Head return info

[Little Hawk]

This is a good idea Pro. Good on you and count on my support if you (we) can bring this to bear.

 

[Deewar25]

I am curious if you can fill me in on the science...how the heck does DNA from a wild fish tell you the river it came from? What is the process? Is it mostly just comparing genetic makeup to other known fish from those systems? Are we privy to all the DNA information gathered from the states rivers? Does it matter? Could it be just a straight comparison to known Fraser DNA and just throwing out the rest of the samples since the only thing we care about is the Fraser run?

I assume thats the scoop here!

 

[Dogbreath]

I am curious if you can fill me in on the science...how the heck does DNA from a wild fish tell you the river it came from? What is the process? Is it mostly just comparing genetic makeup to other known fish from those systems?

Yes profiles exist for most runs in most rivers.

Are we privy to all the DNA information gathered from the states rivers?

The power of the internet! People share info.

Does it matter?

Political question!

Could it be just a straight comparison to known Fraser DNA and just throwing out the rest of the samples since the only thing we care about is the Fraser run?

I guess it depends oh how the science is done-again a political question and also a funding issue.

 

[profisher]

I don't see throwing away any information at all. I want this done specifically for the early timed Fraser component in 19/20's sport catch. The other data that would come from sampling all the heads would lead to a better true (accurate) understanding of the total 19/20 sport fishery catch. I can see that we are going to come up against the Cowichan River (Chinook) problem here in the next few years. We need to know how many of these fish are or are not being taken in 19/20. If we don't know for sure, I can foresee another extension of the hatchery only fishery in 19/20 to protect these fish too.

 

[Time]

For DNA testing, what size or type of sample is required?
It should not require the whole head. Would a few scales be sufficient?
If so, in the May-June release of wild fish period I can see the guides - being the only semi-organized or recognizable group other than the full commercial boats - doing scale sampling of released fish for submission to DFO to identify the home river of the fish.
Could provide good info. Maybe not what you might want to hear, but may help with identifying the source of the wild ones and management of the wild stock.

 

[Deewar25]

thanks dog, thats my 'well how about that' info of the day!

 

[profisher]

Any tissue sample will provide DNA. For this to work and get a complete and accurate profile of the fish in 19/20 we need samples from all the fish. Not just the guides. Make it mandatory to turn in all Chinook heads from fish above the 67cm mark. (which are the ones they are concerned with as returning spawners) Get 100% of the fish, get 100% accurate data and move on once and for all. Otherwise how long are we going to put up with fricken guessing? We would be raising the money to do them all, so lets just do it.

 

[Time]

You will never get 100%, that is why I suggested the guides may undertake it to provide a representative sample.

 

[Fish-Hunter]

FN pay?...believe that one when i see it...lol...holmes*

I knew that someone would get this one... But hey, fair is fair, EVERYONE that is going to fish, pays!!! No pay, no fishy. Make a penalty fine that makes the DNA fee make sense to pay B-4 you put a hook in the water! We are all supposed to be equal right? So we all pay the same - fair right?

 

[sammyslabber]

WE already pay they call it the salmon enhancement stamp no LIC. NO stampy no fishy

 

[Fish-Hunter]

Here is another good idea, what ever the fisherman contribute to the DNA testing, the Federal Govt. matches so that testing for the next year is covered and this would allow for the fees to be readjusted in the next year, effectively creating an operating fund to keep the testing going. I think that it is the least that the feds could do with some of our tax dollars, especially if we lead on this! The feds should be completely on board with this kind of testing and accounting of the fish resource IF they truly have any intrest in productively managing and maintaining our fishery. It will after all give them real numbers to work with instead of guessing how many and who is catching fish in BC coastal waters. It may not tell them what is happening to OUR fish from here in BC (IF we are in fact catching most of our fish from USA runs) but it will tell them what real impact we in BC are having on the West Coast Fishery (Canada and USA). If a program like this works here, then it could be a model for USA (Alaska and US Northwest) to adopt and give us all a complete picture of where everyones fish are being caught and how much is being harvested, and thus be used to manage the resource. Just a thought.

 

[profisher]

Come on....$28.00 bucks for an annual (365 days) and the stamp. How many ski trips does that get you? rounds of golf? Canuck (or for the traitors Hawk) games you gonna see live? The sport fishing license is the best value for the buck, maybe to good. How many will pay $50 bucks to fish a few hours in a derby, but god forbid we pay more for the license. And I know it will come up...I agree that all sport license fees should stay out of general revenue and be put back into the west coast fishery. I'm not suggesting a mandatory increase in licenses to pay for this particular DNA sampling. However I can see having to pay more in the future. If you multiply $28 by the number of annual sport license holders..it is not that much money.

 

[Time]

No need for additional funding or increased license fees.
DFO could handle it out of the petty cash drawer, if, and it's a big if, a case can be made for the research.
Well, maybe not out of petty cash, it would be a new program, so 2 people would have to write the proposal for a year, then a management committee would have to review it, and if implemented, it would require a manager, two research associates, a budget manager, two fisheries analysysts, a programmer, an entry clerk, and of course, back office support, so you're looking at upwards of 800,000 per year.
Oh, don't forget the cost of doing the DNA testing.

 

[Fish-Hunter]

Question: does anyone know the real number of annual and temporary saltwater fishing lisences sold in BC for 2010? Or is it top secret info not available to the general public?

 

[Fish-Hunter]

No need for additional funding or increased license fees.
DFO could handle it out of the petty cash drawer, if, and it's a big if, a case can be made for the research.
Well, maybe not out of petty cash, it would be a new program, so 2 people would have to write the proposal for a year, then a management committee would have to review it, and if implemented, it would require a manager, two research associates, a budget manager, two fisheries analysysts, a programmer, an entry clerk, and of course, back office support, so you're looking at upwards of 800,000 per year.
Oh, don't forget the cost of doing the DNA testing.

I hear you loud and clear. What happened to the days when you wanted or needed something done, so you (and perhaps a few others) rolled up your sleeves and got it done? What has made us into a society that has to spend more time (and money) covering our a$$es to protect our pride in case we fail, to the point that it makes it impossible to get anything done?

 

[profisher]

It is around 300,000, but many of those are of the 1 to 3 day type too. Someone else will have to help you with the approx number of resident annual licenses.

 

[Little Hawk]

Fish Hunter: http://www.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/fm-gp/rec/licence-permis/stat-eng.htm

Rolly: Might be an idea to the Gov on board with your idea. If the SFAB thinks it's a useful initiative they'll put it to Ottawa for us. No?

 

[profisher]

I've asked Chris to bring it up at the south coast meetings and to get a response. All I can do at this point is see how it goes.

 

[Charlie]

Yes, I have that information and many other numbers... glad to share.

Reported Sales in TWST Database: For the Period of April 1, 2020 to October 26, 2010. There were:

Resident Annual 121,569 @ $21.00 = $2,552,949.00; 5 day 10,904 @ $16.00 = $174,464.00; 3 day 16,262 @ $11.00 = $178,882.0; 1 day 27,902 @ $5.25 = $146,485.50; Senior 23,882 @ $11.00 = $262,702.00; Juvenile 34,721;
Total resident 235,24 = $3,315,482.50 funds collected

Non Resident Annual 3,533 @ $101.00 = $356,833.00; 5 day 13,246 @ $31.00 = $410,626.00; 3 day 9,396 @ $19.00 = $178,524.00; 1 day 11,152 @ $7.00 = $78,064.00; Juvenile 2,831;
Total non-resident 40,158 = $1,024,047.00 Total funds collected

There were 7,498 Licence Replacements

Salmon Conservation Stamps Adult 199,382 @ $6.00 = $1,196,292.00

Replacements 4,985

That equates to a total of 204,367 (little short of 300,000) licences and a total of $5,535,821.50 total funds collected! FYI... DFO’s budget for ALL Pacific salmon, is some were between $27 – 29 million depending on which numbers you are looking and believe?

http://www.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/fm-gp/rec/licence-permis/index-eng.htm#Fees
http://www.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/fm-gp/rec/licence-permis/Stats/year-to -date-sep-10.pdf

I also have these numbers, if anyone is interested? Read them closely! This pretty much spells out and sums up the status of your “Chinook” fishery around Vancouver Island? Gill Net: Area B, Chinook 87. Troll: Area D, Chinook 1,772; Area E, Chinook 6,385; Area G, Chinook 79,123; Area H, Chinook 7.
http://dsp-psd.pwgsc.gc.ca/collection_2007/dfo-mpo/Fs97-6-2665E.pdf


Simply put, DFO doesn’t need to do any DNA testing to verify, what they already know! Your southern BC CHINOOK - ARE DYING OFF! And might I add, THEY do not have any interest in fixing anything, - if not required by law!

 

[profisher]

DFO might not need to know,(because they already do) but we do. We need hard numbers so we can fight the fight. This is for us not for them.