Fishing with Rod Discussion Forum

Fishing in British Columbia => Fishing-related Issues & News => Topic started by: DanL on October 05, 2011, 05:54:51 PM

Title: 2011 Chum return numbers
Post by: DanL on October 05, 2011, 05:54:51 PM
Every year its always interesting to look at the Albion test fishery numbers to get an idea of when the fish are starting to move in then taper off.

http://www.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/fraserriver/commercial/commercialalbionchum_e.htm

Looking at the chum catch numbers from Sept 5th – Oct 3rd going back to 2005, I have to wonder if something's going on with 2011?

year  #chum
-----  -------
2005   1,312
2006   1,546
2007   520
2008   1.388
2009   879
2010   1,365
2011   191
With the exceptions of 2007 & 2009, previous years have shown about ~1,400 fish over the same 1 month period. However this year shows a mere 1/7th of the historical numbers. That seems shockingly low.

They also have a page where you can get the data for ‘Catch Per Unit Effort’, and 2011 is way, way down from previous years.

Also, if you look at catch numbers, previous years always show a spike sometime between Sep 23rd - Oct 1st as the bulk of the run starts to move in, but that just has not occurred so far this year. Its possible that the run is simply late, which could explain the numbers, but it would have to be a full two weeks late to account for such low returns so far.

I don’t know if the catch methodology or reporting has changed and comparing year-to-year numbers like this simply isn’t appropriate? I haven’t heard any projections on the expected chum returns for this year, so maybe someone has additional info to chime in with.
Title: Re: 2011 Chum return numbers
Post by: iCemAn on October 05, 2011, 06:46:32 PM
Strange, maybe just taking their time getting here? The overall Chum returns were huge last year with that higher test fishery. Things that make you go HMM.
Title: Re: 2011 Chum return numbers
Post by: Dogbreath on October 05, 2011, 07:43:51 PM
Perhaps a better indication of run strength would be returns through Johnstone Strait particularly numbers taken in the commercial fishery.
Title: Re: 2011 Chum return numbers
Post by: scuntor on October 05, 2011, 08:00:16 PM
Seems like everything has been a little late this year. Still catching fresh pinks today in the Vedder. Stupid pinks.
Title: Re: 2011 Chum return numbers
Post by: DanL on October 06, 2011, 05:18:29 PM
Strange, maybe just taking their time getting here? The overall Chum returns were huge last year with that higher test fishery. Things that make you go HMM.
If you recall, chum retention was closed mid-season in 2010 due to low returns. So obviously the test fishery numbers can be somewhat hard to compare on a year to year basis. The extremely low numbers for thus far for 2011 really seem to stand out though, and not in a good way ...


Perhaps a better indication of run strength would be returns through Johnstone Strait particularly numbers taken in the commercial fishery.
Do you know where/if that data is available? I'd be very interested in having a look at those numbers as well.
Title: Re: 2011 Chum return numbers
Post by: Morty on October 06, 2011, 11:00:23 PM
I've been out in the CHedder several times this Fall, several places each trip.  I have yet to see even one Chum.
Title: Re: 2011 Chum return numbers
Post by: lapa on October 07, 2011, 07:54:24 AM
I've been out in the CHedder several times this Fall, several places each trip.  I have yet to see even one Chum.
I saw 3 landed.Already black.
Title: Re: 2011 Chum return numbers
Post by: BwiBwi on October 07, 2011, 10:39:18 AM
Try this site

http://www.psc.org/info_testfishing_summaries.htm#2011
Title: Re: 2011 Chum return numbers
Post by: adriaticum on October 07, 2011, 02:42:45 PM
Everything is a couple of weeks late this year.
Title: Re: 2011 Chum return numbers
Post by: DanL on October 14, 2011, 05:05:29 PM
Thought I'd update the numbers now that its been a little over a week:

Sept 1st - Oct 14

year  #chum
-----  -------
2005   2,633
2006   3,782
2007   1,476
2008   2,681
2009   2,671
2010   3,476
2011   566
Still deplorable numbers. Only about 1/5th of the average of the previous six years.  I'm not so sure we can simply say its just a couple weeks late anymore..
Title: Low chum numbers
Post by: hamster on October 17, 2011, 11:23:29 PM
I was out on the harrison today and couldn't beleive the incredibly low numbers of chum.  I only caught one chum in about a 4 hour stretch.  About 3 or 4 years ago, I went out to the Harrison and it was polluted with so many chum my arm was sore at the end of the day. I understand the chum run was closed last year and there is talk again of closing the chum run this year.  What is going on? Where did they all go?   :'(

PS I did meet some really nice locals who helped us find a shop so we could get our 20 hp Merc motor running. It was really appreciated!
Title: Re: Low chum numbers
Post by: dennyman on October 17, 2011, 11:43:51 PM
Who knows, but also noticed the lack of chum in the Vedder too. And you are right four years ago, they were so thick in certain parts of the Vedder they were a nuisance.  Some stocks on the rebound, but does not seem to be so for Chum salmon in the Vedder and the Harrison.
Title: Re: Low chum numbers
Post by: fishfulthinkin on October 17, 2011, 11:50:16 PM
I've heard some theories say it's because the runs are 3 weeks behind schedule of passed years?.. lets hope the strange weather has just got them
a little behind. They don't have a calandar so they judge times of the year by weather and ours is above normal right now right? :D
Title: Re: 2011 Chum return numbers
Post by: typhoon on October 18, 2011, 10:11:14 AM
Any update on a potential closing Rod?
The numbers are now 4 weeks behind last year. How can they justify keeping it open?
Title: Re: Low chum numbers
Post by: milo on October 18, 2011, 10:47:06 AM
FWIW, on Sunday on the Vedder there were a couple pushes of fresh chum where everybody at the location we were fishing was into a chum. There were a couple of quintuple headers with five guys fighting a chum at the same time.
It sure reminded me of the good old days.

Also, I visited a northern trib the same day and found it full of chum.
Hopefully they are just late.

It would be nice if all fishing groups showed more respect for the chum and started harvesting chum for the meat, too, not only for their eggs.Fresh chum are delicious both cold and hot smoked.
Title: Re: Low chum numbers
Post by: bunnta on October 18, 2011, 10:54:28 AM
i left when i hooked into a fresh chum on sunday at the vedder. the coho bites just turned off after 10am, then i hook into a spring and next a chrome chum...no wonder the hoes we're not there. they got pushed out lol....chrome chum put up great fight!
Title: Re: Low chum numbers
Post by: ynot on October 18, 2011, 04:16:57 PM
chilliwack\vedder closed for chum retention today.
Title: Re: Low chum numbers
Post by: milo on October 18, 2011, 04:28:24 PM
chilliwack\vedder closed for chum retention today.

Good.
Even if they are only late, it's better to err on the side of caution.
Title: Re: Low chum numbers
Post by: typhoon on October 18, 2011, 04:36:42 PM
To be precise Chum retention on the Chilliwack was closed last Sunday.
Title: Re: 2011 Chum return numbers
Post by: Rodney on October 18, 2011, 11:07:37 PM
Here's a memo that was sent out tonight.

Quote
Returns of chum salmon to the South Coast area have been quite variable so far in 2011.   Estimates of abundance in Johnstone Strait have provided for opportunities for all sectors: First Nations, Recreational and Commercial. The Johnstone Strait fishery is a mixed stock fishery of fish returning to the Johnstone Strait area, the Georgia Strait, Washington State and the Fraser River. The percentage of Fraser River stocks contributing to this fishery ranges from week to week with Fraser stocks typically contributing more early in the season and dropping off from mid- to late-October. 

There are considerable uncertainties regarding Fraser River chum run strength at this time. Chum returns to the Fraser River are currently tracking below the identified escapement goal of 800,000 and information gathered from South Coast fisheries indicates that the run may be later than normal. 

As many of you are aware, there have been very good catches in Johnstone Strait this year, and the current Fraser chum estimate is not in line with what has been seen in the approach areas. This is most likely due either to lateness of the run, or to unusual stock composition in the Straits. To address the issue of stock composition, DNA samples from this year's Johnstone Strait test fishery have been submitted for analysis, with the results expected later this week. The DNA results will provide us information about what proportion of the mixed-stock run in the Straits can be attributed to Fraser chum, which will be helpful in determining whether the Fraser chum run is late, or weak.

The next update will be on Monday, October 24, 2011.   At this that time, we will have additional data from the Albion test fishery, as well as results from the Johnstone Strait DNA analysis.

Please note that the Lower Fraser Test Fishing Information line @ 604-666-6182 will be updated with current 2011 Albion Chum Test Fishery catch information or you can view the test fishing results at the following link:    http://www.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/fraserriver/commercial/commercialalbionchum_e.htm
Title: Re: 2011 Chum return numbers
Post by: quill on October 19, 2011, 06:57:34 AM
Thanks Rod. Big difference between the way sockeye and chum are managed. When they open up numerous mixed stock fisheries there's going to be some weak stock casualties... like Thompson steelhead.
Title: Re: 2011 Chum return numbers
Post by: Silex-user on October 20, 2011, 12:10:19 AM
 Fishing for coho back in 80's and 90's there were thousands and thousands of chum in most major hatchery produced rivers. I usually catch about 10-15 chums before I hook 1 coho. Gee, did I ever hated those chums back then. Now days with declining coho runs, I look forward in catching some fresh strong fighting chrome chums in one of the Zipper-mouth rivers in last decade. However, it sadden me  to see those rivers which I enjoy catching them are declining just like the coho too.

Nowadays, when I ever hook a chrome or booted chum or any another species of salmon I treat with  respect, care and gentle released in the water, unless it legal salmon which I intend to keep. 

I just hope that the chums will come back in strong numbers again.


Silex-user

Title: Re: 2011 Chum return numbers
Post by: buck on October 20, 2011, 09:22:58 AM
One would think with declining chum salmon stocks that hatchery production would be increased to compensate for lack of wild production. Mismanagement of stocks by DFO and the lack of funding for hatcheries is starting to show big time. One example is the on going roe fishery for chums on the Fraser which is impacting chum production on the Harrison. Lots of males put few females.
At a time when we should be proactive DFO is now facing a 58 million dollar cut. Are we looking at another East coast scenario in the near future?
Title: Re: 2011 Chum return numbers
Post by: BwiBwi on October 20, 2011, 09:32:45 AM
1493816 chum was released from Chilliwack hatchery for brood year '07 and not many show up.  For brood year '08 3461574 chum was released.  I wonder what is it going to be like for returning chum numbers in Chilliwack R. next year.
Title: Re: 2011 Chum return numbers
Post by: Rp3Flyfisher on October 20, 2011, 09:50:32 AM
Well, I am not sure on the numbers on the Vedder system, but the Stave did pick up.

As of a week back, the numbers were quit dismal, but the past few days have been stellar so maybe (Fingers crossed) they really are just "Late"

I was out yesterday with a few buddies in a boat, we went to one of the Islands on the Stave and there were at least another 10 boats there (including at least 5 Guides) and it was awesome. It didn't matter if you threw a fly or gear, it was almost every cast, and I would say 60/40 Female/Male with many very nice clean fish.

My buddy has been on the Vedder system 7 days in the past 2 weeks and it does seem that the chum numbers are VERY low, maybe, just maybe they are late, but I really don't hold out my hope for that, as we all know, the north side runs are almost ALWAYS later than the South side, and it does seem that the north side is really starting to get some numbers.

Rick
Title: Re: 2011 Chum return numbers
Post by: fishseeker on October 20, 2011, 07:17:32 PM
Well, I am not sure on the numbers on the Vedder system, but the Stave did pick up.

As of a week back, the numbers were quit dismal, but the past few days have been stellar so maybe (Fingers crossed) they really are just "Late"

I was out yesterday with a few buddies in a boat, we went to one of the Islands on the Stave and there were at least another 10 boats there (including at least 5 Guides) and it was awesome. It didn't matter if you threw a fly or gear, it was almost every cast, and I would say 60/40 Female/Male with many very nice clean fish.

My buddy has been on the Vedder system 7 days in the past 2 weeks and it does seem that the chum numbers are VERY low, maybe, just maybe they are late, but I really don't hold out my hope for that, as we all know, the north side runs are almost ALWAYS later than the South side, and it does seem that the north side is really starting to get some numbers.

Rick
Shhhh...don't say this too loudly  ;)  I got into quite a lot of chums on the Vedder last week as a by-catch while targeting coho but someone did tell me it was they were the first ones he saw caught this season.    Hopefully they are just later than usual this year.

Its funny the attitude people have that Chums are only good for the smoker.   A clean chum is better than a pink in my opinion but I guess people don't favor them due to the white color of the meat and the taste not being as rich as other salmon.
Title: Re: 2011 Chum return numbers
Post by: RA40 on October 23, 2011, 06:17:55 AM
Milo, I agree 100%, i keep chum for my smoker, every winter my wife and I spend a few days making indian candy, i like using chum the best.

Unfortunately Chum are not doing well throughout the Fraser Valley, numbers are way down in the Fraser, Harrison, Vedder and Stave. One of the possible reasons for this is that hatchery funding has been cut back so far that the fry are no longer being fed to 1 gram as in past years, about 5/6 years ago the Vedder Hatchery stopped feeding chum fry,since then returns have almost colapsed. Could be that fry are not surviving the out migration.

I was at the SFAC - FV meeting the other night and we talked allot about chum, DFO reported that their was a large group of Chum out in the Strait that werre heading towards the Fraser, these fish are mixed stocks so not all will come our way, some are heading south to USA and Vancouver Island east coast. These are mixed stock fish, on average Fraser portion can be anywhere from 60 to 30%.

Even with the late push if it happens, I have never seen such low numbers, the fraser itself has nothing for Chum. You see the odd one jump but I have been fishing the Fraser Bars for the past 2 weeks and caught more Coho and Chinook than chum which is un heard of.

Keep your fingers crossed, maybe some late fish will show up.
Title: Re: 2011 Chum return numbers
Post by: Stratocaster on October 24, 2011, 10:21:22 AM
This year's Browns bay Chum derby was a great success.  The fishing seemed better than the last number of years according to the participants.  Seems to confirm DFO's info that there is a large mass of chums moving down the strait.  Question is where are they headed to?  Wondering if they are indeed late.  Maybe the Squamish perhaps?
Title: Re: 2011 Chum return numbers
Post by: Rodney on October 24, 2011, 05:32:38 PM
Here's today's update from DFO.

Quote
Further to my update of last week, returns of chum salmon to the South Coast area continue to be quite variable in 2011.   

Initial analysis of the DNA samples from the Johnstone Strait test fishery shows that Fraser River stocks contributed to the abundance at similar levels to recent years however these fish are not being caught in the Fraser River by the Albion test fishery.  The percentage of Fraser stocks in the Johnstone Strait test fishery was approximately 36% in the third week of October. 

This still means that there are considerable uncertainties regarding Fraser River chum run strength at this time however the information at hand shows that chum returns to the Fraser River are currently tracking below the identified escapement goal of 800,000. The Department will be using the decision guidelines table in the IFMP to manage this fishery and will be moving to non-retention of chum in the recreational fishery in Areas 11, 12, 13 and 29, the non-tidal Fraser and tributaries. Fishery notices will be released at some point tomorrow with the actions taking effect October 27th. Information will continue to be collected and assessed and if opportunities to retain chum in terminal areas arise fisheries will be announced.
Title: Re: 2011 Chum return numbers
Post by: liketofish on October 25, 2011, 03:26:18 PM
If the chum are in trouble this year, what do you think contribute to the great coho return this year (at the Vedder at least)? Do chum and coho have the same life cycle (4 years)? If so the ocean is surely a mysterious thing. It gives you boom for one fish and bust on the other for the same brood year.  ???
Title: Re: 2011 Chum return numbers
Post by: Easywater 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.
Title: Re: 2011 Chum return numbers
Post by: Dave 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?
Title: Re: 2011 Chum return numbers
Post by: Dogbreath 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 (http://blogs.sacbee.com/photos/2011/09/japan-marks-6-months-since-ear.html) to see that things have changed in/around Sendai substantially since the disaster.
Title: Re: 2011 Chum return numbers
Post by: Easywater 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
Title: Re: 2011 Chum return numbers
Post by: rjs 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/
Title: Re: 2011 Chum return numbers
Post by: JPW 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. 
Title: Re: 2011 Chum return numbers
Post by: rjs 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 !!!

Title: Re: 2011 Chum return numbers
Post by: living_blind 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.
Title: Re: 2011 Chum return numbers
Post by: JPW 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!
Title: Re: 2011 Chum return numbers
Post by: VAGAbond 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?

Title: Re: 2011 Chum return numbers
Post by: Dave 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.
Title: Re: 2011 Chum return numbers
Post by: bkk 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!
Title: Re: 2011 Chum return numbers
Post by: clarki 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
Title: Re: 2011 Chum return numbers
Post by: chris gadsden 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
Title: Re: 2011 Chum return numbers
Post by: chris gadsden 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.
Title: Re: 2011 Chum return numbers
Post by: Dave on October 28, 2011, 04:37:28 PM
The closer the rivers are to the fish farms equals less chum. ;D
Beak :)
Seriously though, clarki is right; 2 bad years in a row for eagles is not good news.  I expect fewer this year on the Vedder but sure hope I'm surprised.
The good news is the Chilliwack hatchery will be feeding chum fry this year - lets hope they can obtain enough broodstock.  Chums are so important to this system; damn shame they aren't managed that way.
Title: Re: 2011 Chum return numbers
Post by: bkk on October 29, 2011, 09:59:02 AM
Beak :)
Seriously though, clarki is right; 2 bad years in a row for eagles is not good news.  I expect fewer this year on the Vedder but sure hope I'm surprised.
The good news is the Chilliwack hatchery will be feeding chum fry this year - lets hope they can obtain enough broodstock.  Chums are so important to this system; damn shame they aren't managed that way.

Actually Dave it's been a full chum cycle of poor returns for the Squamish and it has indeed been very hard on the eagles. On the annual eagle count the best site for counting birds has been the dump. Sad. Yet we are still having mixed stock commercial fisheries in Johnstone Straight generally followed by Oops...sorry no fish. Fishery mismanagement at it's best. No accountability.
Title: Re: 2011 Chum return numbers
Post by: buck on October 29, 2011, 11:17:24 AM
BKK
Good to hear from you. I hope those coho are treating you well?  Chilliwack hatchery staff spawned a whopping 23 females last week. I offered them a loonie to pay for the fish feed. Martin got a chuckle over that and in his excitement over the chum numbers inadvertently deleted all of his steelhead data on the computer. He forgot to save it and then jokingly blamed me. He was able to redo his work but it did take some extra time. We should get together this winter for a day or two off steelheading on the Vedder.
Title: Re: 2011 Chum return numbers
Post by: bkk on October 29, 2011, 01:40:53 PM
Hi Buck,

 How is that fixed income thing working out for you? ;D  Coho have been tough this year but they are still treating me well. I indeed will be out your way this winter as I have 2 weeks annual leave to burn up to get me down to the maximum I'm allowed to carry. How has it been for you? I've heard good things about your area this year except for the nut job slashing tires. Keep in touch!

Bkk
Title: Re: 2011 Chum return numbers
Post by: Dave on October 29, 2011, 04:23:15 PM
BKK
Good to hear from you. We should get together this winter for a day or two off steelheading on the Vedder.

I'd like to part of that excursion Pete but I'm not sure if B could keep up with us :D
Title: Re: 2011 Chum return numbers
Post by: nosey on October 29, 2011, 06:32:34 PM
I was hooking chums every third cast in the canal this morning, never realized there was a shortage, maybe they're just late.
Title: Re: 2011 Chum return numbers
Post by: Rodney on October 29, 2011, 08:21:22 PM
I'd like to part of that excursion Pete but I'm not sure if B could keep up with us :D

what is this? This place is starting to turn into a DFO hangout after work... :o How come I never get invited to these excursions? :-\
Title: Re: 2011 Chum return numbers
Post by: Dave on October 29, 2011, 10:21:17 PM
Hey Rod, you have been  ;D - remember we're counting steelhead spawners next spring.
As to fishing with DFO guys, well we bitch a lot, actually really a lot, fart some and don't catch a whole lot but enjoy the day.
LOL, I'd have to run it by the guys to see if you could tag along; we'll get back to you :D :D
Title: Re: 2011 Chum return numbers
Post by: bkk on October 30, 2011, 12:55:46 PM
what is this? This place is starting to turn into a DFO hangout after work... :o How come I never get invited to these excursions? :-\

Your more than welcome.....you just have to do the buy in. You can pick up the tab for breakfast as Buck and Dave are both on fixed incomes. Well that anf they are both very cheap ::)

I'd like to part of that excursion Pete but I'm not sure if B could keep up with us :D
No problem there as long as you guys continue to use your walkers while walking around on those slippery rocks! ;D