Cuba Libre
Well-Known Member
Yup.............................
Alberni Inlet springs
- Thread starter Olde School
- Start date
Sculpin
Well-Known Member
This is appauling. We have seen some big changes last year in regards to commercial interest in this sector. It is flawed big time. This only proves it. We are getting nowhere in trying to replenishing our wild salmon with this bs going on. These numbers came from where? How many more fish were not recorded? The number could be (and probably is) much higher than posted.
Last edited by a moderator:
IronNoggin
Well-Known Member
Perhaps. This was an "Economic Fishery" read Commercial. The numbers are however likely close considering but a few Legal Buyers purchased the vast majority and at least They are held Accountable for the numbers they handle...
Given that the Recreational Sector has so called "Priority Access" it is not all that surprising that the total estimated Rec catch is hovering around 11K. Pretty well Bang-On the mark for forecast and Allotted for Rec Catch. In this particular instance "commercial", in ANY shape or form, supposedly comes in behind that. Remember... We are NOT discussing FSC fish, rather $$$.
To Hell with the "sectors"! Without the FISH, NONE exist!!
Is DFO to blame. You Betcha! Allowed it to happen under their very eyes. Knowing all the while it was more than a "strong likelihood".
Are the FN's to blame? Of course. They already knew about the "Blind Eye" (too many years of exactly the same) and were ready and willing and DID Abuse it.
Ask any Buyer what this fishery is about. Males = Cat Food. The ROE is The target. The future of the run sold so some uninformed, drooling "connoisseur"can gobble their eggs.... Sheesh!
Nog
Seafever
Well-Known Member
FinAddict:- re :- "supposed stewards of the land"...
I hear ya:- The original natives were not stewards of the land. Why? Because they didn't have the technology or means to be stewards of the land.
They didn't have the horse or machinery........brought in by others.
They didn't, it seems, have the wheel.
They were not adept at forging or creating metals.
So.......to control large tracts of forest, land, or bodies of water or rivers from a "stewardship" point-of-view.....forget it.
Back then when they had a large forest fire.......there was zero they could do about it.
Other than standing by a river and looking at fish....there was noway they could monitor runs technologically.
Nowadays you can get from Vancouver to Prince Rupert, for example,in a matter of hours.
Back then it would have taken them weeks. So any kind of useful information happening in "real time" was slower than the slowest of slow.
A "steward of the land " would define one who is equipped and capable to be a steward.......with the necessary equipment and means .......B.C. is a big "land" and it would be rather difficult to "steward ' it when one has absolutely nothing to "steward" it with.
I hear ya:- The original natives were not stewards of the land. Why? Because they didn't have the technology or means to be stewards of the land.
They didn't have the horse or machinery........brought in by others.
They didn't, it seems, have the wheel.
They were not adept at forging or creating metals.
So.......to control large tracts of forest, land, or bodies of water or rivers from a "stewardship" point-of-view.....forget it.
Back then when they had a large forest fire.......there was zero they could do about it.
Other than standing by a river and looking at fish....there was noway they could monitor runs technologically.
Nowadays you can get from Vancouver to Prince Rupert, for example,in a matter of hours.
Back then it would have taken them weeks. So any kind of useful information happening in "real time" was slower than the slowest of slow.
A "steward of the land " would define one who is equipped and capable to be a steward.......with the necessary equipment and means .......B.C. is a big "land" and it would be rather difficult to "steward ' it when one has absolutely nothing to "steward" it with.
IronNoggin
Well-Known Member
Actually there were around 100 boats that participated in the fishery. That from a reasonably reliable source.
Not saying there might not have been a few previously captured fish in the mix, but if your information regarding that is as reliable as your boat count...
Going to the press can wait, and may become part of the eventual plan to try and prevent future occurances of this nature.
From the Resource's point of view, there is a much more critical step required immediately. Simple actually... STOP KILLING THEM!!
Nog
Fish-Hunter
Active Member
Hey Nog, Have you seen the current Chinook Escapement Numbers? I haven't seen them recently, how close are they to getting the required escapement?
If any of the fishing sectors are going to participate in DFO's planned and "controlled" pre escapement harvest, then they MUST be resposible and accountable for their harvest.
Here is a suggestion, if they over harvest (because of complete ignorance and disregard), then they should be on the hook to support the hatchery costs for an INCREASED enhancement percentage for this year and the next. If they abuse the fishery, make them pay, and perhaps they should be banned from fishing the next season as well. There has to be consequences for their actions, and further more how and why is DFO letting this occur????
This makes me so mad I could spit nails
!
FH
If any of the fishing sectors are going to participate in DFO's planned and "controlled" pre escapement harvest, then they MUST be resposible and accountable for their harvest.
Here is a suggestion, if they over harvest (because of complete ignorance and disregard), then they should be on the hook to support the hatchery costs for an INCREASED enhancement percentage for this year and the next. If they abuse the fishery, make them pay, and perhaps they should be banned from fishing the next season as well. There has to be consequences for their actions, and further more how and why is DFO letting this occur????
This makes me so mad I could spit nails
!FH
IronNoggin
Well-Known Member
No, I haven't. It cannot be anything of significance however. The River is LOW and Warm, which of course is the perfect conditions to stack them at the river's mouth. Which is exactly what happened. And is exactly why they were such "sitting ducks" for the nets.
I have walked a lot of the river in the past week and change. There are a few at the Falls, waiting for high enough water to jump them and wander up. "Few" being the operative word. Between there and Papermill they are basically non-existent. Saw but a couple near the Store Pool and nada the rest of the way down. Without rain, or a surge from one of the impound lakes, these fish are very reluctant to enter the fresh water.
Apparently NOT.
While I do like your suggestion, it simply isn't practical. For various political / funding reasons, the hatchery has been the recipient of several repetitive cuts in production. Now, with the new saddle damn in place, it seems there is even further restrictions regarding water flow - again reducing the hatchery's potential in terms of production. THAT is now the "Limiting Factor", not so much the funding.
That said, we could always take advantage of the many offers that have been made to rear them in GCL...
No Apologies, No Remorse. Smash them 'till they're gone mentality seems to rule at least one particular sector here.
If DFO doesn't get a handle on that, the writing for this run is on the wall...
I IMPLORE those who fish this area to PLEASE forgo bonking any more springs. And Please spread the word while out there as well.
They are hurting and any further removals at all may well prove to be the last straw for their ongoing survival!!
Nog
Fish-Hunter
Active Member
Thanks Nog
This is sooooo Frustrating!
FH
This is sooooo Frustrating!
FH
persistent
Active Member
I would like to phone dfo's aberni office and ask them directly what's up. I found their number online but i'm not sure who the correct person to talk to is? Enough is enough already. Every year we go through the same thing. What do the natives say about this? Where do we go from here?
Islandgirl
Well-Known Member
When I get back to my computer on Monday I will post names and contact info for port Dfo office. It actually is a laughing joke talking to these people because their answer to me is always the same. That being we can't stop the commies and the natives from taking their fish.
I agree with Glg it is poaching.. Maybe if everyone makes the phone calls and contacts media and gets this on the news it can be changed. It will take a lot of work.
When I contacted Dfo last year about the huge overun that the commie sector took I was told it was a very hard
Fishery to monitor and those things just happen. WTH??
IronNoggin
Well-Known Member
As of September 7th:
Escapement
The Stamp Falls Chinook counters are operational and the river above Stamp Falls was assessed by a swim team Sept 6th. They observed approximately 1100 pcs of Chinook and 1100 pcs of Coho.
Catch Estimate: ~ 22,861 pcs
Port Alberni Tsu-ma-uss fishery – 9700 pcs ( includes EO and FSC )
Commercial Gillnet – 1306 pcs
Recreational – ~ 11,900 pcs
The FN Fishery is now recognized to have removed 9,700 springs, 400 more than previously reported. Brings their number to 511% of their allocated Target Number.
The overall catch now is very close to 230 % (22,906) of what was recommended for a Conservation Concern run of this limited size.
We simply can NOT afford to keep Killing Them!!
Nog
Escapement
The Stamp Falls Chinook counters are operational and the river above Stamp Falls was assessed by a swim team Sept 6th. They observed approximately 1100 pcs of Chinook and 1100 pcs of Coho.
Catch Estimate: ~ 22,861 pcs
Port Alberni Tsu-ma-uss fishery – 9700 pcs ( includes EO and FSC )
Commercial Gillnet – 1306 pcs
Recreational – ~ 11,900 pcs
The FN Fishery is now recognized to have removed 9,700 springs, 400 more than previously reported. Brings their number to 511% of their allocated Target Number.
The overall catch now is very close to 230 % (22,906) of what was recommended for a Conservation Concern run of this limited size.
We simply can NOT afford to keep Killing Them!!
Nog
Jencourt
Well-Known Member
Thanks for posting the updated #'s Nog.
I had the option of coming over and spending friday and Sat night at the sister in-laws in Port so as to hit it one last time. This fiasco made the decision for me and I am going to a BBQ here in town instead.
Maybe hit the local waterfront tomorrow AM.
Thanks again for the updates.
I had the option of coming over and spending friday and Sat night at the sister in-laws in Port so as to hit it one last time. This fiasco made the decision for me and I am going to a BBQ here in town instead.
Maybe hit the local waterfront tomorrow AM.
Thanks again for the updates.
No respect for this resource plain and simple, and zero repercussion for poaching (let's not sugar coat it here). The DFO half the time allows it to happen and they seem to have zero authority here in port alberni for some reason over the same resource they get paid to monitor and protect.
Last year commercial's poached well over their allocation, and this year FN's grossly poached well over their allocation.
I assume it was some sort of economic opening because how on earth would the few thousand first nations that live here in port alberni manage to eat 9700 chinook salmon and all the sockeye they have caught this year between now and next summer?
We have double'd the catch efforts on this run, and now conservation concern is a big issue yet again.
Loss for words right now as a citizen of port alberni and someone who enjoys recreational fishing from time to time (I buy a salt water fishing licenses every year and a salmon tag and I might tag one chinook a year on it) and loves watching salmon at the fish ladder this is disgusting to watch unfold every year.
Last year commercial's poached well over their allocation, and this year FN's grossly poached well over their allocation.
I assume it was some sort of economic opening because how on earth would the few thousand first nations that live here in port alberni manage to eat 9700 chinook salmon and all the sockeye they have caught this year between now and next summer?
We have double'd the catch efforts on this run, and now conservation concern is a big issue yet again.
Loss for words right now as a citizen of port alberni and someone who enjoys recreational fishing from time to time (I buy a salt water fishing licenses every year and a salmon tag and I might tag one chinook a year on it) and loves watching salmon at the fish ladder this is disgusting to watch unfold every year.
Last edited by a moderator:
Derby
Crew Member
As of September 7th:
Escapement
The Stamp Falls Chinook counters are operational and the river above Stamp Falls was assessed by a swim team Sept 6th. They observed approximately 1100 pcs of Chinook and 1100 pcs of Coho.
Catch Estimate: ~ 22,861 pcs
Port Alberni Tsu-ma-uss fishery – 9700 pcs ( includes EO and FSC )
Commercial Gillnet – 1306 pcs
Recreational – ~ 11,900 pcs
The FN Fishery is now recognized to have removed 9,700 springs, 400 more than previously reported. Brings their number to 511% of their allocated Target Number.
The overall catch now is very close to 230 % (22,906) of what was recommended for a Conservation Concern run of this limited size.
We simply can NOT afford to keep Killing Them!!
Nog
I don't have the last couple years numbers but do you the numbers for this time the last couple years?
IronNoggin
Well-Known Member
Not offhand, but am looking. Going by recall, last year's opening for the same bunch was ~ 3,000, and they took 10,000.
Definite established pattern...
IronNoggin
Well-Known Member
What's the diff? Well when You, a newcomer, come on here and "report" flagrant fishery violations, and in the same post note a grossly erroneous number of boats participating in the fishery, it kinda makes your original message just a tad suspect...
Are you basing your acusation that they fished early also on what "was reported that night from a buyer"?
Or something you, yourself actually witnessed? Heresay is simply that unless there are grounds for belief.
I'd be ALL EARS were you able to enlighten beyond simple suppositions...
As for your last statement there, I AIN'T in the business of "fluffing up" anything. Simply require a little in the way of "facts" and / or "proof" before jumping on ANY bandwagon. Yours definitely included btw...
Cheers,
Nog
