Fraser river sockeye

Its at the P50 level why is it not opened???

Because the environmental groups are pushing the impact on Fraser chinook mortality if it opens. Several statements have been made questioning impact of rec fishing last few days on social media.

Where do you think FN got the idea about the catch and release mortality? One doesn't need to be a rocket scientist to figure out where that came from and who initiated it?

You can bet the two stooges at Watershed have been pushing back opening it. You can bet there were some backdoor discussions. It can't come as a surprise?

Remember Greg Taylor was asked specifically to be a part of the catch and release study this year and he never responded. What do you think that means? If he is so up at arms on mortality why didn't he participate?
 
Last edited:
From FB

Just got off the Fraser call.

The Canadian Panel under Les Jantz rejected run size forecasts done by the Commission and recommended that much lower run sizes be adopted. "to be risk adverse"

Which would mean no fisheries. The US accepted the run size forcasts of the PSC so is "issuing a letter" tomorrow to say that they are going fishing anyway.

Canada offered to meet with the US tomorrow to see what tomorrows test fisheries bring but when the US said that they were going fishing anyway, Les said he withdrew the offer to meet tomorrow and would not meet til the regular meeting next Tuesday. Said "Canada is bearing the whole burden of conservation"

No Fishing for us. Next mtg Tuesday.

Serious disagreement between US, Canada and PSC secretariat. PSC recommends lates at 2 million which is somewhere between p25 and p50. US agrees with the PSC.

Bottom line, the US will go fishing even though Canada opposes the US fishery, and Canada will not fish.

Canada does not accept that Lates are really late and still coming.

The US can go fishing if PSC staff agrees with them, which they did.
 
Bottom line, the US will go fishing even though Canada opposes the US fishery, and Canada will not fish.
Not trying to derail this thread but if the US is officially communicating their plans to go out and fish the same run, why would we not capitalize on the same approach? At minimum, we could organize a protest fishery where we put the lines down in the restricted areas with no lures attached just so it provides some PR optics.

Fraser Sockeye fishery is a meat harvest, I get that. But if the department is so incompetent that they can't even defend their forecast and are competely out of line with the PSC, this deserves to get the public eyes. I wonder what the local guiding community think about this.
 
Not trying to derail this thread but if the US is officially communicating their plans to go out and fish the same run, why would we not capitalize on the same approach? At minimum, we could organize a protest fishery where we put the lines down in the restricted areas with no lures attached just so it provides some PR optics.

Fraser Sockeye fishery is a meat harvest, I get that. But if the department is so incompetent that they can't even defend their forecast and are competely out of line with the PSC, this deserves to get the public eyes. I wonder what the local guiding community think about this.
most of guys who fish are busy with families and job and paying taxes and generally producing for society, we aren't un employed or on cerb, 20 something year-olds with time on our hands like the environmentalist movement have.
 
The card that Canada/DFO used to play was the chinook and coho fishery off the west coast which was/is predominantly USA bound stocks. Now that DFO has pretty much bankrupted the troll fleet we no longer have that card to play hence no leverage with the USA. The USA only responds to power, they do nothing out of the goodness of their hearts.
 
I feel the Americans can see right through the DFO’s political agenda and aren’t going to stand by and not let their people fish.
 
Tell me something new….:rolleyes:

———————

Canada is abusing the precautionary approach,” UFAWU-Unifor President James Lawson says.

“UFAWU-Unifor supports responsible and scientific decision making but rejecting the PSC’s recommendations confirms that Canada is ignoring clear scientific data.

“UFAWU-Unifor wouldn’t typically support the United States fishing while Canadians are tied up, but in this case, both countries should be fishing right now,” Lawson says.

“Science supports a fishery, and the Pacific Salmon Commission’s recommendations confirm that.”
 
Back
Top