|
Are you allowed
to keep pinks in the Vedder? I was positive that you wern't but I heard
reports of guys catching and keeping them thinking they were allowed. So
am I mistaken are they allowed to be kept? I can't find info anywhere
else if they are open or not so I would appreciate a quick response. Thanks
|
|
No. Regulation specifies no retention of salmon in Region 2 unless otherwise specified. If you look under the Chilliwack/Vedder, Pinks and Sockeyes are not specified. Therefore, no retention. Hope this helps. Patrice
|
|
back in '95 (I think) keeping 2 was allowed. There was a bad flood that year and it was thought most of the pink eggs were lost. Next cycle there was no retention. It hasn't been allowed since. We now seen it cut back on the Harrison to 2 fish below the CPR bridge when before the entire river was open and the bag limit was 4. It seems DFO is moving away from allowing retention of pinks. I'm not sure why. There is no conservation concern for these stocks though DFo has expressed concern that people who claim to be targeting pinks in the Harrison are really targeting sockeye.
|
|
Ralph, there is nobody targeting Sockeye on the Harrison. All the pressure is below the bridge where it is open to 2 pinks per day. I spoke to Devona Adams(DFO) in late August about the non-retention of pinks in the Fraser and the limited area on the Harrison. Devona stated the reason the Fraser would have no retention was that the run size was estimated at 5 million, the escapement for the Fraser is 6 million, leaving a shortfall of 1 million.(Harrison stocks is included in the Fraser) They allowed a short period of retention on the Fraser during August as a result of bycatch during the sockeye fishery. Sounds reasonable, shortfall of 1 million so close the Fraser to retention. 10 days after the Fraser closed the Pink run was upgraded, now there is a 21 day Commercial Native Seine fishery between Chilliwack and Hope. Now that the run has been upgraded you would think the sport fishery would be re-opend to retention of Pinks, not likely. The past 3 years the sport anglers have been taken off the Fraser river after September long weekend in the name of conservation to save the Thompson Coho. We all bought in to the program, close the Fraser, save the Coho. DFO stated that we could not lose one Coho as the stocks were so low. I remember many debates on this site and others with most of us agreeing that if it meant the colapse of the Thompson coho then closeing the river was acceptable. You tell me how the hell can DFO allow a 21 day Commercial siene fishery when the Fraser is RED ZONED to all fishing. Is the mortality rates of beach seine less than angling? yeh right! This is all about politics and nothing to do with conservation. At Island 22 there are refeer trucks, fork lifts and boats coming in with tones of Pinks(mostly females)Buyers are standing in line waiting to see the product while we stay at home in the name of conservation. If there is enough fish in the river for a siene fishery then I would think there should be enough for a small sport fishery, even if it was non-retention it would still spread out the angling pressure more evenly and allow for a better angling expiereance for all to enjoy. This is everyone's resource not just special interest groups. oh ya, just about forgot, they can also harvest chinook, what? harvest chinook, Gee I wonder what run of chinook is in the river right now? Maybe Harrison River chinook?, I wonder if that's why i haven't seen many Harrison River chinook around this year, couldn't be!. I guess we will have to close the Harrison for the next 4 years to rebuild those stocks too. I personally am getting sick and tired of all the bullshit. It's high time we stand up for whats right. Is there a conservation concern or isn't there. DFO needs to be held accountable for there actions, call, write, e-mail these idiots, tell them this is unexceptable. We are canadians and we have a right to enjoy our resources as much as anyone else. I feel much better now, thanks for listening. Now I can call DFO and scream at them.
|
|
Vic all the boats involved in the Commercial Fishery are carrying revival tanks-all Coho taken are supposed to be placed in the Tanks and released alive when they are ready to go. OK so it's not a perfect world but I would like to remind you and everyone here that David Anderson got priority on the Coho and Chinook for Sports Fishermen. The tradeoff-and so many now forget this-is that we are at the bottom of the list when access to other stocks is allocated. It's awful to see how people will debase conservation concerns that they all pretend to espouse when a 'surplus' is determined-this is happening on the North Coast the Commercial Trollers up there are livid at all the big Coho that swam by while they were tied up. Everything isn't money-it would be a better world if people remembered that more often.
|
|
Carl, i would like to believe you when you say that they are using holding tanks but thats just not the case. I have been watching the commercial fishery very closely. A few days ago at Mountain bar I watched for over an hour the beach siening. They kept all fish but the male pinks. When they pulled a male pink out of the net they would throw it as far as they could hurling it through the air. I wish I had my video camera. When i phoned and talked to DFO, they told me that they couldn't do much, there is a hands off policy when it comes to Cheam and Stolo fisheries.They can do what they want, period. I find it difficult to swallow what is going on out there. No one is watching to see if Coho are being released unharmed or even released at all. This entire fishery is a slap in our faces. DFO is not patrolling the river or even checking this fishery. I am on the Fraser River more than any single person in the Province other than Rusty the tug operator. I see what is going on and I take it personally when i see this kind of abuse of our and I mean OUR ( yours and mine) resources. It's quite sickening Carl when you see what i see day in and day out. Illegal gills nets in the same places day after day.(When i call it in, they tell me they will try to get someone out but can't promise because they are short staff, meanwhile coho, pinks and sockeye are dieing). Commercial fisheries during peak Thompson Coho runs and not to mention Thompson Steelhead and Harrison chinook. Natives throwing fish in the air as if it was a stick. Someone has to take responsibility for these actions. It's time we made DFO accountable for the mayhem that is going on out there. I better stop now before I get carried away. I am just sick of this whole thing. You can besure of one thing. Once my season is over I will being doing all i can to make someone accountable for what has gone on. My video camera is now on my boat and the tape is rolling. One more thing, when I say DFO i don't mean the guys in the field. They are doing their best with what they have. The people at the top are who need to be held accountable. I have now ranted and feel much better, for now.
|
|
Its the Cohos and Chinooks and Sockeyes that should be restricted or closed. Theres more than enough of Pinks and Chums. The salt is still closed for cohos, yet they're the most sought after fish in rivers..? Chris
|
|
Vic - the Fraser River panel set the estimated return of Fraser Pinks at 10 million. Ten million is a strong return. There are no conservation concerns on Harrison Pinks. That's bull! The original estimate was 7 million. If the target escapment is 6 million then that leaves a surplus of 1 million fish. BTW there is talk of an opening on the Harrison for White Chinook. As far as the native commercial fisheries - they are supposed to be selective beach seine fisheries with all sockeye, coho and steelhead released. Oh yeah - I guess all those guys with the drift gear above cabin point were up there for the late summer tarpon run.
|
|
It's a real shame it's not open I was at the Vedder today (where the water is gin clear) When you look in you can see thousands of fish swimming up stream, there seems to be more fish than rocks. I tried some fishing and I could get them every cast for a little C&R. Now why do they let the Chums, Springs and Coho's open when there seems to be way fewer of them?
|
|
The Vedder is busy enough with all the kill fisheries it has. It should be kept closed for Pinks. With the abundance of Pinks dying, they will only provide nutrients for the river system. I wouldnt think the Cutthroat fishing on the Harrison would be as good without the strong returns of chums would it?
|
|
Not that I need any Pinks, but there are thousands of them in the Vedder right now. A retention limit of two Pinks per day would do zero damage to the stocks. Again, Vic has really opened my eyes and ears over DFO's policies. Something has to be done with regards to the Native fishery, this is total BULL#%$T! DFO are hypocrites!
|
|
Well gentlemen, sounds like this is getting worse every year. Let's set something up then, seriously. I am in, I am pretty keen. Let's do something about it, maybe set up meetings, form a group, get straight, clear answers from the DFO, etc. Just whining away on this discussion group will only stir up more anger, we need to get some constructive discussion going with the DFO and other user groups. I may sound naive, but it's worth a try. Dave, Vic, who else is in? I dunno how to start really, but I'm sure if we all chip in some ideas, we can get something going. My email is in the profile. :-)
|
|
Rodney, I totally agree with you. Let's set something up! I'm in and i'm sure many others are too.
|
|
This may sound typical, but perhaps a march of numbers. I'm sure the news media would mention something prior to the event which would give most fishermen notice to attend - news programs love to show large gatherings of protest. However, I believe the main message of the march should be to direct more government funding towards policing our waters - more DFO employment, etc.. Then most of the problems we are witnessing could be attacted. I'm confident that there are many nets retaining everything they catching and many recreational fishermen are fishing illegally - we need them to visited by officers. I don't believe the government is using license fees for their original purpose.
|
|
I think what's missing right now are all the concrete facts from the DFO. Many of us are just piecing information together and criticizing the authority without hearing all the facts. I want to be informed with everything before deciding whether the actions taken are totally wrong. As of now, there is not a definite group that is pushing the DFO for all the details. What anglers must do is to unite and demand for answers. I don't think protest or protest fishery would be effective, since that would just stir up more anger. However, I do believe we need some information sessions, meetings set up with the DFO. This way we can get all the information that we need to know, and they can receive feedbacks from all of us as well. If no actions are taken, such trend will continue and the state of our Fraser fishery will one day diminish just like the Atlantic cod fishery back east. What do you all think? Who would like to volunteer some time and see some action done? I would love to hear from you and see what we can do in the remaining season.
|
|
Heres an idea. Why don't we all take a Saturday or Sunday off and set up a blockade at the entrance to island 22?
|
|
Great Idea John. Please excuse me gentlemen if I get a bit cynical in this post. This discussion in various forms has been ongoing for years. Lots of discussion about the ineffective policies and inexcusable management decisions of FOC (DFO). The discussions have also included talk of civil unrest amongst sports anglers. Lots of talk, lots of whining (me included), but no action. FOC doesn't give a shite what you think or what you do. They have their mandate, they have their objectives and policing river anglers or giving them a larger piece of the pie are not in their game plan. The sooner we all go away, the happier FOC will be. Did anyone here realize that the next item on their agenda is to privatize all hatcheries? If you think its been bad in the past, just wait. Its gonna get alot worse before it gets better. Until such time as most river anglers are organized and all the organizations can speak with a collective voice against the policies of our pathetic FOC senior management, we will be no more than annoying ants at a porkbarrel picnic. Rant over, Cheers.
|
|
Why is privatizing a hatchery any worse then privatizing any other government activity? Are we ticked off with DFO/FOC because they are bad or simply because we don't like them? For years Sport Anglers on the Fraser have been demanding more selective commercial harvest methods. When some are actually introduced - like beach seines - we are suddenly outraged! Our SFAB should be pressed to make the point that if endangered coho etc can tolerate the incidental mortality of beach seining - why can't they tolerate the same from limited sport fisheries (ie artificial fly only for pink salmon)
|
|
Rodney/Ryan, Trying to get individuals organized is a lot of work, what if everyone simply joined one of the existing fishing organizations (e.g. BC Fed of Drift Fishers $10/yr, Steelhead Society of BC $30/yr, etc). Coordination of any effort would then only have to occur between the 2 or 3 organizations. The local guides must also have some sort of an association ... what do you think?
|
|
Oscar, I understand what you're saying, but ... the current fragmentation of sportfishing groups is our greatest weakness. The driftfishers, steelheaders, flyfishers (etc.) all have their hearts in the right place, but it's SO easy to play one off against the other. The so-called "umbrella" organization (BCWF) is little more than a social club for senior members of the fragment groups. And then there's the "Sport Fishing Advisory Board" ... does anyone remember voting for them ? Where oh where did the SFAB come from ?
|
|
Bobber, You're dead on about playing one organization against another. Within each there are a vocal few who undermine the good intentions of all withtheir own personal agendas. Having said that, I would suggest the biggest problem that all these organizations have (and I'm a member of three of them) is membership. Almost 400,000 resident fishing licenses are issued each year and yet if you add up the membership of the big four (BCWF, BCFFF, BCFDF and SSBC) you'll get a total membership of less than 35,000. 33,000 of those are with BCWF. So while it is important to a relatively small group of dedicated individuals, most of the average anglers out there just want to fish. As is rampant in Canadian society, apathy reigns supreme.;-) Cheers
|
|
Fin - there is of course an agenda in your comments about apathy. I find offensive the suggestion made by many that those who aren't members of some organization are apathetic. The fact is i would love to belong to an organization that put lobbying for fish first and the politics of fish resource harvest well down the list. But the fact is none do and as a result I don't belong to any. Non-membership does not mean an angler with a voice that needs to be heard can't get a message out. Far from it. I believe that direct communication from members of the public mean far more to politicians and bureacrats then manifestos from groups of like minded malcontents. Every gov't body, every politician has an email address. Use it. be heard. Someone wants to listen.
|
|
Ralph, While you are correct that notes, emails, letters and phone calls from John Q. Public definately mean more than continued whining from us 'malcontents', the fact still remains that those notes,letters and phone calls take effort. It is also true that the vast majority of the public are unwilling to take that required step. It is for this reason that angling organizations formed in the first place. There was a need to present information collectively in order to have the concerns of these people heard. Has it been successfull? I guess that would depend on who you talk to. I have no agenda, hidden or otherwise in my comments about joining an organization. It has worked in the past to be associated with like minded individuals, and politicians hear numbers. If the apathetic Canadian public were capable of expending the energy necessary to voice their fish concerns, it would save alot of us alot of volunteer time and effort in trying to have those concerns heard. That you are an aberration to that public apathy is commendable. If you are offended by my comments, don't be, you are the last person they were intended to be directed to. Cheers :-)
|
|
Ralph, From personal experience, I can tell you that any individual is much more effective when working within a group (and it doesn't have to be a large group). Among many other things, there is improved access to information and the decision-making process. An individual can take a lifetime establishing their credibility. TA
|
|
Here's how you start. Honourable Minister, FOC staff and concerned fellow anglers, > >On a rainy and windy Wednesday, September 26, 2001, I (and several other concerned anglers) had the opportunity to tour six selective (beach-seine) >fishing sites on the upper Fraser River, which appeared to be run by >various First Nations. Specifically, we visited fully operating selective >fishing sites located on or near Wellington, lower Queens Island, upper >Queens Island, North Island and Harrison Hill Bars. > >Firstly, what we witnessed not only shocked us, it thoroughly sickened and >disgusted all of us. Never in my 40 years on the Fraser River as a >ex-commercial fisherman, avid angler or professional fishing guide have I >seen any species of "living fish" treated in a manner that shows such a >total disregard or a lack of respect for life itself. > >Let me try and explain: While most of the gravel bars located on the upper >Fraser River are now just beginning to see a very thin but noticeable >sprinkling of spawned-out pink salmon carcasses, the stretches located >"directly below" each beach-seine site were literally stacked with >hundreds upon hundreds of (pre-spawn) male pink salmon bodies. Now at >this point neither myself or the others could quite put two and two >together, that is until we saw what was happening at the end of each and >every set. It appeared that only the male pink salmon (and of course the >odd so-called endangered coho or steelhead) were being culled and grabbed >roughly by their heads, gills or tails and thrown from the bunt of the net >(some 10 to 15 feet in the air) back into the very shallow water. So much >for releasing fish the gentle way. Sadly, it certainly looked to all of us >like we had our explanation for the hundreds upon hundreds of dead >(pre-spawn) pink salmon lining the beaches below each selective fishing site. > >Secondly, it appeared that "only female" pink salmon were being retained >by the Natives. Maybe sport-fishermen are getting their chains yanked >again, but I was recently told that these female pink salmon were being >harvested simply for their payload of valuable roe. Certainly this can't >be true? Maybe someone at FOC could clarify this? > >Lastly, and perhaps most importantly, each selective beach-seine fishery >that we witnessed was being conducted right over (or on top of) key Fraser >River pink salmon spawning habitat. Combine this factor with the proposed >Fraser River gravel removal projects scheduled for the winter of 2001 in >these same general areas and I would say you have another recipe for a >fisheries disaster in the making. And, in a worst case scenario, perhaps >another species of salmon soon to become a candidate for Fisheries and >Ocean's ever growing endangered or extinct lists? > >In closing, and in my opinion as a concerned British Columbian, avid >angler of some 40 years, former commercial fisherman and professional >angling guide, I firmly believe that Fisheries and Oceans Canada has >failed each and every one of us ... again. These days, with our sport and >commercial fishing opportunities in steady decline, one doesn't have to >look too long or too deeply into our rivers and streams in British >Columbia to see Fisheries and Oceans Canada have also failed dismally at >their mandate to protect, conserve and enhance our fish stocks. > > >Ken Kristian >34337 Catchpole Ave >Mission, B.C. V2V6P2 >Office phone: (604) 826-8007 >
|
|
Last year, I forwarded a copy of one of Ken's excellent letters to my MP and MLA, along with my own vehement comments. Both Ken's letter and my comments were forwarded to DFO. What I got back was a standard "PR" response ... thank you for your interest ... and for Ken's interest ... bear in mind that there are many points of view ... rest assured that we are working closely with ... be sure to come out for one of our staged information sessions ... (blah, blah, blah). I suspect that if the most senior officials of DFO had been standing on the river, right beside Ken and his colleagues on Sept. 26, they would actually be able to spout the same bland nonsense five minutes later. It's an amazing talent - the ability to look at reality and mentally re-process it in a way that makes it politically acceptable. It's not really in my nature to give up hope, but I'm getting pretty close to that point these days.
|
|
I hear ya Bobber, but I can't give up so here's a copy of my letter. Ken, thank you very much for writing the letter, Big trouble with Native salmon fisheries on the upper Fraser River. Honorable Minister, FOC staff and concerned fellow anglers, I too have witnessed the same type of conduct. Just the other day I watched the beach seining at Harrison Bar, the so called commercial beach seines were so called selectively harvesting. I watched in horror as male pinks were being hurled through the air, dieing on impact as they hit the water. The past 3 years sport anglers have been taken off the Fraser River in the name of conservation. User groups and anglers have reluctantly supported the efforts by DFO to save the Thompson Coho. Red Zoning was not received well but we (anglers) have always supported fisheries when conservation of a particular stock is a concern. We were told that only a few hundred Thompson Coho remained so a zero mortality policy was the only way to save this precious stocks of Coho. For the past 3 years anglers have watched millions and millions of salmon swim by with no fishing opportunities. Communities, small businesses, guides and lodges along the Fraser have lost millions of dollars to save these few Thompson Coho. The Fraser Valley Salmon Society in it's better days, Federation of Drift Fisher's and many other angler groups fought hard to keep fishing opportunities for all of British Columbians on the Fraser River alive. Countless hours of planning, meeting after meeting, studies after studies. There was Coho encounter studies, angler surveys and endless money spent to prove that anglers could indeed fish selectively without harming the few Thompson Coho left. All this effort was for nothing, Fisheries continued to say that a ZERO MORTALITY was the only way to ensure the survival of the few fish left. Now, once again, this season we( families, food fishers, sport anglers, guides and lodges) are not able to fish the Fraser due to the Thompson Coho Red Zone that is still in effect from September 5 until sometime in late October. Once again small businesses along the Fraser from your local grocery store to hotels , motels, lodges, tackle stores and fishing guides suffer and lose clients and valuable income that normally keeps them going through the winters. Local anglers, many old-timers who have fished and counted on the salmon on the Fraser as much as anyone for food stay at home and watch this horror as it unfolds. I too am getting sick to my stomach from being treated as a second class citizen. How can DFO allow a native, commercial seine fishery when a RED ZONE is still in effect? Is there a ZERO mortality policy or isn't there? Are Thompson Coho endangered or aren't they? How can DFO continue to manage what was once a world class fishery when they talk from both sides of their mouths. Is looking after commercial and native interests their only mandate? How can they allow this so called commercial fishery to go unsupervised? I and many other British Columbians are sick and tired of the mismanagement by Fisheries and Oceans. It's clear to me that Fisheries and Oceans have failed in their mandate to conserve and manage our (all British Columbians) fisheries on what once was one of the worlds most productive salmon rivers, the Fraser River. Vic Carrao STS Guiding Service 32374 Ptarmigan Dr Mission, B.C. V2V5R5
|
|
I don't doubt Ken's assessment for a minute but this is one instance where a picture may be worth more than a thousand words. This is very highly charged political situation. Selective harvesting does not seem to be working out the way that some of us had envisioned due mostly to short-sightedness and insensitivity to the situation. There were reports of unauthorized harvests of steelhead through the Yale fishwheel last year too. If these people had half a brain they'd be trying their best to make it work otherwise they'll be standing on the bank watching the fish go by like everyone else. (That's if FOC actually finds the cajones to "manage" the situation.)
|
|
Vic thanks for both posting Ken's letter and your thoughtful comments. Perhaps people aren't aware but the wastefull practice of harvesting for roe is widespread. It has been practiced on Chum for years and there is of course the herring fishery. Often the males and the bodies of the females are sold for fish meal or worse yet a market can't be found.
|
|
The best way to effect change in a situation such as this (IMO) is to embarass FOC/DFO. How? A web site with pictures, relevant links to regulations, and most importantly Streaming Video of the lawbreakers in action. A campaign of posting the URL on any and every BB/DG/Newsgroup in creation, emailing the URL to every politician in the Federal and Provincial Gov't, and again most importantly evey Media outlet of every and any persuasion.Not to forget all special interest/conservation and environmental NGO extant. Such an undertaking would of course require money, time and web expertise, but is a golden opportunity for a group like http://www.defendsportfishing.com/ and all it's sister grouops. I doubt that anything will happen though, it 's too easy to stage bogus 'protest fisheries' and funnel money to lawyers who have little interest in conservation but who talk a smooth line about 'rights'.
|
|
Sounds like a great idea Carl, Why don't you take the ball and run with it.
|
|
Because I lack all of the following 1-Technical expertise/web authoring skills. 2-A boat and a video camera. 3-Cash, oodles of which would solve the 2 above problems. 4-And most importantly-Faith in Humanity that anything would really change-when Humans first came to North America the first thing they did was to extirpate all the Mega-Fauna extant, since then almost all other Animal species have followed the Megas into oblivion I don't see that we've changed all that much.
|
|
Yeah, Just as I suspected, Carl. Lots of good suggestions, no willingness to get involved. Oh no wait, I know......you're the 'idea' guy, right?
|
|
I used to belong to 5 different Conservation Groups. I now belong to one-it has only as a marginal relation to Sportfishing concerns. The reason I quit being a 'follower' are similar to those elucidated by both Ralph H and Bobber. The Good News is that you are now free to use my idea as you wish, I require no compensation and no further input from me is needed. Good Luck and Have Fun!
|
Back to Articles page