Accurate Catch data would be great. THat way, we don't have 10,000 angler hours off of Sooke in August 2008 when there were 18 days with wind over 20KNTS. Mandatory return of punched licenses every season would be great. Mandatory participation of creel survey is fine too. Creel Surveyors would have to be bonded profesionals, not summer help like what we have now, a lot do a great job, but as Hourston pointed out, some go a little overboard. I am a guide and have been participating in the log book program.
I think DFO collecting accurate data is a darn good thing. And I want DFO data to withstand scrutiny, which it clearly can't do based on some numbers we were given at some South Coast working groups a couple of years ago.
Regulations similar to wild game would go a long way to our fishery. ALL PARTIES must be accountable.
1) Commericial Fisheries - Extremley well accounted for.
2) Rec Fishery, slowly being brought into line via creel survey and flight data. And end to voodoo formulas, extrapolations, over flights where every boat is limiting out. Every fish accounted for on the license, A condition of the license is the license is returned at the end of the season. A refundable deposit on the license would go a long way too.
3) Fist Nations - Must be accountable. Yes, they get priority access, but as it has been demonstrated on the Fraser River, inviting DFO to "Make love to a pinapple" shouldn't fly far either.
If we account for the bulk of the fish caught on this coast, and get credible data, then I wouldn't have a problem with a fishery being closed for a genuine conservation concearn.
To give you an idea of how bad the DFO data is, and how badly used it was, the first time we were given a slot size in area 19/20, it was all fish over 65 CM to protect early timed Fraser Fish. A few weeks later, whoever was in charge of salmon policy that week was shown that hatchery fish over 65 CM have nothing to do with early timed Fraser Fish, so "Oops, we will make another annoucement opening these Hatchery fish, which are part of a US Put and Take Fishery". The point of that statement is adequate homework is NOT being done on the fishery.
This would put an end to the voodoo logic that was explained to ME IN PERSON at some of the south coast working groups we had two years ago, they were out to lunch. When I pointed out a few problems with the model, I was told "You can't have an infinatly variable model". This was in reply to my suggestion that "Reduce estimated fishing effort when winds are over 20KNTS, (they were not taking weather into account if you can belive that!), and the fly over photos were clear enough to either see wakes and downriggers from trolling boats, or no wake and/or a stationary boat fishing for halibut/groundfish. The only variables in the model were the number of boats on the water, period, and the number of fish counted per boat at the boat launches. This does did not take into account the guide fleet which does not use boat launches, nor the many places the creel people have the resources to monitor properly.
If we get damn good data, then I'm all for it. I don't think anyone has a problem with how wild game is managed, we need that for DFO, it's going to take some pain, some paperwork, but if we have good data, then we can manage our fishery. And DFO will need some resources from the Harper Government to do this.
