MultiSectoral Prawn Meetings

Way to go OBH, topping an ignorant post with an even more ignorant post.

Comparing trap fishermen to drift netters?

Do you even know the issues at hand?

The commercial fleet is not asking for more of the resource. No one is trying to eliminate prawns as a public resource or eliminate the competition.

Most commercial prawners have no problem with sportsprawning as long as regs are followed. Rec fishers have all the grounds open 12 months a year in most areas. In lower stock seasons upcoming it's 9 months a year in some areas. Go ahead, fish, enjoy.

Commercials are not killing every prawn. The opposite is true. This species seems to thrive when it is fished properly. Commercial traps feed juvenille prawns without disturbing them. 4th year prawns are harvested leaving first and second year prawns an abundance of food. This seems to let each year class thrive. It is much easier to catch a feed of prawns now than it was for your parents or grandparents. What we're doing works.

Commercial fleet was angered when DFO decided on a whim to raise the spawner index in some high use areas. This decision will close subareas around Powell River and Sechelt much earlier than usual displacing boats to the rest of the coast and forcing those areas to close earlier. In my opinion, taking about 10 days off a 60 day season. Can you understand the commercial concern over this?

There is no attempt to end rec prawning. Status quo was working, I thought all users were satisfied until this reallocation by DFO.
 
Cheers Coho17,

I am sorry but the 'status quo' is no longer an option. For commercials to rape the sea for 2 months and, at the end leave an area devoid of prawns so that we are shut down for 3 months is no longer acceptable.

Their abuse of areas where they run over both traps, lift or cut and consider it their right is no longer acceptable.

Their cleaning out the 'prime spots' close to the home ports of recreational fishermen instead of moving a bit further along the coast in their much larger vessels is no longer acceptable.

They are not asking for more but they sure are getting more...to the tune of tons and tons more. How come the recreational quota has not gone from 200 to 1000 per license per day in this time frame? That would be equivilent to what has occured in the commercial sector. Hmmm? They don't have to ask because the way the system is set up it is a given that they get it. Why ask when you don't need as it is given!

Was speaking to DFO today and he was indicating the amount of feedback they are getting has migrated right up the pecking order and the powers that be are taking notice of how upset the recreational fleet has become - over crabs, prawns, salmon and halibut - and the significant voting block they represent as opposed to the insignificant commercial interests. He suggested that the power that be are taking notice and that, if it continues, some changes will have to be made to accomodate our concerns. Seems like now is the time to ask for our interests to be taken into consideration! Finally!

Fishing Guide
www.invictuscharters.com
BC Outdoors Pro Staff
www.fishingvancouverisland.org
 
Cheers Coho17,

I am sorry but the 'status quo' is no longer an option. For commercials to rape the sea for 2 months and, at the end leave an area devoid of prawns so that we are shut down for 3 months is no longer acceptable.

Their abuse of areas where they run over both traps, lift or cut and consider it their right is no longer acceptable.

Their cleaning out the 'prime spots' close to the home ports of recreational fishermen instead of moving a bit further along the coast in their much larger vessels is no longer acceptable.

They are not asking for more but they sure are getting more...to the tune of tons and tons more. How come the recreational quota has not gone from 200 to 1000 per license per day in this time frame? That would be equivilent to what has occured in the commercial sector. Hmmm? They don't have to ask because the way the system is set up it is a given that they get it. Why ask when you don't need as it is given!

Was speaking to DFO today and he was indicating the amount of feedback they are getting has migrated right up the pecking order and the powers that be are taking notice of how upset the recreational fleet has become - over crabs, prawns, salmon and halibut - and the significant voting block they represent as opposed to the insignificant commercial interests. He suggested that the power that be are taking notice and that, if it continues, some changes will have to be made to accomodate our concerns. Seems like now is the time to ask for our interests to be taken into consideration! Finally!

Fishing Guide
www.invictuscharters.com
BC Outdoors Pro Staff
www.fishingvancouverisland.org
 
A simple rebuttal

Cheers Coho17,

I am sorry but the 'status quo' is no longer an option. For commercials to rape the sea for 2 months and, at the end leave an area devoid of prawns so that we are shut down for 3 months is no longer acceptable.

No one is raping the sea. Areas are closed on a healthy spawner index every season. Prawns are quick to regroup to "hot-spots", wait just a couple weeks after commercial season and they'll be back in strong numbers. I don't agree with the 3 month shut down either. In most areas the sport catch is minimal and if a berried reg was enforced would be even less. For those areas with greater efforts, pulse fishing seems like a fair solution

Their abuse of areas where they run over both traps, lift or cut and consider it their right is no longer acceptable.

Commercial prawners don't go out of their way to mess with sporties, there just isn't time. But yes tangles will happen. How can a fisherman with a family to feed and a mortgage not put his gear in the best possible spot each day. The majority do their best to avoid gear or put it back safely. Just like the majority of sportsfishers would not pull a couple traps of a commercial string up for a feed or cut a scotty off.

Their cleaning out the 'prime spots' close to the home ports of recreational fishermen instead of moving a bit further along the coast in their much larger vessels is no longer acceptable.

There are more prawns in the gulf than anywhere else on the coast. In particulaur the grounds near towns and ports are often the best grounds. Flat, fertile, irrigated land above sea leads to human settlement, flat, fertile, irrigated land below seas leads to prawn settlement. Due to DFO licensing restrictions, not all boats are as big and safe as they should be.


They are not asking for more but they sure are getting more...to the tune of tons and tons more. How come the recreational quota has not gone from 200 to 1000 per license per day in this time frame? That would be equivilent to what has occured in the commercial sector. Hmmm? They don't have to ask because the way the system is set up it is a given that they get it. Why ask when you don't need as it is given!

09 was more, '10 looks to be far less, that is fishing. There isn't enough science on prawns to determine an accurate TAC. How many prawns does a rec fisher need? 200 per day equals 4 - 5000 lbs per year. Seems like a lot when a half million dollar licence will allow you to catch 20 - 30 000 lbs per year.

Was speaking to DFO today and he was indicating the amount of feedback they are getting has migrated right up the pecking order and the powers that be are taking notice of how upset the recreational fleet has become - over crabs, prawns, salmon and halibut - and the significant voting block they represent as opposed to the insignificant commercial interests. He suggested that the power that be are taking notice and that, if it continues, some changes will have to be made to accomodate our concerns. Seems like now is the time to ask for our interests to be taken into consideration! Finally!

News flash: DFO will tell people what they want to hear to keep them happy, and sometimes even to get them off the phone. I'm sure commercial licence holders making payments on a boat or licence don't believe their interests are insignifigant. I hope all interests are taken into consideration.


There is a lot to understand before sending half-cocked letters everywhere
 
A simple rebuttal

Cheers Coho17,

I am sorry but the 'status quo' is no longer an option. For commercials to rape the sea for 2 months and, at the end leave an area devoid of prawns so that we are shut down for 3 months is no longer acceptable.

No one is raping the sea. Areas are closed on a healthy spawner index every season. Prawns are quick to regroup to "hot-spots", wait just a couple weeks after commercial season and they'll be back in strong numbers. I don't agree with the 3 month shut down either. In most areas the sport catch is minimal and if a berried reg was enforced would be even less. For those areas with greater efforts, pulse fishing seems like a fair solution

Their abuse of areas where they run over both traps, lift or cut and consider it their right is no longer acceptable.

Commercial prawners don't go out of their way to mess with sporties, there just isn't time. But yes tangles will happen. How can a fisherman with a family to feed and a mortgage not put his gear in the best possible spot each day. The majority do their best to avoid gear or put it back safely. Just like the majority of sportsfishers would not pull a couple traps of a commercial string up for a feed or cut a scotty off.

Their cleaning out the 'prime spots' close to the home ports of recreational fishermen instead of moving a bit further along the coast in their much larger vessels is no longer acceptable.

There are more prawns in the gulf than anywhere else on the coast. In particulaur the grounds near towns and ports are often the best grounds. Flat, fertile, irrigated land above sea leads to human settlement, flat, fertile, irrigated land below seas leads to prawn settlement. Due to DFO licensing restrictions, not all boats are as big and safe as they should be.


They are not asking for more but they sure are getting more...to the tune of tons and tons more. How come the recreational quota has not gone from 200 to 1000 per license per day in this time frame? That would be equivilent to what has occured in the commercial sector. Hmmm? They don't have to ask because the way the system is set up it is a given that they get it. Why ask when you don't need as it is given!

09 was more, '10 looks to be far less, that is fishing. There isn't enough science on prawns to determine an accurate TAC. How many prawns does a rec fisher need? 200 per day equals 4 - 5000 lbs per year. Seems like a lot when a half million dollar licence will allow you to catch 20 - 30 000 lbs per year.

Was speaking to DFO today and he was indicating the amount of feedback they are getting has migrated right up the pecking order and the powers that be are taking notice of how upset the recreational fleet has become - over crabs, prawns, salmon and halibut - and the significant voting block they represent as opposed to the insignificant commercial interests. He suggested that the power that be are taking notice and that, if it continues, some changes will have to be made to accomodate our concerns. Seems like now is the time to ask for our interests to be taken into consideration! Finally!

News flash: DFO will tell people what they want to hear to keep them happy, and sometimes even to get them off the phone. I'm sure commercial licence holders making payments on a boat or licence don't believe their interests are insignifigant. I hope all interests are taken into consideration.


There is a lot to understand before sending half-cocked letters everywhere
 
It is always good to educate ones self when issues that affects us are discussed.

Link provided below is only a draft and may be changed
http://www.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/consul...rev-trap/docs/ifmp-pgip/ifmp-pgip-2010-11.pdf


One of many “take away” for me from the above DFO document
Commercial prawn fishermen major customer (90 to 95%) is the Japanese Market.
Less than 300 Commercial prawn fishermen take more than 90% of the available prawn

It simply amazes me that a common property owned by all Canadians is being vacuumed up for the economic benefit of so few only to be served up in a seafood restaurant in Japan.

Links for more reading
http://www.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/consultation/fisheries-peche/shell-inv/crev-trap/index-eng.htm

The commercial prawn fishermen need to remember this advice from their leaders.

quote:Fishing plans for the commercial fishery must consider impacts on all stakeholders. These groups include First Nations, recreational fishers, coastal communities, and the general public. The Oceans Act passed last year demonstrates the public concern for marine harvesters and the will of the people to protect the ocean environment. The people of Canada own the resource, and the privilege to harvest remains at the discretion of the Minister of the Department of Fisheries and Oceans. Therefore, commercial fishers ultimately rely on the support of the public to hold the privilege for commercial harvest.

THE FUTURE MANAGEMENT
OPTIONS SUBCOMMITTEE
CO-CHAIRS
T. ORR
K. MIKKELSEN
APRIL 1999
Click to expand...
 
It is always good to educate ones self when issues that affects us are discussed.

Link provided below is only a draft and may be changed
http://www.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/consul...rev-trap/docs/ifmp-pgip/ifmp-pgip-2010-11.pdf


One of many “take away” for me from the above DFO document
Commercial prawn fishermen major customer (90 to 95%) is the Japanese Market.
Less than 300 Commercial prawn fishermen take more than 90% of the available prawn

It simply amazes me that a common property owned by all Canadians is being vacuumed up for the economic benefit of so few only to be served up in a seafood restaurant in Japan.

Links for more reading
http://www.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/consultation/fisheries-peche/shell-inv/crev-trap/index-eng.htm

The commercial prawn fishermen need to remember this advice from their leaders.

quote:Fishing plans for the commercial fishery must consider impacts on all stakeholders. These groups include First Nations, recreational fishers, coastal communities, and the general public. The Oceans Act passed last year demonstrates the public concern for marine harvesters and the will of the people to protect the ocean environment. The people of Canada own the resource, and the privilege to harvest remains at the discretion of the Minister of the Department of Fisheries and Oceans. Therefore, commercial fishers ultimately rely on the support of the public to hold the privilege for commercial harvest.

THE FUTURE MANAGEMENT
OPTIONS SUBCOMMITTEE
CO-CHAIRS
T. ORR
K. MIKKELSEN
APRIL 1999
Click to expand...
 
Cheers Unknown,

I am responding to the actions at the Multi-Sectoral Prawn Meetings as well as the occurences on the water over the past few years. The reports from the MSPM were directly from our SFAB Represenative. He did not indicate the problems originated with DFO but with the commercial sector. They did mention that DFO did not stand up for the recreational angler. To arbritraily label everything DFO's fault is simply inaccurate.

You are accurate in your comment that I have only mentioned two sectors in my thread. I naturally assumed everyone knew my view that the prawns that are sold/traded/bartered by First Nations should come under the commercial quota while those for personal use should come under recreational use.

I humbly disagree that 50%/50% offers no remedy. I hold that it offers the greatest solution and takes DFO away from making further interventions that simply do not work.

I do remember who is directing and controlling the Candian common property - US! DFO is a political entity that takes its orders from political appointees that work for US. I agree that we must combat DFO's actions/inactions and that - sadly - seems to mean political intervention. It is interesting to see that due to the focus on the Halibut Allocation by the recreational sector, many politicians are beginning to understand the voting strength that the vast recreational fishery offers - either in support or in defeating their election efforts. A good read is the latest SFI Newsletter.

I again disagree that I am posting and pointing fingers in the wrong direction as DFO is NOT harvesting 6,000,000 pounds of prawns a year and asking for more. DFO is not sitting at the table and casting insults at our elected representatives. DFO is not ... well ... I could continue but I think you get my point. The problem rests in the commercial sector but I also agree that DFO holds blame.

I was under the impression that I offered some solutions. Sorry you don't agree. I stand back to hear your informed efforts to solve this particuliar situation.



Fishing Guide
www.invictuscharters.com
BC Outdoors Pro Staff
www.fishingvancouverisland.org
 
Cheers Unknown,

I am responding to the actions at the Multi-Sectoral Prawn Meetings as well as the occurences on the water over the past few years. The reports from the MSPM were directly from our SFAB Represenative. He did not indicate the problems originated with DFO but with the commercial sector. They did mention that DFO did not stand up for the recreational angler. To arbritraily label everything DFO's fault is simply inaccurate.

You are accurate in your comment that I have only mentioned two sectors in my thread. I naturally assumed everyone knew my view that the prawns that are sold/traded/bartered by First Nations should come under the commercial quota while those for personal use should come under recreational use.

I humbly disagree that 50%/50% offers no remedy. I hold that it offers the greatest solution and takes DFO away from making further interventions that simply do not work.

I do remember who is directing and controlling the Candian common property - US! DFO is a political entity that takes its orders from political appointees that work for US. I agree that we must combat DFO's actions/inactions and that - sadly - seems to mean political intervention. It is interesting to see that due to the focus on the Halibut Allocation by the recreational sector, many politicians are beginning to understand the voting strength that the vast recreational fishery offers - either in support or in defeating their election efforts. A good read is the latest SFI Newsletter.

I again disagree that I am posting and pointing fingers in the wrong direction as DFO is NOT harvesting 6,000,000 pounds of prawns a year and asking for more. DFO is not sitting at the table and casting insults at our elected representatives. DFO is not ... well ... I could continue but I think you get my point. The problem rests in the commercial sector but I also agree that DFO holds blame.

I was under the impression that I offered some solutions. Sorry you don't agree. I stand back to hear your informed efforts to solve this particuliar situation.



Fishing Guide
www.invictuscharters.com
BC Outdoors Pro Staff
www.fishingvancouverisland.org
 
Dear Minister,

I have just posted the following on www.sportsfishingbc.com. The mood of many recreational prawn fishers I speak with is in line with my comments.

Excuse me for chiming in here folks; I'm just your average rec prawner and I don't know much about the politics of commercial allotments and season lenths. But I do know that the commercial prawn traps were in the water in the vicinity of Schooner Cove a number of weeks longer last year than in previous years. I observed that they eventually had to resort to dropping their traps in waters they would not normally fish, indicating to me that they had fished-out their prime target areas.

I also know that prawn fishing, or should I say catching? was nonexistent for me and everyone I know who sets rec nets next to the islands off Schooner after that commercial season closed. It would be difficult for me to express in acceptable terms how much this pi##es me off and it still does. However, about a year ago I posted a piece on this board that foretold of just such a lobby of unlimited access by commercial prawn fishermen, and by golly, it would seem that they have swung it.

As has been voiced by others here, it is my right to fish and it is my right to have a share of the resource and by golly I will, by hook or by crook! Complaining to the goofs in Ottawa may not be enough to get attention.
 
Dear Minister,

I have just posted the following on www.sportsfishingbc.com. The mood of many recreational prawn fishers I speak with is in line with my comments.

Excuse me for chiming in here folks; I'm just your average rec prawner and I don't know much about the politics of commercial allotments and season lenths. But I do know that the commercial prawn traps were in the water in the vicinity of Schooner Cove a number of weeks longer last year than in previous years. I observed that they eventually had to resort to dropping their traps in waters they would not normally fish, indicating to me that they had fished-out their prime target areas.

I also know that prawn fishing, or should I say catching? was nonexistent for me and everyone I know who sets rec nets next to the islands off Schooner after that commercial season closed. It would be difficult for me to express in acceptable terms how much this pi##es me off and it still does. However, about a year ago I posted a piece on this board that foretold of just such a lobby of unlimited access by commercial prawn fishermen, and by golly, it would seem that they have swung it.

As has been voiced by others here, it is my right to fish and it is my right to have a share of the resource and by golly I will, by hook or by crook! Complaining to the goofs in Ottawa may not be enough to get attention.
 
Cheers Coho17,


Thank you for your reasoned response.

I don't believe you grasp my point. The increased "harvest" by the commercial is in effect raping the sea. Why should we have to 'wait' for the sea to regroup? A fair and equitable sharing would mean that we neither have to wait nor do we have to suffer through 3 months closure. I am for the closure if the numbers are down for natural reasons but, a significantly larger commercial harvest does not constitute natural closure. Nor should we be forced to endure a pulse fishery when commercials are catching over 3,000 tons of product. A 'fair' solution is to fairly share the resource - 50/50 - not simply allow one to continue 'business as usual' while the other is faced with significant reductions.

I would disagree that commercials don't go out of their way to 'mess with sporties' as I have personally watched - and pointed out to charter guests - as prawners have deliberately steered towards set traps. This is not hersesay but first hand knowledge. A fisherman -even with a family/mortgage should avoid conflict - using his various skills to ensure that conflict does not occur. Sports fisherman cannot practice the same type of fishing as we simply cannot compete with the much larger sets of their commercial counterparts. I would like to see any commercial fisherman lose his entire license FOREVER should they be involved in any conflict. That would go a long way towards where and how commercials set their gear. I would also point out that what is the difference between guides who wish to place their gear to satisfy their guests - also with mortgages, families etc. - than commercial fisherman. What gives commercials the right of way. Nothing in my books.

That there are more prwns in the gulf than anywhere else on the coast really does not change my perspective. All areas within 30 miles of a city of 35,000 or more should be a total reserve for recreational fishermen. If DFO licensiing restrictions do not allow your boats to be big enough or as safe as they should be then you should lobby for larger or safer boats. Certainly your families - as well as DFO/WCB - should be comfortable that you are in safe boats.

As to how many prawns a person needs is dependend on a lot of variables. How many in the family, do they enjoy sea food, do they enjoy cooking, do they have other options.... One can see a lot of variables but I don't think that your math makes much sense. You state "200 per day equals 4 - 5000 lbs per year". If you were being serious you would recognize that the average fisherman is out perhaps 7-10 times a year and NOT every day. So your average fisherman is harvesting 1500-2000 prawns per year and no where close to 400 lbs let alone 4-5,000 lbs. Again, I support a sharing of the resource 50/50 and, with the reduction in the commercial harvest, an increase in the recreational limit from 200 upwards to 600/day to allow the occasional recreational to harvest in fewer trips. Seems fair to me that if a commercial fleet can harvest 6,000,000 pounds then an increase in the daily rate is in order.

Thank you for the News Flash that DFO will tell people anything. That must change as they should be held accountable as they work for commercials and recreational taxpayers who pay their salaries. I agree that commercial license holders making payments on a boat believe their interests are signifcant. However, recreational fisherman also make payments on houses, utilities, boat payments, university not to mention a lot more taxes (in total) to support DFO as well as this fishery also have equally significant interests. Nothing special about the financial obligations of commercial operators. Many guides/recreational fishermen experience these same pressures.

If all interestes were taken into consideration then the resource would be split 50/50. I would also remind you that my 'understanding' of the issues is at least as informed as yours and, until you walk in my guide boots, it is difficult for me to comprehend how you can label my right to express my opinion as 'half cocked'.

I defend you right to express your opinion and expect the same from you.

I thank you for your consideration.










Fishing Guide
www.invictuscharters.com
BC Outdoors Pro Staff
www.fishingvancouverisland.org
 
Cheers Coho17,


Thank you for your reasoned response.

I don't believe you grasp my point. The increased "harvest" by the commercial is in effect raping the sea. Why should we have to 'wait' for the sea to regroup? A fair and equitable sharing would mean that we neither have to wait nor do we have to suffer through 3 months closure. I am for the closure if the numbers are down for natural reasons but, a significantly larger commercial harvest does not constitute natural closure. Nor should we be forced to endure a pulse fishery when commercials are catching over 3,000 tons of product. A 'fair' solution is to fairly share the resource - 50/50 - not simply allow one to continue 'business as usual' while the other is faced with significant reductions.

I would disagree that commercials don't go out of their way to 'mess with sporties' as I have personally watched - and pointed out to charter guests - as prawners have deliberately steered towards set traps. This is not hersesay but first hand knowledge. A fisherman -even with a family/mortgage should avoid conflict - using his various skills to ensure that conflict does not occur. Sports fisherman cannot practice the same type of fishing as we simply cannot compete with the much larger sets of their commercial counterparts. I would like to see any commercial fisherman lose his entire license FOREVER should they be involved in any conflict. That would go a long way towards where and how commercials set their gear. I would also point out that what is the difference between guides who wish to place their gear to satisfy their guests - also with mortgages, families etc. - than commercial fisherman. What gives commercials the right of way. Nothing in my books.

That there are more prwns in the gulf than anywhere else on the coast really does not change my perspective. All areas within 30 miles of a city of 35,000 or more should be a total reserve for recreational fishermen. If DFO licensiing restrictions do not allow your boats to be big enough or as safe as they should be then you should lobby for larger or safer boats. Certainly your families - as well as DFO/WCB - should be comfortable that you are in safe boats.

As to how many prawns a person needs is dependend on a lot of variables. How many in the family, do they enjoy sea food, do they enjoy cooking, do they have other options.... One can see a lot of variables but I don't think that your math makes much sense. You state "200 per day equals 4 - 5000 lbs per year". If you were being serious you would recognize that the average fisherman is out perhaps 7-10 times a year and NOT every day. So your average fisherman is harvesting 1500-2000 prawns per year and no where close to 400 lbs let alone 4-5,000 lbs. Again, I support a sharing of the resource 50/50 and, with the reduction in the commercial harvest, an increase in the recreational limit from 200 upwards to 600/day to allow the occasional recreational to harvest in fewer trips. Seems fair to me that if a commercial fleet can harvest 6,000,000 pounds then an increase in the daily rate is in order.

Thank you for the News Flash that DFO will tell people anything. That must change as they should be held accountable as they work for commercials and recreational taxpayers who pay their salaries. I agree that commercial license holders making payments on a boat believe their interests are signifcant. However, recreational fisherman also make payments on houses, utilities, boat payments, university not to mention a lot more taxes (in total) to support DFO as well as this fishery also have equally significant interests. Nothing special about the financial obligations of commercial operators. Many guides/recreational fishermen experience these same pressures.

If all interestes were taken into consideration then the resource would be split 50/50. I would also remind you that my 'understanding' of the issues is at least as informed as yours and, until you walk in my guide boots, it is difficult for me to comprehend how you can label my right to express my opinion as 'half cocked'.

I defend you right to express your opinion and expect the same from you.

I thank you for your consideration.










Fishing Guide
www.invictuscharters.com
BC Outdoors Pro Staff
www.fishingvancouverisland.org
 
The three month closure you are "suffering" through is during the most critical breeding time for prawns. Maybe it's not such a bad thing. I know that when the commercial fleet stopped fishing during this period and disallowed retention of berried prawns stocks started to rise. Seems like an obvious conservation method.

Also the 09 prawn season was closed well above DFO set spawner index. Although you may feel it was raped spawner index proves otherwise. The reason it may look as though it was raped is that the '10 class may be weak for natural reasons, nothing to do with overfishing in '09.

Do you realy support shortening the commercial season so that recreational fishers can catch berried prawns during the foulest weather months of the year? Why not wait till April and have first crack at replenished, non-berried stocks with no threat of commercial gear on the water.
 
The three month closure you are "suffering" through is during the most critical breeding time for prawns. Maybe it's not such a bad thing. I know that when the commercial fleet stopped fishing during this period and disallowed retention of berried prawns stocks started to rise. Seems like an obvious conservation method.

Also the 09 prawn season was closed well above DFO set spawner index. Although you may feel it was raped spawner index proves otherwise. The reason it may look as though it was raped is that the '10 class may be weak for natural reasons, nothing to do with overfishing in '09.

Do you realy support shortening the commercial season so that recreational fishers can catch berried prawns during the foulest weather months of the year? Why not wait till April and have first crack at replenished, non-berried stocks with no threat of commercial gear on the water.
 
Cheers Coho17,


The three month closure has been a significant obstacle for many of our locals who do not have the vessels to pound out to the open areas. It is also a concern as in the winter we have inclement weather and I have witnessed too many vessels heading to open areas that their vessels were not meant to travel.

I recognize that the three month closure is during the breeding time for prawns. Howver, the question I continue to ask is if the commercial had caught only 3,000 tons of prawns, instead of 3,500 tons of prawns last summer, would this fishery be open? If that is the case then the closure is NOT conservation but allocation. I honestly believe that this is the case and one of the major points of my call for 50/50.

I can appreciate and even accept that a certain class - in this case 2010 class - are simply naturally weak but had DFO adjusted for perceived weakness and curtailed the exceptionally large commercial catch, I would have less problems than I do to allow the huge haul and then hold the recreational fishermen holding the bag. I can even expect that they will occasionally simply lose a year to bad judgement as, since I am not perfect, one cannot hold others to a higher standard.

I do support shortening the commercial season so that the commercial season harvests 50% of the TAC. However, I do NOT support recreational fishermen catching berried prawns at all. I believe the regulations should be changed so that the same regulations that require commercials to immediately release all berried prawns are extended to include all recreational fishermen too. No exceptions regardless of weather or time of the year.

If the commercials were relugated to areas 30 miles outside of any city with more than 35,000 I would not care when they fished. However, since they are on the water near those cities, then I like the shortened season to keep the conflict between the two factions to a minimum. I am not an agressive person and the conflict on the water bothers me greatly. The aggressive nature of the commercials as well as their tactics leave me quite sad and that is most disconcerting as I really enjoy this lifestyle.

Sincerely...

Fishing Guide
www.invictuscharters.com
BC Outdoors Pro Staff
www.fishingvancouverisland.org
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Baxter
Crabs in prawn trap
Replies
13
Views
3K
happy hooker
happy hooker
SpringVelocity
Prawning Closed Again for 3 month Window
Replies
0
Views
2K
SpringVelocity
SpringVelocity
High Time
Alberni Sockeye Upgrade
Replies
0
Views
797
High Time
High Time
Tinchucker
Fishing boundaries
Replies
0
Views
348
Tinchucker
Tinchucker
Whole in the Water
  • Sticky
IMPORTANT Please Sign - Fed Govt. Petition to Stop Excessive Salmon Regs & Closures
Replies
34
Views
2K
jackfish
jackfish
Back
Top