cohochinook
Well-Known Member
Here's Watershed Watch's Post on Facebook on it:
https://www.facebook.com/163765883653829/posts/3043798138983908/
https://www.facebook.com/163765883653829/posts/3043798138983908/
"There are some sources of fishing mortality, like the illegal Fraser Valley fishing, which appear to be beyond DFO’s ability to monitor or control. The potential loss accrued in these fisheries must be taken into consideration when planning any other fisheries."
Here's Watershed Watch's Post on Facebook on it:
https://www.facebook.com/163765883653829/posts/3043798138983908/
I'm working on a response. Feel free to jump in with comment if you want?I saw your post, and I see Watershed's position. This is re posted on Facebook on public comment section. Look at the words" read the backgrounder"
View attachment 50627
Lol group of professional fundraisers
I should add I will gladly donate to these pseudo scientists when I hear they are actively monitoring the legal and illegal netting in the Fraser. I’ll double the donation when the Activists start pulling illegal nets! Until then they can continue to bleed the unwitting.
Read this for the real answer.
From article,
- December 5, 2019. The silence from DFO continues but an informant advises that a related issue just might be the fact that Grand Chief Ken Malloway, the Chairperson of the Fraser River Aboriginal Fisheries Secretariat, has a company that monitors 22-25 FN bands in the Fraser Valley. Malloway indicated that included about 60% of the FSC fisheries and 100% of Economic Development (“Economic Opportunity”?) fisheries. How blatant can conflict of interest get? The relationship between this company and those 70 monitors indicated to me on Sept 23 to be the ones responsible for the same objective is unknown, although it would be logical to assume they are one in the same. I’d ask DFO but history instructs that would only add to my long list of unanswered communications.
http://steelheadvoices.com/?p=1868#more-1868
Good science relies on being questioned while religion is faith based and in some cases as we have witnessed recently cannot tolerate being questioned. While I don’t agree with personal attacks from either side and the Facebook link had many, it’s very weak in my opinion to not question assertions made, estimates, or in the case of the press release being questioned the total lack of estimates.
Good science relies on being questioned while religion is faith based and in some cases as we have witnessed recently cannot tolerate being questioned. While I don’t agree with personal attacks from either side and the Facebook link had many, it’s very weak in my opinion to not question assertions made, estimates, or in the case of the press release being questioned the total lack of estimates.
To demean those who question the methodology by characterizing them as self professed experts who shoot the messenger, when you in fact are doing just that erodes your credibility. Let’s be honest, there are no true experts out there, in truth the real scientists are demanding research because they realize this.
Papers like the one that’s being commented on cannot be defended when they totally dismiss any effort to assess harvesting in the Fraser itself for political reasons Perhaps it is “walking on eggshells” but if you don’t have the courage to speak up and walk on those eggshells you need to be called out for your partial research. This information is vital to the theory! Will ocean closures protect the stock if there are insufficient control in the river? Or are we just harvesting the same fish in a different area.
Hooton is a well respected individual but I have to wonder if he was commenting on the right link?
Lol, it’s all becoming clear now.Time to start connecting the dots....
The Truth is Out There!Time to start connecting the dots....
catch and release is 37% mortality
Misty is on crack, no one bothered to catch and release and all the mortality on this stock happen in river gilnets and the Fraser slide.
Look at the backgrounder their science comes from 2017 fishing data.
My bet is they have already submitted something like this to the IFMP.