“Random” iREC Fishing Survey

********!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I filled out that thing diligently along with many others and thats 2 times now they kicked us when it matters most ... it wouldn't have mattered IF everyone who ever fished area 19/20 filled out a data book !!!!!!!!!!!
They had it set in their mind to **** us over plain and simple, they dont give a **** how many peoples jobs this is effecting .
It is really sad to see our marina half full and sunny shores with a whopping 12 boats. The other day they was 6 boats fishing in the area i was at they have accomplished what they wanted KILLING our community...and guess what not once has SRKW been off our waters...

Yes it would have Wolf. The more data you would have had it would have made a difference. That area got slapped right in the face and I still think it has to do with your data. I am talking DNA data not just from guides but also anglers in area. Your area rejected it SOG didn't. Look at the result. If I would have known about a DNA data in our area years ago I would have done it. But it wasn't offered or even started. I am carrying one on my boat this year.

As I said before why do you think Renfrew up far from you are open. It is because a lot of them have good data. And FYI we are all not happy with what went on there. You know I fish there 2, so hear u.
 
Can't compare the JDF to SOG, one has restrictions to protect Fraser River early/summer 4-2, 5-2 spring 5-2 summer run chinook and one has protections to protect harrison stock. The Natives on the fraser solidified area 19/20 fate, not sure any amount of data would have changed that considering that the regulations go back over 10 years.

here is a graphic from 2008 keep in mind its out dated, The nicola mouth sport fishery has been eliminated, the fraser river sport has been eliminated, The JDF sport has seen slot limits but nothing has been done about FN net fisheries!!!

View attachment 38658

Here is the more recent graphic, im sure you have all seen it, Now FN are the biggest user group still and again nothing being done... Just more restrictions in the JDF where there is barely any blood left to squeeze.

View attachment 38659

Just think soon DFO will be forced to squeeze a FN commercial fishery out as well, well guess where that allocation is going to come from! us!



the SRKW closures tho is ridiculous, Total finfish closures are completely unjustified.


I am not comparing the fish ( they are different fisheries) I am making an example. For last time so everyone understands. SOG fishery did better because it has an accepted DNA data program that it has had for many years. JDF had a limited data collection program, and tried to start an angler DNA program similar to SOG. That didn't get done so who's fault is that? Now people wonder why we have slot limits till end of July. You guys can keep arguing but that made it worse. I think the outcome could have been better in JDF is we had better data. Just my view.
 
Jarrod you have no clue . stick to what you know ok ....
 
Jarrod you have no clue . stick to what you know ok ....


And you know what????? LOL... now coming to a theatre near you... Mandatory log books my friend so embrace it :) :)


DFO, with help of the Sport Fishing Institute (SFI) and the West Coast Fishing Guides Association (WCFGA), have been asking guides and lodges to report catches in logbooks for over a decade. Due to poor compliance in past years and review of how the process of requesting catch information is supposed to proceed, DFO is now requiring guides and lodges provide the necessary information under section 61 of the Fisheries Act.

The SFI and the WCFGA have agreed to assist DFO by providing support and advice to ensure the transition does not disrupt the business operations of lodges and guides, and that catch reporting and bio sampling protocols respect the priority of guides to provide an excellent customer service and fishing experience to their clients.

The SFI and the WCFGA agree that guides and lodges have a higher responsibility for reporting their catch. These organizations recognize the importance of accurate and timely catch and biological information to demonstrate the sustainability of the fishery and provide the necessary tools to effectively manage the fishery in season. These organizations also recognize the need to maintain the highest level of professionalism and respect for the resource within our fishing guide community and are confident that the vast majority of professional fishing guides and lodges will fully support and comply with this program.

What is section 61 requirement for guides and lodges to provide catch and sampling information and how will it affect you?

Section 61(5) of the fisheries Act states that:

61 (5) A person referred to in subsection (1) shall, in accordance with the regulations and the terms and conditions of any lease or licence issued to the person under this Act, provide a fishery officer, a fishery guardian or any authority designated in the regulations, lease or licence with any information relating to a matter mentioned in subsection (2) that the regulations, lease or licence requires.

Subsections (1) and (2) state:

Persons who may be required to provide information

61 (1) The following persons may be required under this Act to provide information or to keep records, books of account or other documents:

(a) any person who engages in fishing;

(b) any person who purchases fish for the purpose of resale;

(c) any owner, operator or manager of an enterprise that catches, cultures, processes or transports fish; and

(d) any agent or employee of a person referred to in paragraphs (a) to (c).

61 (2) A person referred to in subsection (1) may be required to provide information or to keep records or other documents relating to any of the following matters:

(a) the number, sex, size, weight, species, product form, value or other particulars of any fish caught, cultured, processed, transported, sold or purchased;

(b) the time and place at which any fish was caught or landed and the person, enterprise or vessel by which the fish was caught or landed;

(c) the time and place at which any fish was purchased and the person, enterprise or vessel from which the fish was purchased;

(d) the vessels, gear and methods used and the number of persons employed for the purpose of catching fish;

(e) the buildings, equipment, products and methods used and the number of persons employed for the purpose of culturing or processing fish; and

(f) any other matter relating to the proper management and control of fisheries or the conservation and protection of fish.

63 (3) No person shall produce for examination or copying by an inspector, a fishery officer or a fishery guardian or any authority designated by a fishery officer or a fishery guardian any records, books of account or other documents that contain false or misleading information.

The following condition of licence is stated on the tidal waters sport fishing licence:

Provision of Information: The licence holder shall provide accurate information regarding their catch and fishing activities upon request of a Creel Surveyor and/or an online surveyor, authorities designated under s. 61(5) of the Fisheries Act.”

Here is a link to the complete Fisheries Act Section 61: http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/f-14/page-9.html#h-19

DFO will be working with guides and lodges to provide support with monitoring and sampling requirements wherever possible. Creel surveyors are stationed in key landing locations and will provide assistance and training in the completion of the log book and bio sampling protocols as they can.

If you don’t have access to a creel surveyor you are required to complete a logbook yourself for every fishing trip. In addition, you should be collecting heads from adipose fin clipped chinook and coho, and providing additional samples as requested. The requirement priority is in this order:

1. Complete a log of catch and effort for each fishing trip in the supplied logbook or electronic log

2. Provide adipose clipped heads, with an appropriately filled out marked head label, for as many heads as practical. Record the head label number in your logbook in the biological sampling section.

3. Along the WCVI in 2018, conduct biological sampling on 1 chinook salmon per day, generally the first chinook within 5 nautical miles of the surf line. Sampling consists of taking scales, length, and head for otolith dissection. Bio sampling protocols can be obtained by contacting Karin Mathias at: Karin.Mathias@dfo-mpo.gc.ca. In other areas, DFO may be requesting DNA or other samples.


IF DFO staff become aware of guides and lodges along the WCVI who are not complying with required reporting then a Fishery Officer can serve notice demanding the information. If the guide or lodge refuses to provide or falsifies information, the guide or lodge can be charged with an offence under Section 61 of the Fisheries Act.


DFO, in cooperation with the SFI and WCFGA is making every effort to provide as much support, training and assistance as possible during the transition period of mandatory compliance. If you have any questions about the program along the WCVI, or require support, training or sampling materials please contact:
 
Last edited:
No, I’m saying the extremely biased and non-randomized data collected by voluntary survey and dock interview is junk data that is virtually useless and the way DFO uses it in modelling is often irresponsible. I do agree that DNA data collected provides presence/absence information of the various species and stocks, which is important, but without properly structured study design and data collection to remove bias and ensure random, or stratified random, sampling more valuable insight into proportions and ratios of stocks encountered in various fisheries can’t be concluded with any defensible scientific rigour.

Anyone who claims otherwise without showing how the bias and randomness error and uncertainty are properly characterized and accounted for, how the error and uncertainty are calculated within the modeling and what the final confidence intervals and error range of the results are (and that all of these were subjected to a proper peer review process) is mischaracterizing the data quality and results ... which is essentially what regularly occurs with rec fish data presented by DFO.

Anyway, imho the saying “continuing to do the same thing, but expecting different results is insanity” applies to the sentiment that these surveys and data collection methods are better than nothing because poor data misused is a dangerous thing!

Cheers!

Ukee

What are you using to inform your opinion that iREC is so bad? Can you share this with us because from my point of view and having had to keep up with developments I don't share your view.
 
THEY can implement anything all they want just like the blue decal NO ONE enforces it . bring on the data book ill have zeros all the way thru it . you guys dont get it !!!! THEY DO NOT USE SCIENCE BASED MODELS FOR THIS. its all political motivated they dont care about everyday anglers or you or me that is more then clear...
I wont do it along with most of the sooke guides as we are FED UP with all the ******** we have had to endure.
Sorry derby but its not going to fly down here as we did do it and we got ****** in the butt over it until they come back to us or GIVE US BACK something they wont get any help from me....and i dont appreciate the LOL in your statement . you all are laughing it up cause it doesnt effect you until it does laugh all you want .this hurt the whole south its really bad booking are down marinas half full, resort is down a huge amount , 6 boats on the water in prime areas...

I personally have lost 9 days now because of these measures still think its funny.!!!!!!
 
Its not a funny subject at all, in fact a very serious one. We have been pushing for science based management decisions for years. Unless there is accurate catch data to assist us in using it to hold DFO to account when making management decisions that impact our fishery, any efforts to get science based management are indeed useless.

Silly idea to boycott doing log books. We are actually hurting ourselves if we do not embrace log books, and as pointed out DFO can and will require you to complete a log book. They have told us that this year they are going to enforce it with Section 61 of the Fisheries Act, which is a summary conviction requiring court attendance - its not a ticket. The "threat" of DFO doing that with Section 61 should not be why you comply - it should be about contributing data as professional guides who have a higher duty to provide catch data given our professional concern for the fishery.

What happened in Sooke with the SRKW Area Closure is when DFO does not make science based management decisions. There is NO science to prove the Area Refuge rec fin fish closure is any more effective than a 400 m spatial exclusion or "bubble zone" strategy!! Now they are asking for more "consultation" on expanding the "Critical Habitat" from Swiftsure all the way to Long Beach on LaPerouse Bank. Again, not based on any science for the most part - just assumptions that whales like these areas. There's no data to prove whales use LaPerouse as an example - I fish out there a ton and have only seen them transit the area (no forage activity) on 2 occasions. So regardless of the issues, we need science based decision making not politically motivated ones! Catch data is your friend.
 
Now Searun..Data is not your friend if your name is.. Mr. Wolf.... Wolf give your head a shake if anyone of use thinks this funny.... your just being a goof ball.... :)
 
And you know what????? LOL... now coming to a theatre near you... Mandatory log books my friend so embrace it :) :)
this is what you wrote derby and you wonder why my hackles went up? I respect you a ton to call me a goof ball is childish.

11 years now i have provided data and look where it got us ... NO WHERE. ill never do it and let them enforce something on me im leaving the game anyways as its gonna be over soon enough and THAT is the TRUTH.
 
Last edited:
Just think about what your saying... look at what you write & how wrong it is... your last statement is what has come out of Victoria for 11 years.. so I guess I should have not put in a c hundred hrs in your area like I did this spring eh....
 
I deleted that last statement as im just upset and mad how things have gone and You really got me fuming last night Derby by your comments . As you know i have never wanted anyone to endure what us here have endured for the last 11 years .
I dont think anyone who doesnt live in our community understands if you dont live here how upsetting this all is.
When we do go fishing its almost like you feel like your guilty of doing something you love!!!

Good luck wolf
 
As I said before why do you think Renfrew up far from you are open. It is because a lot of them have good data. And FYI we are all not happy with what went on there. You know I fish there 2, so hear u.
Wrong, Bud and Rex at the marina make it their case to tell everybody DO NOT TURN YOUR HEADS IN, word for word"we don't want them to find out that there may be Cowichan or other runs in trouble being caught here"
 
Wrong, Bud and Rex at the marina make it their case to tell everybody DO NOT TURN YOUR HEADS IN, word for word"we don't want them to find out that there may be Cowichan or other runs in trouble being caught here"

Now this statement really pisses me off. You guys deserve to be shut down just because of that.

I hope the guides there feel the section 61 wrath. 2 guides here have already taken flack from DFO and are being threatened with charges.
 
Now this statement really pisses me off. You guys deserve to be shut down just because of that.

I hope the guides there feel the section 61 wrath. 2 guides here have already taken flack from DFO and are being threatened with charges.
I agree, dont shoot the messenger, hey go to the Nucks thread it might cheer you up
 
I keep a log book and have since DFO created them. I know as was the first in Sooke/Victoria to agree to it. There have been times that I have questioned if I should continue and did stop collecting just the DNA for a period when I learned that my samples were sitting on a shelf unprocessed for lack of funds to do so. I'm now taking DNA again as they have assured me that all samples will be read. Without good data the door is open for DFO to impose whatever precautionary restrictions they feel are required and we have no ammo to fight back with. If the data supports a DFO position so be it...I would rather know I'm helping over being the problem. We all complain about the lack of accountability with the in river fisheries.....how then could you justify the sport sector joining that club?
 
Both sides of this argument have good points. IMHO were damned if we do and damned if we don't. Without good data DFO can justifiably impose whatever they want as what's to say otherwise? With good data DFO can still make BS decisions that are politically motivated and not based on science and sound resource management - that's the nature of politics.

However, I am on the side that says we need to collect date under one condition. We (the citizens) get access to the same data and in additions we collect some of our own and we all look at what the date says and push for fair, sustainable fisheries management (what we all want) and hold DFO accountable to do so, not with just complaining to them, but with data to back up our positions.

The days of trusting DFO to do the right thing in regards collecting data to make sound, sustainable fisheries management are long over. The rec sector needs to start collecting as much data as we can to know what is truly happening with the fishery and do our own analysis to counter BS DFO decisions that screw the rec sector. Look at what the anti fish farm groups and the pro orca groups have done lately - they collect and analyze data to support their positions. Its time the rec sector started doing the same! It's time to get the rec sector lobby groups to raise funds to pay for our own data collection and analysis and start to fight fire with fire!
 
Last edited:
I did my random IREC survey for June today. I am happy to give data but this is a copy of my comments at the end of the survey.

"I am perplexed why DFO collects data from recreational fishers. The data seems to be universally ignored in management decisions. I cite the area 18 and 20 recreational finfish closures as being critical SRKW habitat as evidence of that lack of using our input. Input in that decision from recreational fishers was sought, provided and then ignored by the implementation of what DFO originally tabled in the first place. So why ask? Why seek input? The same style consultation process is under away now for Swiftsure and LaPerouse Banks on the West Coast of Vancouver Island. From a taxpayer's perspective my tax dollars are being wasted. A DFO employee or contractor reviews mine and other recreational fishers data which they do for pay, wraps it up in a report and then discussed report findings in a meeting with management. This all costs tax dollars and is a waste of tax dollars if input from recreational fishers is routinely ignored in management decisions. I would much rather see tax dollars spent on enforcement, habitat restoration, salmon enhancement and salmon smolt predator management."

I won't be holding my breath on a response.
 
Wrong, Bud and Rex at the marina make it their case to tell everybody DO NOT TURN YOUR HEADS IN, word for word"we don't want them to find out that there may be Cowichan or other runs in trouble being caught here"
Pretty harsh to throw Bud and Rex under the bus. I have rented a spot there for a few years and fished out of their even longer and never once did I ever hear Bud or Rex tell anyone DO NOT TURN YOUR HEADS IN.
 
Back
Top