Another SRKW diet-ribe
- Thread starter John Ingram
- Start date
salmonkiller01
Well-Known Member
funny how these studies come out just before regulations are released. All bill ****
WHO DAT
Crew Member
Saw this first hand in the early "70s" penned up in Pedder Bay( we would hike over from Weirs Beach) while the rest of the pod wondering why they weren't joining them. Did not seem right even as a young boy, extremely sad! Then the PCBs dumped into the Puget Sound by the Navy. We keep 5 or 6 Chinook a year(if we are lucky) and supposed to feel guilty?
Last edited:
Help halt harmful Chinook salmon fishery
We need your help to put pressure on Minister Lebouthillier to halt a B.C. fishery that will affect endangered salmon and killer whales.
davidsuzuki.org
Posted this in another thread but people need to see this.
Fisheries Minister must stop new fisheries that will harm endangered Chinook salmon and killer whales | Raincoast
The fishery will increase the amount of noise and disturbance from angling boats fishing where endangered killer whales are trying to feed.
www.raincoast.org
searun
Well-Known Member
Bottom line is NOAA published a detailed study noting there are more than enough Chinook available for SRKW - perhaps the issue preventing recovery isn't salmon abundance! Prey acquisition when they are being hounded by many WW vessels is a highly likely cause/effect IMO. Lots of science now pointing to impact of vessel approaches (not presence)....it is the approaching vessel that disrupts forage behaviour. That is much like a hiker walking up to a grazing deer - they are startled and often move off and away from the area and perceived threat. Different story if they approach you - not particularly startled and carry on with their activity.
I also see evidence NRKW are expanding their population even though they appear on surface to utilize the same food source as SRKW. Perhaps NRKW are competing for food, or perhaps their food isn't contaminated by toxins! Or do they actually share the same food?
Contamination? SRKW have (at least according to the science) an affinity for Fraser River Chinook - could it be that these Chinook that migrate down a toxin dump (Fraser River) are contaminated passing along these toxins which are aggregated by SRKW mother's and then de-toxified through the mother's milk? - passing toxins from one generation to the next. Imagine the compounding effects of generations of toxins passed from generation to generation through their food.
Perhaps the plight of SRKW has little to do with recreational vessels and fishing - what a novel idea. Or is it just easier to chase the shinny penny and let the captain obvious ENGO's spin a bunch of novel unproven theories. We can trust their science - after all, the future of SRKW hinged (we were told) on closing vast areas off Sooke because this was critical to their recovery as a significant forage area. Many local knowledge holders in Sooke tried advising DFO Science that the whales didn't forage in those waters....BUT in 2018 it was closed. Subsequently we were advised by the same DFO science folks that gosh, all that ENGO fluff science got it wrong - this isn't a key forage area.
Trust the science or is this just a bunch of guess work cobbled together in the name of we don't really know, can't measure the efficacy and performance of these measures....so let's invoke the precautionary principle.
Getting sick and tired of the ongoing BS, not backed up by meaningful metrics to assess performance of management measures...then compare the made in Canada approach to what NOAA and Washington State are doing - no fixed spatial closures - instead, robust avoidance bubble zones - they are looking to increase them from 400 yards to 1000 yards.
Last edited:
ziggy
Well-Known Member
Probably talking about the Penn Cove capture. They rounded up virtually all three of the SRKW pods. Pretty ugly situation. Six captured for amusement parks and at least five killed.
Similar threads
