Emergency Victoria @ Area SFAB Mtg Re: 2018 Chinook - May 4/18

[spoiler]

These closures happen and there will be an increase of FN netting. The nicola 4-2 which is migrating now has already had 3 full blown openings in the last 2 weeks, and they cleaned up. and as for trying to protect them in the saltwater most have already passed through the terminal areas!!
The Shuswap 4-1 will get wiped out due to a cermemonial sockeye fishery that will turn the Fraser into gauntlet of set nets and drift nets. Springs for 2$ a lb and socks for 5$ filleted.
The Harrison stock will get absolutely wiped out because of the FN chum fishery.
By this point in end of Sept the FN will not even be able to sell their catch because they have flooded the market with legal and illegal catch over May,June,July,August and September.
So we will be in the same situation as the last few years...wasted net caught fish because they can’t sell them and miles of unsold fish below the Harrison mouth as well as in the Hope dump.
I’m sorry I have no problem not fishing if stocks are of concern....but stop the genocide within the river!

I live in Chilliwack and have fished the Vedder / Chilliwack, Fraser and Harrison Rivers for the past 52 years! I hate to say it but Whitebuck is right! You can regulate the saltwater fisheries all you want but at the end of the day if these fish that DFO are trying to protect get wiped out because of the FN in-river fishery then it's all for not. Regardless of the "legal openings" that DFO grants the FN's, there is so much illegal activity happening on the Fraser these fish are doomed!

 

[profisher]

The location is still being worked on. Esquimalt Anglers clubhouse is no cost if available but is a small room and doesn't work if many are expected. The hotel banquet room out behind Costco is big enough but comes with a minimum $400 price tag...(they say regular rate is $1000). but being a Friday it may already be taken. As there is no SFAB budget to hold these meetings it becomes a challenge. I believe SVIAC has picked up the tab to rent a bigger room in the past when it was neccesary to have a bigger room. The reason why we have a donation box by the door.

 

[searun]

Few comments:

1) Let's not spread panic out there until we actually hear all the facts, and know precisely what is being decided and why.

2) The SFAB Executive asked a small group to work directly with DFO on a technical committee to refine the Chinook modelling. The aim being to better understand the impacts of potential management measures we might be asked to consider applying. The thinking is to have a model that helps develop science based decision making around applying management measures where and when they will actually lead to the desired outcome (more impacted Fraser Chinook reaching the spawning grounds). We didn't want "blanket" management measures put in place - rather a more surgical approach that minimizes the impact on fishing opportunity while delivering the desired conservation outcomes.

3) Once the Technical Committee finished their work on modelling options, the SFAB Exec asked for a conference call with ALL the Area SFAC Chairs so they could hear the facts, and have input into the decisions

So, lets allow this to play out before we jump the gun. I've heard so many false rumours its not funny anymore. People are looking to change their vacation plans as a result, so getting this right is critically important, as is stopping the rumour train until we actually have facts.

 

[The Jackel]

You’re kidding right? This is simply another example of the confusion created by the fact that the President of SVIAC is also the chair of the local SFAC. So, is this an SFAB meeting or a SVIAC meeting? Where does one end and the other begin in Victoria? The SFAB is not an “arm” of SVIAC and shouldn’t be perceived as one yet more and more that is what’s happening. I doubt the confusion is intentional in order to provide a perception that SVIAC is more “in the loop” than the SFAB or any other group, but it sure seems self serving. Using a government advisory board to promote the activities of your own “non-profit” advocacy group is not only against the terms of reference of the SFAB, but is more than a wee bit misleading. Its getting really tiresome and is damaging to the local SFAC committee.


As mentioned by others, what specifically is it we’re going to talk about? Is this about all of Southern Vancouver Island (SVIAC) or specifically areas 18, 19 & 20 (SFAB?) Are we talking closures, extension of slot limits, changes in bag limits or what? It’d be nice to actually have an exchange of information here rather than an alarmist post threatening closures etc as a way to pull in the crowds. Rumour has it we may be looking at an extension of the 85 cm, slot limit to the end of July. Is this the case? Knowing more about what we’re up against would help me participate better at the meeting. Come on, stop the sales tactics and get down to responsible information exchange!


Frankly, the chair of the local SFAB should know better, but just doesn’t seem to care. The confusion, as outlined in your post here, is not helpful to anyone.

Ah grass hopper i think you have snatched the pebble from my hand, you have done well my student

 

[tincan]

In-river fishery is an issue for sure. There are many issues that ultimately affect adult salmon returns and of late (20-30 years) the biggest issue/change has been early marine survival for SOG populations. Yes, in-river FN fishery needs to be addressed but it is not THE reason for the current poor status of Fraser River salmon populations. Priority 1 is to address early ocean survival IMO. That said, we can walk and chew gum at the same time.

I live in Chilliwack and have fished the Vedder / Chilliwack, Fraser and Harrison Rivers for the past 52 years! I hate to say it but Whitebuck is right! You can regulate the saltwater fisheries all you want but at the end of the day if these fish that DFO are trying to protect get wiped out because of the FN in-river fishery then it's all for not. Regardless of the "legal openings" that DFO grants the FN's, there is so much illegal activity happening on the Fraser these fish are doomed!

 

[Dave]

In-river fishery is an issue for sure. There are many issues that ultimately affect adult salmon returns and of late (20-30 years) the biggest issue/change has been early marine survival for SOG populations. Yes, in-river FN fishery needs to be addressed but it is not THE reason for the current poor status of Fraser River salmon populations. Priority 1 is to address early ocean survival IMO. That said, we can walk and chew gum at the same time.

Then we better start chewing and walking real soon. Absolutely, ocean survival is key but what is needed right now are spawners in these critically endangered summer chinook rivers. I believe FN should be offered financial payment to not fish these stocks.

 

[Last Chance]

You’re kidding right? This is simply another example of the confusion created by the fact that the President of SVIAC is also the chair of the local SFAC. So, is this an SFAB meeting or a SVIAC meeting? Where does one end and the other begin in Victoria? The SFAB is not an “arm” of SVIAC and shouldn’t be perceived as one yet more and more that is what’s happening. I doubt the confusion is intentional in order to provide a perception that SVIAC is more “in the loop” than the SFAB or any other group, but it sure seems self serving. Using a government advisory board to promote the activities of your own “non-profit” advocacy group is not only against the terms of reference of the SFAB, but is more than a wee bit misleading. Its getting really tiresome and is damaging to the local SFAC committee.


As mentioned by others, what specifically is it we’re going to talk about? Is this about all of Southern Vancouver Island (SVIAC) or specifically areas 18, 19 & 20 (SFAB?) Are we talking closures, extension of slot limits, changes in bag limits or what? It’d be nice to actually have an exchange of information here rather than an alarmist post threatening closures etc as a way to pull in the crowds. Rumour has it we may be looking at an extension of the 85 cm, slot limit to the end of July. Is this the case? Knowing more about what we’re up against would help me participate better at the meeting. Come on, stop the sales tactics and get down to responsible information exchange!


Frankly, the chair of the local SFAB should know better, but just doesn’t seem to care. The confusion, as outlined in your post here, is not helpful to anyone.

Ah grass hopper i think you have snatched the pebble from my hand, you have done well my student

Let me get this straight? This message was signed by the chair of the SFAB, posted by the chair of the SFAB on a public forum inviting sport fishermen to participate? The Sport Fish Advisory Board was originally created to have a process to allow recreational fishermen to advise the Department of Fisheries and Oceans on fishery policy.

Our local chair may be a little jumpy because 10 years ago, some "temporary" restrictions turned into one of the most restrictive set of regulations on the coast. More often then not these days, rumors of increased regulation compounded by a federal government hell bent on "First Nations reconciliation", voodoo statistics, and orcas only spell disaster for the recreational fishery.

From what I have observed, many branches of the SFAB have meetings during working hours, in a closed forum with minor input from recreational fishermen. Quite often the SFAB folks are local guides and lodge owners. This was made abundantly clear to me when I was involved in a last ditch effort to speak on an upcoming fish policy recommendation that was going to make my area take it on the chin.

The chair of the local (South Island) SFAB is going well out of his way to ensure this is an open forum for all recreational fishermen in the area to attend, after working hours so they can advise him on what message to take to DFO regarding the potential management measures coming our way, at no cost to the SFAB.

I am not aware of SVIAC considering the SFAB an "arm" of the organization. There are directors of the WCGA, SCBA, and SFI who all serve on the SFAB.

Jackel, I am surprised an outdoorsman of your caliber is making a local group that is doing so much in your area the object of your unique brand of sarcasm.

 

[UkeeDreamin]

Sorry have to agree with Rollie on this one its CLEARLY states SFAB would it be different if i posted it under bluewolf charters?? point it IT DOES NOT MATTER .there is some serious **** coming down the pipe as i see it. I dont care who tells me or whatever as long as the word got out.
I have a very bad feeling that its going to spider web out ward.
Hope to see you down here derby , I have a bad feeling on this one....THANKS TRUDEAU

Thanks Trudeau???!!! Was he the one who gutted DFO and let industry and developers have their way with our freshwater habitat for the better part of the last decade? We’re starting to see legacy effects of Harper’s environmental policies and regulatory cuts. Pretty revisionist to blame Trudeau for the state of any of these stocks.

Cheers!

Ukee

 

[The Jackel]

Let me get this straight? This message was signed by the chair of the SFAB, posted by the chair of the SFAB on a public forum inviting sport fishermen to participate? The Sport Fish Advisory Board was originally created to have a process to allow recreational fishermen to advise the Department of Fisheries and Oceans on fishery policy.

Our local chair may be a little jumpy because 10 years ago, some "temporary" restrictions turned into one of the most restrictive set of regulations on the coast. More often then not these days, rumors of increased regulation compounded by a federal government hell bent on "First Nations reconciliation", voodoo statistics, and orcas only spell disaster for the recreational fishery.

From what I have observed, many branches of the SFAB have meetings during working hours, in a closed forum with minor input from recreational fishermen. Quite often the SFAB folks are local guides and lodge owners. This was made abundantly clear to me when I was involved in a last ditch effort to speak on an upcoming fish policy recommendation that was going to make my area take it on the chin.

The chair of the local (South Island) SFAB is going well out of his way to ensure this is an open forum for all recreational fishermen in the area to attend, after working hours so they can advise him on what message to take to DFO regarding the potential management measures coming our way, at no cost to the SFAB.

I am not aware of SVIAC considering the SFAB an "arm" of the organization. There are directors of the WCGA, SCBA, and SFI who all serve on the SFAB.

Jackel, I am surprised an outdoorsman of your caliber is making a local group that is doing so much in your area the object of your unique brand of sarcasm.

Ah Kelly please dont comment on what you have no clue on what was said, this is an inside thing between derby and me. But seeing as you poked the bear, i hear, Chris is the guy who voted for the reduced size limit on hally and 2 possession, instead of 1 and a bigger size fish, and stated the opposite, this what is being said from people in the know. Oh and Kelly drop the BOLD lettering, you sound like Wolf, carry on!

 

[Whitebuck]

Dave couldn’t have said it better. People need to wake up...

 

[profisher]

Searun, with all due respect.... but isn't it too late once something has been decided on? And here is an observation....Victoria and Sooke have and have had blanket type restrictions for years and has taken it on the chin while the rest of the coast just carries on. There is a reason why we want to be proactive...we can't say we tried if we didn't.

 

[Admin]

We've given lots of latitude to this thread and understand that for many of you there is a lot of frustration, hard work, time and passion put into trying to help save and eventually, I hope, enhance our fabulous fisheries. People have had a chance to vent and now it is time to move on and refocus on the hurdles ahead that will require many people pulling in the same direction to make any positive change a possibility. Let's keep it respectful and on track from here on in.

 

[Jencourt]

Reading this thread makes me think of the dry season in the Serengeti and all the beasts gathered at the Last remaining water hole staring at the last few slurps in the bottom.
I truly hope all this leads to some long term effort by dfo to turn the tide and start creating an upward trend in our fish stalks. To those working tirelessly Trying to make a difference I am thankful to you.

 

[Aces]

Reading this thread makes me think of the dry season in the Serengeti and all the beasts gathered at the Last remaining water hole staring at the last few slurps in the bottom.
I truly hope all this leads to some long term effort by dfo to turn the tide and start creating an upward trend in our fish stalks. To those working tirelessly Trying to make a difference I am thankful to you.

Great analogy, Jencourt! That's how i'm seeing it too.

 

[Cut Plug]

And in that spirit of getting back on topic...

Based on what I know, and with the intent of having people actually show up to a meeting with the basic facts in place, and able to actually offer their advice on options that are likely to be presented without having to start from scratch, here's a summary of what you will likely be asked to consider on Friday based on my potentially limited knowledge of the subject matter.

Just for laughs, and hopefully to get a conversation started rather than to light the flame throwers, I'll also offer my personal opinion on the utility of some of the options...

• In early April, DFO provided information to the SFAB that specific runs of both Fraser River and Skeena\Nass chinook were suffering from historically low escapements over the past few years, and would require a decrease on exploitation rates (catch\escapement) in the range of 25% - 30% from all fisheries from a 2013 - 2016 base period in order to address this trend.
• The stocks that the Victoria area will be specifically asked to address in 2018 are the ones indicated in the meeting notice. Fraser River Fall Whites, Summer 4.2's and spring 4.1's.
• There are only a limited number of tools we have to sort this out - time and area closures, bag and possession limits, size limits, MSF; and hybrids of these. Here's what they mean to me:
• Time and area closures - Just what they sound like and I'd say a non-starter. Think about whats left after we dealt with SRKW's. Don't want to go there imho.
• Bag & possession limits - seems like a simple relationship but its not. Cutting the bag limit in half doesn't always lead to a 50% reduction in ER. Depends on the ratio of day anglers to multi day anglers, actual cpue and a bunch of other things. IMHO - not desirable as it cuts in to expectation and opportunity.
• Size limits - the slots we already have in place. These are based on the relationship between size and age in salmon. So, 67cm protects most 3 year old fish, and 85 cm protects most 4 year old and almost all 5 year old fish. All chinook salmon in any given run return to spawn at different ages, but most runs have a predominant age class of spawners. Hence Spring 4.1's and summer 5.2's etc. Can be one of the least painful options when you consider the average size of fish you catch in any given month (67cm = about 6 - 8 lbs and 85 cm = 15 - 20 lbs) and provide an option to preserve bag limits that consist of two fish, especially when "hybridized" with MSF.
• MSF - "Mark Selective Fisheries" in DFO speak, simply put, means keeping adipose fin clipped hatchery fish and releasing unmarked fish. Its utility depends entirely on the number of marked fish that are available in the area you fish when you are fishing it (the "mark rate"). So, in the JdF I have experienced mark rates as high as over 90% in the Nov to May period (and obviously it varies both day to day and location to location on any given day) but in the June to Sept period its way lower and I don't think my experience is atypical. The data supports it. The risk associated with MSF is that if there aren't a lot of marked fish present, the release mortalities can actually end up being greater than if you had a non MSF fishery in place. Obviously in order to be a viable option on its own we also need to move to mass marking in Canadian production hatcheries immediately, and move towards increased marked fish production in the near future.
• Hybrid -what we currently live with in JdF - a slot limit with the opportunity to keep marked hatchery fish greater than the slot size. Do I love it? Nope. Does it preserve the opportunty to keep 2 fish, and based on 85 cm provides me a decent shot a a few fish to take home on any given day? Yup, it does. That's why we currently have it in place. Your local SFAB reps back in the day "consulted it out" and it was agreed that it was the least painful of the options presented that would achieve the objective set forth in terms of reducing the ER on the stocks of concern.

So, I assume that on Friday you'll be asked to choose your poison and offer advice ( in the form of a motion?) to the local chair that he can then provide to DFO, although I'm not 100% clear how that will happen given the timelines. I guess we'll find out on Friday.

My bet is that a time extension of the hybrid options we currently have in place will be on the table ie - extend 85 cm to end of July. If that is indeed the case then compared to the others - and although I'd prefer to have things go back to just 2 per day 4 in possession all year long - its what I'd support. Why?

• It maintains the opportunity to keep 2 chinook per day which is an important principle for me.
• The last few years I have found a good number of chinook in the 80 to 85 cm range in JdF during the summer and to me they represent a decent fish which I don't mind keeping.
• Maybe I just suck at getting the big ones, but I don't find I get a lot of fish much bigger than 85 cm these days. I wonder if that's why the restrictions are being put in place on the larger fish?

Now, that being said, I totally get it and agree that if we can eventually persuade DFO to actually solve the problems with Fraser chinook abundance by dealing with predation (ie seals), fixing habitat, providing strategic enhancement, dealing with other in river issues etc,...etc...then all of this stuff would be unnecessary. Don't need to be reminded of that as I deal with it pretty much every day on your behalf, and am as frustrated as anyone else about the historic lack of progress. Unfortunately we are right now placed in a position that the options presented above is what we'll be talking about on Friday. I don't like it any more than any of you, but its reality.

So, any other thoughts to get us prepared to have a meaningful discussion Friday and not have to start from scratch?

CP

 

[Whole in the Water]

And in that spirit of getting back on topic...

Based on what I know, and with the intent of having people actually show up to a meeting with the basic facts in place, and able to actually offer their advice on options that are likely to be presented without having to start form scratch, here's a summary of what you will likely be asked to consider on Friday based on my potentially limited knowledge of the subject matter.

Just for laughs, and hopefully to get a conversation started rather than to light the flame throwers, I'll also offer my personal opinion on the utility of some of the options...

• In early April, DFO provided information to the SFAB that specific runs of both Fraser River and Skeena\Nass chinook were suffering from historically low escapements over the past few years, and would require a decrease on exploitation rates (catch\escapement) in the range of 25% - 30% from all fisheries from a 2013 - 2016 based period in order to address this trend.
• The stocks that the Victoria area will be specifically asked to address in 2018 are the ones indicated in the meeting notice. Fraser River Fall Whites, Summer 4.2's and spring 4.1's.
• There are only a limited number of tools we have to sort this out - time and area closures, bag and possession limits, size limits, MSF; and hybrids of these. Here's what they mean to me:
• Time and area closures - Just what they sound like and I'd say a non-starter. Think about whats left after we dealt with SRKW's. Don't want to go there imho.
• Bag & possession limits - seems like a simple relationship but its not. Cutting the bag limit in half doesn't always lead to a 50% reduction in ER. Depends on the ratio of day anglers to multi day anglers, actual cpue and a bunch of other things. IMHO - not desirable as it cuts in to expectation and opportunity.
• Size limits - the slots we already have in place. These are based on the relationship between size and age in salmon. So, 67cm protects most 3 year old fish, and 85 cm protects most 4 year old and almost all 5 year old fish. All chinook salmon in any given run return to spawn at different ages, but most runs have a predominant age class of spwaners. Hence Spring 4.1's and summer 5.2's etc. Can be one of the least painful options when you consider the average size of fish you catch in any given month (67cm = about 6 - 8 lbs and 85 cm = 15 - 20 lbs) and provide an option to preserve bag limits that consist of two fish, especially when "hybridized" with MSF.
• MSF - "Mark Selective Fisheries" in DFO speak, simply put, means keeping adipose fin clipped hatchery fish and releasing unmarked fish. Its utility depends entirely on the number of marked fish that are available in the area you fish when you are fishing it (the "mark rate"). So, in the JdF I have experienced mark rates as high as over 90% in the Nov to May period (and obviously it varies both day to day and location to location on any given day) but in the June to Sept period its way lower and I don't think my experience is atypical. The data supports it. The risk associated with MSF is that if there aren't a lot of marked fish present, the release mortalities can actually end up being greater than if you had a non MSF fishery in place. Obviously in order to be a viable option on its own we also need to move to mass marking in Canadian production hatcheries immediately, and move towards increased marked fish production in the near future.
• Hybrid -what we currently live with in JdF - a slot limit with the opportunity to keep marked hatchery fish greater than the slot size. Do I love it? Nope. Does it preserve the opportunty to keep 2 fish, and based on 85 cm provides me a decent shot a a few fish to take home on any given day? Yup, it does. That's why we currently have it in place. Your local SFAB reps back in the day "consulted it out" and it was agreed that it was the least painful of the options presented that would achieve the objective set forth in terms of reducing the ER on the stocks of concern.

So, I assume that on Friday you'll be asked to choose your poison and offer advice ( in the form of a motion?) to the local chair that he can then provide to DFO, although I'm not 100% clear how that will happen give the timelines. I guess we'll find out on Friday.

My bet is that a time extension of the hybrid options we currently have in place will be on the table ie - extend 85 cm to end of July. If that is indeed the case then compared to the others - and although I'd prefer to have things go back to just 2 per day 4 in possession all year long - its what I'd support. Why?

• It maintains the opportunity to keep 2 chinook per day which is an important principle for me.
• The last few years I have found a good number of chinook in the 80 to 85 cm range in JdF during the summer and to me they represent a decent fish which I don't mind keeping.
• Maybe I just suck at getting the big ones, but I don't find I get a lot of fish much bigger than 85 cm these days. I wonder if that's why the restrictions are being put in place on the larger fish?

Now, that being said, I totally get it and agree that if we can eventually persuade DFO to actually solve the problems with Fraser chinook abundance by dealing with predation (ie seals), fixing habitat, providing strategic enhancement, dealing with other in river issues etc,...etc...then all of this stuff would be unnecessary. Don't need to be reminded of that as I deal with it pretty much every day on your behalf, and am as frustrated as anyone else about the historic lack of progress. Unfortunately we are right now placed in a position that the options presented above is what we'll be talking about on Friday. I don't like it any more than any of you, but its reality.

So, any other thoughts to get us prepared to have a meaningful discussion Friday and not have to start from scratch?

CP

Good post CP, thanks for the clear, concise overview of the main options available.

I hope that those that attend the meetings stick to these issues at hand and don't turn it into a ***** and blame session and end up fighting amongst ourselves - big waste of everyone's time!

For those that want to do this direct your energy/anger towards calling, talking to, or writing your MP, DFO minister, Prime Minister etc. The big problems driving these proposed reg. and management changes and issues are political in nature and not operational.

 

[profisher]

Cutplug, exactly how I responded to a pm on here. Our chair is looking for direction from his local anglers as to which options he should support or refuse to support. He is seeking input as he should rather than taking apon himself.

 

[Admin]

A number of posts have been deleted as they were veering off topic and in some cases getting personal and going to lead to yet another useless fight. If there is further veering off topic or fights break out we will close the thread and simply post the meeting location and time once it is confirmed. Cleaned this up for the last time.

 

[High Time]

Is this just a JDF, Victoria,Sooke thing? I have not heard one mention of how Area 18 and Area 29 may be affected by whatever is being thrown out at this late date or any meetings on this side of the pond? Are we chopped liver over here? How are we supposed to contribute anything when we know nothing and have nowhere to get the info. and nowhere to discuss it?

 

[Gear'n'beer!]

I'm thinking if you don't know who your sfab chair is now is the time to find out and ask them
I know who my chair is and how to contact him........