Sport fishing is big Business

Derby

Crew Member
Sport fishing is big business
Published on January 24, 2014
OUTDOOR WORLD COLUMN BY DON MACLEAN

If you ever wondered how many anglers there are in Nova Scotia, or how much they spend every year on their sport, then the results of the recently released 2010 Nova Scotia Sport Fishing survey will interest you. This survey, which is carried out every five years, provides information on the numbers of anglers, their expenditures, the numbers and kinds of fish harvested and the amount of fishing effort expended.
That sounds like a lot of information, and it is. The survey shows that in 2010 there were 64,112 licensed anglers, of these 97 per cent were Nova Scotia residents and three per cent were non-residents. A look at the place of origin for non-resident anglers shows that 68 per cent were Canadian, 29 per cent American and four per cent came from Europe. There were 14,466 young people under the age of 16 living in licensed angler’s households who fished, bringing the number of anglers to 78,578.
Angling continues to be a major recreational activity in Nova Scotia. Licensed resident, and non-resident anglers spent 1.1 million days fishing in 2010. Residents fished an average of 18.5 days in 2010 while non-resident anglers spent an average of 7.2 days. Angling effort by residents continued to be highest in Halifax, Cape Breton and Lunenburg Counties while non-resident anglers expended most of their effort in Inverness County. The survey results show that angling continues to be a popular activity in Pictou County with anglers spending 31,860 days on the waters of Pictou County in 2010.
The age of the angling population is of interest to sport fish managers as they look at future anglers and in the 2010 survey the average age of resident anglers was 52. The sport fishery continues to be made up of a large number of male anglers. In the latest survey approximately 91 per cent of resident anglers were male.
The survey also estimates harvest and in 2010 Nova Scotia anglers caught an estimated four million fish, of which they retained 1.6 million (40 per cent). This retention rate is the same as it was in the 2005 survey and compares to anglers keeping 45 per cent of their catch in 2000, 54 per cent in 1995, 63 per cent in 1990 and 82 per cent in 1985. An average of 70 fish were caught per angler in 2010 of which 28 were retained. Of freshwater species speckled (brook) trout were the preferred species by both resident, and non-resident anglers, this was followed by rainbow trout by residents and Atlantic salmon by non-residents. Smallmouth bass were the third most popular fish for residents and fifth for non-residents.
Sport fishing continues to be an important economic generator in the province. Nova Scotia anglers spent a total of $56.4 million directly on their sport in 2010. The average expenditure per angler on their sport in 2010 was $977.00. If you are interested in finding out more about sport fishing in Nova Scotia copies of the survey are available from the Inland Fisheries Division, Nova Scotia Dept. of Fisheries and Aquaculture, P.O. Box 700, Pictou, N.S. B0K 1H0, or may be viewed on their website at http://novascotia.ca/fish/documents/NS-Sportfishing-Survey.pdf
Sport fishing, an important industry which provides recreation and employment for a lot of people in Nova Scotia.

Don MacLean is an outdoor writer and biologist who lives in Pictou County.
 
Have you ever gotten up at 4 AM in July and tried to make a leisurely exit out of Ucluelet Harbor with your boat?

Sport fishing has become a freaking military-industrial complex!!!

I'd like to see a similar up-dated report done on the Skeena system. The level of noise that accompanies any sort of regulatory changes in a sport fishery of that type seems to be in direct proportion to the amount of money the resident players suck out of the fishery.
 
If only the govt would realize this, and invest in it. The return would be huge, not to mention the influx of needed money to the remote communities the farms are supposedly saving/supporting.
 
If only the govt would realize this, and invest in it. The return would be huge, not to mention the influx of needed money to the remote communities the farms are supposedly saving/supporting.

Especially when you look at the return per pound of harvest. It always exceeds the return per pound of harvest in the commercial sector by many fold. When the resource is limited (say for example the TAC for halibut), the greater economic benefit can be had by allocating more of the resource to the rec sector.
 
we need to have a memeber from SFBC elected. Maybe we should bring our MLA's out for a day fishing!!!
 
That's called lobbying, JAC. The sooner we realize that we need a strong lobby group the better our chances are to knock some sense into our politician's heads.
 
And the commercial sector has been doing this for years. That is why they have the majority of tac in all sectors.
Until the sports sectors solve this you can look forward to loosing on a regular basis.
There is no lobby group for the sportsfishing sector in Canada. No one has staff in otttawa lobbying on a regular basis.




That's called lobbying, JAC. The sooner we realize that we needhe commerc a strong lobby group the better our chances are to knock some sense into our politician's heads.
 
And the commercial sector has been doing this for years. That is why they have the majority of tac in all sectors.
Until the sports sectors solve this you can look forward to loosing on a regular basis.
There is no lobby group for the sportsfishing sector in Canada. No one has staff in otttawa lobbying on a regular basis.
Exactly. That's why the CCA in the U.S. has slowly been expanding and that's why they charge a membership fee. Supporting lobbyists and competing with the commercials on a more level playing field is (IMHO) the only way that sporties will see an increase in TAC and resource sharing that is more sensible.
 
I once heard recreational fishing described in this way - which made a lot of sense to me. That is...recreational fishing is the wisest use of a common property resource, and Canada should be making allocation decisions around what derives the best economic return to the people who own it....wise use. What we need is a government committed to wise use of a common property resource, not maintaining the status quo.
 
Exactly. That's why the CCA in the U.S. has slowly been expanding and that's why they charge a membership fee. Supporting lobbyists and competing with the commercials on a more level playing field is (IMHO) the only way that sporties will see an increase in TAC and resource sharing that is more sensible.

Good post seadna. We need something like this. It appears that something has been started in Vic and apparently has been doing something positive lately. We just need it to grow and involve the rest of the Province for a more louder and complete voice. Once this happens we will see some major changes. Too many folks on here want instant gratification.
 
Exactly. That's why the CCA in the U.S. has slowly been expanding and that's why they charge a membership fee. Supporting lobbyists and competing with the commercials on a more level playing field is (IMHO) the only way that sporties will see an increase in TAC and resource sharing that is more sensible.
I've been hoping the CCA would expand up our way eventually
 
Good post seadna. We need something like this. It appears that something has been started in Vic and apparently has been doing something positive lately. We just need it to grow and involve the rest of the Province for a more louder and complete voice. Once this happens we will see some major changes. Too many folks on here want instant gratification.

Yes, you are right Sculpin, this is exactly what SVIAC has started to do on Southern Van. Isle with some decent progress after 1 year. But to be effective we need more people to join SVIAC and help it grow and spread to better help represent the rec sector.

If you want to check it out, and/or join look here: http://anglerscoalition.com/
 
Yes, you are right Sculpin, this is exactly what SVIAC has started to do on Southern Van. Isle with some decent progress after 1 year. But to be effective we need more people to join SVIAC and help it grow and spread to better help represent the rec sector.

If you want to check it out, and/or join look here: http://anglerscoalition.com/

If the SVIAC is truly interested in spreading its reach,at some point it should consider dropping the "SVI". The rather restrictive geographic notation doesn't provide a whole lot of incentive to anglers outside of the Capitol Regional District to get involved.
 
I thought their intension always was to expand once they proved success within their region. I can't blame them for starting in their own backyard first on a pilot scale. They are probably all Victoria residents and fishermen and what do they know about other regions' needs? They probably would have been mauled by the mob had they dared to speak for other regions too. I think if other regions liked their model and liked to jump at this idea they would start their own chapter with own manpower and then the name would consolidate into something more inclusive.
 
Calmsea - I thought (perhaps mistakenly?) that kind of organization structure already existed under the SFAB/SFAC umbrella. I also understand the concept of starting small and expanding - which was my point in my previous message. My assumption at this point is that the various appeals we see on these threads to get involved and join the SVIAC are directed towards the folks who live south of the Malahat.
 
How does the following look for Vision and Mission Statements for an organization that would look out for the interests of the recreational fishery...

"The Vision: A sustainable and vibrant recreational fishery in British Columbia, providing broad social and economic benefits through diverse opportunities that recognize and respect other users of the resource.

The Mission: To achieve this vision through the best managed recreational fisheries in the world, consisting of:

• Healthy environment and fishery resource;

• Sound management and decision-making;

• Sustainable, stable, and diverse recreational fishing opportunities."

Membership in such an organization could represent the various stakeholders in the fishery - guides, lodges, tourism representatives, individual anglers etc. It would have a formal executive structure, collect membership fees and represent the industry to the media, politicians and so forth.

Oh wait, you say, such an organization already exists??? The Sports Fishing Institute of BC?
So why are we trying to replicate that organization with entities such as the SVIAC?
Please note, I'm not trying to throw mud anywhere here. I saw the SFIBC banner run across the top of a page on this Forum and got curious as I hadn't heard anything of this organization.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
There is a lot you need to ask SVIAC's execs yourself. I am not all that familiar with all the politics of each individual group. All I gathered from several SVIAC meetings was what I stated above. Their differentiation to SFAB is that SFAB is a DFO advisory group and can't lobby. That's how I understand it. Some other organizations rely on regular government handouts and can't therefore not ask for the sky. I think that was reason why another independent group was formed to lobby for the rec sector.
 
The SFAB does not lobby for our fisheries. They are a group with local, regional and coast-wide committees and boards that provide informed, filtered and motion approved advice to DFO. SVIAC strongly supports and participates in the SFAB at all levels. But clearly DFO is not obligated to follow the SFAB advice. That is where lobbying comes in to play...

Lobbying for our province's freshwater and saltwater fisheries is undertaken by a wide-spectrum of groups: the SFI, the BCWF, the BCFDF, the BCFFF, the SSBC, Marine Trades Association, BC Marina and Campground Association, Amalgamated Conservation Society, Trout Unlimited to name a few. And then a host of smaller local or regional fishing clubs and associations, of which some are affiliated to larger provincial or national groups, and all have advocacy as part of their mandate. Each group has it's own mandate, special membership and unique strength. We are blessed in this province to have so many groups out there working for our fish and fisheries! However, no single organization currently has the capacity to be or is the panacea.

SVIAC was set up a little over a year ago in the South Vancouver Island region for two clear reasons:

First, and most importantly, before SVIAC there was a large gap in any effective advocacy on the south island for specific regional fisheries-related issues. For example, over 15 years the fishing opportunity down here has diminished by 50% and since 2007 Chinook fishing has been heavily restricted. Secondly, starting small and proving itself viable and effective remains the SVIAC founders and board of directors goal. The prospect of attempting to launch a new lobbying focused organization on a province-wide basis without a provincial network or infrastructure in place is doomed to failure.

So what is SVIAC's vision:
For the people of Southern Vancouver Island to enjoy and benefit from a range of thriving year-round angling opportunities and healthy fish populations needed to sustain those fisheries now and for future generations.

And our mission:
To promote thriving, sustainable tidal and fresh water fisheries for the benefit and enjoyment of the public on South Vancouver Island;
To advocate for productive ecosystems and abundant healthy populations of fish and invertebrates;
To encourage government to maintain and expand access to Canada’s common property fish resources, thereby safeguarding angling opportunities for the benefit and enjoyment of the public; and
To educate government and the public about the economic, social and cultural value of angling to society.

And we are primarily focused on at SVIAC right now is:
1) Championing a broad-based SVI Chinook Revitalization Initiative;
2) Initiating important steps in a Fraser River Stream-Type Chinook salmon recovery (where something on the ground is actually being done to get more fish in the water).
3) Seeking priority access to all species important to the public fisheries;
4) Advocating for sufficient stable funding to maintain our fisheries and protect the SEP budget; and
5) Building alliances with like-minded groups inside and outside the public recreational fishery.

In this more connected world every angler and forum subscriber has the opportunity to become a member of any or all of the fish, environmental and fishery lobbying groups they choose. Or conversely do nothing and expect others to do it for them. We, at SVIAC, prefer to be respectful about all the groups out there with their special strengths and geographic footprints, offering to work cooperatively toward common goals. Alliances are strong and powerful.

We also believe our positive message is resonating with many anglers.
 
Thanks, SVIAC, for the explanation. I applaud the efforts of the organization. I belong to the Fanny Bay Salmon Enhancement Society and spend about 7 hours a week volunteering at the Rosewall Hatchery as well as at a small satellite hatchery on Wilfred Creek.
This part of your explanation concerns me:

"Lobbying for our province's freshwater and saltwater fisheries is undertaken by a wide-spectrum of groups: the SFI, the BCWF, the BCFDF, the BCFFF, the SSBC, Marine Trades Association, BC Marina and Campground Association, Amalgamated Conservation Society, Trout Unlimited to name a few. And then a host of smaller local or regional fishing clubs and associations, of which some are affiliated to larger provincial or national groups, and all have advocacy as part of their mandate. Each group has it's own mandate, special membership and unique strength. We are blessed in this province to have so many groups out there working for our fish and fisheries! However, no single organization currently has the capacity to be or is the panacea."

I strikes me that given the number of organizations you have mentioned here, the lobbying efforts on behalf of the recreational sports fishery are rather fractured. In other words, there does not appear to be any one voice coordinating the individual efforts of all of the organizations you have noted.
I would have thought, given their mission and vision statements, that the SFIBC would have been the logical umbrella organization - but perhaps I am wrong, in that they may not have the will or the backing to perform that role. Again, given the apparent splintering of the recreational "industry" I'm not surprised that any one of the groups has taken a more central leadership role.
BTW - I don't have a solution to this apparent dilemma - but I suspect that the more splinter groups arise to deal with specific industry and/or geographical concerns, the more difficult it will be to reach one.
 
Back
Top