Print

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

[Stealth]

This is always an interesting time of year to watch the forums. To floss or not to floss is the great debate. As many may, or may not know, I have been kicking around the fishing and guiding industry for the better part or 12 years or so. I very seldom post on forums but do lurk and enjoy others commentaries.  Personally, I will use any legal method that I deem appropriate to catch fish for my clients and myself, PERIOD! and I make no apologies nor will I debate this any further. What I do see every year is DFO causing fear-mongering and division among Fraser River anglers.  This Stuart run sockeye issue pops up every season. I think that if we are a legitimate threat to these fish than we should absolutely not fish for them or any other species that is at risk for that matter. But are we a risk to Stuart Sockeye??? I have always said no. 

There are several sites that post DFO actual Sockeye catch and escapement numbers and these come straight from DFO. See for yourself, Decide for your self. All I can say is why is DFO wasting so much time on us anglers monitoring Bottom flossers when the only term that can possibly come to my mind with regards to our impact is
INSIGNIFICANT!!

http://www.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/fraserriver/recreational/creelsurveyPDFs/2005creel/creel05FRSummerDesign.htm

http://www.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/fraserriver/Escapement/2005SUMMERPRELIMINARIES.htm


In 2005 the Stuart run escapement was 293,144 our bi-catch was 3,601 with a 10% mortality rate we killed 306 fish from July 1 to July 31.   Even if every fish that we caught died it would still be Insignificant.  Check out past seasons and do the math. In my opinion this is not the conservation issue that DFO would have us think that it is. If they honestly think that we cause a serious risk to Stuart Sockeye than they clearly are not looking at there own data.

I know that this will not stop the cries to stop flossing from the anti-flossers and its not meant to. I just thought it was interesting that so many would take DFO at their word when their track record in the past would suggest that maybe what the say is not always based on fact but possibly more so on politics.

This post is simply put up to show facts as I have interpreted them, not as a pro or con flossing thread so come to your own conclusions and enjoy this great sport and resource that we have hear.

Just for the record these are my personal thoughts and do not reflect the opinions of any business or organization that I may be affiliated with.

Fish on!
Steve Kaye

[goodangler]

Thanks Steve, Great post

[al-COHO-lic]

i am not a flosser but i am not an anti-flosser either. great post with some interesting facts

[mikethesportsfisher]

Way to put it Steve!

Mike <")))))><

[Sterling C]

What ever happened to every angler being a stuart of the resource and we each do our part, regardless of what others do.

[fishinmansam]

believe me boys this year will not be a small year in sockeye and i have the records of recent years kept in my book to prove it. this year is a Adams year and[4th cycle] this year is going to be HUGE just watch...... keep you lines tight buddies!

[Sterling C]

believe me boys this year will not be a small year in sockeye and i have the records of recent years kept in my book to prove it. this year is a Adams year and[4th cycle] this year is going to be HUGE just watch...... keep you lines tight buddies!

This coming from the guy who didn't know what a bb setup was. Who are you?

[chris gadsden]

In all respect to Steve's post the numbers mentioned there is for Late Stuarts.

 The sockeye of concern is the Early Stuart sockeye stocks that are starting their migration now in the Fraser River. These fish are made up of 32 different stocks that spawn in the Stuart River system and run from the end of June to late July. These endangered stocks are the ones we have been asked to not fish for in a method that could impact them. I am not sure of the escapement of these fish the last couple of years but it was no where near the total in Steve's post. For example information from several FOC web sites said that in 2002 only 187,000  Early Stuart sockeye made it past Mission and then only 9,244 of them were counted on the spawning grounds for a total of only 5% of the sockeye that passed Mission. I know some will question the counting methods at Mission.

As well the parasite Parvicapsula that attacks the sockeye kidney has resulted for thousands if not millions of some runs of sockeye and make fish management difficult.

Lots of talk is circulating that the Fraser River rec fishery could close if compliance is not followed and I just received a e-mail that a stepped up creel survey will be out on the river evaluating the unselective fishery going on. At least were have been warned and if the river is closed we will know what caused it.

[fishinmansam]

biffchan thats because i dont waste my time bb'ing.

[Sterling C]

biffchan thats because i dont waste my time bb'ing.

Then how do you keep track of the numbers, unless of course you like fishing for big trout 

[fishinmansam]

albion test nets, look at recent years. adams run happens every 4 year. 1994, 1998, 2002, 2006!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1

[The_Other_Gman]

Most die-hard anti-flossers are so due to the issue of fishing ethics far more than conservation so the minimal impact in terms of conservation card isn't going to make any impact in their minds.  Conservation concerns become a much more real issue on smaller systems where the methods carry-over and can have a much greater effect on smaller runs.  The advent of flossing has also greatly increased MEAT fisherman mentality which in my view has severely effected fishing etiquette on our rivers.

I've never been completely sold on the ethics argument, I think it is an argument reserved for purists of the sport.  If you want to be a purist that's good and fine but you have no right to pry into other peoples lives and subject them to your standard of ethics as I am 110% sure you do not allow others to do the same to you.  In fact, with the constant second-guessing and looking for ulterior motives I have seen by a number of hardcore ethical anti-flossers I have been pretty turned-off the argument.  Preaching ethics to someone who is not interested in your sermon is no different than force-feeding someone religious beliefs they have no interest in.  I don't mean to seem like I'm picking on any religious folk that may be reading but calling someone a "beak" at the slightest possibility of ethical impropriety in your eyes is just as bad as those self-righteous religious people who will go out of their way to tell you that you are a bad person who is going to hell because you do not live up to their vision of good and righteous person.

For me flossing is a conservation and etiquette concern due to issues noted above.  For those that do choose employ such methods, please be aware you may be effecting at-risk stocks and stop or change your methods if you are.  Also, please remember our rivers are the lifeblood of these fish we all cherish, our rivers are also for many an escape from the daily grind where they go to relax and enjoy not only fishing but the river and it's surroundings.  Be aware of your actions, you may be having fun but you may be doing it at other peoples expense regardless of what method you are employing.  Let's keep the gridlock on the roads and off the rivers.

[nosey]

I sure hope somebody's paying attention to what Chris said, if they close the river down it's all over but the whining. I won't call anyone a beak but in my opinion allowing for 10% mortality in the fish you C&R has got to be an unacceptable thing, that's killing fish just for the fun of it or if you're a guide for the money I guess. Unfortunately sockeye have the smallest energy reserve of any of the Pacific salmon and 10% is probably a conservative estimate, how many of you out there think it's a good idea to kill one out of every ten fish you release and just waste it? So what if it looks healthy when you release it how does it handle that extra stress of being caught and released once or twice by the time it's going past Prince George. The DFO has asked us as sportsmen to voluntarily avoid the sockeye as a conservation method if we don't adhere to this we'll look like the deer hunters in the Bambi movie.

[Stealth]

The total Sockeye numbers vary from year to year. The numbers I quoted earlier come from their site
(http://www.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/fraserriver/Escapement/2005SUMMERPRELIMINARIES.htm)
 Interpreting them can be confusing that’s for sure. However, The catch numbers paint a pretty clear picture. Fraser anglers caught and released about 3600 Stuart Sockeye last season. With a generally accepted mortality rate of 10% that is between 300 to 400 dead Sockeye that we are responsible for over a months time. You could double that number and it still would not have any real impact on this run! All angling has a mortality rate associated with it. Regardless of the run size this is an insignificant impact on this fishery by sports anglers.  Personally I feel that this Stuart Sockeye issue is not about conservation but is more about politics, you know business as usual!

I am on the water regularly at this time of year and I catch very few Sockeye and see very few Sockeye caught.

Fish on!
Steve Kaye

[The_Other_Gman]

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