Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Fish Assassin]

Yes you can. It closes from Apr/May to Oct/Nov. (Not sure of the months.)

[Rodney]

If pollutant (artificial and natural) level exceeds the safe numbers set out by the authorities, then the waters in question will be closed for angling. Keep in mind that safe levels are defined differently in each country. What's safe in one country is unsafe in another.

[Reservoir Dog]

i have always wondered if it is polluted or not in the Cates area... Anybody know...


Also was wondering if you can crab from the dock at cates ... anyone know the rules.. I know they close it for part of the year

As a general rule, crabs, prawns, shrimp will not inhabit polluted water. If an area is devoid of them, then it's best not to even be fishing there.

[THE_ROE_SLINGER]

Lucky read your PM!!!!

[jettabambino]

not entirely true... I have been told by a reliable source that this isnt always the case.  In the past beaches have been closed to swimmers but not to anglers as this is harder to regulate.  One example he used is that they cant go around to different boats asking them not to fish there.....

If pollutant (artificial and natural) level exceeds the safe numbers set out by the authorities, then the waters in question will be closed for angling. Keep in mind that safe levels are defined differently in each country. What's safe in one country is unsafe in another.

[FISHIN MAGICIAN]

i have always wondered if it is polluted or not in the Cates area... Anybody know...


Also was wondering if you can crab from the dock at cates ... anyone know the rules.. I know they close it for part of the year

As a general rule, crabs, prawns, shrimp will not inhabit polluted water. If an area is devoid of them, then it's best not to even be fishing there.

You're nuts if you think that is true....CRABS, PRAWNS, and SHRIMP all inhabit polluted water....all you have to do is check out Howe Sound as one of the screaming examples. Just cuz something's able to live somewhere doesn't mean it's safe to eat!

By the way...it's well known that many resident Killer Whales have highly toxic levels of lead and suffer adverse health affects as a result of eating chinook salmon......

etc etc...the examples are NUMEROUS!

[Rodney]

not entirely true... I have been told by a reliable source that this isnt always the case.  In the past beaches have been closed to swimmers but not to anglers as this is harder to regulate.  One example he used is that they cant go around to different boats asking them not to fish there.....

Different concerns here. Swimming closures are usually due to concerns on urban sewage release, biological pollution, ie. nitrogen level that may cause problems with skins and eyes when exposed. Closures of angling of sportfish and shellfish are due to the detection of alarming heavy metal concentration (mercury, lead).

If there is indeed a concern on the safety of seafood consumption from a particular region, DFO has the mandate to implement a closure, which is done in the form of fishery notices (faxed to post offices, tacklestore, boat launches, information kiosks, emailed to websites, etc). Failure to implement a closure would lead to endangering safety of those who consume the harvested fish or shellfish, so I highly doubt DFO would want to be liable to such damages simply because it is "harder to regulate".

As a general rule, crabs, prawns, shrimp will not inhabit polluted water. If an area is devoid of them, then it's best not to even be fishing there.

Not entirely true as FM has pointed out. If the concentration of mercury or lead reaches a level that cannot be tolerated by inhabitants, then of course nothing would be alive in the water. If the water is polluted with a certain amount of mercury or lead, which would eventually end up in the food chain through filter feeders first, then the next trophic level, etc. Bioaccumulation is the concern in consumption of shellfish or fish that are contaminated with heavy metals. Although one crab swims happily with a small amount of mercury, once you ingest the crab, that amount of mercury ends up in your system. Consuming 9 more crabs that live in the same area, you would have 10 times more mercury in your system than the amount found in one of those crabs. This eventually leads to mercury poisoning. These cases were common back in the 70s and 80s. So, a swimming crab does not necessarily mean a clean crab.

[jettabambino]

Actually Rod,   and i hate to call you on this but i have been told by a very reliable source that for the most part..... What is harmful for humans to swim in can be, and in most cases is, harmful to eating fish inhabitted in this area....not to mention i am sure that the flavor of the fish may be jepordized..

This information was from a microbiologist major that is also a health inspector and specializes in enviromental health..........

not entirely true... I have been told by a reliable source that this isnt always the case.  In the past beaches have been closed to swimmers but not to anglers as this is harder to regulate.  One example he used is that they cant go around to different boats asking them not to fish there.....

Different concerns here. Swimming closures are usually due to concerns on urban sewage release, biological pollution, ie. nitrogen level that may cause problems with skins and eyes when exposed. Closures of angling of sportfish and shellfish are due to the detection of alarming heavy metal concentration (mercury, lead).

If there is indeed a concern on the safety of seafood consumption from a particular region, DFO has the mandate to implement a closure, which is done in the form of fishery notices (faxed to post offices, tacklestore, boat launches, information kiosks, emailed to websites, etc). Failure to implement a closure would lead to endangering safety of those who consume the harvested fish or shellfish, so I highly doubt DFO would want to be liable to such damages simply because it is "harder to regulate".

As a general rule, crabs, prawns, shrimp will not inhabit polluted water. If an area is devoid of them, then it's best not to even be fishing there.

Not entirely true as FM has pointed out. If the concentration of mercury or lead reaches a level that cannot be tolerated by inhabitants, then of course nothing would be alive in the water. If the water is polluted with a certain amount of mercury or lead, which would eventually end up in the food chain through filter feeders first, then the next trophic level, etc. Bioaccumulation is the concern in consumption of shellfish or fish that are contaminated with heavy metals. Although one crab swims happily with a small amount of mercury, once you ingest the crab, that amount of mercury ends up in your system. Consuming 9 more crabs that live in the same area, you would have 10 times more mercury in your system than the amount found in one of those crabs. This eventually leads to mercury poisoning. These cases were common back in the 70s and 80s. So, a swimming crab does not necessarily mean a clean crab.

[FISHIN MAGICIAN]

Hey Jetta Bambino...Going to have to reel you in on this one...Do you fish the river? if you do, then the fish you harvest (if you do keep) swam through all kinds of pollutants etc to get to where you caught it (the Vedder), and the almighty Fraser and it's tributaries for being the worlds "most productive" salmon river is plenty polluted. They don't advise swimming in the Fraser. Yet that doesn't stop you from fishing there and eating fish you caught from there does it? You wouldn't see me swimming in there...and they say...NO SWIMMING..yet we're all eating fish from there.

It's SPECIES specific, and depends on the situation at hand and the species in question. 

At any rate, if anything you're agreeing with Rod more than disagreeing... and I'm siding with Rod as that's the information I have from Oceanography courses @ UBC, researching for papers etc.., spending time with John Ford,  trips to the Vancouver Aquarium etc etc...

At any rate, are you going to go for a swim in the Fraser? The fish are there, they're healthy, and they taste good too...therefore it must be safe to swim there too! Be my guest buddy...go swimming.

Actually Rod,   and i hate to call you on this but i have been told by a very reliable source that for the most part..... What is harmful for humans to swim in can be, and in most cases is, harmful to eating fish inhabitted in this area....not to mention i am sure that the flavor of the fish may be jepordized..

This information was from a microbiologist major that is also a health inspector and specializes in enviromental health..........

not entirely true... I have been told by a reliable source that this isnt always the case.  In the past beaches have been closed to swimmers but not to anglers as this is harder to regulate.  One example he used is that they cant go around to different boats asking them not to fish there.....

Different concerns here. Swimming closures are usually due to concerns on urban sewage release, biological pollution, ie. nitrogen level that may cause problems with skins and eyes when exposed. Closures of angling of sportfish and shellfish are due to the detection of alarming heavy metal concentration (mercury, lead).

If there is indeed a concern on the safety of seafood consumption from a particular region, DFO has the mandate to implement a closure, which is done in the form of fishery notices (faxed to post offices, tacklestore, boat launches, information kiosks, emailed to websites, etc). Failure to implement a closure would lead to endangering safety of those who consume the harvested fish or shellfish, so I highly doubt DFO would want to be liable to such damages simply because it is "harder to regulate".

As a general rule, crabs, prawns, shrimp will not inhabit polluted water. If an area is devoid of them, then it's best not to even be fishing there.

Not entirely true as FM has pointed out. If the concentration of mercury or lead reaches a level that cannot be tolerated by inhabitants, then of course nothing would be alive in the water. If the water is polluted with a certain amount of mercury or lead, which would eventually end up in the food chain through filter feeders first, then the next trophic level, etc. Bioaccumulation is the concern in consumption of shellfish or fish that are contaminated with heavy metals. Although one crab swims happily with a small amount of mercury, once you ingest the crab, that amount of mercury ends up in your system. Consuming 9 more crabs that live in the same area, you would have 10 times more mercury in your system than the amount found in one of those crabs. This eventually leads to mercury poisoning. These cases were common back in the 70s and 80s. So, a swimming crab does not necessarily mean a clean crab.

[Big Steel]

Blah Blah Blah!  What does it all mean!!!   Yes I would and have eaten fish out of the fraser, would I swim in it, not a chance!!  I know that doesn't really sound right but whatever, everyone else is doing it!!

[FISHIN MAGICIAN]

Blah Blah Blah!  What does it all mean!!!   Yes I would and have eaten fish out of the fraser, would I swim in it, not a chance!!  I know that doesn't really sound right but whatever, everyone else is doing it!!

  I'll be on the shore taking pictures of Jetta Bambino swimming the mighty Fraser while the members of Fishing with Rod stand on the banks fishing...then I'll post a full report that night in photo documentary format with captions stating how Jetta Bambino advocates swimming in the water that you catch fish...... 

Just kidding Jetta Bambino..it's all in good fun! 

[Rodney]

Actually Rod,   and i hate to call you on this but i have been told by a very reliable source that for the most part..... What is harmful for humans to swim in can be, and in most cases is, harmful to eating fish inhabitted in this area....not to mention i am sure that the flavor of the fish may be jepordized..

This information was from a microbiologist major that is also a health inspector and specializes in enviromental health..........

Without knowing the source etc I can't really discuss on the information that you heard. My information is based on my undergraduate work in marine pollution, eosc microbiology, various earth and ocean science and fish biology courses, in addition, in case the information is outdated, I receive updates on a weekly basis from DFO staff in Area 28, 29 and Fraser River on the Do's and Don'ts as I sit on the SFAC. As FM said, species dependent is how it is managed. Intake of pollutant is different in pelagic and benthic species.

Big Steel, how do those northern pikeminnow taste? Spicy? The last time we ate some, was back in the mid 90's. Not bad, just a bit boney.

[jettabambino]

i do realize its all fun and games but you totally missed the point....

contaminants in the Cates park effect resident flounder and crab far more than the fraser affects salmon.......Think about that for a minute.. Salmon migrate and only spend a small percentage of a life in the fraser.... Flounders however spend most of there lifes in a area....Crabs are scavengers...

Hey Magician.... might want to stop playing with your bunny in that hat and asses the situation before you make comments...


oh yah and by the way i am just kidding...

[FISHIN MAGICIAN]

Now that friendly debate and discussion has taken it's course on this topic...and we've flogged yet another FWR thread to the death, I suggest we get back to the real subject in this area..FISHING REPORTS...unless swimming reports are now part of fishing reports on FWR?!  

I vote we get back to FISHING REPORTS!

Fish On! 

Actually Rod,   and i hate to call you on this but i have been told by a very reliable source that for the most part..... What is harmful for humans to swim in can be, and in most cases is, harmful to eating fish inhabitted in this area....not to mention i am sure that the flavor of the fish may be jepordized..

This information was from a microbiologist major that is also a health inspector and specializes in enviromental health..........

Without knowing the source etc I can't really discuss on the information that you heard. My information is based on my undergraduate work in marine pollution, eosc microbiology, various earth and ocean science and fish biology courses, in addition, in case the information is outdated, I receive updates on a weekly basis from DFO staff in Area 28, 29 and Fraser River on the Do's and Don'ts as I sit on the SFAC. As FM said, species dependent is how it is managed. Intake of pollutant is different in pelagic and benthic species.

Big Steel, how do those northern pikeminnow taste? Spicy? The last time we ate some, was back in the mid 90's. Not bad, just a bit boney.

[Big Steel]

Big Steel, how do those northern pikeminnow taste? Spicy? The last time we ate some, was back in the mid 90's. Not bad, just a bit boney.

What are you trying to say Rodney?  Are you insinuating that Pikeminnows are the only fish that I can catch??