Fishing with Rod Discussion Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Author Topic: Stuart Sockeye at Risk?  (Read 11967 times)

chris gadsden

  • Old Timer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13952
Re: Stuart Sockeye at Risk?
« Reply #15 on: June 29, 2006, 11:16:49 PM »

For the Early Stuart I think this is the link you should be looking at Steve: http://www.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/fraserriver/Escapement/2005EARLYSTUARTPRELIMINARIES.htm  :)
Thanks for posting this, as once again we are talking about the Early Stuarts, the one run that we need every sockeye possible back to their natal streams.

After this run is throught the system even though I personally donot agree with the flossing way of bringing a fish a shore the recreational anglers has no impact on the strong sockeye stocks. Maybe during the short sockeye openings that are given to the recreational anglers I donot think they take the 50,000 pieces that FOC says they do.

nosey

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 429
Re: Stuart Sockeye at Risk?
« Reply #16 on: June 30, 2006, 05:26:27 AM »

In response to Steve Kaye saying he sees very few caught this time of year, it's because they ARE endangered don't you get it not catching fish while you are bottom bouncing means they aren't there,they haven't gone"off the bite". when a run is endangered everyfish counts.
Logged

RA40

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 126
  • STS Guiding Service
    • STS Guiding Service
Re: Stuart Sockeye at Risk?
« Reply #17 on: June 30, 2006, 07:05:07 AM »


Steve, I think the problem not only lies with low numbers of early stewart but also the law and how it is interpreted by our local native bands. Section 35 of the constitution says that conservation is first, natives is second, then  commercial and recreation can begin. Only after the first two are met are we allocated a # of fish.

DFO does not give the local native bands an opening for early stewart as these fish are protected and have conservation concerns. Anglers are out bottom bouncing and catch & release a few sockeye, using your 10% mortality ( i think that is low). Those fish are now allocated to the sport fishing community as a mortality, whether it's 10 fish or 200, it's still an allocation. To the natives, that means the sport fishing community has been given an allocation before them.

The Cheam Band has said very clearly, if an allocation is given to the sport fishing community then the nets go in the water. So although I agree with the low impact on BB early season, the repercussions are much greater.

Although I do enjoy a bit of BB during sockeye season, I don't think it is a proper way to fish for Chinook or any other species. There are many other options for fishing the Fraser. Bar fishing, trolling, casting spoons and spinners and even float fishing at creek mouths. Anglers just need to be a bit more patient with these methods.

I think Chris will agree, for many years we have been going to meetings, arguing for selective fishing by commercial and natives groups and asking for more angling opportunities, yet we as recreational anglers are now fishing with a non-selective method.  It's been well documented that bi-catch has caused much of the decline in fish stocks around the world. This is no different, just lower numbers.

I know this issue is a hot one and know matter what view I have, I will be hammered from one side or another. But for me, BB ( the way it is done on the Fraser) is a method used for sockeye and sockeye only. Anglers and guides on the Fraser need to make a choice, my choice is to not BB or promote it unless we are given a green light to retain sockeye.



Tight lines and have a great season.
Vic

PS. By the way the bar fishing has been excellent this past week, best day was 8 fish.


chris gadsden

  • Old Timer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13952
Re: Stuart Sockeye at Risk?
« Reply #18 on: June 30, 2006, 07:16:09 AM »

Excellent post Vic, thanks for posting it. Just heading to the bar, bar fishing that is ;D right now.

Hope to see you on the river.

Stealth

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 146
    • Steve Kaye Sportfishing
Re: Stuart Sockeye at Risk?
« Reply #19 on: June 30, 2006, 09:30:58 AM »


Hello Vic / Chris,
 
I am well aware about the concerns with first nations, so clearly this is politics as usual. In past seasons they have had “Chinook nets” in the water during this time so we will see what happens this season, also lets not forget the many test fisheries that also take there toll on Stuart Sockeye.

“The other Gman” posted this link http://www.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/fraserriver/Escapement/2005EARLYSTUARTPRELIMINARIES.htm

Good info for sure but still close to 100,000 fish on the spawning beds so obviously the few fish that we catch are not at issue.   As I said it’s all about politics.

I made this post because every season it is made to sound like Bottom flossers will be the death of Stuart sockeye and this could not be farther from the truth.  Our impact is less than 1% no mater what numbers you look at.

BTW I am certainly not anti bar fishing. I actually prefer it whenever possible and have already had great success barfishing this season. 

This issue is not going away anytime soon I just wanted to educate people to what our impact actually is.

Unfortunately even though we clearly have the smallest impact we are the most visible user group on the river and will continue to be a pawn in the Fraser River politics game.

Have a great season everyone!
Steve Kaye






BwiBwi

  • Old Timer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1959
Re: Stuart Sockeye at Risk?
« Reply #20 on: June 30, 2006, 10:28:32 AM »

Ya sure blame on rec' fishery. (regardless of fishing method)

So far there has been no report of sockeye been caught by Rec' fishery.  However, the so called chinook nets set by the FN has already captured and kept 32.

http://www.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/fraserriver/firstnations/HTMLs/SockeyeKeptCatch.html
Logged

The_Other_Gman

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 54
Re: Stuart Sockeye at Risk?
« Reply #21 on: June 30, 2006, 04:50:43 PM »

The entire "it's not us it's them"  is the same arguement used by everyone with a stake in fish stocks.  Regardless of any actual legitimate merit of it, it's an endless circle that just points the finger elsewhere and will do nothing to help protect endangered runs.  Can we not find more constructive methods than finger pointing?
Logged

Old Black Dog

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 347
  • I Volunteer!
Re: Stuart Sockeye at Risk?
« Reply #22 on: June 30, 2006, 05:00:42 PM »

Fishery Notice - Fisheries and Oceans Canada

Subject: FN0481-Salmon: Fraser River Sockeye Update - June 30 - Areas 11 to 29

The Fraser River Panel met today, June 30 to review assessment data on Fraser
River sockeye salmon and complete the management plan for 2006 Fraser River
sockeye salmon fisheries in Panel Area waters.

The total return of Fraser River sockeye for 2006 is a forecast of 17,357,000.
Early Stuart and Early Summer-run sockeye are forecast to return at abundances
of 84,000 fish, and 1,303,000 fish, respectively. Summer-run sockeye stocks are
forecast to return at an abundance of 7,158,000 fish with most of the
production expected to come from the Quesnel and Chilko stock groups (4,613,000
and 1,689,000 fish, respectively). This is the dominant cycle year for Late
Shuswap sockeye (which includes the Adams River) and Late-run sockeye are
forecast to return at an abundance of 8,812,000 fish. This strong forecast
return is due in part to the low in-river mortality that they experienced and
the large spawning escapement of some Late-run stocks in the brood year. Late
Shuswap sockeye are expected to comprise a high fraction of the Late-run return
at 7,725,000; while Weaver and Birkenhead sockeye are forecast to return at
abundances of 411,000 and 433,000 fish, respectively. Cultus sockeye are
forecast to return at a level of 5,800 fish.

There is high uncertainty in the forecast of the total run size of Fraser
sockeye this season since most (71%) of the production is dependent on the
return of just two stock groups; Quesnel and Late Shuswap. The forecast for
Quesnel sockeye is particularly uncertain, in part because the fry from the
2002 brood year had a much smaller body size than average, which may result in
low marine survival.

The problem of early entry of Late-run sockeye stocks has continued every year
since 1995 and has resulted in significant in-river mortality during this
period. Management actions taken to compensate for this mortality have
substantially reduced harvest opportunities on these Late-run stocks as well as
co-migrating Summer-run sockeye. The 2006 management plan assumes that this
abnormal upstream migratory behavior and associated in-river mortality will
continue. However, based on the relative strength of the forecast Late-run
return in 2006, a flexible approach to Late-run sockeye management wherein
their escapement target will vary with in-season estimates of abundance and
upstream migration behavior. Additional management actions will be taken to
protect Cultus and Sakinaw sockeye.

Fishery openings in 2006 will be adjusted as required based on in-season
estimates of abundance and timing of sockeye, and on the corresponding spawning
escapement needs for each stock group. Conservation concerns for other species
and stocks will be taken into account throughout the 2006 management season.

The present forecast of the proportion of Fraser River sockeye salmon that will
divert through Johnstone Strait in 2006 is 52%. The forecast 50% cumulative
migration timing of Early Stuart and Chilko (and Summer-run sockeye in
aggregate) sockeye through Area 20 are July 3 and August 9, respectively.

During the last two weeks of May, there were six days of record or near-record
high temperatures through portions of the Fraser watershed, which resulted in
snow-melt rates that were well above normal. Several of the snow-water indexes
in the Fraser River watershed to June 1 are now far below average: the upper
Fraser and Nechako were 30% and 61% of normal, respectively, while the middle
and lower Fraser were 53% and 84% of normal, respectively. Snow-water indices
in the north and south Thompson watersheds were 81% and 86% of normal,
respectively. Fraser River discharge levels and water temperatures will be
monitored closely this summer to determine specific management actions that are
required during the in-river migratory period to help achieve spawning
escapement goals for Early Stuart, Early Summer-run and Summer-run sockeye.
River entry timing for Late-run stocks will also be monitored, and management
adjustments will be adopted as necessary to increase the likelihood that
desired numbers of Late-run fish will reach the spawning grounds.

Sockeye have begun entering the marine and Fraser River assessment areas,
however it is too early to provide an update on the strength of the Early
Stuart sockeye migration. Migration conditions for sockeye entering the Fraser
River are presently satisfactory. The discharge of the Fraser River at Hope on
June 29 was 4,650 cms, which is approximately 30% lower than normal for this
date. The water temperature of the Fraser River at Qualark Creek on June 29 was
16.9 degrees C, which is over 2 degrees C warmer than average for this date.

The next scheduled update will be Friday p.m., July 7 following the next Fraser
River Panel meeting.
Logged

BwiBwi

  • Old Timer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1959
Re: Stuart Sockeye at Risk?
« Reply #23 on: June 30, 2006, 06:04:08 PM »

If DFO does not give special treatment to certain group and ask another to reframe, then there would be less conflict.
Logged

dnibbles

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 281
Re: Stuart Sockeye at Risk?
« Reply #24 on: July 03, 2006, 10:47:05 PM »


Hello Vic / Chris,
 
I am well aware about the concerns with first nations, so clearly this is politics as usual. In past seasons they have had “Chinook nets” in the water during this time so we will see what happens this season, also lets not forget the many test fisheries that also take there toll on Stuart Sockeye.

“The other Gman” posted this link http://www.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/fraserriver/Escapement/2005EARLYSTUARTPRELIMINARIES.htm

Good info for sure but still close to 100,000 fish on the spawning beds so obviously the few fish that we catch are not at issue.   As I said it’s all about politics.

I made this post because every season it is made to sound like Bottom flossers will be the death of Stuart sockeye and this could not be farther from the truth.  Our impact is less than 1% no mater what numbers you look at.

BTW I am certainly not anti bar fishing. I actually prefer it whenever possible and have already had great success barfishing this season. 

This issue is not going away anytime soon I just wanted to educate people to what our impact actually is.

Unfortunately even though we clearly have the smallest impact we are the most visible user group on the river and will continue to be a pawn in the Fraser River politics game.

Have a great season everyone!
Steve Kaye








Steve,
If you want to educate other anglers on what their impacts may be, take some time to educate yourself first. Yes, last year there was an escapement of just under 100,000 Early Stuart sockeye. The year before there was UNDER 10,000. Is 300 dead sockeye ok then? In 2002 ( the brood for this year), there werre only 24,000 fish. What if the declining returns that have been occuring up there continue this year?  But hey, as long as all the new guides can make some money, why not?  A C&R'd Early Stuart fish is a dead fish, are far as I'm concerned.
Yes, anglers are most definately not the most pressing conservation concern when it comes to sockeye, but it sounds childish to me to refuse to do your part just because others aren't doing their part, in your opinion. Oh, and also, even though there is no record of sockeye being caught by this year's creel curveys, how many guys that release one may possibly 'forget' to mention it to the DFO employee asking them about it? I'm betting more than a few.
« Last Edit: July 03, 2006, 10:51:55 PM by HungLikeABullTrout »
Logged

BwiBwi

  • Old Timer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1959
Re: Stuart Sockeye at Risk?
« Reply #25 on: July 03, 2006, 11:35:46 PM »

Does anyone know what is the mortality rate for release by-catch in drift net?
Logged

Stealth

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 146
    • Steve Kaye Sportfishing
Re: Stuart Sockeye at Risk?
« Reply #26 on: July 04, 2006, 09:34:30 AM »

Keep in mind that as the sockeye run numbers go up and down so do our by-catch numbers, on a year with 10,000 spawners our mortality numbers would be much less than 300.  One number affects the other. Fact is a 1% or less impact any other fishery would not normally even remotely be considered as a problem by DFO, it’s just that this one is so politically charged. I bet they (DFO) sit back and watch the forums at this time of year and laugh at all the infighting.    ENJOY!!!

As I said before this is my opinion take it or leave it, just come to your own conclusion based on facts not propaganda.

I’m done here, enjoy the season!

Steve Kaye

chris gadsden

  • Old Timer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13952
Re: Stuart Sockeye at Risk?
« Reply #27 on: July 04, 2006, 07:01:47 PM »

I would not call it so much infighting other than posters on this subject are just expressing their views and it is up to readers to decide how they wish to fish. I know I try to approach it this way, by education but maybe sometime I fail.

While out on the river this weekend on Grassy, Wellington, Queens, Mountain and Maple Leaf Bar ;D ;D ;D I observed except for Grassy, the majority of anglers were following FOC's request to fish selectively.

The good part as well was the bar rods were doing very well, with excellent catches of chinooks. ;D ;D ;D

I hope this trend continues on both fronts.

marshal

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 139
  • Hook Chucker
Re: Stuart Sockeye at Risk?
« Reply #28 on: July 06, 2006, 07:07:58 PM »

I agree with Steve K.

If you look at the stats (and after being on the river a number of times... apply a little common sense), its pretty obvious that recreational fishers have the LEAST impact on Fraser salmon of the said groups, when they are all operating.
Logged

Steelhawk

  • Old Timer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1384
  • Fish In Peace !
Re: Stuart Sockeye at Risk?
« Reply #29 on: July 08, 2006, 11:23:01 AM »

If everyone is so scared that your action will damage the sockeye stock even by C&R, and even one dead sockeye is more than your guilt conscience can take, then even bar fishing has problem. Why not just hang up the rod and join PETA and feel forever peaceful about your cause. When DFO allow racist based fishing going on & take massive number of 'endangered' stock even as a bycatch, why hammer your other fisherman brothers on the head like they are a sore thumb to you when they just exercise their rights to fish just as much as you. They just don't have a boat to access other areas like you. If all BBers buy boats & turn into bar fishers, you bar fishers will then find no room to cast on your cuurent spots, or your private island even at first light. Each bar fisher requires much more room then BBer to fish.

No report of any sockeye hookups by BB fishers at all for a whole day of fishing in my last trip. So, you want to have all BBers stay home, you enjoy your private fishing, and FN killing endangered stock legally left and right. Sorry, I champion the fishing rights of all fishermen unless DFO close down all users groups for conservation concern. If they close down the Frase for sporties but not FN, don't blame your other fellow fishers for conservation concern (for there is none), blame yourself for sensitizing the issue to the point that DFO finds it convenient to shut us down. I have the suspicsion that the selective clause is placed there in the reg due to the relenless lobbying of the bar fishing fraternity to DFO to shut down BBers.

If your objection is ethics, then say so. We can then debate on that issue. But it has been debated to death. It is better just to do a search and you will get all the points debated in the past. Have peace in your fishing and don't try to force everyone to fish like you.
Logged