Emerging Issues for SVI Chinook Regulations

wow !!!! love reading all the post on here and see everybodys view and opinion, but just being a dumb fisherman just returning from vancouver , i always drive up the fraser and see how many fn nets are out!!!there are nets every where!! there is absolutely no chinook conservation going on at all on the fraser river at all!!- i 'll say it !! -we get told to do this so one sector cleans up under the BS of conservation!!say no to a fn your labeled a racist, i'm not!! i love fishing and i want my kids to enjoy it for years to come but it will not happen if this crap keeps happening!!!
 
Thanks bottom finally someone who gets it ....
I can tell you when the "rumor" of closure was evident in around May i asked certain businesses to keep track of how things were doing in the next few months and I can tell you on thing this has hurt ALOT of people because tourists think we have no fishing ... we give and give and for what to get shafted complete BS
 
It is a sad day for the sport fishery and the Salmon.
I have seen the number of nets presently on the Fraser and it does not look good.
Ceremonial and food fishery is one thing but this is pretty much an unregulated large scale commercial fishery that has been gifted to one group.
If this continues the FN will fish the Fraser salmon to extinction.
 
While many agree with what you are saying in concept and theory ST, the sad reality is this is NOT what is happening and very little is happening to change it!

The bottom line is this. The rec sector is the easiest sector for the other sectors and FN's to target with restrictions and threats of closures as we are not as well organized or funded and therefore get the short end of the stick consistently. This is one of the reason SVIAC was formed to help improve this situation. Thankfully we have a few other similar group to help but rec fishers need to support them more with their time and $ to be more effective.

There are many clear cut examples over the years of how DFO has caved to political pressure from powerful groups to influence so called "management " decisions that have very little to do with evidence based fisheries management and conservation. This is what many rec fishers are pissed off about!

They want DFO and their political masters to make sound, fair decisions based upon current, accurate, reliable data for the sake of sustainable fisheries management (and adequate funding to collect this data), not to continually give in to what ever sector can leverage the most political pressure, or hand over the most $ for political donations. Rec fishers need to get better organized and focused to make our needs better known to decision makers while their is still a decent salmon fishery. My 2 bits.
 
While many agree with what you are saying in concept and theory ST, the sad reality is this is NOT what is happening and very little is happening to change it!

The bottom line is this. The rec sector is the easiest sector for the other sectors and FN's to target with restrictions and threats of closures as we are not as well organized or funded and therefore get the short end of the stick consistently. This is one of the reason SVIAC was formed to help improve this situation. Thankfully we have a few other similar group to help but rec fishers need to support them more with their time and $ to be more effective.

There are many clear cut examples over the years of how DFO has caved to political pressure from powerful groups to influence so called "management " decisions that have very little to do with evidence based fisheries management and conservation. This is what many rec fishers are pissed off about!

They want DFO and their political masters to make sound, fair decisions based upon current, accurate, reliable data for the sake of sustainable fisheries management (and adequate funding to collect this data), not to continually give in to what ever sector can leverage the most political pressure, or hand over the most $ for political donations. Rec fishers need to get better organized and focused to make our needs better known to decision makers while their is still a decent salmon fishery. My 2 bits.
 
jimmy pattison owns 80% of the commercial salmon licenses in bc - he owns the MP for west vancouver- he 'll take every salmon out of the ocean and wont put one penny back into enhancement,that would be bad business.there is no DFO-jimmy and his lobbyists tell dfo what to do-period!sorry to break the news to you so bluntly. 1-commerccial 2-fn 3-recreational thats the pecking order.you are absolutely right !!!! instead of having all these different organizations s v i anglers/sportfishing insitute/sidney anglers /esquimalt anglers etc we should have just one- and all the money should just go to one firm with an office in ottawa, just like FN and mr Pattison, were always the last one to the table and we dont have any money or power backing us so the minister responsible for fisheries just blows us off.
 
sockeye , halibut, troll caught salmon, herring,Jimmy pattison-sockeye and chinook when they get to the rivers FN ,recreational fisherman- sloppy 3 rds!! hey if i'm wrong ,tell me, just go look at the alberni canal right now!!
 
I would love to hear what response our lobbying groups are getting from DFO and Government in regards to the netting and lack of Conservation on the Fraser?
Anyone??

This should be a big part of our stand and we should demand action.
 
Pro - as you are fully aware, DFO must follow the precautionary principle prior to any decision(s) can be adjoined to all area opportunities - including that concern registered in the SVI. I believe that having all of that information on the table was a responsible thing for DFO to do. That, as apposed to closing the opportunity without any type of notice of concern - if at all, it were to change without notice. If it was announced without any notice that it were to be closed, what do you think the outcome might be?

The precautionary principle is the responsible way to manage. Without data prior to decisions could be detrimental to stocks, and it is most certainly the best way to move forward. All sectors must be held accountable and be open to providing data.

Further, you may need to talk with DFO directly to see if I am even close in my humble assumption. Remember I am not a decision maker in our shared resource, so what I say doesn't even really matter.



I agree, the precautionary principle is the responsible way to manage.
I just have a hard time linking DFO and the precautionary principle. One only has to look at the proliferation of fish farms all up and down our coast to have any faith in DFO adhering to those terms.
 
Hey folks, there are no sales and therefore no market,if people don't buy the illegal fish. Perhaps much like the "Shame the Johns" program they use to battle prostitution, DFO needs to go after the buyers as opposed to sellers

I am sure it would be difficult to launch a campaign aimed at educating consumers without being labeled racist. I'm also sure though that many FN are appalled by the abuse of the fishery!
 
If you really want to look behind the curtain you need to read this. There are many parts that are redacted but the gist is there.

DFO-Minister Tootoo Briefing Documents Released
Document prepared by DFO for Minister of Fisheries Hunter Tootoo (recently released under the Access to Information Act) provide insight about how the Feds look at fisheries–from economics to conservation, aboriginal rights to aquaculture. It’s basically an introductory backgrounder on DFO, the Coast Guard, and his role as the minister.
https://www.watershed-watch.org/resources/dfo-documents-released/
 
Ziggy, most of the sales are large scale to restaurants in vancouver or to alberta....
Even better if that's the case. Exposing these business's as helping wipe out the wild salmon on the coast would be a Public Relations nightmare for them. Can you imagine the backlash? Nobody in their right mind would want that kind of negative publicity.
 
If you really want to look behind the curtain you need to read this. There are many parts that are redacted but the gist is there.

DFO-Minister Tootoo Briefing Documents Released
Document prepared by DFO for Minister of Fisheries Hunter Tootoo (recently released under the Access to Information Act) provide insight about how the Feds look at fisheries–from economics to conservation, aboriginal rights to aquaculture. It’s basically an introductory backgrounder on DFO, the Coast Guard, and his role as the minister.
https://www.watershed-watch.org/resources/dfo-documents-released/
Thanks for sharing this link GLG. More Forum members should read this and contact their local MP to express their concern and encourage them to speak up for the Liberals promise to adopt the Cohen Inquiry Recommendations. Public pressure is the only thing that will result in any action.
 
From today's Times Colonist:

Chinook limits will cost millions, Island anglers say


AMY SMART / TIMES COLONIST

JUNE 22, 2016 06:00 AM



  • PreviousNext
    Wild chinook: Daily limit two; ban on catches larger than 85 cm Photograph By Dept. of Fisheries and Oceans


South Vancouver Island anglers are contesting a restriction on chinook fisheries they say will cost millions in lost revenue.

Fisheries and Oceans Canada has banned catches of wild chinook larger than 85 centimetres through July 15. Daily limits are two wild or hatchery-marked chinook between 45 and 85 cm.

The restriction is the latest in a string of challenges for sport fishermen, including spotty weather and uncertainty over whether chinook fisheries would be open at all, said Chris Bos, president of the South Vancouver Island Anglers Coalition.

“This has caused anguish in the angling community and a great economic loss to those who provide related services,” Bos said.

The main draw of pursuing chinook is their size, he said. You can still have a great fishing day without catching a big one, but taking away that opportunity will push anglers elsewhere.

Adding to their woes is the expansion of the fisheries management area by about 20 kilometres, to near Sombrio Beach from Shearingham Point — a change on which Bos said local anglers weren’t consulted.

Restrictions are based on the federal department’s Albion chinook test fishery on the lower Fraser River. It estimated returns this year to be about 43,000 — putting them in the low range — based on captures between late April and early June. Bos said later counts indicate that returns might not be low — they might just be late.

Jeff Grout, regional resource manager for salmon, said the forecast marks the second-lowest year on record since 1981.

Fisheries and Oceans Canada puts restrictions in place in a number of fisheries along the chinook’s migration route to try to conserve those returning to the river in the spring and summer. They vary by area, so anglers should check Fishery Notices online, Grout said. “It’s a fairly complex suite of regulations to try to ensure we get sufficient numbers of fish back to the spawning grounds,” he said.

The federal department won’t likely revise fishery restrictions mid-season, he said, but will consider broader adjustments in the post-season.

One contentious issue concerns the balancing of sport fishermen’s livelihood with First Nations’ rights. First Nations communities along the Fraser River have argued for greater restrictions on commercial and recreational fishing, as pressure mounts on chinook populations and their own fisheries face heavy restrictions.

Legally, First Nations’ food, social and ceremonial fishing rights take priority over commercial or recreational rights. But recreational anglers question whether a priority right can be extended to an exclusive right, in considering full closures.

Tourism Victoria president and CEO Paul Nursey said fisheries restrictions wouldn’t have a significant impact on regional tourism.

“In Greater Victoria, the tourism sector is exceptionally diverse, and we continue to expect tourism will remain robust for the foreseeable future,” he said. “While fishing charters provide great experiences, there are many reasons people are compelled to visit our destination and we are confident there are enough options to satisfy every traveller."

asmart@timescolonist.com




© Copyright Times Colonist- See more at: http://www.timescolonist.com/news/l...nd-anglers-say-1.2284303#sthash.iAk7Ameb.dpuf
 
Already seeing in Sooke and Metchosen for last few months now. Ghost town compared to usual and marinas not as full. Definitely less boat traffic around.

"but will consider broader adjustments in the post-season."

Broader adjustments. Wow going to expand it further next year?
 
Last edited:
The problem is that once these restrictions are put in place, they are seldom lifted,
even in times of abundance.
It's kind of like the government adding new taxes, once in place they are there forever.
 
Back
Top