Print

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

[wildmanyeah]

IMO

Fraser sockeye is probably one of the most managed fisheries we have. If our other fisheries had even half of the management effort that goes into fraser sockeye we would be doing much better.

[marshal]

Most of the spawning grounds for the adams cycle have been over 97% full over many of the last cycle years. DFO has a formula for calculating how much space salmon need to spawn.

If spawning grounds get to full, fish returning after other salmon have already spawned will diss lodge the other salmon eggs when they make their redds.  Thus there is a max capacity for spawning grounds.

PSC does have the spawning capacity numbers if you want to go did though that data.

The process isn't perfect make no mistake we do over fish some runs while targeting the dominate runs.  Putting more spawning on the grounds is generally always better

Sounds like management then tries to harvest just enough to stay under that threshold for the dominant runs?

[RalphH]

Sounds like management then tries to harvest just enough to stay under that threshold for the dominant runs?

No. There is some margin built in now to better take into account factors like in stream mortality and harvest above Mission. Recreational harvest the last couple of cycles (2010 & 2014) is now on the order of 1/4 million above Mission. Ten or 15 years ago the estimate was about 50k.

As far as  sockeye returns for '15 through '17, these were recognized as brutal years for ocean survival - things improved from '16 on - the evidence from this cycle is still that ocean survival is the major determinate of abundance. We have seen many examples of species with low exploitation  (most south coast steelhead) that tanked despite having little or no exploitation. In such an ecological regime it matters little how many fish get to spawn. The result is an overabundant new generation competing for marginal or poor resources.

Dave I have seen fry sampling on the Harrison in the spring. A 5 year chum fry sampling study took place on the Alouette not too long ago. Fry from the Alco hatchery were trucked to Neaves Road and released there. I also understood or have read that sockeye smolt sample enumeration takes place in the lower river. Stock origins are determined by genetic analysis like it is for the adult test fisheries. The lower river enumeration is the major input in pre-season forecasting.

[Dave]

Dave I have seen fry sampling on the Harrison in the spring. A 5 year chum fry sampling study took place on the Alouette not too long ago. Fry from the Alco hatchery were trucked to Neaves Road and released there. I also understood or have read that sockeye smolt sample enumeration takes place in the lower river. Stock origins are determined by genetic analysis like it is for the adult test fisheries. The lower river enumeration is the major input in pre-season forecasting.

Sorry, thought we were talking sockeye .. there was (perhaps still is) a juvenile assessment program on the Fraser every spring monitoring fry and smolts of all species. DNA samples from sockeye may be taken during this operation but it does not have any individual stock enumeration component, so I am not sure what lower river program you are speaking of.

[RalphH]

Lower River = Lower Fraser

[Dave]

Lower River = Lower Fraser

OK. Got that. Do you know of a sockeye juvenile assessment program there?

[clarki]

https://www.psc.org/fund-project/season-of-the-smolt/

This recent article indicates smolt enumeration, including individual stocks, in Mission

[Dave]

Thanks clarki.  Wow, this program has expanded considerably since I was involved.

[RalphH]

Recreational Sockeye Opening Region 3 Kamloops Lake and Thompson river below Kamloops Lake

https://www-ops2.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/fns-sap/index-eng.cfm?pg=view_notice&DOC_ID=213593&ID=all

Sockeye Salmon:

Effective until September 30, 2018 at one hour after sunset, the daily limit is
two (2) Sockeye in Kamloops Lake and the Thompson River from the outlet of
Kamloops Lake downstream to fishing boundary signs located just downstream of
Gold Pan, except the three areas described below which are closed to fishing
for salmon. Fishing is permitted during daylight hours only.

Description of three closed areas:

1. Deadman - from the fishing boundary signs approximately 1 km downstream of
the Hwy No. 1 Bridge at Savona to the CN rail bridge approximately 500 m
downstream of the confluence with Deadman Creek.

2. Juniper - from the fishing boundary signs approximately 1.5 km downstream
from Juniper Beach park downstream approximately 4 km to the fishing boundary
signs located at 50°46.893' N and 121°08.110' W.

3. Ashcroft - from the fishing boundary sign at the upstream side of the mouth
of the Bonaparte River to Hwy 97C Bridge in Ashcroft.

Daylight hours only refers to (one hour before sunrise to one hour after
sunset).  Reference to sunrise and sunset means the times for those events as
calculated by the National Research Council of Canada and published daily at
http://weather.gc.ca/city/pages/bc-45_metric_e.html

[marshal]

At the end of the day - say what you will, it certainly looks like DFO is trying to allow as much harvest as possible (i.e. allowing 60% harvest of the return (as of Sept 7)) without adversely affecting certain (all?) runs, by trying to manage activities based on their estimates of the numbers making it to the spawning grounds. 

Why let a fish escape if it is deemed that it won't contribute to future returns?... must be a DFO mantra, with all the political and commercial pressures.... to some degree, it makes sense; IMO, I'd put my trust in nature (deferring to allow more spawning) moreso than to our concepts.....

[RalphH]

hmmm - there is something close to 100 years of managing sockeye this way. No it's not perfect, yes there have been many mistakes but it has  produced a lot of fish. We don't know how much fish FNs took before Brits, Canadian and Americans came here but it was likely substantial. They quickly traded it in quantity to the new arrivals.

It's also clear that a reasonably well managed commercial fishery is not a major threat to salmon populations.

What I find most amusing is that some 'sport anglers' believe the resource belongs exclusively to them.If they don't get to fish when and as they like, something is going wrong.

[Robert_G]

We don't know how much fish FNs took before Brits, Canadian and Americans came here but it was likely substantial.

Do you dream this stuff up in your sleep? The natives took nothing in sockeye numbers back then like they do today. First of all they had no power boats, no technology....just traditional methods.....and its all irrelevant to the discussion anyways because there were no seiners or commercial gillnetters alongside them....meaning the overall catch was miniscule.

[RalphH]

well that's your opinion RG & mostly baseless. Sockeye was the food staple for FNs from the southern Island, in the valley and well up the river. FN populations were likely much higher than today so It's not hard to extrapolate estimates how many fish they needed just for basic dietary needs let alone trade and so forth.

[Robert_G]

Sockeye was the food staple for FNs from the southern Island, in the valley and well up the river.

Actually if you do your research, you'd see that their staples were pinks and chinook on odd years and chinook (and some coho) on even years. Sockeye were an afterthought, except in the canyon where they were easy to dipnet. Their heavy interest in sockeye came later after the Caucasian was already here

FN populations were likely much higher than today

You have absolutely no source for this. The last century of census' has shown a consistant increase of First Nations with legal status. Before the Caucasian came, natives did have higher child mortality rates, but that all dropped fast after the caucasion brought advanced medicine over. Native people since we've been here have always had a higher fertility rate with more births than the Caucasian could ever dream to have. They have been increasing and continue to increase in numbers.

well that's your opinion RG & mostly baseless.

Not baseless at all. I'll say it again. Without commercial seiners and gillnets, there is no way the total native traditional catch was even a FRACTION of what (all fisheries combined) became with the commencment of commercial fisheries. You act like you're so smart, but your level of math and logistics are laughable.

[wildmanyeah]

It was estimated that after European settlers arrived - the indigenous population took a crash of upwards of 80% of the population - largely due to smallpox and other diseases (https://www.ictinc.ca/blog/the-impact-of-smallpox-on-first-nations-on-the-west-coast). Pre-contact population estimates for BC vary widely with some estimates ranging from a conservative 100,000 to more than a million.

It was estimated the average Aboriginal salmon catch pre-contact to be ~88 million kg per year, comparable in magnitude to the average yearly commercial catch between 1901 and 2000 (Jones 2002).


“The Northwest Coast was estimated to have the second highest indigenous population density in North America (after California) at European contact, with population estimates ranging from 102,100 to 210,100. At an annual average per person consumption rate of 230 kg/yr, 200,000 people would annually consume 46,000 metric tons (50,706 tons) of salmon, comparable in magnitude to the average yearly commercial catch between 1901 and 2000 (Jones 2002).”

http://saveourskeenasalmon.org/threatened-treasures/historic-bc-salmon-returns/

“Comparable levels of production were achieved under traditional Aboriginal and contemporary industrial systems…

It was estimated the average Aboriginal catch pre-contact to be 88 million kg per year (see Carlson, supra note 28 at 141). This estimate is based on a consumption rate of 220 kg per capita per year and an estimated pre-epidemic Aboriginal population in the B.C. area of 400,000… the pre-contact catch can be estimated at between 60 and 106 million kg per year.”(that is roughly 80,000 metric tons)