Emergency Victoria @ Area SFAB Mtg Re: 2018 Chinook - May 4/18

[Admin]

Re-post so it is at the top of the page for all to see.

Given the heightened tension around the lack of Salmon returns, for a multitude of reasons that continue to be discussed in this forum and many other places as well, it was likely inevitable that this type of exchange was going to happen here. While we are willing to let this topic be part of the broad discussion of why Salmon are in trouble and what may be done to help them rebound, so that everyone who currently enjoys access to this amazing resource will continue to do so for generations to come, we are not willing to have it be a rant born of frustration. To that end, here are some guidelines for keeping this discussion alive while understanding that it will be heavily moderated.
Discussions that revolve around First Nation's rights that are firmly entrenched in the Canadian Constitution are a non starter. That debate happened a long time ago and isn't going to be regurgitated here. At the same time, we are not going to simply expect everyone to pretend that the history of Canada does not include immigrants from a multitude of countries, that also have rights entrenched in that same Constitution.
As has been mentioned in other threads before, using this forum to vent your frustration and paint everyone in a certain "community" with the same brush will result in removal of content. If their is illegal activity happening, report it to the proper authorities. If you want to use this forum to promote a campaign for change, as in a petition or flooding the politicians with emails demanding something be done to stem any illegal activity, you are welcome to do so. However, simply ranting about what may be happening will only inflame a useless discussion and won't be tolerated.
Sharing your thoughts in a way that directly states, or implies, that "all" or "most" members of any community are "this" or "that" or, do "this" or "that" is simply ridiculous and will result in such posts being removed immediately. These generalizations are one of the main reasons this constant bickering and taking "sides" on an issue result in nothing but fights and little productive change where it is needed most...saving this precious resource from extinction.
As mentioned, the content posted on this topic will be heavily moderated from here on in and editing, removal of posts and potential banning of members will be used where necessary, to keep this conversation civil and moving in a direction that may help everyone's right to access this resource and keep us from fighting for the right to catch the last remaining Salmon. Pulling together instead of pushing each other away might just be the right thing to do.

 

[outoftowner]

West Coast charter business for sale. Apply within

Not worth anything

 

[Aces]

Not worth anything

Hey, we got eco tours and whale watching still....

 

[Che]

However, if you have read the major court decisions as you claim you have, including the recent one involving the Nu-Chah-Nulth you would know that conservation is still the primary consideration to be determined by DFO,

I have not yet read the recent BC Supreme Court Case, as its quite lengthy. Once I read it, I can comment on it.

But yes, conservation is the primary consideration in all these matters. Where I think things go awry here is essentially a 'chicken and egg' type argument. Which comes first? Intercepting a certain percentage of the adult return is one thing, but what about the out going migration? People seemed concerned about the return population, but not the fact that these fish all had to hatch, parr and smolt first. Why is that? Because we can catch the adult populations. This is where the ignorance and racism comes in for some people.

Yes there is 'illegal' netting in the Fraser River. We've all seen it. The question I pose is who is BUYING that fish? It's not the aboriginal people 'abusing' their rights to fish for food. If nobody bought that fish, there would be no market for it. Is there any "Don't buy poached salmon" campaigns going on? Is anyone shaming those people who support this illegal fishery? Or is it just a wink and a nudge, and a gunny sack full of Fraser Valley Chicken? People seem to want to talk about conservation, then blame aboriginal people for poaching all the fish. But it's not so simple is it?

 

[scott craven]

Yes there is 'illegal' netting in the Fraser River. We've all seen it. The question I pose is who is BUYING that fish? It's not the aboriginal people 'abusing' their rights to fish for food.

Hey if they are selling it, what does it matter who is buying ?
commercial fishery of any kind on the fraser should be kiboshed.

 

[Whitebuck]

Sweet...arrest the guy who is buying drugs....not the guy who is selling it!
And no market because it’s flooded with too many fish...it will just end up in dump like usual.

Anyway probably banned after this post ,have been with this website since the beginning..keep fighting the good fight!!

 

[Cut Plug]

Re-post so it is at the top of the page for all to see.

Given the heightened tension around the lack of Salmon returns, for a multitude of reasons that continue to be discussed in this forum and many other places as well, it was likely inevitable that this type of exchange was going to happen here. While we are willing to let this topic be part of the broad discussion of why Salmon are in trouble and what may be done to help them rebound, so that everyone who currently enjoys access to this amazing resource will continue to do so for generations to come, we are not willing to have it be a rant born of frustration. To that end, here are some guidelines for keeping this discussion alive while understanding that it will be heavily moderated.
Discussions that revolve around First Nation's rights that are firmly entrenched in the Canadian Constitution are a non starter. That debate happened a long time ago and isn't going to be regurgitated here. At the same time, we are not going to simply expect everyone to pretend that the history of Canada does not include immigrants from a multitude of countries, that also have rights entrenched in that same Constitution.
As has been mentioned in other threads before, using this forum to vent your frustration and paint everyone in a certain "community" with the same brush will result in removal of content. If their is illegal activity happening, report it to the proper authorities. If you want to use this forum to promote a campaign for change, as in a petition or flooding the politicians with emails demanding something be done to stem any illegal activity, you are welcome to do so. However, simply ranting about what may be happening will only inflame a useless discussion and won't be tolerated.
Sharing your thoughts in a way that directly states, or implies, that "all" or "most" members of any community are "this" or "that" or, do "this" or "that" is simply ridiculous and will result in such posts being removed immediately. These generalizations are one of the main reasons this constant bickering and taking "sides" on an issue result in nothing but fights and little productive change where it is needed most...saving this precious resource from extinction.
As mentioned, the content posted on this topic will be heavily moderated from here on in and editing, removal of posts and potential banning of members will be used where necessary, to keep this conversation civil and moving in a direction that may help everyone's right to access this resource and keep us from fighting for the right to catch the last remaining Salmon. Pulling together instead of pushing each other away might just be the right thing to do.

Well done mods. If those who choose to use this forum as a way to discuss fishery management can simply spend more time on ideas that may actually produce opportunity rather than things that unfortunately are out of our control it may allow for it to help us all gain a better understanding of a reasonable path forward.

How about changing the discussion to members views of how a fishery based on a combination of marked fish and size limits like we currently have in place in JdF is working?

Does 85 cm represent a decent fish these days? How many fish bigger than that do you encounter in an average day? How many marked fish do you catch and in what months? What do you think might be something we can do rather than what you think other sectors should do to get ourselves out of this mess?

If we can focus on solutions rather than problems this forum may actually be able to help.

CP

 

[wildmanyeah]

I agree that all thoes things need to be discussed.

Also do we need a chinook fishery from from October to March? Do we need to be hammering small feeding chinook?

Lots of the recreational fishermen I know out there boats beds to sleep for thoes months. However thoes months have become big buinseness for some local guides.

Also when did fishing depths of 150 to 200-+ become so popular. Are we hammering stocks that typically were not targeted?

If you want an unorthodox way of conserving more chinook what about a bait ban? I guess their is no way not model that but I do know the creek survey guy asked if your using bait or not.

What would a bait ban do to your fishery?

Also I would personally perfer to see 1 any size 2 in possession.. the some kind of slot with 4 in possession. I know tho a lot of business would rather have to 2 daily and 4 in possession and be able to seek their clients on opportunity ect.: is that’s what’s best for the average day angler?

Just throwing out ideas.

 

[california]

I have not yet read the recent BC Supreme Court Case, as its quite lengthy. Once I read it, I can comment on it.

But yes, conservation is the primary consideration in all these matters. Where I think things go awry here is essentially a 'chicken and egg' type argument. Which comes first? Intercepting a certain percentage of the adult return is one thing, but what about the out going migration? People seemed concerned about the return population, but not the fact that these fish all had to hatch, parr and smolt first. Why is that? Because we can catch the adult populations. This is where the ignorance and racism comes in for some people.

I don't understand your argument about outgoing populations. We don't fish those, and there is significant scientific effort currently to try and understand the factors leading to poor survival of young salmon. These forums discuss many of the possible factors, but until now I haven't seen that racism plays a role in smolt survival issues. It seems you are maybe leaning a little too heavily on the racism card.

Yes there is 'illegal' netting in the Fraser River. We've all seen it. The question I pose is who is BUYING that fish?

Why do you put illegal in quotations? DFO has many exclusive FN openings, and they are still able to regulate the fishery based on the court rulings. This is the same way Non native sport and commercial fisheries are regulated and scheduled by DFO. If anyone, Native or Non Native fishes outside of the parameters in those DFO announced openings, it is by definition illegal fishing. No quotation marks needed.

I have no problem with buyers being charged, but from an enforcement standpoint, all crimes, not just illegal salmon sales, have the perpetrator at the center of the enforcement efforts. Plus its a lot easier to enforce fishing regulations on a defined piece of geography like the Fraser river where many of the illegal fishing spots are known, than the points of sale which could occur anywhere in the lower mainland. DFO, or at least their political masters, have decided not to enforce those regulations for FN. DFO is the problem here, if Non natives knew they could fish the Fraser outside of official openings with no repercussions, they would do it as well. If DFO would just do what needs to be done to fulfill the conservation priority in the fishery, we wouldn't have a problem.

 

[Che]

I don't understand your argument about outgoing populations.

These are just made up numbers, but let's say a female chinook lays 2500 eggs in her redd. Of those eggs, 2000 hatch in to alevins. From there, let's say 1000 make it to fry. 500 make it to smolt. 50 make it to adult. Less than 5 return to spawn, probably closer to one or two. So here we are worried about these adult fish returning, but don't care about the original 2500 eggs we started with?

Obviously if we do more to enhance juvenile production and survival rates, we will get more adult returns. So things like, spawning channels and rearing habitat in home rivers. Settling ponds to filter run off from development, keeping silt and sediment out of home rivers. Controlling predators like seals and cormorant birds. Replanting Eel grass beds have been choked out by debris from log booms in estuaries. There are lots of things to be done at this end of a salmon's life cycle. We know that chinook, coho, and steelhead all spend a year or more in fresh water before heading out to sea. So what are we doing to take care of them in that critical time?

Imagine a marathon where we only have two people cross the finish line. Wouldn't we want to know why the other participants didn't make it?

Why do you put illegal in quotations?

Because I'm not the one to say what is and isn't illegal. Cap'n Sparrow was charged with illegal fishing, turns out, he wasn't.

I have no problem with buyers being charged, but from an enforcement standpoint, all crimes, not just illegal salmon sales, have the perpetrator at the center of the enforcement efforts.

Don't even have to charge them. Publicly shame them. Make buying contraband salmon a socially unacceptable thing. As I mentioned earlier in this thread, a social media campaign and some hashtags can help accomplish this. Explain to people that by buying these fish, they're contributing to the decline in wild salmon stocks. People are selfish and greedy when it comes to salmon. It's a scarce resource. But nobody wants to talk about black market salmon, because it's an ugly truth out there. A lot of aboriginal people depend on that money for their annual income. It would cause a political poop storm. Nobody wants to kick that sleeping dog.

 

[california]

Because I'm not the one to say what is and isn't illegal. Cap'n Sparrow was charged with illegal fishing, turns out, he wasn't.
Don't even have to charge them. Publicly shame them. Make buying contraband salmon a socially unacceptable thing. As I mentioned earlier in this thread, a social media campaign and some hashtags can help accomplish this.

Your ignorance of the law is significant. If a law is passed it is in effect, and anything done to contravene it IS illegal. If the law is overturned in court like Sparrow it ceases to be a law. If the FN believe they can legally fish during closures they should stage a protest fishery where someone is charged and and battle it out in court. The DFO doesn't at this point have the political will to charge anyone though.
You go ahead and publicly shame someone who you think has bought bootlegged salmon. If they have not been charged they have committed no crime, and your publicly shaming them will land you in court as there is something called libel laws. So have at it, I hope you have deep pockets. I love people thinking a social media campaign will cure all ills. You really think someone buying salmon out of a wheelbarrow for cash doesn't know its illegal? The same as someone buying that kicker outboard for 1/2 its value from some guy in a parking lot for cash doesn't know it was ripped off, maybe from the back of the boat of a member of this forum. There are 2.5 million people on the lower mainland, there will always be someone willing to buy something at below its legal market value. But since you have it all figured out, lets have social media campaigns that people shouldn't buy jewelry, cell phones, TVs or power tools from shady characters for cash. Whats more lets get a social media campaign that people shouldn't take heroin, rape, or kill other people. In no time it will be #CrimefreeBC!

 

[Che]

Your ignorance of the law is significant. If a law is passed it is in effect, and anything done to contravene it IS illegal. ... If they have not been charged they have committed no crime,

So if an aboriginal goes out, and fishes for food, even though the DFO has ruled they cannont. That is illegal.

But if a white person buys fish from an aboriginal, who poached it, it's not illegal.

Gotcha.

Social media is much more powerful than you think. There are over two billion facebook users. There are much much more active fishing groups on FB. Internet forums such as this one are a tiny niche, and are dying off. A properly mounted social media campaign could shape public opinion on a LOT of topics. Salmon conservation is one of them. #NOBLACKMARKETSALMON

 

[Hook in Mouth]

So if an aboriginal goes out, and fishes for food, even though the DFO has ruled they cannont. That is illegal.

But if a white person buys fish from an aboriginal, who poached it, it's not illegal.

Gotcha.

Social media is much more powerful than you think. There are over two billion facebook users. There are much much more active fishing groups on FB. Internet forums such as this one are a tiny niche, and are dying off. A properly mounted social media campaign could shape public opinion on a LOT of topics. Salmon conservation is one of them. #NOBLACKMARKETSALMON

Maybe you should take your disruptive attitude to a Facebook group and leave this niche market.

 

[terrin]

I don't understand your argument about outgoing populations. We don't fish those, and there is significant scientific effort currently to try and understand the factors leading to poor survival of young salmon. These forums discuss many of the possible factors, but until now I haven't seen that racism plays a role in smolt survival issues. It seems you are maybe leaning a little too heavily on the racism card.




from an enforcement standpoint, all crimes, not just illegal salmon sales, have the perpetrator at the center of the enforcement efforts.

A little off topic but if you remember the Liberal BC Rail scandal they gave the perpetrator immunity so they could get the little guys Bassi and Virk so not in "all crimes" it seems to depend what actors are in play.

 

[wildmanyeah]

How many people on here would pay 10 dollars for a Chinook salmon stamp in addition to the regular salmon stamp? If 100% of the processed from the stamp went into Chinook Salmon Enhancement like net pens?

 

[littlechucky]

How many people on here would pay 10 dollars for a Chinook salmon stamp in addition to the regular salmon stamp? If 100% of the processed from the stamp went into Chinook Salmon Enhancement like net pens?

I think $20 per year with full proceeds to salmon enhancement and conservation projects is totally fair.

The reality is we need to get the license fees right with the times and use the increment to support our fisheries (not for the general coffers of our spendy gov’t).

 

[wildmanyeah]

Has their been any motions in the past from the SFAB to up licence fees? create a new stamp? Anyone know the history?

 

[littlechucky]

Has their been any motions in the past from the SFAB to up licence fees? create a new stamp? Anyone know the history?

I believe so, but don’t know the details.

http://www.theardentangler.com/index.php/license-fees-remain-unchanged-too-bad/

 

[wildmanyeah]

I believe so, but don’t know the details.

http://www.theardentangler.com/index.php/license-fees-remain-unchanged-too-bad/

So its a dead end? Bah

" I’ve written about this situation before and, despite advisory and organizational interests in the recreational fishery almost pleading with government to apply a significant increase – with the proviso that the additional funds generated flow back to fishery programs like catch monitoring, salmon enhancement, enforcement and SFAB support – the fishery has found itself in the perverse situation wherein Ottawa seems unable or unwilling to make such a move."

 

[terrin]

How many people on here would pay 10 dollars for a Chinook salmon stamp in addition to the regular salmon stamp? If 100% of the processed from the stamp went into Chinook Salmon Enhancement like net pens?

I would pay that much to get Fish Farms out of the Ocean and just send the workers a check in the mail with the money collected until they find other work.