Print

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

[alwaysfishn]

The most common excuse I keep hearing is that DFO says it is legal ...kind of similiar to people yacking on their cellphones while flying down the highway. Just because the government says it is right dont make it right.

You are right that just because the government says it is right.....   doesn't neccessarily make it right. It's also admirable to see individuals such as yourself put themselves out there to defend what they believe is right.

You must know that individuals that wish to bb will likely continue to bb. Your shouting only divides the sports community when we should be united.  For instance, I believe you could be more effective in convincing members in the fishing community of your points, if you stop referring to them as "members of the flossing/snagging crowd".

By the way how did you choose the name "wacker"?   

[RA40]

Rodney, just because HLABT works on the Fraser does not make him an expert on hook release mortaility. To say that every fish caught by sport anglers is a dead fish is far fetched and mis leading. I'm try to be polite because I feel stronger words could be used at this point.

Erni creys credibility is on a scale of 1 to 10 is 0 in my books. Wasn't he the one who was charged with running a massive poaching ring where reefer trucks were seized on a washington Native Rserve? Correct me if I am wrong. Yes the media and some on this forum actually responded to his crys and supported his plea for a closure on sport fishing.

The low sockeye counts are a great excuse to for those anglers who are against BB to start up the anit bb crap once again. Maybe we should be holding those fishery mangers accountable who refuse to regulate the Fraser as many have asked for. How many times have we as a community asked DFO managers to regulate the Fraser, define regulations, and make it so that we are clear on what is legal and ethical. Instead, they do nothing but make way off predictions then the rest begine their anit-bb campaine.

The Fraser is very close to being completely closed to fishing. For me and many others who fish the Fraser, this type of managment is unexceptable. There are other methods used to catch salmon on the Fraser and if needed, selective fishing should be considered long before closures. Regulations need to be put in place so that during times like these, regulations can be adjusted to suite stock predictions.

Below is a copy of my media reslease

The current disappointing returns for Sockeye Salmon are a serious concern for all BC Anglers.  Vic Carrao, President of the Fraser Valley Angling Guides Association (FVAGA) states “These poor results are more than a concern.  In a year where the Guiding Industry has been hard hit by a Global recession the very livelihood of our members is on the line.”  Nonetheless Carrao say that the FVAGA is committed to ensuring a sustainable fishery in the Fraser Valley and completely understands and supports the need to close the Sockeye fishery until return numbers improve.  However the recent calls to take all Sport Fishers off the Fraser River and close all fisheries is an overreaction that cannot be justified. 

Recreational Fishers catch only a small percentage of the Sockeye when the fishery is open.  According to statistics reported by the Pacific Salmon Commission in 2004, Recreational fishers caught 1.4% of the Sockeye run compared to 21.8% for First Nations and 25.7% for Commercial Fishers.  While the Sport Fishers impact on the fish resource is minimal their impact on the BC economy is significant. Approximately 400,000 licensed anglers spend $400 million on freshwater fishing in B.C. each year employing approximately 3500 people according to a 2007 BC Government Study. 

The FVAGA position is that the DFO needs to ignore panicked calls based on speculation and suspicion and focus on science based conservation.  They believe closing the Fraser to all fishing is a knee jerk reaction that does not address the real issue.  Dr. Carl Walters of UBC in a presentation at this years “State of the Salmon” Conference stated “Declines have not been reversed by closing the fisheries (overfishing was not the problem).”  In addition since the Sockeye fishery is closed any Sockeye inadvertently caught will be released and carry on to spawn; recent studies have shown that released salmon suffer a mortality of less than 2%.   The FVAGA believe that shutting down the river to all fishing is not only unnecessary from a conservation perspective it will decimate a local tourist economy at a time that it is barely holding its head above water. 

For further info Contact
Vic Carrao
President, Fraser Valley Angling Guides Association
sts@guidebc.com

[Rodney]

Rodney, just because HLABT works on the Fraser does not make him an expert on hook release mortaility. To say that every fish caught by sport anglers is a dead fish is far fetched and mis leading. I'm try to be polite because I feel stronger words could be used at this point.

Vic, my comment was mainly directed to the response to HLABT, which we are seeing too often on the web. It doesn't necessarily suggest that I agree with HLABT. I was just pointing out that his opinion needs to be respected when responding, a communication style that most participants in this discussion no longer wish to adopt.

I've slowly distanced myself from these discussions because most of the time it's simply rhetorical bantering based on personal agenda instead of constructive criticisms based on factual information. I'm sure that you also feel the same. I don't desire to do the research and work behind the scene only to have the credential damaged by annonymous individuals who can make a misinformed remark with nothing to lose.

[canso]

FYI, HLABT's work field is on Fraser River sockeye so he has extensive knowledge on the species. Whether you agree or disagree with his opinion, it is unnecessary to insult it. A better approach would be to express why you disagree with him.

if this is his field,
then lets see the data that can suport such a statement.
"any sport caught sockeye is as good as dead"
that is ridiculous, no mater how you read it.


you cannot convince me that a 5min intervention with a spring fisherman is the reason the fish will die.

[RA40]

understood but stating  HLABT has extensive knowledge leads one to believe that what he says is true. I can say that is is far from it and if he has any proof that what he says is true, I would be interested in reading it. I call BS.

[tsawytscha]

well, I can see a lot of "maybe", "we could", "something should be done", but no constructive points to really take an action to change the BC fishery management .  Guys, you are right that everybody has its own small and personal agenda.  One doesn't like flossing, another doesn't like FN guys, other wants to have his salmon barbecue on the weekend and a guide wants to have his clients entertained....

We have to be united in order to save our wild salmon and the Fraser, regardless whether we are rec fishermen, FN , commercial guides....we have to make our Government gouys accountable  beacuse what they have ben doing and showing off 'till now is simply mismanagement and you don't have
to have any studies conducted in order to see the results of their terrible mismanagement.  Period. 

We cannot do anythign abotu the water temperature, but we can:

*

[chris gadsden]

well, I can see a lot of "maybe", "we could", "something should be done", but no constructive points to really take an action to change the BC fishery management .  Guys, you are right that everybody has its own small and personal agenda.  One doesn't like flossing, another doesn't like FN guys, other wants to have his salmon barbecue on the weekend and a guide wants to have his clients entertained....

We have to be united in order to save our wild salmon and the Fraser, regardless whether we are rec fishermen, FN , commercial guides....we have to make our Government gouys accountable  beacuse what they have ben doing and showing off 'till now is simply mismanagement and you don't have
to have any studies conducted in order to see the results of their terrible mismanagement.  Period. 

We cannot do anythign abotu the water temperature, but we can:

*

The SDA under Bill Otway and others tried this for many many years, working very hard for the rec angler. They had some success but angler apathy and lack of monetary support finally saw the SDA fade away.

[Steelhawk]

If you worry about sporties' impact on sockeye stock, then drop your rod, whether it is bf rod or bb rod. There are other better things to do than the 'violent' sport of fishing. Both groups off the water. No need to santify your method as safe if you care so much about saving each sockeye.  A bf caught sockeye is sure more dead than a bb one. No doubt about that.    For stock conservation, I am more concern if DFO will let FN fish the heck they want for the so called food & ceremony purpose weeks after weeks like last year. That is where you should focus your attention if you want to save the sockeye stock. Go chain yourself to some FN boats.  Blowing steam at BBers as if they are going to ruin the sockeye stock is an overkill. There is a hidden agenda to belittle bbers. Just another bbing-hate attempt to me. Those of us who were at the bb bars know very few sockeyes hooked so far, and unlike springs, bb caught sockeye don't fight you much until they are very near shore. They just come in as you reel in your line, and the fight is only very brief before you release them. They probably dispense more energy running away from seals than the brief fight. That may explain the high survival rate of the study. I can't say the same with a bf caught sockeyes, as they have to fight pulling the weight of a heavy lead slab. Try strap lead on your waist and swim or stay afloat and you know what I mean.

[RA40]

Nuggy, the study that took place last year has scientific base or it would not have been used. Just about every mortality study done is done this way with pen held fish. When a group does not like the out come of a study they start attacking the study and asking for more study's. Unfortunately there is no money available to conduct a radip tagged study so this is all we have.

I am not for or against bb, I can run our business just fine without it, but this type of managment should be unexceptable to all anglers regardless of gear choice.

Dr. Carl Walters of UBC in a presentation at this years “State of the Salmon” Conference stated “Declines have not been reversed by closing the fisheries (overfishing was not the problem).” 

Yet we still sit here and think that closing the fishery is going to save fish. Don't buy into Erni "Poacher" Crey's call for the sport fishery to close, all he wants is us off the river so they can continue to run drift nets 24/7. unreported.

tight lines

[Rodney]

the study that took place last year has scientific base or it would not have been used. Just about every mortality study done is done this way with pen held fish. When a group does not like the out come of a study they start attacking the study and asking for more study's.

Vic, I read this paragraph and had to walk away from the computer for a bit, washed some dishes while thinking about if I should reply to this or not. Look what you've done to my Saturday morning. On one hand I really do not want to get into the technical aspect of this issue too in depth because I suspect the number of people who read and participate in these threads is limited. The same people come back year after year and almost make me think that they have turned this into a hobby on its own. On the other hand, I feel that I have an obligation to ensure that people are not ill-informed if I am to host a public resource on the internet. I'm replying because I have high expectations from a number of forum participants and will expend the time to reply when needed.

What alarms me is that science has become so mainstream that it is now a religion on its own. This has had positive impacts, such as the green movements in recent years, but it takes away a lot of integrity that science once had. It has become a powerful ammunition that advocates (note, not suggesting you) use to sway public's opinion. No disrespect to anyone, but swaying the opinion of individuals without a scientific background is easy and it has a cascade effect that's almost impossible to stop once those ideas are planted in people's mind.

One should realize that scientific papers are not conclusive. In the scientific community, studies undergo peer reviews and critiques. This is done not because others dislike the results obtained in the study, but it is done to determine if the methodology used to obtain those results and the statistical interpretation of those results are done correctly. While there are the usual participants who are against the sockeye sportfishery dismissing the study completely, there are also individuals who have a scientific background making some constructive criticisms on the study. Again, in an internet discussion forum where most do not reveal their identity and background, it is difficult to decide whose words should be taken seriously at first. On the other hand, outspoken advocates of the sockeye sportfishery, who mostly have not looked at the study in depth, dangle the result of this study in front of you before you have a chance to blink.

A mortality study of caught and released sockeye salmon is needed because as long as the Fraser River is opened for sportfishing, incidental catches during sockeye salmon closures will occur. Quantitative facts allow fishery managers to make sound decisions instead of half guessing on what might be happening in the water. Some suggest that the second part of the study should not be conducted due to warm water temperature, my response would be to look at the large picture. Data obtained from caught and released sockeye salmon at a higher water temperature than last year's lead to comparative studies of caught and released sockeye mortality at various water temperature. This information would be beneficial for managers who need to make conservation measures when discharged water temperature rises.

Results from last year's study were pretty uniform to what is already known. Fish that are hooked externally survive better than fish that are hooked internally because it minimizes the chance of servere loss of blood. This is why in some parts of the world, treble hooks are used rather than single hooks as a management measure in catch and release fisheries. Managers and anglers rather see externally injured fish rather than dead fish. This is also why some have started pegging their trout bead a few inches above the hook so the fish is hooked outside the jawline rather than in its oral cavity. It may contradict the traditional definition of fishing, but from the practical aspect, it serves a better purpose in catch and release fisheries.

That being said, these results cannnot be viewed as definitive proof that the number of sockeye salmon dying from catch and release is minimal. The results presented are simply demonstrating temporary mortality, due to the fact that these fish were held for 24 hours in a channel that has a similar discharge velocity of the Fraser River around Chilliwack. Scientific studies create models of the real scenario, they do not paint the whole picture. Factors such as predation of released fish during its recuperation, recapturing by other sportfishermen and nets, mortality in higher stream velocity, spawning performance are not being considered. This is not suggesting that study designers intend to disregard these and flaw the results. Budget constraints and the inability to create these scenarios prevent them to factor these in. Nevertheless, they are significant factors that can skew what we are actually trying to find, which is how many caught and released sockeye salmon can arrive at their natal streams and spawn successfully.

This is why the study is planned for five years and it is premature to use one year's result to conclusively suggest the sockeye salmon that anglers catch and release are perfectly fine. This type of false sense of security is not good for the fish, and not good for anyone.

By this point of the post, most might suggest that I am against the sockeye sportfishery. At the same time, others might suggest I am for the sockeye fishery based on my view on the difference between external and internal injuries of caught and released fish. For or against, if only it is that simple, that black and white, there wouldn't be these long winded debates at all.

If there is one message to take away from this long post, it is that anglers should have some reservation on the unnecessary impact of the fish that they need to release. Do I need to be by-catching a certain number of sockeye salmon when exclusively targeting chinook salmon? Would the sockeye salmon that I release make it to their natal streams and spawn successfully? Maybe, maybe not, one would never know, but remember that these doubts may have significant impacts on the resource when it can be avoided. Would barfishing, which has a much smaller possibility of intercepting sockeye salmon, be a good alternative for targeting chinook salmon?

This isn't an attempt to persuade seasoned bottom bouncers who apparently can avoid incidental catches of sockeye salmon. Those who do so regularly have already made up their mind and will continue to do what they believe it is right. That's fine, it's legal by definition, so those who think otherwise do not have the authority to stop you. Information such as this is intended for entry-level anglers who are unfamiliar with the biological background of this fishery. On the other hand, it is unnecessary for seasoned barfishermen to resort to name labelling as a way to promote their interest. What an insult to education, as some like to justify their behaviour.

[Rodney]

There are constant complaints that harvest of sockeye salmon by First Nations continues while it is prohibited for recreational fishermen. We live in a country where certain laws may seem unfair to you, but that's the way it is and should be respected. Finfish management in BC involves meeting conservation requirement first, followed by allocated quota for First Nations, then recreational fishermen and commercial fishermen. Contrary to what the media has sensationalized this already hot topic, sockeye salmon are not going extinct. There simply are only enough fish to meet spawning escapement and some First Nations' harvest. Catching and releasing sockeye salmon because First Nations are harvesting them is a terrible justification of one's action. In the end, the angling community is only shooting itself in the foot by not respecting these constitutional rights and giving more ammunition to individuals such as Crey.

What Crey has done in the media is unacceptable and it creates a stir among the angling community as he intended. It further divides two main user groups and escalates problems on the river. Then again, how does one dispute his claims when there are in fact sockeye salmon caught and released by recreational fishermen. The problem with this community is that it lacks a leader who is well aware of all the issues and has the ability to represent the whole angling community in the public's eyes.

Recreational fishermen should also have more understanding on First Nations' fishery. While we condemn the generalization Crey has made, the same type of generalization of First Nations is widespread on this forum whenever illegal netting is brought up. It is important to realize that not all First Nation fishers are fishing illegally. In fact, only a small percentage do not play by the rules, just like a small percentage of recreational fishermen. The difference is the amount of impacts caused by these violators in the two sectors. One poaches with nets, while the other poaches with a hook. People should also realize that since 2004/2005, the frequency of illegal netting has dropped significantly due to more enforcement by DFO and better cooperation between many bands and DFO. Believe it or not, they also want to see more harvestable fish in future years. Raving about illegal netting on the internet has no benefit to anyone, it in fact hinders the dialogue process between sportfishing representatives and First Nations. Want to make a difference? Join a sportfishing group that forms a collective voice with representatives who can express your concerns.

It is baffling to see so much negative attention focused on one species simply because of its commercial value while so much more of BC's freshwater fisheries are being omitted. It almost seems as anglers prefer to dig ourselves in a hole of pessimism. Ths year's summer Fraser River chinook salmon run, particularly the Shuswap watershed stock (expected run size is 150k) is stronger than average so quality angling opportunities are available despite of the closure of one species. Judging by how well the coho salmon fishing is in the sea, this fall's coho salmon fishery in the Fraser Valley should also be better than average. Coming back from a country where one stream's annual salmon quota for recreational fishermen is 120 fish, I'd say fishing is pretty good here.

There goes two hours of my Saturday morning, I'm going to catch some peamouth chub now.

[Steelhawk]

Dude, you are just having a conversion with yourself in your posts. Please try and quote who you are talking about as you just seem to be blowing smoke for the most part.

Cheers
Nuggy

Dude, I don't have to quote anybody. I know what I am talking in regards to what sockeye fight is all about. Sporties bbing just will not deplete the fish to the point of killing it. The study proved that. With all the talk of fish dying as a result of c/r, it is just empty talk. I made it a point of keenly looking for dead sockeyes floating down the river. Not one dead sockeye in my 5 trips that I saws floating on the surface. If c/r sockeyes will die as some bb haters claim, why we don't see massive dead fish floating down? You may be blowing steam out of your own imagination, but I base on my observation on the spot and many of my co-bbers can support my claim of seeing no dead sockeyes drifting down. Even if there are a few, you cannot blame them on bbers. How can you be so sure they don't come from the nets. I already heard of friends buying sockeyes from natives. Don't tell me that they are not fishing, legally or illegally.

So stop being a computer fisherman, dude. Go to the fishing bars and see for youself. Rant all you want. Just not supported by facts.  As far as few sockeye being hooked by bbers, it was based on my 5 trips but I have stopped fishing since 2 weeks ago after having 3 springs on my card. So my obeservation on sockeye accident catch was based on the condition I observed 2 weeks ago. There should be more hookups now. It should be up to the individuals to decide whether he should or should not stop. If he cannot avoid sockeyes, then perhaps he should stop. However, to blame sockeye run being ruined by bbers is just blowing smoke in the air - just out right lies. If you care so much about hurting the last sockeye, you should really consider hanging up your bar rod, as it is no guarantee that you won't hook & kill that sockeye. I don't see the point of targetting bbers in this sockeye issue when one illegal drift net will kill many times more sockeyes than that of the 'possible kill' that all recreational c/r sockeyes (bf included) will inflict. Just another attempt to bash bbers to me in the big picture of stock conservation. Why not march in front of the bands known for illegal netting and bring the media along so you can shame them publicly. That will do much more for the fish stock than hammering your bellow sporties who happen to prefer fishing a method different from yours.

Enough has been said already by both sides. It is no point to keep on hammering the same things year after year. I am off this thread and will enjoy other more interesting reads. So, to each his/own. Fish in peace.

[RA40]

Rodney, great post. I don't have much time right now and hope to make one more post but for now, i just want to say thanks for taking the time to post.

[chris gadsden]

The latest from the Chilliwack Progress.

Chilliwack Progress
Fraser sport fishery closure ‘overreaction’

Halt sport fishery to save sockeye: Crey
Sockeye fishery may be a flop – again

Published: August 10, 2009 5:00 PM

 Disappointing sockeye returns on the Fraser River are a major concern for recreational anglers and fishing guides in B.C.

But “panicked” calls from First Nations leaders to take sport fishermen off the river and shut down all fisheries is a “clear overreaction,” said Vic Carrao, president of the Fraser Valley Angling Guides Association.

“In a year where the guiding industry has been hard hit by a global recession, the very livelihood of our members is on the line,” he said in a press release.

They’re committed to ensuring “a sustainable fishery” in the Fraser Valley and the group “completely understands and supports” the rationale for keeping the sockeye fishery closed until numbers improve.

However, anglers catch only “a small percentage” of the sockeye when the fishery is open, Carrao said.

He cited 2004 statistics from the Pacific Salmon Commission in 2004, which showed that sport fishers caught 1.4 per cent of the sockeye run, compared to 21.8 per cent for First Nations and 25.7 per cent for the commercial sector.

“While the sport fishers’ impact on resources is minimal, their impact on the economy is significant,” Carrao argued.

About 400,000 licensed anglers spend $400 million on freshwater fishing in B.C. each year employing about 3,500 people, according to a 2007 study by the province.

But Ernie Crey, fisheries advisor to the Sto:lo Tribal Council, said he couldn’t buy the minimal sockeye impacts argument, or the economic one. He wasn’t in any way convinced, especially since the final results of the ongoing sockeye mortality study are not even in yet.

The guiding group is asking “everyone to accept, as an article of faith, that anglers are not injuring and killing sockeye before the facts garnered from the study are in,” said Crey.

But for many Sto:lo leaders, conservation of the sockeye runs should “take precendence over the tourist trade.”

It only makes sense to be extra cautious, Crey said.

“Besides, if the anglers don’t help conserve sockeye now, there won’t be much of a tourist trade based on the sport fishery in the future.

“Are folks in the salmon charter business suggesting we blow away the sockeye runs to meet their short-term goal of having a profitable season? Strange logic.”

Crey said he was highly disappointed to see the sport fishery “still blazing away” on the Lower Fraser River this weekend.

“I saw dozens and dozens of anglers’ cars and trucks along the highway between Hope and Chilliwack,” Crey said. “DFO has closed our fishery to sockeye, including the dry rack fishery. However, DFO continues to allow countless sockeye to be snagged and injured by the sport fishery crowd.”

They’re still demanding prompt action.

“I think it’s well past the time to throw a flag down on the sport fishery. I hope and expect that DFO will take prompt action to curb the sport fishery until we know what is going on with summer sockeye.”

But despite demands to close the recreational chinook fishery on the Fraser for the good of the sockeye, DFO officials are still holding firm at this point.

“We are monitoring the environmental conditions in the river and other factors,” said DFO area director for the Interior, and Fraser panel chair Barry Rosenberger last week. “They are taken into account when we make those decisions.”

Demands to shut down the recreational fishery peaked when river temperatures shot up above 20 degrees Celsius, and were being considered by DFO management officials last week.

The plan was to look at sockeye encounter impacts by chinook fishers.

“They specifically asked us to close the chinook recreational fishery for the protection of sockeye. But on that recreational fishery, the sockeye encounter rates are generally low,” said Rosenberger.

He pointed to last year’s early results from a sockeye mortality study, which indicated that the “instantaneous” mortality rate was just above one per cent.

“We’re looking to move this forward by getting all the data together on sockeye mortality,” Rosenberger added.

Temperatures on the Fraser were forecast to drop to around 18 degrees by mid-week.

jfeinberg@theprogress.com

[alwaysfishn]

But Ernie Crey, fisheries advisor to the Sto:lo Tribal Council, said he couldn’t buy the minimal sockeye impacts argument, or the economic one. He wasn’t in any way convinced, especially since the final results of the ongoing sockeye mortality study are not even in yet.

Although it is suggested that a minority of FN members engage in illegally catching sockeye for black market sales, based on the numbers of fish being sold in the back alleys of lower mainland towns this is something that everyone should be concerned with. Crey would have perhaps a small bit of credibility if there was any evidence that he did not support this illegal activity.

I still maintain that the eyes of the sporties on the river is essential to try and limit their illegal netting. The small amount of sockeye sustaining fatal injuries as a result of incidental sockeye encounters is likely a very small percentage of the number of sockeye being caught for illegal sales. This guy is looking for every angle he can to get sports fishermen off the river!