no one takes this the wrong way or a reason to push their ideals. It's just discussion to broaden your perspective on these issues.
-
I believe we all wants the best for all of our resources not just fish. Many cases government just want to illuminate a problem that's the easiest for them to deal with and direct all attention there. In this case of fishery harvesting is a problem and to close it down is the quickest and cheapest method for governemtn. However, reducing or stop all harvest will only slow down depletion but not recovery.
What caused the first most significant reduction of Fraser salmon? Early 1900 railway expansion effort that almost choked all salmon migration up past Hell's Gate area. It took the government over 3 decades to fix the problem. (as of current, west side low water blockage, is producing problem for migrating salmon during low water years)
Almost all depletion of fish stock global wide is a combined effort of habitat distruction and over fishing. Current regulations manage harvesting to fish abundance, it leaves the habitat destruction and survival rate as the variable in fish stock management. If habitat for these endangered species can be constructed to suit these species' best use strong young fish can be produced and increase ocean survival rate.
Many coastal water system has been closed to salmon/steelhead retention for decades. Some just prior to clusure had a few spawning pairs left. However, over the past decades, those system did not increase in fish population instead all dissappeared.
One thing for sure, no matter what our opinion is on fishery closures, we all strongly believe government is not putting enough funding into fishery.
-
I certainly could not agree strongly or forcefully enough that governments at all levels are not doing what is needed funding wise.Look at the obscene huge surpluses in past years.Instead of restoring and increasing funding we hear weasel words about how expensive and labour intensive former successful hatchery programs were.Yet if it is something a politician believes will make him look good then the sky is the limit when it comes to bribing us with our own money.Surpluses continue to rise and and fish stocks continue to fall.Most of us are sick of the glad handing and mealy mouth excuses!I believe we need to start by putting more in instead of taking more away.The rivers south of here experienced much the same problems as us that depleted stocks,with greater population pressures and greater warming issues.The have had huge successes in many areas and continue to do so.We on the other hand appear content to let political decisions to be made which will ensure this downward spiral continues.Sorry for the rant just my two cents worth.