Fishing with Rod Discussion Forum
Fishing in British Columbia => General Discussion => Topic started by: Old Black Dog on September 27, 2005, 07:25:44 PM
-
Chinook caught in B.C. mostly from U.S.
Coalition seeks renegotiated salmon treaty
LES BLUMENTHAL
TACOMA NEWS TRIBUNE
Even as the federal government spends more than a half-billion dollars a year to restore Pacific Northwest salmon runs, new DNA samples show nearly 90 percent of chinook caught by Canadian fishers off the west coast of Vancouver Island come from the United States.
And most of the fish caught by Canadian trollers are endangered salmon from Puget Sound and the Columbia River Basin, according to a coalition of utilities and sport-fishing groups threatening to sue unless the Pacific Salmon Treaty between Canada and the U.S. is renegotiated.
"The Canadian catch should be a key piece of any effort to restore these runs," said Svend Brandt-Erichsen, a Seattle lawyer representing the coalition.
EXPENSIVE ISSUE
Federal and state agencies are spending an estimated $600 million a year trying to restore the Columbia River Basin salmon runs. A salmon plan recently unveiled for Puget Sound would cost about $1.5 billion over 10 years.
If the Canadians don't agree to adjust their catch, the United States should consider barring imports of Canadian fresh and canned salmon, Brandt-Erichsen said. Federal law bars the importation of endangered species.
"It's often said we have no leverage over Canadian fishing," he said. "We do. It's against the law to import improperly caught Endangered Species Act fish."
60 DAYS' NOTICE
In a letter to Secretary of Commerce Carlos Gutierrez and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, the coalition gave 60 days' notice of its intent to sue unless the treaty with Canada is renegotiated. Such notice is required before a lawsuit can be filed against the federal government.
"I don't know how this will shake out," said Brian Gorman, a spokesman for National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration Fisheries in Seattle, which coordinates the region's salmon recovery efforts. "We have to see what the plaintiffs say in their filing."
A spokeswoman for the Canadian embassy in Washington, D.C., had no comment.
-
YOU HAVE GOT TO BE KIDDING ME!!!!! First the FN fisheries, now the Americans want a piece as well!!!! I would really be checking into the source of those DNA results, something just doesn't sit right!!!
-
Yes, very difficult to believe.
-
I very much dount the numbers.
Also you have to look at the huge amounts of BC (and Washington, Oregon) salmon caught in Alaska.
-
What about the Alaskan Commercial fishery. Shouldn't they be suing themselves as well??
http://tinyurl.com/7nd38
-
if that is the problem then, simple...we salt water sporties will make sure we fish over there for US stocks...hehehehehehhe..in US WATERS! lol
-
wow 90% did our commercial guys lineup at the border to catch their fish? ::)
-
yeah.. umm... It's kind of hard to know where to start.
First off if 90% are from endangered stocks, and there are a lot of fish caught there, then wouldn't that imply that either a) the fish aren't that endangered or b) their numbers are just so much bunk.
I don't doubt that the story is partially true, but 90% is a hard figure to believe in any news story.
Looking into my crystal ball I see that the US will try to sue and what ever forum they do it in will look at the science and throw it away.
-
Did they also look at the genetics (DNA) of the salmons they catch in Alaska? ??? ??? ???
-
I could see that 90% of BC caught springs are from US streams...I looked at the Boneville Dam fish counts todate...Chinook where at 250,000!!! How many chinpook does the fraser see each year?
Thats one counter on one tributary of the columbia (I believe). The americans pump out some huge numbers in terms of hatchery chinook out put, so I could see these fish being very prevelant and accessible in BC waters.
Good point on whose fish are being caught in Alaska?!?
The numbers game is just that ...a game. 90% of BLAH BLAH BLAH, its just a number (altho it sounds huge). I wonder what percentage of the total US chinook population is represented in BC's catch...thats the truly telling number - and a more meaningfull number at that.
BTW, I do think that the genetic test that they use are a reliable way of identifying a fish's origin.
-
Interesting and potentially precedent setting lawsuit. We'd be sued for harvesting resources in our own country... Wonder what will happen when they do DNA testing on softwood and find out all our trees are "related" to theirs? Or if a tie is found between the gold in our hills and the gold in theirs? Does that make it all theirs? I wonder if this concept could reach out to the law...whereby if an Canaidan breaks the law and ins incarcerated in the US, we could sue because "we" paid to raise and train the guy but they caught him on their land therefore they owe us money. (wait a minutes...this could work!)
Might be time to dust off the passage tarrif that was imposed on all American vessels a few years ago. That turned out to be pretty effective...
Nikko
-
I don't know about gold mines. But oil fileld does have that problem. Running from one country's economic territory into another. Like in Gulf of Mexico, Ease China Sea, Sparley Is. etc etc....
-
Thats one counter on one tributary of the columbia (I believe).
Gooey, the Boneville is on the main stream of the Columbia. 250,000 isn't very many chinooks when you consider that the vedder gets around 100,000. There runsare in serious trouble this year for whatever reason. Perhaps this warm water buisness is pushing warm water predators further north ie Washinton, Oregon but not far enough north to have much of an affect on us.
-
Perhaps this warm water buisness is pushing warm water predators further north ie Washinton, Oregon but not far enough north to have much of an affect on us.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Not so, Giant Humbolt Squid are now being caught at Port Hardy, and to the Queen Charlottes.
Water temperatures have warmed up 3 degrees celcius and show no signs of reverting to normal.
-
Yanks are generally decent people but they do have tendency to blame their problems on 'other people'-thus the messes they get themselves into all the time.
It was them who destroyed the Greatest Source of Salmon on the Planet-the Columbia River.
-
Cut & Paste from my reply to the same Topic @ FishBC:
This whole scenario is the direct result of managing the fishery under the terms of the Pacific Salmon Treaty. In Canada, by and large the DFO has intentionally shifted the (offshore) harvest focus to US origin passage fish for the commercial fleets, and directs monitoring/sampling resources towards those fisheries nearly exclusively.
On one hand this has had the effect of offering WCVI and to an extent Frazer/Skeena fish some form of protection, and their populations do appear to have responded well (generally) over the last 6 or so years. On the other hand, the troll fleet has been literally crippled by mini-shotgun style openings, that largely don't even cover fuel expenses! These small openings are timed to keep that fleet OFF BC stocks, INTENTIONALLY, and target on US origin fish. And, since the samples that are collected are taken by onboard observers (did just that for many years, and took many of the DNA samples now in question) in those exact fisheries, guess what? aYup, 90+ % US origin is correct, as designed. The DNA analysis is correct, and reflective of the management practise of the day.
The US on the other hand has two regions fishing both their, and our fish. By and large, Washington/Oregon commercial fisheries are closely monitored, and do take a good portion of both US origin and Fraser origin fish stocks. Alaska has always been a wild card. As Washington DC NEEDS their oil reserves, they are not prepared to make a major deal out of the way that the Alaskans hit fish, regardless of origin. As a result, Alaskan fisheries, although controlled, remove far more Canadian origin fish than any other sector/region, PERIOD. They resist overtures by the PSC, for instance: when Canada imposed serious restrictions regarding coho catch, they decided (and did) proceed full speed ahead targetting those stocks. Don't expect that to change in the forseeable future.
The group that is threatening the Lawsuit obviously doesn't understand the management thrust of the PSC via the Treaty. The Canadian "hit" on US (Alaskan, Washington and Oregon origin fish, California is NOT part of the Treaty, so it's basically a free-for-all by everyone on their stocks) fish is a direct trade-off for US harvests of Canadian origin fish in Alaska and off the US Pacific Northwest. It was designed to do just that. Unless they are looking to re-write the management regime and have some BIG-TIME backing, their lawsuit is likely doomed to failure.
On the other hand, should they be successful, this will leave Canada in a most undesireable situation. It is entirely unlikely that the US harvests of Canadian fish will be reduced. Should we have to reduce our harvest of their fish, there would be no purpose in being part of the Treaty, it may just simply collapse, which would directly threaten stocks both side of the border (should we return to the free-for-all fisheries of the past). Sincerely hope that is not realized!
Nog