Print

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

[chris gadsden]

http://www.watershed-watch.org/2013/04/globe-and-mail-ottawa-withholding-reports-on-bc-wild-salmon/

[Dave]

Hmmm, must be a way some people could blame salmon farms for this
Seriously, redzoning a few upper Fraser sockeye stocks could have huge social and economic implications, much like listing eulachons under SARA would.
Looking forward to seeing this unfold.

[Every Day]

Hmmm, must be a way some people could blame salmon farms for this
Seriously, redzoning a few upper Fraser sockeye stocks could have huge social and economic implications, much like listing eulachons under SARA would.
Looking forward to seeing this unfold.

Yep, I don't think people quite understand the implications with this.

A lot of people are complaining about it not being released right now, but they need to really think this through. If they red list a population, chances are it will then be listed as endangered. Even as a red list however, they need to then close ALL fisheries (commercial, FN, recreational - probably for the WHOLE fraser, period) and establish a recovery plan. This means not only are they losing money through fisheries, but they have to put a whole lot of money into restoration projects and recovery plans...

People can complain all they want, but I'd really like to see them take their time. Realistically though, those populations probably should be red listed, and politics should be forgotten, if they actually want to save a few of the stocks that are suffering.

[dnibbles]

Yep, I don't think people quite understand the implications with this.

A lot of people are complaining about it not being released right now, but they need to really think this through. If they red list a population, chances are it will then be listed as endangered. Even as a red list however, they need to then close ALL fisheries (commercial, FN, recreational - probably for the WHOLE fraser, period) and establish a recovery plan. This means not only are they losing money through fisheries, but they have to put a whole lot of money into restoration projects and recovery plans...

Close, but not quite. If a Conservation Unit (not a population) is identified as being in the red zone (not red listed), there is no requirement to close fisheries, change management strategies or anything else. I think you are confusing the COSEWIC (Committee on Endangered Wildlife in Canada) and the WSP (Wild Salmon Policy) status assessments.

This Fraser sockeye WSP status report is the first comprehensive status report that has been completed since the WSP was completed in 2005. There's another one in development (for Southern BC Chinook CUs) that should be ready by the end of the year. I've seen some of the preliminary versions of the Fraser sockeye paper: some of the Red CUs are located right in the middle of major fishing zones (e.g. Cultus Lake). While there may be some conservation or recovery actions implemented to help recover the CU, there will also be socio-economic considerations at play. None of the red Cus will be any surprise to people that are familiar with the state of Fraser sockeye these days. While I used to be naively optimistic that WSP status may lead to some serious changes in the way fisheries and habitat are managed, I'm thinking that it's more likely that decision makers and stakeholders (i.e. fisherpeople of all persuasions) will be more likely to accept to live with some CUs are in the red when presented with the trade-offs that may be required for potential recovery.

[Dave]

While I used to be naively optimistic that WSP status may lead to some serious changes in the way fisheries and habitat are managed, I'm thinking that it's more likely that fisheries managers and stakeholders will be more likely to accept that some CUs are in the red when presented with the trade-offs that may be required for potential recovery.

Thanks nibs, we all appreciate your candour. Looking forward to seeing that chinook report.