B.C. First Nations Fishing Rights - Supreme Court Ruling

[agentaqua]

I agree I would gladly pay more for my licence if it ment stationing validators at the docks.

More creel surveys and enforcement is something that everyone would welcome. Many have begged for higher licence fees for just this purpose.

that's great, WMY.

However, at this point - there are NO 3rd party validators for the rec fleet. Let's be clear about that. And only a scattered, ad hoc approach to short-term creel surveys (which are not the same thing) for only a few areas of the coast. Lets be clear about that too.

However, there are a few rec posters that want to complain about FN validating their catch - mostly those whom appear to not really know anything about FSC catch and the case law behind it.

And certain sectors of the commercial fleet even have cameras and pay quite high bills to Archipelago to monitor - and have to use those cameras/GPS - on the far end of that catch monitoring spectrum.

“Let him who is without sin among you be the first to cast a stone...” John 8:7

 

[wildmanyeah]

However, at this point - there are NO 3rd party validators for the rec fleet. Let's be clear about that. And only a scattered, ad hoc approach to short-term creel surveys (which are not the same thing) for only a few areas of the coast. Lets be clear about that too.

Very good points about the rec fleet. Definitely needs to change. Lots of cleanup needed

Do you think DFO is greatly underestimating the catching power and effort of the rec fleet.

 

[trophywife]

It would appear to me that in your own post, that there are entities starting to recognize the importance of accurate catch reporting. When I sat in SFAC some years back as an independent angler, I always asked to make it a condition of license that it be mandatory previous year rec licenses be remitted to DFO for tabulation. The response from more than one DFO rep was that (we, as in the public) do not want to know our true numbers harvested. Meaning that they are bigger than we think. My argument was how then can DFO effectively manage any fishery without effectively proven scientific data from all sectors. I made **** ON DFO decals and t-shirts and distributed over 11,000 decals and 200 t-shirts, 144 coffee mugs all across Canada. Did it help? I am uncertain...but I felt good about it.

more **** on dfo swag needed.

 

[agentaqua]

Very good points about the rec fleet. Definitely needs to change. Lots of cleanup needed. Do you think DFO is greatly underestimating the catching power and effort of the rec fleet.

Maybe. Some large differences in the components of the rec fleet - as I see it.

My experience is that the local fishers (either rec, commercial, and/or FSC) have the most to loose if some stupid sh*t goes down. They know their areas well, and want their kids to have the same benefits and access we have had. They are also the "eyes on the water" wrt bad behaviour. Often they are the ones to report any bad behaviour to enforcement.

So - this "group" is more likely to comply and even often suggest more regulation and voluntary conservation measures such as rockfish descenders, etc. IMHO. There's always the odd bad apple in every group - but the more consensus you get - the better enforcement you get.

Lodges also have their tenures and reputation to protect. If the provincial tenure renewal was tied into federal fisheries law - that would be an extremely effective tool to moderate "bad" lodge behaviour.

Then there is the charter operators - that also operate on reputation and renewal of business clients. They are always under pressure to produce fish for their clients - esp for those clients whose sense of self-worth is tied-up in how many fish they bring home. That pressure can enable some shady behaviour with some individuals - esp when they are out of sight of other "eyes on the water".

Then there are the "tourists" who travel back n forth along the water between Alaska and the continental US. Most are well-intended. Often they are naive and ill-educated wrt regulations - and like other groups - w/o "eyes on the water" can and often do some stupid sh*t.

I imagine other posters have their experiences to share wrt stupid sh*t they have seen on the water from certain individuals from these groups. A once every few years creel survey in only a few areas probably won't be able to provide an accurate catch estimate from some of these individuals in these groups.

 

[agentaqua]

Not sure where your last post went, WMY - but there really should have been another column next to the catch estimates - the statistical "error" one - so one could assess how accurate those estimates were.

 

[wildmanyeah]

Not sure where your last post went, WMY - but there really should have been another column next to the catch estimates - the statistical "error" one - so one could assess how accurate those estimates were.

Deleted it because I was dragging it off the thread topic. Your right tho no matter what the data is their is always a method to picking it apart. I suspect calculating the statistic error would be about as hard as putting the survey together.

 

[agentaqua]

Deleted it because I was dragging it off the thread topic. Your right tho no matter what the data is their is always a method to picking it apart. I suspect calculating the statistic error would be about as hard as putting the survey together.

not necessarily. A properly done creel survey always includes statistical error. Hard to say if the "historic" creel surveys were done with scientific rigor, though...