F
fah cups
Guest
Here Here X 2 Rockfish. Iam thinking the same damm thing. Cheers Fc
Important mtg about chinook fishing in Victoria
- Thread starter Governor
- Start date
drhook
Active Member
This is an excerpt from minutes of the SFAB meeting. It shows how DFO can manipulate figures and just one or two tags can give the false impression that we are single handidly wiping out the resource with our coyote spoons[}
]
Don't turn your heads in!! But that's just my opinion and if your going to bash me for it, go ahead.
The Area 19/20 rep expressed his concern that the expansion for the 2009 estimates needs to be explained. DFO stated that the submission rates for chinook tags continue to be for 2009. The submission rates are based on the estimated tags, which uses the number of recovered tags divided by the submission rate and those rates vary among months and years. As an example, for JDF sport, 1 tag was recovered in 2008 and 2 in 2009. The submission rate for the June 2008 recovery was 14% meaning the 1 tag represented 7.4 estimated tags and for the 2 tags recovered in June 2009 the submission rate was 9% meaning the 2 tags represented 21.9 estimated tags. For Fraser mainstem sport, 2 tags were recovered in 2008 and 4 in 2009. The submission rate for the 2008 tags were 17% and 98% meaning the 2 tags represented 6.9 estimated tags. For the 2009 tags, the 2 in June had a submission rate of 13% and the 2 in July had 7% meaning the 4 tags represented 45.0 estimated tags
]Don't turn your heads in!! But that's just my opinion and if your going to bash me for it, go ahead.
The Area 19/20 rep expressed his concern that the expansion for the 2009 estimates needs to be explained. DFO stated that the submission rates for chinook tags continue to be for 2009. The submission rates are based on the estimated tags, which uses the number of recovered tags divided by the submission rate and those rates vary among months and years. As an example, for JDF sport, 1 tag was recovered in 2008 and 2 in 2009. The submission rate for the June 2008 recovery was 14% meaning the 1 tag represented 7.4 estimated tags and for the 2 tags recovered in June 2009 the submission rate was 9% meaning the 2 tags represented 21.9 estimated tags. For Fraser mainstem sport, 2 tags were recovered in 2008 and 4 in 2009. The submission rate for the 2008 tags were 17% and 98% meaning the 2 tags represented 6.9 estimated tags. For the 2009 tags, the 2 in June had a submission rate of 13% and the 2 in July had 7% meaning the 4 tags represented 45.0 estimated tags
T
Truth
Guest
It is unfortunate that the native fisheries dont turn heads in!!! Wait a sec they dont report 98% of there slaughter!!!!
The great hode
The great hode
T
Truth
Guest
Numbers Rob. we aint even in the same ballpark of what they harvest to sell and if they dont sell it. Right into the Hope dump or on whatever reserve is closest!!
The great hode
The great hode
twinwinds
Active Member
Come on now! Stop the F*&%in Indian bashing...Just because a few do it doesn't mean all FN do it? I have seen lots of non natives do that S^%t as well.
Why cant we look at the BIG picture here and all work for the common good! DFO is mis-managing the fishery not all of us.
Lets work together to fix/rebuild it or all our kids and future generations will be screwed.
lets get over it and move on...........
Why cant we look at the BIG picture here and all work for the common good! DFO is mis-managing the fishery not all of us.
Lets work together to fix/rebuild it or all our kids and future generations will be screwed.
lets get over it and move on...........
T
Truth
Guest
Completely my bad. Natives along the Fraser from Yale to the mouth that use non traditional methods!. Almost all the other natives above yale do not believe in non traditional methods. They use dipnets when they net! They also cant stand and HATE what the other tribes do below Yale!!
The great hode
The great hode
T
Truth
Guest
Sorry Rob I thought were talking about early and summer run chinook stocks of the Fraser river?Just trying to paint a picture for the people who dont live in the Fraser valley about what actually happens on the Fraser river.
The great hode
The great hode
In the past I have religiously turned in all hatchery heads and reported to creel if asked. I will stop doing so and here is the reason why. Even though I hear what you are saying Unknown but you forget one major thing: head recovery and creel survey is good for science BUT DFO does not make decisions based on their science! If they would then their action plan would look completely different. Thus, supporting their science has NO benefits to the fish stocks. Therefore I WONT SUPPORT IT ANYMORE and even more so as they play it out unfairly against ME and my friends!
You know what smiley, this guy - while commending his energy and drive to achieve some REAL change - does not understand some critical points in the equation: in 2008 the JDF sport fleet had a total impact of 1.2% on a 35% total exploitation rate while FN came in at 24% of the same 35% total. Yeah, that makes it very clear that shutting down the JDF sport fleet will save the stocks and have a significant impact for a change - NOT! Assuming that an ideal exploitation rate of 8% can be politically achieved, so let's divide this allowable harvest up fairly: give every user group 1% and what do you see? JDF sport does barely needs any adjustment and you can still achieve the ideal outcome. Hmmm Mr. salmon guy, hard to understand I guess. Also his statements about a 2000% growth of the sportfishing sector is totally unsubstantiated and simply laughable. Man, you should have seen the sport fleet back in the 80's when Saanich Inlet, Cowichan Bay, Sidney, Oak Bay, Gulf Islands, Victoria waterfront were the places to go. If you added up all those boats back then in all those places you could fill the JDF solidly with boats between Otter Pt. and Port Angeles. But he is a young buck so I give him this lack of knowledge. If he could now look a little closer at the facts and think for a second before he bursts out then he could be a voice people might actually listen to respectfully.
Deewar25
Well-Known Member
So salmonguy says 50% exploitation last year? Anyone have a link to this new data? I thought they still had a while to go before they had any real numbers.
At that, we accounted for 1.2% of the 2008 mortality numbers, what are we of this 50%? Like to know that. Natives were 70% of the catch in 2008, does that mean they account for 35% of the salmon run now to our whopping 1.7%(using the same 2008 ratio), and WE are the problem?
At that, we accounted for 1.2% of the 2008 mortality numbers, what are we of this 50%? Like to know that. Natives were 70% of the catch in 2008, does that mean they account for 35% of the salmon run now to our whopping 1.7%(using the same 2008 ratio), and WE are the problem?
From a reliable source the 2009 pie chart is out. Apparently since the last SFAC meeting in which we pointed out that in 2006 we took 1.6% and in 2008 down to 1.2%, while the native fishery went from 20% to 24% things have changed a bit. We asked why they wanted the group taking 1.2% to bare the brunt of further cuts? So in 2009 the natives went down to 16% and we went up to 11%. I think they recently hired some ex-Enron accountants to come up with numbers that fit their agenda. With this kind of fish management....say good bye to the pacific salmon!!
Deewar25
Well-Known Member
yikes...that does seem a little weighted for sure...I mean, if you use the JDF derby as a guideline, you could say 4.8% makes sense...11 though???? Did that chart ever show a spike that big in the past? I didn't get one to take home.
Only other thing that I'd be curious to analyze was TOTAL #'s - 11% of what? If 10x the fish came back to the fraser that did in 2008, then these numbers mean little. I assume not so though.
IF those new numbers were correct then I would accept restrictions without any arguing BUT not this late into this year's season and NOT without a reasonable and promising PLAN for an improvement of those troubled stocks. I will never accept anything just because we are the easiest victim to roll over. We did have a better than before June fishery last year in JDF - that is true and this could account for a higher take. But then there also appeared to be more of those springs around in June than the years before (nothing comparable to the good ol' days but better than the last 5 years I would say). And Nanaimo area had an even better May/June season (to everyone's surprize) last year - and they stay open?????
DFO has a plan for early timed fraser Chinook. Its the same as the plan for Thompson Coho. Its real simple, make it look like you care and are doing something about restoring salmon runs without spending any money. Stop all commercial and recreational fishing on that stock and cross your fingers. Twelve years later and opps still no Thompson River coho. Seems to be a similar pattern and outcome on WCVI Chinook stocks too.
scott craven
Well-Known Member
3 weeks and the current slot size restriction supposedly ends...
I'll bet they wait till May 21 before they drop a bomb on us.
I'll bet they wait till May 21 before they drop a bomb on us.
scott craven
Well-Known Member
Juan de Fuca recreational fishery: March 1 through May 21, the daily limit is two (2) chinook per day which may be wild or hatchery marked between 45 and 67 cm or hatchery marked greater than 67cm in Subareas 19-1 to 19-4 and 20-5. From May 21 through June 30, the management actions above will be continued and may also include Subarea 20-4 in addition to the above areas
This part of the proposal is what impacts us, extention of the
restriction on unclipped fish over 67cm until June 30
How many fish stocks have rebounded by only reducing or stopping fishing? Thompson Coho - NO Atlantic Cod -NO Cowichan Chinook -NO Any Georgia Strait stock -NO Our neighbors to the south seem to have figured it out....spend money on producing more fish to re-establish the runs. We have been on a fast downward spiral ever since SEP went in the toilet.
Similar threads
