2011 Salmon Head Recovery Program
- Thread starter Doug
- Start date
Doug
Well-Known Member
The tag report shows that Lower and Upper Columbia fish are being caught in zone 19-20.
On the 2011 head recover stat sheet it shows the following tags from the Upper and Lower Columbia.
May- 8% UC
June - 8% LC
July - 5% UC and 5% LC
Aug - 9% UC and 9% LC
Sept - 00
Oct to April - 7% LC and 3% UC
Hopefully later today I will be able to tell you the % of fish of each of the zones.
On the 2011 head recover stat sheet it shows the following tags from the Upper and Lower Columbia.
May- 8% UC
June - 8% LC
July - 5% UC and 5% LC
Aug - 9% UC and 9% LC
Sept - 00
Oct to April - 7% LC and 3% UC
Hopefully later today I will be able to tell you the % of fish of each of the zones.
Charlie
Well-Known Member
Most of the Columbia return as 3/4 year-olds. There is also some 2,5,6, and even 7's. You can go to the link at the bottom of the page and see where those fish come from and where caught!
Political! What makes you think that? Of course it is ALL 100% POLITCAL!
Concerning Columbia Chinook on the inside? Off course there is and WE know it! Only someone who knows "nothing" (ignorance isn't a bad thing) about the Columbia River migration habits, or some one who doesn't want to admit it would claim otherwise. Sorry Chris, no Chinook just DO NOT leave the rivers, go out and swim in this great big circle in the Gulf of Alaska. When the Columbia get to the mouth of the Strait of Juan de Fuca, there is this big thing that forms in the spring called the "Big Eddy." It produces currents and algae blooms. Most Columbia Chinook will transit to the outside of that towards the shelf and continue on up the coast. Some will follow the currents the Big Eddy creates into the Strait. Some of those turn around and exit, some actually continue on up the inside. If, I were them I personally would not go near Victoria either - they don't like all those toxins either. Actually, it is water temperature, currents, and food that is the driving force - They like farther off! Columbians are found in Howe Sound. How do you think they get there?
It is simple matter of money! if any salmon is not "clipped" and "tagged," it is not required to be reported. Canada considers that fish Canadian, unless can be proven otherwise - end of subject. Ever wonder why DFO never does DNA and other testing on those fish? It is Very simply! If you don't test, two things immediately come to mind. First, no ISAv problems to disclose! Second, it isn't U.S. origin. Why does Canada care if it is known to be U.S. origin? Also very simple (ignorance is a blessing here)... can you say PST compensation for interception of U.S. salmon? Does anyone realize how many millions of dollars it would cost Canada, if they ever admitted harvest of Columbia Chinook by Canada on the inside? How is this for a thought? The last round of PST negotations cost the U.S. $140 million in compensation to Canada, for U.S. interception of Canadian fish. Mostly by and in Alaska. BTW... Most of that went into a trust managed by both countries for the different salmon programs, including restoration and enhancement. Washington State also directly contibuted funds for that (so, out of that $27 million Canada is spending on the Pacifc salmon - who's is really paying for those programs)? If you look there was $50 million that went directly into Canada's general fund. Might want to look at how much of that British Columbia actually got and is getting? Canada (DFO) is not stupid, they know way less than 40% of those Columbia Chinook are clippped. They also know only a small percentage (and I do mean small) have CWTags. Sorry to inform, the Pacific Salmon War is not over, and Canada is just waiting for the next round to grab some more money for their compensation, restoration, enhancement... and of course their general fund. How many millions do you think would it cost Canada, if those unclipped untested Chinook where actually Columbians? Right now, at least until those fish farms kill off all you wild salmon, if any salmon is not clipped it simply equates to a Fraser.
Okay enough of that. Just because I love you guys!
What I did, since DFO contends their sport restrictions are only due to interception of Nicola 4-2 Spring off Victoria, I went through and found all the CWTags of the Nicola CWTs reported recovered from 2006 through 2011. Here are the actual tag numbers if anyone want to check them, they are: 180183, 180184, 180189, 180965, 180966, 180990, 180991, 181364, 181380, 181582, 181583, 185925, 185926, 185935, 185936. Then I went back and individually entered each of those tag number to find where that fish was actually reported caught. Here is the results of the summary of where your Nicola Springs are "really" being caught. This information is input directly in this system from both U.S. and Canada as required IAW the Pacific Salmon Treaty.
[TABLE="width: 100%"]
[TR]
[TD]CWT Recovery Dist (groups)
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Run Date: 2012-01-06
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Tag List: Nicola Tags
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]
[TD="colspan: 5"]Ungrouped Tags
[/TD]
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]
[TABLE="align: center"]
[TR]
[TD]Recovery Location
[/TD]
[TD]Number of
Obs. Recoveries
[/TD]
[TD]Number of
Est. Recoveries
[/TD]
[TD]% of Total
Est. Recoveries
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Southeast Alaska Troll
[/TD]
[TD]2
[/TD]
[TD]6.3
[/TD]
[TD]7.5%
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]North British Columbia Troll
[/TD]
[TD]10
[/TD]
[TD]27.7
[/TD]
[TD]32.8%
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]North/Central British Columbia Sport
[/TD]
[TD]4
[/TD]
[TD]14.4
[/TD]
[TD]17.1%
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]NW Vancouver Island Troll
[/TD]
[TD]1
[/TD]
[TD]3.3
[/TD]
[TD]3.9%
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Georgia/Juan de Fuca/Johnstone Str. Sport
[/TD]
[TD]2
[/TD]
[TD]13.0
[/TD]
[TD]15.4%
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]WA Areas 4 and 4B Troll (Cape Flattery)
[/TD]
[TD]4
[/TD]
[TD]7.9
[/TD]
[TD]9.4%
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]WA Area 3 Troll (Quileute)
[/TD]
[TD]3
[/TD]
[TD]3.9
[/TD]
[TD]4.6%
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]WA Area 5 Sport
[/TD]
[TD]2
[/TD]
[TD]7.9
[/TD]
[TD]9.4%
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Total Recoveries
[/TD]
[TD]28
[/TD]
[TD]84.4
[/TD]
[TD]100.0%
[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
Looks to me like the 'North British Columbia Troll' might be the ones of concern? Oh wait that won't work since they are basically the only one left that can interceipt those SEA and Columbia, since the U.S. paid Canada $50 million to shut down the WCVI troll. Hey Nog , how much of that $50 million actually went to the ones that were supposed to get it?
Might I add, you Victoria guys really do have a "*****" here. Those Nicola's really aren't intercepted by the "sport"! Enjoy those "TWO" Nicola Springs reported caught by the Sport Sector, over the last "SIX" years in the Georgia/Juan de Juca/Johnstone Strait? Yep, nothing political here... All in the name of conservation! Have fun with this, it IS information input directly from DFO, here is your link: http://www.rmpc.org/
Political! What makes you think that? Of course it is ALL 100% POLITCAL!
Concerning Columbia Chinook on the inside? Off course there is and WE know it! Only someone who knows "nothing" (ignorance isn't a bad thing) about the Columbia River migration habits, or some one who doesn't want to admit it would claim otherwise. Sorry Chris, no Chinook just DO NOT leave the rivers, go out and swim in this great big circle in the Gulf of Alaska. When the Columbia get to the mouth of the Strait of Juan de Fuca, there is this big thing that forms in the spring called the "Big Eddy." It produces currents and algae blooms. Most Columbia Chinook will transit to the outside of that towards the shelf and continue on up the coast. Some will follow the currents the Big Eddy creates into the Strait. Some of those turn around and exit, some actually continue on up the inside. If, I were them I personally would not go near Victoria either - they don't like all those toxins either. Actually, it is water temperature, currents, and food that is the driving force - They like farther off! Columbians are found in Howe Sound. How do you think they get there?
It is simple matter of money! if any salmon is not "clipped" and "tagged," it is not required to be reported. Canada considers that fish Canadian, unless can be proven otherwise - end of subject. Ever wonder why DFO never does DNA and other testing on those fish? It is Very simply! If you don't test, two things immediately come to mind. First, no ISAv problems to disclose! Second, it isn't U.S. origin. Why does Canada care if it is known to be U.S. origin? Also very simple (ignorance is a blessing here)... can you say PST compensation for interception of U.S. salmon? Does anyone realize how many millions of dollars it would cost Canada, if they ever admitted harvest of Columbia Chinook by Canada on the inside? How is this for a thought? The last round of PST negotations cost the U.S. $140 million in compensation to Canada, for U.S. interception of Canadian fish. Mostly by and in Alaska. BTW... Most of that went into a trust managed by both countries for the different salmon programs, including restoration and enhancement. Washington State also directly contibuted funds for that (so, out of that $27 million Canada is spending on the Pacifc salmon - who's is really paying for those programs)? If you look there was $50 million that went directly into Canada's general fund. Might want to look at how much of that British Columbia actually got and is getting? Canada (DFO) is not stupid, they know way less than 40% of those Columbia Chinook are clippped. They also know only a small percentage (and I do mean small) have CWTags. Sorry to inform, the Pacific Salmon War is not over, and Canada is just waiting for the next round to grab some more money for their compensation, restoration, enhancement... and of course their general fund. How many millions do you think would it cost Canada, if those unclipped untested Chinook where actually Columbians? Right now, at least until those fish farms kill off all you wild salmon, if any salmon is not clipped it simply equates to a Fraser.
Okay enough of that. Just because I love you guys!
What I did, since DFO contends their sport restrictions are only due to interception of Nicola 4-2 Spring off Victoria, I went through and found all the CWTags of the Nicola CWTs reported recovered from 2006 through 2011. Here are the actual tag numbers if anyone want to check them, they are: 180183, 180184, 180189, 180965, 180966, 180990, 180991, 181364, 181380, 181582, 181583, 185925, 185926, 185935, 185936. Then I went back and individually entered each of those tag number to find where that fish was actually reported caught. Here is the results of the summary of where your Nicola Springs are "really" being caught. This information is input directly in this system from both U.S. and Canada as required IAW the Pacific Salmon Treaty.
[TABLE="width: 100%"]
[TR]
[TD]CWT Recovery Dist (groups)
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Run Date: 2012-01-06
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Tag List: Nicola Tags
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]
| Group Name: | |||||
| Age: | 4 | Total # of Est. Recoveries: 84.4 | Total # of Est. Fishery Recoveries: 84.4 |
[TD="colspan: 5"]Ungrouped Tags
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]
[TABLE="align: center"]
[TR]
[TD]Recovery Location
[/TD]
[TD]Number of
Obs. Recoveries
[/TD]
[TD]Number of
Est. Recoveries
[/TD]
[TD]% of Total
Est. Recoveries
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Southeast Alaska Troll
[/TD]
[TD]2
[/TD]
[TD]6.3
[/TD]
[TD]7.5%
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]North British Columbia Troll
[/TD]
[TD]10
[/TD]
[TD]27.7
[/TD]
[TD]32.8%
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]North/Central British Columbia Sport
[/TD]
[TD]4
[/TD]
[TD]14.4
[/TD]
[TD]17.1%
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]NW Vancouver Island Troll
[/TD]
[TD]1
[/TD]
[TD]3.3
[/TD]
[TD]3.9%
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Georgia/Juan de Fuca/Johnstone Str. Sport
[/TD]
[TD]2
[/TD]
[TD]13.0
[/TD]
[TD]15.4%
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]WA Areas 4 and 4B Troll (Cape Flattery)
[/TD]
[TD]4
[/TD]
[TD]7.9
[/TD]
[TD]9.4%
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]WA Area 3 Troll (Quileute)
[/TD]
[TD]3
[/TD]
[TD]3.9
[/TD]
[TD]4.6%
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]WA Area 5 Sport
[/TD]
[TD]2
[/TD]
[TD]7.9
[/TD]
[TD]9.4%
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Total Recoveries
[/TD]
[TD]28
[/TD]
[TD]84.4
[/TD]
[TD]100.0%
[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
Looks to me like the 'North British Columbia Troll' might be the ones of concern? Oh wait that won't work since they are basically the only one left that can interceipt those SEA and Columbia, since the U.S. paid Canada $50 million to shut down the WCVI troll. Hey Nog , how much of that $50 million actually went to the ones that were supposed to get it?
Might I add, you Victoria guys really do have a "*****" here. Those Nicola's really aren't intercepted by the "sport"! Enjoy those "TWO" Nicola Springs reported caught by the Sport Sector, over the last "SIX" years in the Georgia/Juan de Juca/Johnstone Strait? Yep, nothing political here... All in the name of conservation! Have fun with this, it IS information input directly from DFO, here is your link: http://www.rmpc.org/
Last edited by a moderator:
Thanks for the details Charlie. Makes you wonder how those early season restrictions can be justified. However, your mid paragraph conspiracy theorie I don't buy. I don't think DFO is sophisticated enough to play games like that. Sorry, just don't believe it. Not saying it is impossible, from what one reads about fish farms and so what is really impossible with DFO?
Maybe there is the odd small school of Columbians that gets pushed or drawn into the eastern JDF once in a while for whatever reason, but what we used to call the Columbian run in April/May 20 and 30 years ago in Sooke certainly wasn't Columbians. Those fish are basically gone now and from what I read the Columbians have not been in bad shape lately.
Maybe there is the odd small school of Columbians that gets pushed or drawn into the eastern JDF once in a while for whatever reason, but what we used to call the Columbian run in April/May 20 and 30 years ago in Sooke certainly wasn't Columbians. Those fish are basically gone now and from what I read the Columbians have not been in bad shape lately.
Charlie
Well-Known Member
Oh, YES they are!
The government of Canada looks out for the government of Canada. The government of the U.S. looks out for the government of the U.S. The differance, in the U.S. is the public vote actually still controls our Congress!
How about... Canada's favorite, which is "PR." They love taking out newspaper ads to convince the public they are right? They took those ads in the U.S. At the same time how about taxing the U.S. commercial fleet that transited in Canada waters? Then seizing those commercial boats? Cancelling defense contracts? Turning the Commercial fleets lose to catch every salmon, befor those American can get them, etc, etc, etc. None of that really got the U.S. attention and probably would have worked except, one small problem... when Canada decided to seize a U.S. ferry full of U.S. citizens... can you say, game over! The U.S. Congress immediately met and actually voted "IN FAVOR OF" sending "ARMED" U.S. military forces into Canada, to protect those U.S. citizens. Can you say WE now have a crisis? After that Congress vote quess what, the whole thing seemed to immediately be settled go away. BTW... I almost didn't go fishing that year!
Last edited by a moderator:
IronNoggin
Well-Known Member
None Charlie
Our representatives were not allowed to attend, not allowed to provide any input whatsoever, and WE took ALL of the Hit for Canada! Complete Bull$hit!
The funding provided by the US was "intended" to offset the loss of 35% of our standing quota. The quota was removed alright, in an even greater amount than that percentage. The Feds gobbled up the coin that was specified to offset our losses, and said they could do whatever the hell they wanted with it. Of course this pissed us off, so we took them to court. Twice. In both cases, the federally appointed judge sided with DFO's interpretation of where the money should go (Surprise Surprise Surprise). The Dino of course rubbed it's hands in glee, and merrily wandered off to spend that wherever it's antiquated heart desired.
The latest development on this front is equally disgusting. The Dino is now in the process of setting up yet another "buy-back" of licenses (sorry about your boat). A third party (sic) appointed by The Dino will set what they believe to be a "fair" price for those licenses, and that will form the basis of retiring any license that chooses to go that route. None expect the "fair" value of said licenses to be anything even close to that. AND, while we're at it, each License that is so retired will see their percentage of the quota REMOVED from the overall reduced TAC! Methinks the thought is that eventually if they restrict us enough, we'll all give up. Not a lot of point when we get down to 2 or 3 salmon to share amongst the fleet after all.
At the same time we are taking these hits, The Dino sits in FULL support for the non-selective Bag Fleets. Completely the antithesis of ensuring selectivity, and sustainability. Again, COMPLETE Bull$hit from our so called "management" team...
BELIEVE IT! There's is a long term Game Plan. The Recreational Sector, the trollers, and everyone else besides their beloved Bag Fleet (and of course the uncontrollable FN's) are expendable in the overall Agenda. Don't EVER make the mistake of believing it has ANYTHING to do with conservation, or even the fish themselves. Really.
Nog
Last edited by a moderator:
Wow, that sound like quite a dimension. I must admit I know very little about DFO commercial fishery politics. so why, why are they so deep in bed with the bag fleet? JP? And why is it so seemingly easy for DFO to third-party assess salmon licence values but when we demand changes to halibut quotas then nothing seems possible?
Lipripper
Active Member
[cpbbuaIA3Ds] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cpbbuaIA3Ds
hooktender68
Well-Known Member
Where do you guys fish to catch so many Puget sound fish? Is that what the reply says is just Puget Sound ? or are there specific rivers there they come from. All the heads I hnd in early-mid June Nootka, close, come back Columbia river with a few Conuma thrown in the mix. X2 on the way to go USA hatcheries, especially the ones on the columbia!
jeffywestcoast
Well-Known Member
Just turned in a chinook head this morning, interested to here back where it came from. Lets keep this thread going! Turn in them Hatchery heads!
jeffywestcoast
Well-Known Member
Guess maybe a 2013 salmon head recovery thread should be up somewhere?, didn't realize this was such an old thread
Fish Assassin
Crew Member
Funny you bring this thread up.... I have a 2011 head in my freezer still. 01/01/11
jeffywestcoast
Well-Known Member
send er in could be a prize in it for ya
Peahead
Well-Known Member
Just turned in a chinook head this morning, interested to here back where it came from. Lets keep this thread going! Turn in them Hatchery heads!
Don't hold your breath on that ..... if it was a Gulf Island caught chinook it will have a very small chance of having a coded tag.
Reason: its likely an american chinook and the US Chinook are adipose clipped with only a very small percentage of those having coded tags inserted as well. The reason they adipose clip without code tag is simply for a hatchery only retention fisheries ( very much the same as our Capilano coho where all the hatchery coho are now clipped for retention reasons and with only 10% of those having wire codes inserted)
In BC I believe a small percentage of all hatchery Chinook are clipped but all the BC clipped chinook are also code-wire tagged ( need to confirm that though).
Similar threads
