Is the commercial salmon fishery still viable?

Can’t imagine too many people risking a vacation like that. Will hit the campgrounds and marinas hard and they probably employ as many or more people than commies.
absolutely - 881 employed directly in the commercial salmon fishery with average income of just under 9,000/year. scarcely enough to buy a big mac. The secret sauce for Canada optimizing social and economic benefits from the recreational fishery is to provide stable opportunity and expectation of catching fish - no subsidization required. License fees alone generate $5.9 million/year, and could easily be much more if government could demonstrate to those who buy recreational licenses that the money actually went into directed recreational fishery management and salmon conservation programs. Who wouldn't pay more than double for a license fee if that was the case?

Currently $1.6 million from the Salmon Conservation Stamp fees goes to the PSF to fund all the conservation programs - just imagine what we could do with more?
 
DFO released their Salmon Allocation Policy review public consultation paper, seeking input by January 9th. This could be extremely harmful to the future of recreational fishing - everyone should read the consultation paper and respond. The SFI posted helpful materials on the website below - please take time to review and take action. Your access to salmon fishing opportunities could be significantly reduced if some of the proposed amendments are adopted.

 
knows the time to put that lawyer fund to use

probably the most influential and defining process that will happen

Is anyone really qualified in SFI, SFAB qualified for these type of negotiations

Get destroyed when the FN and Commercial bring their lawyers and career negotiators to the table.

not knocking the people, but this really is something different. I certainly would not feel qualified to give my 2 cents at a table.

In fact giving the magnitude of something like this, DFO should be obligated to give the rec sector fair representation
 
Last edited:
knows the time to put that lawyer fund to use

probably the most influential and defining process that will happen

Is anyone really qualified in SFI, SFAB qualified for these type of negotiations

Get destroyed when the FN and Commercial bring their lawyers and career negotiators to the table.

not knocking the people, but this really is something different. I certainly would not feel qualified to give my 2 cents at a table.

In fact giving the magnitude of something like this, DFO should be obligated to give the rec sector fair representation
Great ideal. Halibut did not work out well, might have had a different solution if a lawyer was involved.
 
So many contradicting statements, This is not to discuss numbers or how it should be split, or caps ect,,

Then every single comment is about it, in one way or another


and then this polished turd to finish it off

"For issues where agreement has not been reached, the Minister will be provided with the recommendations accompanied by information that reflects the perspectives of the groups. A summary of Related Issues that DFO has deemed not in scope will also be documented and shared with the Minister for consideration. The First Nations-DFO Committee may also submit a supplementary report on the proposed options to accompany the recommendations package. "

The way i actually interpret this is the current allocation policy could be striped down to vague language and everything will be left to that stinky yearly IFMP.

what a mess, gonna have to take back up lake, fly fishing
 
knows the time to put that lawyer fund to use

probably the most influential and defining process that will happen

Is anyone really qualified in SFI, SFAB qualified for these type of negotiations

Get destroyed when the FN and Commercial bring their lawyers and career negotiators to the table.

not knocking the people, but this really is something different. I certainly would not feel qualified to give my 2 cents at a table.

In fact giving the magnitude of something like this, DFO should be obligated to give the rec sector fair representation
You may want to review the SFAB submission - it was prepared by legal firm Faskin - https://www.fasken.com/en/offices/vancouver

Thanks so much for shooting your SFAB reps in the foot. Not to mention the legal firm providing advice to the SFAB negotiating team. Little wonder people are so reluctant to get involved. Why are we the only community that consistently attacks those who work hard behind the scenes to try to make a difference?

BTW....Here's the submission from the SFAB, prepared by Faskin:

 
You may want to review the SFAB submission - it was prepared by legal firm Faskin - https://www.fasken.com/en/offices/vancouver

Thanks so much for shooting your SFAB reps in the foot. Not to mention the legal firm providing advice to the SFAB negotiating team. Little wonder people are so reluctant to get involved. Why are we the only community that consistently attacks those who work hard behind the scenes to try to make a difference?

BTW....Here's the submission from the SFAB, prepared by Faskin:


Despite spending the last 7 years in the Sfac process I always find out more about what the SFAB is doing from the people posting on this website then I do taking part in any sfac meetings.

Sooo excuseeee meeee
 
Last edited:
So, the new question is, where is the money coming from for the SFAB to hire lawyers?
This was always a no, no for the SFAB to have money?
Bill Otway raised money that was used via the BCWF that was used for lawyers to go to court.
 
You may want to review the SFAB submission - it was prepared by legal firm Faskin - https://www.fasken.com/en/offices/vancouver

Thanks so much for shooting your SFAB reps in the foot. Not to mention the legal firm providing advice to the SFAB negotiating team. Little wonder people are so reluctant to get involved. Why are we the only community that consistently attacks those who work hard behind the scenes to try to make a difference?

BTW....Here's the submission from the SFAB, prepared by Faskin:

Thank you Searun for passing along the information so that the good folks on this forum are updated and informed regarding this very urgent matter. As usual it's all the same haters that have a history of this behavior are the ones that usual try to pile on & behind everyone of them there is a story. So to the rest of the good folks out there that have question on the how or what please ask as we are here to help in anyway we can. If some of you are part of the SFAC and are not see any information or have question you can reach out to your area chairs as they are there to help you and have the most updated information.
 
Last edited:
Dear Sport Fishing Advisory Board Representatives:



It has come to our attention that the email address included in the original letter and consultation document was incorrect.



The correct address is: DFO.SAPReviewBC-PASRevueBC.MPO@dfo-mpo.gc.ca



Both the letter and consultation document have been updated to reflect these changes. All other information in the consultation document remains unchanged.



We apologize for any inconvenience this may have caused and thank you for your understanding.



Regards,

SAP Review BC Secretariat
 

Here's a very good analysis of the current question under active consideration within a pending review of the Salmon Allocation Policy. Proposals from Commercial and FN's will see the majority of recreational salmon re-allocated to the commercial fishery to help make the failing commercial fishery viable again.

Nobody would have dreamed land title would be in jeopardy - nobody would have dreamed it possible your recreational salmon fishery could be given away to commercial fishers as a subsidy - but its a read and active proposal. Learn more, and ACT now before its too late. January 9th is the feedback deadline.
 
Last edited:

Here's another perspective from Watershed watch...some highlights to peak interest - Greg wrote:

Who caught what in 2025 and the respective economic values/impacts of the catch.​

This takes us to who caught what in 2025 and the value of the catch by commercial and recreational fishers.

I think most readers would be surprised to learn that the economic value of the recreational fishery was many, many times that of the commercial salmon fishery. When we think about the B.C. salmon fishery, images of commercial fishermen come to mind. But this image belongs to history books and romantic recollections of our coastal economy. Instead of picturing a commercial gillnet or troller fishing an isolated part of the B.C. coast or moored in a coastal community; picture a charter boat filled with clients, a large lodge, or packs of sport boats fishing outside Victoria, Nanaimo, Prince Rupert, or Vancouver.

Many would also be surprised that the largest commercial harvesters of B.C. salmon – measured in both catch and value – were US fishermen, not Canadian.

In considering the table below, it is important to note that I am comparing apples and oranges. I have used wholesale value for commercial landings and total expenditures for the recreational fishery. These are the best data I could find for both (see links below). But using wholesale values for the commercial fleet understates its economic impacts because it leaves out the economic activity between the processor and the eventual consumer. One could easily double or triple my estimates for the commercial fleet. But this doesn’t detract from the fact that the economic impact of the recreational fishery was many times greater than the commercial fishery in 2025. As an additional check, I compared the GDP of the two sectors. It only confirmed the wide disparity.

Preparing this report led me to begin thinking of the value of discards. Over one million salmon were discarded in 2025. A reasonable estimate would be that 30 to 50% of the discards died before spawning. My analysis grants these dead discards zero value. One could argue that the retention fisheries could not have happened without allowing the discards. Hence, they might be considered a subsidy granted by the people of Canada to the respective fisheries. But surely, if we are going to kill 300,000 to 500,000 salmon, we should attach some value to them, even if it is only to recognize what we, as society, are choosing, or maybe just grant them some respect?
 
Your recreational fishery is proposed to be on the chopping block - all you will have if these proposals advance is crumbs - gone. And for what...subsidization of the failed commercial salmon fishery for Chinook and Coho....this is real - a proposal from commercial and FN's to change the Salmon Allocation Policy to remove recreational priority access for Chinook/coho - everyone who holds a recreational license needs to act now before its too late.

Send your thoughts to DFO in a simple e-mail

The correct address is: DFO.SAPReviewBC-PASRevueBC.MPO@dfo-mpo.gc.ca
 

Here's another perspective from Watershed watch...some highlights to peak interest - Greg wrote:

From the context of his article, I assume what he refers to as ‘discards’ are released fish in the recreational sector. Applying a 100% mortality rate to these fish seems extremely pessimistic to me.
 

Here's another perspective from Watershed watch...some highlights to peak interest - Greg wrote:

The fact he went on the offense means it was written well. They don't like talking about because it doesn't fit the agenda.

Wow Greg thank for sharing your incredible experience with us. Such a clown.

This guy wears so many hats his closet must be full.
 
Your recreational fishery is proposed to be on the chopping block - a proposal from commercial and FN's to change the Salmon Allocation Policy to remove recreational priority access for Chinook/coho
A significant % of the commercial fleet is FN and the non FN owners are rapidly selling out and being reallocated to FN. So what you are saying is there is a proposal to continue with reconcilliation and reallocation to FN using the rec TAC.
 
Yes the commercial fishery is mostly FN now, as per reconciliation goals.It has priority as per undripa so the gov will give them fish even if it is not the best decision for use of the resource.... as its reconciliation..... makes the NDP and Liberals happy.
 
Last edited:
Yes the commercial fishery is mostly FN now, as per reconciliation goals.It has priority as per undripa so the gov will give them fish even if it is not the best decision for use of the resource.... as its reconciliation..... makes the NDP and Liberals happy.
If you think its unlikely this government will re-allocate Recreational salmon to subsidize Commercial fisheries - with high FN's ownership ....just look around and see whats happening here. Your Recreational salmon are currency to satisfy this government's reconciliation agenda.

Lots of examples like.... EBY passing legislation that forces government to apply DRIPPA to all government business as an interpretive lens- and you thought it was just your fee simple land title that was at risk.....

“It affirms the interpretive lens through which B.C. laws must be viewed and the minimum standards against which they should be measured,” wrote the majority of their decision."


Take action - let DFO hear your feedback on the proposed Salmon Allocation Policy -mailto:DFO.SAPReviewBC-PASRevueBC.MPO@dfo-mpo.gc.ca
 
Last edited:
Commercial and FN’s Proposed Amendments to SAP Harmful to Recreational Fishery Interests
  • Remove Recreational priority over the commercial sector for access to Chinook and Coho
  • Re-allocate the majority of Recreational Chinook & Coho to subsidize commercial salmon fishery
  • Establish a “Shares” model employing a fixed cap on Recreational Chinook and Coho allocations – similar to how halibut is managed
  • Once cap is reached all Recreational fisheries will close immediately and without warning
  • Commercial Salmon fishery afforded priority over the Recreational fishery for all 5 species of salmon to subsidize the Commercial fishery to make Commercial fishery viable
  • Your Recreational salmon are proposed for a subsidy to the Commercial fishery where current average household income for Commercial salmon fishers is $8,976
  • Recreational fishers will only get the left over crumbs
  • Opposed using socio-economic data as a metric and data informed approach for assessment of allocation decisions regarding the wisest use of Canada’s Chinook and Coho resource in optimizing benefits to Canada
  • Negotiations and decision-making regarding future proposed “Shares” percentages would take place at local sub-regional Salmon Allocation Boards controlled by local First Nations – and would not take place on a Coastwide level
 
Back
Top