April 1 Fishing Regs-sell your Boats!!

[brutus]

The argument isn't anything to do with FN , its all about the "publicized" reasons rec fisheries are closed , even for a hatchery marked fish.
If the reasoning behind the closures are conservation then so be it ,but they are not when net fisheries are aloud in rivers and catch/kill indiscriminately any and all species , some being the marked fish rec fishers are not aloud to keep, there is your legitimate reason for ther rec fishers argument for msf to be open

Oh I guarantee you there are no Marked fish in those nets, those are all early upper fraser fish, the ones that are in danger for some, I need to add to this, lilooet and Birkenhead fish in those nets too, the few that are left

 

[John Ingram]

Oh I guarantee you there are no Marked fish in those nets, those are all early upper fraser fish, the ones that are in danger for some

A lot of our hatchery fish "NOT CLIPPED" will show's up in a net as wild

 

[brutus]

A lot of our hatchery fish "NOT CLIPPED" will show's up in a net as wild

Lol yes , but the ones in the river now are not hatch jobs period, no debating that one

 

[SpringVelocity]

Aaron Hill (President of Watershed Watch and member of MCC Caucus) response to MSF fisheries, and hatcheries. This was presented to Ottawa on May 5th:

Aaron Hill presentation to FOPO, May 5, 2021 | Watershed Watch Salmon Society

watershedwatch.ca

 

[UkeeDreamin]

Quickly and simply summarizes the issues w/ DFOs archaic hatchery programs, good for you Aaron Hill!

Cheers!

Ukee

 

[scott craven]

He is not supporter of MSF , which we need in order to keep a westcoast
fishery alive.

 

[UkeeDreamin]

He is not supporter of MSF , which we need in order to keep a westcoast
fishery alive.

Unfortunately, I don’t think either the science/data, or recent fisheries decisions, support that statement.

One thing you can pretty much guarantee, though, is that if one side of the boat is rowing to maintain or expand an outdated hatchery program and the other is rowing to protect and recover wild stock/natural productivity, the “boat” is just going to spin in circles!

Cheers!

Ukee

 

[SpringVelocity]

He is not supporter of MSF , which we need in order to keep a westcoast
fishery alive.

I agree Scott they are part of the problem, and why DFO caved to MSF. As you can see their supporters are crawling all over this forum.

Just watch them suck in the steelhead anglers. That should be interesting. Just another group to use than spit out when they are done with them.

 

[UkeeDreamin]

Rather than post immature laughing emojis, why don’t you present your counter facts and argument?

Im sure I’m one of those supposed “supporters crawling all over this forum” when in fact I’m an advocate for not abandoning our wild stocks, and as importantly the watersheds that support them, when we still haven’t effed everything up in BC.

I find it very ironic that many on here who speak of uniting the rec sector, turn out to be the ones who immediately turn on and mark clear lines of division when folks simply provide their views, opinions and thoughts. It is also frustrating when folks try to spin or compartmentalize an extremely complex issue into black and white sides, which simply don’t exist. For example, to be anti-DFO hatchery given the overwhelming science against their outdated approach isn’t akin to being anti-hatchery or anti-MSF in their entirety.

Personally, I would argue BC has far more in common w/ Alaska than the Lower 48, and their (Alaska’s) hatchery supplementation approach whereby hatchery stock must be kept certain distances away from wild stock systems, is a model that could be adapted for BC. Similarly, our own Freshwater Fisheries society runs a world renowned hatchery program that similarly keeps wild stocks wild and creates/enhances areas that wouldn’t otherwise support wild trout stocks. That’s a win-win as we all have a choice to head to a stocked lake, or go fish a wild river or lake.

Anyway, the same old division and infighting sure has been working!

Cheers!

Ukee

 

[Stizzla]

The argument isn't anything to do with FN , its all about the "publicized" reasons rec fisheries are closed , even for a hatchery marked fish.
If the reasoning behind the closures are conservation then so be it ,but they are not when net fisheries are aloud in rivers and catch/kill indiscriminately any and all species , some being the marked fish rec fishers are not aloud to keep, there is your legitimate reason for ther rec fishers argument for msf to be open

I don’t understand how the first paragraph you said it has nothing to with FN, then the second paragraph you mention the net fishery in rivers are indiscriminately killing them all. (The net fisheries are FN).

out of curiosity what are the publicized reasons we can keep any, if not for conservation?

 

[scott craven]

Unfortunately, I don’t think either the science/data, or recent fisheries decisions, support that statement

You should talk to some of the good people from the SFAB and SFI.
I think they can show you the data, as far as the decision from DFO ....
well unfortunately they have the ability to ignore it all.

 

[wolf]

You should talk to some of the good people from the SFAB and SFI.
I think they can show you the data

YEAH i have the 2018 data thats almost 7000 pieces that supports a MSF no question they CHOOSE to ignore it

 

[UkeeDreamin]

You should talk to some of the good people from the SFAB and SFI.
I think they can show you the data, as far as the decision from DFO ....
well unfortunately they have the ability to ignore it all.

This highlights one of my points, above - big difference between supporting MSF fisheries and supporting DFOs current hatchery approach.

In fact, it is why, contrary to what some on here may assume, I’m the biggest advocate for catching and killing as many hatchery fish as possible. Again, my opinion (though I feel the best available science supports this view) but DFO has this butt-backwards: unless they can refute the papers on conservation minded MSFs you reference above (and I might add so long as they’re peer reviewed to ensure impacts on the at risk stocks is minimal) it should actually be illegal to release hatchery fish!

As I posted above, if I get to the coast this year, which is unfortunately doubtful, I’ll be strongly considering bonking a hatchery fish or two and would welcome the chance to expose DFOs regulatory hypocrisy in court.

Cheers!

Ukee

 

[SpringFever552]

If hatcheries/and or hatchery fish are bad, why are rec guys not out on the water catching 4 a day

 

[SpringFever552]

I don’t understand how the first paragraph you said it has nothing to with FN, then the second paragraph you mention the net fishery in rivers are indiscriminately killing them all. (The net fisheries are FN).

out of curiosity what are the publicized reasons we can keep any, if not for conservation?

The reasons dfo is spewing is conservation of certain chinook runs, dfo has openings to legal net fisheries which indiscriminately catch anything that swims into them, so its has nothing to do with conservation.
Rec arguments are not with fn, its with dfo and gov of Canada and their lies to every Canadian as to why they can't go and catch a hatchery fish.

 

[brutus]

The reasons dfo is spewing is conservation of certain chinook runs, dfo has openings to legal net fisheries which indiscriminately catch anything that swims into them, so its has nothing to do with conservation.
Rec arguments are not with fn, its with dfo and gov of Canada and their lies to every Canadian as to why they can't go and catch a hatchery fish.

You really think FN has nothing to do with those restrictions???

 

[tiller]

There would be smart, data driven opportunities for the rec sector if it was not for the unreasonable and frequent hyprocital teamwork of the First Nations and the ENGOs that do not want the public fishery to be fishing. Period.

 

[SpringFever552]

You really think FN has nothing to do with those restrictions???

Hell No, but as soon as you bring that up in your argument you'll likely lose some of the gen publics support.

 

[chris73]

Personally, I would argue BC has far more in common w/ Alaska than the Lower 48, and their (Alaska’s) hatchery supplementation approach whereby hatchery stock must be kept certain distances away from wild stock systems, is a model that could be adapted for BC. Similarly, our own Freshwater Fisheries society runs a world renowned hatchery program that similarly keeps wild stocks wild and creates/enhances areas that wouldn’t otherwise support wild trout stocks. That’s a win-win as we all have a choice to head to a stocked lake, or go fish a wild river or lake.

Anyway, the same old division and infighting sure has been working!

Cheers!

Ukee

Well, that calls for a hatchery on pretty much every river and creek in southern BC. I couldn't tell you off hand one single river with a healthy wild salmon population in south BC.

 

[pescador]

But David’s against them.

Join the conversation about salmon hatcheries

Salmon hatcheries are not a silver bullet for wild fish problems, and that government spending should go to other programs, like community-led science and habitat restoration.

davidsuzuki.org