ziggy
Well-Known Member
My area you can only catch 15, which I never do. Perhaps a good first step would be a coast wide limit of 15. Or at least for the Fraser Chinook migration route. Likely too late I guess.
Important Chinook Information - Feedback Required
- Thread starter Admin
- Start date
SerengetiGuide
Well-Known Member
I think we should be talking less about further restricting an already hurting industry and more about enhancing Chinook stocks with vital things like habitat restoration, elimination of pinnepeds at choke points, further hatchery development and enhancement, etc. They would go a lot further than reducing sports fishing’s already minimal impact. Increase smolt survival a couple percent and that would be gigantic.
SerengetiGuide
Well-Known Member
And we will see if what SFAB says about DFO listening is true or if they’ve been duped by DFO again in the upcoming months...I certainly hope it’s the former. When I hear things like it’s not dfo’s fault etc from high ranking members. Makes me a little nervous. (Could go on to list the things that dfo has done to screw over the rec sector based on little science or having little effect on various stocks but most of us know them already).
Last edited:
spring fever
Well-Known Member
Believe me --these Bozo's don't need any help to screw us royally--they are already doing it in spades they don't need anymore suggestions. Perhaps the best bet is to see what comes down and see if we can live with the crumbs they leave us. I suspect all these numbers you guys are throwing around will be a moot point anyway!! Pretty hard to get to 15 or thirty on a non-retention limit or when all the runs have gone through and then you can retain.
MadJigga
Well-Known Member
This!!
DFO can't be trusted period. the closures that were implemented by DFO were made only after they were threatened by RCA to be taken to supreme court and sued. DFO was under an agreement with RCA to implement certain changes to the fishery. This included area closures, commercial closures, fish farms and whale watchers. The only sector DFO made changes to was us the rec fisher. RCA demanded that the whale watchers be included but DFO refused, tell me how the whale watchers rate higher than rec fisherman? How can you trust DFO to do anything when they were faced with supreme court and a lot of bad publicity and still only gave in to one of the demands they had agreed to? Which was us.
ziggy
Well-Known Member
My point is DFO seems to look for Binary solutions, it’s either on or off. There is no excuse for going from 30 to 0 or in the case of Prawns from 200 to 100, 50% reduction, unless of course you have no idea about the health of the stock. There are other tools in the tool kit but DFO seems quite frankly lost.We consistently see what can only be described as panic management decisions based on a sudden aaaha moment from somewhere in the DFO. Sure I agree 15 or 30 at this point, is a moot point, but is it due to a failure to access the degree of the problem? Maybe limits should have been lowered years ago? Maybe treating a run the same from start to finish as far as retention goes makes more sense? Reminds me of the old saying “Poor planning on your part , doesn’t make it an emergency on mine”! Unfortunately in this case and in many others relating to DFO, only the first part is true. We will all accept the conservation measures, as we should as responsible fishers. However we need to question how things became so screwed up that only draconian measures can be instituted.
These are the people that should be receiving letters and emails, they are the ones that got DFO to close the areas and did not follow up to shut down others. https://www.raincoast.org/projects/wild-salmon/fisheries-management-wsp/ I believe they struck some sort of deal with DFO but not sure what it was, whale watchers, commercial guys, natives all left alone. I wish Raincoast had taken DFO to court and not given them the 24 hours. I'm not upset over the restrictions for rec fishers but how we were singled out because they knew we are weak and could really do nothing.
Peahead
Well-Known Member
Good question but is there not DNA samples gathered in 125 ? I would think that for DFO to claim there are Fraser stocks of concern travelling through 125, they must have received DNA data from eg. Avid Anglers/commercial sampling non clipped and wild Chinook (?) Or with too limited or no data then DFO can use the precautionary principle. Data is our friend because in the absence or lack of it, an area can be closed even if there is no proof the fish are there. In your example you are only seeing data from hatchery clipped fish with CWT only. DNA sampling provides data from all fish including wild so would provide the info needed to prove if they are there or not.
Last edited:
Gary Young
New Member
so just kill them all? is that what you are saying? what have you done to help inform fisheries, think up a workable plan, message fisheries and the Indian Act which allows a certain bunch of people to just kill everything, the GREED of so many fishermen wanting ALL THEY CAN KILL has a responsibility of ours.. we encourgaged it for so long.. kill kill kill is not the answer.. a little less would go a long way
Gary Young
New Member
last time I looked, Sweet Spring Salmon is salmon producer/hatchery in Washington or Oregon. they do a great job.. we need more stock in the water and less in a boat.
casper5280
Crew Member
Here is the letter I sent thanks to a lot of better writers me. thank you
I’m writing in regards to the proposed fishing restrictions for the 2019 sport fishery in BC. I would like to express how important a sport fishing opportunity is for my friends, family, the province British Columbia and the entire country. Salmon fishing is a way of life for many in British Columbia and beyond, going with proposed options would destroy many coastal communities and a past time that is important for so many Canadians. It would be devastating for fishing lodges, small charter companies, tackle retailers, marine supply industry, boat dealers and repair shops, fuel docks, marinas, sea plane companies, hotels and much of the coastal bc economy that all depend on salmon fishing. I can tell you that on a more personal level, that for my family sport fishing is a way of life and a real passion for the whole family. salmon fishing is a great family activity that is a real passion and way of life that also helps feed my family as well as many of my friends. We have personally invested a lot of our disposable income over the years to salmon fishing, hundreds of thousands. We would travel from Victoria all over the Island most weekends, get in our boat, which we pay we moor at a marina, fuel up at the gas dock often $300 dollars or more, and then spend the weekend camping and fishing all around the Island. Often we stay at nearby marinas spending money at restaurants and supporting other economies This doesn’t included the your big trips. All of this we often share with family who fly in from other parts of the country to enjoy, and the neighbors and friends who may not otherwise get a chance to enjoy salmon. My point is a lot of money gets invested though sport fishing, but that’s not the important part, its the way of life that we get out of it that’s priceless. Taking away salmon fishing opportunities from us just doesn’t seem right. Its especially hard to accept when other certain groups will still be entitled to catch salmon. There are obviously a lot of opinions as to what’s happening with salmon stocks, the southern orca and ocean conditions, but will stopping or restricting salmon fishing in the ocean have an impact when we continue to net the same fish in the rivers. Why should one group still have opportunities when my daughter who’s spent her entire life fishing for salmon have her opportunity taken away. I don’t think any group should have their salmon opportunity taken away, but rather better management for all. Sport fishing allows any resident to purchase an affordable license and have an opportunity to catch a salmon and feed their family, this should be the last sector to get cut back to zero opportunities.
I am saddened that DFO has been content to allow the Coastal herring fishery to be fished into virtual collapse. I remember a time when everyone had a herring rake on their boat, and could expect to see a herring boil almost every trip out fishing, this doesn’t happen anymore.
I am mad that DFO has sat quietly by as enormous environmental damage has ben done to the entire Fraser River system, and that they still allow nets in the river at all. One can easily find numerous examples of the waste this fishery causes every year, yet they sit by and do NOTHING! I have not studied these issues in depth, and I don't purport to understand them very well. There is one statistic which is overwhelmingly the most troubling to me, because it clearly points out what we know, namely that there are many things beyond catching fish that are destroying Chinook salmon populations. The statistic is this one: total fishery mortalities from fishing are 16.9% with remaining 83.1% of run going to spawning grounds. This suggests it is not overfishing that is the principal cause, or even any cause at all, for this huge decline in the salmon numbers over the last decade or so. Why has your emergency order not included forcing DFO to enforce closures on the Fraser River and stop the ongoing poaching of salmon on the lower sections? Fraser sockeye runs are already so depleted there are no directed commercial or recreational openings for them and now Chinook. When will this organization step up and admit to the public this is a major road block to the recovery of southern BC salmon stocks
How about all the damage to our Coastal eel Grass and Kelp beds. Everyone knows that these are vastly important to Juvenile Salmon and important prey species such as Herring, Anchovies, and other small fish species.
I am upset with the gift of Halibut quota to commercial interests and the lack of requirements attached to that gift. It would appear the idea was to create some stability for small Mom and Pop fishing operations making it easier for them to continue living the lifestyle of small business owners. Sadly for the most part that was a complete and utter failure as is evidenced in the number of these people who no longer fish and instead lease out the original gift to large operations. In essence an Annuity in Perpetuity, a life long gift from the people of Canada that can be willed to their children when they pass on. Very generous of us is it not?
Why there was no finite time limit on this gift, or a caveat that if not fished by the original recipient and that at the very least, on their passing, it would revert back to DFO is mind boggling. So now we have a government who has for decades essentially paid a chunk of cash to people to sit at home (familiar refrain?) and a group of people who have learned to live with the "gift that just keeps giving".
So what are the options.
1) Inform quota holders that unless they fish, the quota is gone, suspend leasing and redistribute through DFO to new commercial and rec fishermen.
2) Begin a process for non fishers whereby the quota is reduced annually by a set percentage and redistributed, to let them get used to working for their money
3) On the death of original holder, quota reverts back to DFO
4) All quota regardless of whether fished or not is leased for a set period of time, after which time it may reduced, renewed or canceled by DFO
I suspect, the outright cancellation will never happen and is perhaps harsh now that people are used to this extra income. But to be fair the government has clawed back benefits from its own retirees , raised retirement age and don't get me started on the private sector, all of who contributed to their retirement, so an adjustment of a gift annuity isn't unreasonable.
I’m writing in regards to the proposed fishing restrictions for the 2019 sport fishery in BC. I would like to express how important a sport fishing opportunity is for my friends, family, the province British Columbia and the entire country. Salmon fishing is a way of life for many in British Columbia and beyond, going with proposed options would destroy many coastal communities and a past time that is important for so many Canadians. It would be devastating for fishing lodges, small charter companies, tackle retailers, marine supply industry, boat dealers and repair shops, fuel docks, marinas, sea plane companies, hotels and much of the coastal bc economy that all depend on salmon fishing. I can tell you that on a more personal level, that for my family sport fishing is a way of life and a real passion for the whole family. salmon fishing is a great family activity that is a real passion and way of life that also helps feed my family as well as many of my friends. We have personally invested a lot of our disposable income over the years to salmon fishing, hundreds of thousands. We would travel from Victoria all over the Island most weekends, get in our boat, which we pay we moor at a marina, fuel up at the gas dock often $300 dollars or more, and then spend the weekend camping and fishing all around the Island. Often we stay at nearby marinas spending money at restaurants and supporting other economies This doesn’t included the your big trips. All of this we often share with family who fly in from other parts of the country to enjoy, and the neighbors and friends who may not otherwise get a chance to enjoy salmon. My point is a lot of money gets invested though sport fishing, but that’s not the important part, its the way of life that we get out of it that’s priceless. Taking away salmon fishing opportunities from us just doesn’t seem right. Its especially hard to accept when other certain groups will still be entitled to catch salmon. There are obviously a lot of opinions as to what’s happening with salmon stocks, the southern orca and ocean conditions, but will stopping or restricting salmon fishing in the ocean have an impact when we continue to net the same fish in the rivers. Why should one group still have opportunities when my daughter who’s spent her entire life fishing for salmon have her opportunity taken away. I don’t think any group should have their salmon opportunity taken away, but rather better management for all. Sport fishing allows any resident to purchase an affordable license and have an opportunity to catch a salmon and feed their family, this should be the last sector to get cut back to zero opportunities.
I am saddened that DFO has been content to allow the Coastal herring fishery to be fished into virtual collapse. I remember a time when everyone had a herring rake on their boat, and could expect to see a herring boil almost every trip out fishing, this doesn’t happen anymore.
I am mad that DFO has sat quietly by as enormous environmental damage has ben done to the entire Fraser River system, and that they still allow nets in the river at all. One can easily find numerous examples of the waste this fishery causes every year, yet they sit by and do NOTHING! I have not studied these issues in depth, and I don't purport to understand them very well. There is one statistic which is overwhelmingly the most troubling to me, because it clearly points out what we know, namely that there are many things beyond catching fish that are destroying Chinook salmon populations. The statistic is this one: total fishery mortalities from fishing are 16.9% with remaining 83.1% of run going to spawning grounds. This suggests it is not overfishing that is the principal cause, or even any cause at all, for this huge decline in the salmon numbers over the last decade or so. Why has your emergency order not included forcing DFO to enforce closures on the Fraser River and stop the ongoing poaching of salmon on the lower sections? Fraser sockeye runs are already so depleted there are no directed commercial or recreational openings for them and now Chinook. When will this organization step up and admit to the public this is a major road block to the recovery of southern BC salmon stocks
How about all the damage to our Coastal eel Grass and Kelp beds. Everyone knows that these are vastly important to Juvenile Salmon and important prey species such as Herring, Anchovies, and other small fish species.
I am upset with the gift of Halibut quota to commercial interests and the lack of requirements attached to that gift. It would appear the idea was to create some stability for small Mom and Pop fishing operations making it easier for them to continue living the lifestyle of small business owners. Sadly for the most part that was a complete and utter failure as is evidenced in the number of these people who no longer fish and instead lease out the original gift to large operations. In essence an Annuity in Perpetuity, a life long gift from the people of Canada that can be willed to their children when they pass on. Very generous of us is it not?
Why there was no finite time limit on this gift, or a caveat that if not fished by the original recipient and that at the very least, on their passing, it would revert back to DFO is mind boggling. So now we have a government who has for decades essentially paid a chunk of cash to people to sit at home (familiar refrain?) and a group of people who have learned to live with the "gift that just keeps giving".
So what are the options.
1) Inform quota holders that unless they fish, the quota is gone, suspend leasing and redistribute through DFO to new commercial and rec fishermen.
2) Begin a process for non fishers whereby the quota is reduced annually by a set percentage and redistributed, to let them get used to working for their money
3) On the death of original holder, quota reverts back to DFO
4) All quota regardless of whether fished or not is leased for a set period of time, after which time it may reduced, renewed or canceled by DFO
I suspect, the outright cancellation will never happen and is perhaps harsh now that people are used to this extra income. But to be fair the government has clawed back benefits from its own retirees , raised retirement age and don't get me started on the private sector, all of who contributed to their retirement, so an adjustment of a gift annuity isn't unreasonable.
casper5280
Crew Member
I am confused by DFO’s continuing lack of support for fish hatcheries and enhancement measures. And now you propose to take the very people who do the important enhancement and restoration work off the water completely? What exactly do you think the effect will be on the salmon when the Recreational Sport Fishers stop the important work DFO refuses to do?
How about the endangered SRKW? Bob Wright began trapping the killer whales in the late 60s and selling them to aquariums , at the time no one knew the difference between transient or resident orca , so many died in the first few days. 45 were taken from the southern resident group. unfortunately their is no hope of recovery for this group. Just optics now.
The inevitable extinction of this group is due to 3 things.
a. The captures took mostly large males out of the population and limited the genetic diversity of the group. The balance of male to females of breeding age is grossly out of whack and has led to a significant imbalance.
b. Lack of Chinook and change in size. The southern residents prefer chinook, but they also eat chum and probably sockeye. The inconsistent returns and the gradual decrease in size of chinook ,due to over fishing and poor management in California , Oregon, Washington state , Alaska and BC.
c. Pollution, The main culprit is PBDE's a fire retardant found mostly in children's clothing. When you wash juniors clothes the fire retardant attaches itself to molecules of water and is flushed out into the strait where it enters the food chain , shrimp-salmon-whales. When a new born killer whale is breast feeding the milk is produced by the mothers fat where the PBDE's hide. If the mother is malnourished she feeds her calf a toxic milk soup and the calf invariably dies. The survival rate of newborns in this group is less than 50%.
Rather grim , especially when you realise this is THE most studied and researched group of whales in the history of mankind. Billions (yes billions) have been spent on these whales yet we just couldn't get it together to do some pretty basic things, pathetic.
Removing the Sport community from the water will likely ensure the demise of this important marine animal. In 2014 the rec fishery in Victoria area (Canada's highest ER for Fraser Chinook) was only 6,632 - that's enough Chinook to feed 82 SKRW for exactly 7 Days...hardly a material difference to SRKW recovery if we closed this fishery! How many days of feed are these same enhancement minded sports fishers putting back into the ocean?
In case you forgot the Recreational salmon Fishery in BC contributes million dollars to the BC Economy, and produces thousands of jobs. This is twice the income and jobs from the commercial sector. What Do you think will happen to communities up and down the coast when the recreational fishers stop spending their money in these communities?
GDP = $219.1 million contribution from rec fishery
Workers employed = 3,580
Household Income = $143.1 million
Taxation = $60 million
This is a substantial economic shift – the recreational fishery has eclipsed the commercial sector
Economic Perspective from PSF Report:
* Total expenditures in BC related to recreational salmon angling were $183.2 million
Top 3 Recreational Salmon Fishery Benefits in Direct Supplier Benefits (businesses that prosper from the fishery)
1. Accommodation & Food $83.5 million
2. Manufacturing $67.2 million
3. Transportation/warehousing $41.6 million
Top 3 Employment Generation benefits related to fishery
1. Accommodation & Food Services 1,344 jobs
2. Manufacturing 303
3. Transportation/warehousing 293
Report Conclusions:
· Charter operations drive significant economic benefits in coastal communities
· Anglers who travelled to BC in excess of 80 km, contributed $101 million to BC’s GDP in 2011
** These are benefits to small coastal communities in BC that depend heavily on recreational fishing to support working families. The decision to essentially shut down the rec fishery will do more than take Sports fishers off the water it will literally destroy the fragile economies of several of our smaller coastal towns, while doing absolutely nothing to solve the low Frazer River abundance, and will likely have an overall negative effect for both Salmon and Whales. So once again, I ask you to consider your proposal very carefully before implementing yet another cut to the recreational sports fishery, while doing nothing to solve the underlying problems.
Clearly the repeated cuts to the recreational sector are going to have devastating consequences up and down the coast to salmon, the whales and the economy. How about stopping cutting the people who are trying to help, and work with us on enhancement and rehabilitation. To be clear, If this occurs, I will put my boat in storage.
1) Option A provides only some fishing but no or very little retention. The sportfishing industry requires at least 4 retention fish to justify the time and expense for the sport fishermen. In the absence of they, there is insufficient rational to spend the money for board, lodges, equipment, etc.
2) Financial Impact: With Option A, I am convinced that most sports fishermen will just stay home. When this happens the following impact occurs reduced travel related spending in the region: Personally I will see at least $15,000 in reduced travel spending.
Reduced marine related spending (fuel, services, equipment): $25,000
Reduced fishing spend (tackle, rods, bait, services): $5,000
TOTAL: $45,000 for 1 person.
In addition, I will not invite friends and relatives to fish this year. They all travel to BC and spend money here. Typically this is 8 people per year.
Their finical spend per person is:
Reduced travel related spending in the region: at $6,000 in reduced travel spending.
Reduced marine related spending (services, equipment): $3,000
Reduced fishing spend (tackle, rods, bait, services): $2,000
TOTAL IMPACT OF OPTION A OR B:
8 x $11,000 PLUS $45,000 for me = $133,000
LONGER TERM IMPACT
At some point I will sell my boat - no longer worth keeping
local services will go out of business
I would like to thank you for your time and hope that you understand what sport fishing means for my family, its not just a past time for well off old white men, it’s a real passion and way of life for many Canadians and beyond.
Please at the very least do what you can to ensure Canadians still have opportunities for salmon fishing in BC.
Texadafisher
New Member
A well thought out and written letter, Casper. Time for me to write one as well
casper5280
Crew Member
Don't thank me, thank all the great writers we have on this forum. I am the worse at thinking of stuff to write. I'm not bad when it comes to copy, cut and paste though.
fishin solo
Crew Member
Hell of a letter good job.
There must DNA evidence. I fish out of Tahsis and for the past 4-5 years DFO has had a fishery tech on the dock taking samples off the chinook caught in the area. I was speaking with the tech last year and he said the vast majority of fish were fish from Washington and Oregon.
Dixsea
Well-Known Member
This is a letter I’ve sent to Jonathan Wilkinson, Rebecca Reid, and Jeff Grout. The letter is partly plagiarized from sources more knowledgeable than me and I have also customized with my personal experiences and knowledge. If it helps anyone else get started to crafting their own letter, please feel free to use any parts.
I will also be writing (and encourage others to as well) to our provincial government to put pressure on Ottawa. Despite the catastrophic economic impact this could have on BC, I have not heard a peep from our government. I know they are extremely busy studying how Uber could work here someday, even though it works everywhere else. But hopefully with our prodding they can focus on what’s really important.
Subject : Proposed Salmon fishing regulations
I am writing to express my concern for what seems to be an imminent closure / restriction on sportfishing for recreational anglers in BC. I write as someone who has enjoyed recreational fishing in the Southern Gulf Islands and the Straits of Georgia as well as the West Coast and Queen Charlotte islands for nearly 60 years. Having the opportunity to fish as a kid got me on the water and taught me about fish, conservation issues, and ecosystems as a whole. Like many BC residents, some of my fondest memories involve a boat and a fishing rod. Many fond memories renting a boat from Sewells with my dad and brother and now owning my own boat and spending time with my sons on the water.
Each year I spend about $5000 on fuel, $7000 on moorage, $2000 on fishing tackle, bait, etc, fishing licenses for all 4 members of my family and at the end of the year we will be lucky to have retained 20 salmon of various species.
If this fishery is closed I will mourn the loss of the time spent on the water fishing with my family and friends but can not imagine the impact to guides, tackle shops, resorts and tourism.
Recreational angers like myself spend countless hours volunteering for local stream-keeping groups, hatcheries, fundraising derbies, etc. We do this because we deeply care about wild salmon populations and want to see them around for our children to enjoy as we have. In my lifetime the salmon fishing in the Strait of Georgia has declined but I can not remember a time in recent memory where I have seen more bait, dolphins, and whales when I am on the water in the Salish Sea.
Does rec fishing have some impact on salmon stocks? Yes. Is rec fishing the main reason for low chinook abundance? Absolutely not! Rec fishing pressure / effort in the early 1990's dropped off sharply and have not rebounded. If rec fishing was the main reason for low salmon returns and now rec fishing effort is but a fraction of what it was, why haven't populations rebounded? The fact is there are much larger and complex reasons this SOG fishery is in that state it is. Habitat loss in both fresh and marine waters; increased predation by growing pinniped populations, pathogen/disease transfer from open net pen salmon farms, and warming waters from climate change are all contributing factors.
The SRKW population are estimated to eat 500K-1M chinook salmon (typically larger ones as well) annually. The entire rec fishing sector in BC catches around 200-300K chinook annually!!! Out of that the SOG rec fishery harvests what? 50K max? That's not enough to sustain 2 SRKW dietary needs for the year and yet targeting certain swaths of rec fishing communities is 'the answer'?
Is closing / limiting rec fishing easy? yes. Is it politically expedient? yes. Will it accomplish it's intended goal of providing the SRWK with the food they need to thrive? No!
Real change is needed. Change that doesn't have a quick fix but will have a lasting positive impact. A few immediate action items that should be taken before any restrictions on rec fishing occur are:
-Invest a substantial ($50M-$100M/year for 10 years min) sum of funds in fresh water habitat/estuary restoration in SOG river systems. Have an arms length independent group of salmon experts handle/distribute funds based on area of need.
-Remove all salmon farms from the marine environment. Start with those on salmon migration routes immediately and phase out the rest over a few years while transitioning to land-based closed containment.
-Invest $50M/year in sea-pen grow out facilities at strategic locations for certain chinook stocks that are known to be critical to SRWK (Harrison, Thompson, Cowichan, etc). You might even be able to get a good deal on some used pens!!!
-Increase the value of the salmon conservation stamp by 5-fold (to $30) which will allow PSF to support more of the small scale habitat and enhancement work that their volunteer communities
As a federal government who campaigned on science-based policy making this pending rec fishing closure is an assault on that ideal.
Thanks for your consideration. I look forward to your response.
I will also be writing (and encourage others to as well) to our provincial government to put pressure on Ottawa. Despite the catastrophic economic impact this could have on BC, I have not heard a peep from our government. I know they are extremely busy studying how Uber could work here someday, even though it works everywhere else. But hopefully with our prodding they can focus on what’s really important.
Subject : Proposed Salmon fishing regulations
I am writing to express my concern for what seems to be an imminent closure / restriction on sportfishing for recreational anglers in BC. I write as someone who has enjoyed recreational fishing in the Southern Gulf Islands and the Straits of Georgia as well as the West Coast and Queen Charlotte islands for nearly 60 years. Having the opportunity to fish as a kid got me on the water and taught me about fish, conservation issues, and ecosystems as a whole. Like many BC residents, some of my fondest memories involve a boat and a fishing rod. Many fond memories renting a boat from Sewells with my dad and brother and now owning my own boat and spending time with my sons on the water.
Each year I spend about $5000 on fuel, $7000 on moorage, $2000 on fishing tackle, bait, etc, fishing licenses for all 4 members of my family and at the end of the year we will be lucky to have retained 20 salmon of various species.
If this fishery is closed I will mourn the loss of the time spent on the water fishing with my family and friends but can not imagine the impact to guides, tackle shops, resorts and tourism.
Recreational angers like myself spend countless hours volunteering for local stream-keeping groups, hatcheries, fundraising derbies, etc. We do this because we deeply care about wild salmon populations and want to see them around for our children to enjoy as we have. In my lifetime the salmon fishing in the Strait of Georgia has declined but I can not remember a time in recent memory where I have seen more bait, dolphins, and whales when I am on the water in the Salish Sea.
Does rec fishing have some impact on salmon stocks? Yes. Is rec fishing the main reason for low chinook abundance? Absolutely not! Rec fishing pressure / effort in the early 1990's dropped off sharply and have not rebounded. If rec fishing was the main reason for low salmon returns and now rec fishing effort is but a fraction of what it was, why haven't populations rebounded? The fact is there are much larger and complex reasons this SOG fishery is in that state it is. Habitat loss in both fresh and marine waters; increased predation by growing pinniped populations, pathogen/disease transfer from open net pen salmon farms, and warming waters from climate change are all contributing factors.
The SRKW population are estimated to eat 500K-1M chinook salmon (typically larger ones as well) annually. The entire rec fishing sector in BC catches around 200-300K chinook annually!!! Out of that the SOG rec fishery harvests what? 50K max? That's not enough to sustain 2 SRKW dietary needs for the year and yet targeting certain swaths of rec fishing communities is 'the answer'?
Is closing / limiting rec fishing easy? yes. Is it politically expedient? yes. Will it accomplish it's intended goal of providing the SRWK with the food they need to thrive? No!
Real change is needed. Change that doesn't have a quick fix but will have a lasting positive impact. A few immediate action items that should be taken before any restrictions on rec fishing occur are:
-Invest a substantial ($50M-$100M/year for 10 years min) sum of funds in fresh water habitat/estuary restoration in SOG river systems. Have an arms length independent group of salmon experts handle/distribute funds based on area of need.
-Remove all salmon farms from the marine environment. Start with those on salmon migration routes immediately and phase out the rest over a few years while transitioning to land-based closed containment.
-Invest $50M/year in sea-pen grow out facilities at strategic locations for certain chinook stocks that are known to be critical to SRWK (Harrison, Thompson, Cowichan, etc). You might even be able to get a good deal on some used pens!!!
-Increase the value of the salmon conservation stamp by 5-fold (to $30) which will allow PSF to support more of the small scale habitat and enhancement work that their volunteer communities
As a federal government who campaigned on science-based policy making this pending rec fishing closure is an assault on that ideal.
Thanks for your consideration. I look forward to your response.
spring fever
Well-Known Member
I think/hope a lot did but didn't post it. I did as soon as I was asked and I seldom ever write letters or speak to politicians. My Mother always taught me to have no contact with unsavory or immoral people!! LOL
Similar threads
