Filletandrelease
Well-Known Member
How many of those 300,000 licences have a salmon tag on them?
I have some questions.
- Thread starter Filletandrelease
- Start date
RODNREEL
Active Member
Islander57
Well-Known Member
I personally don't think it matters whether it's Atlantic salmon or our native strains. You crowd them all together into a pen and the sea lice and the risk of disease transmission remains the same. Isolated land locked pens is the only solution to prevent exposure to wild stocks
wildmanyeah
Crew Member
Yes, it does matter. Escaped farmed salmon interbreeding with wild fish is by far the biggest problem facing salmon farming, worldwide. Raising Atlantic's ( Salmo) here on the Pacific coast guarantees potential escapees will not interbreed with native (Onchorhyncus) species.
Part of the barbed hook question is because in many jurisdictions and many countries it’s perfectly legal to use barbed hooks so making 2 identical lures with different hooks on them becomes labour intensive and ultimately costs companies more. look at The Campbell River area. If you fish in front of the city you can use treble hooks all year except July 15-sept 30, but go a mile out, trebles are legal year round. If you’re a lure manufacturer it doesn’t make allot of sense to sell single hooks on their lures for such a small window where trebles are banned. It’s easier to leave it up to the angler to rig their gear according to the regs. Speaking from experience when we would sell lures with single hooks on them, we got an earful from anglers who only fish trebles, and if course vice versa.
Filletandrelease
Well-Known Member
I get it but I was referring to spoons with a single hook and premade hootchies with 2 hooks.
In many cases barbless hooks cost quite a bit more than barbed. I can’t answer why, the extra cost isn’t always passed along to anglers, but many manufacturers don’t offer a barbless alternative because it adds cost and as I stated previously, in many jurisdictions barbs are legal year round.
browningmirage
Active Member
I am an involved angler with three kids sincerely hooked on fishing.
I appreciate the desire for more revenue, but I would have a very difficult time paying licence fees plus salmon stamps with a 10 fold increase. If you want to make fishing for the elite, that level of increase is exactly what the doctor ordered. If you want a responsible angler who volunteers whenever he can, who brings his kids out and wants them to be part of this world...
I'm not saying a raise isnt fair or in the books, but be careful or you'll exclude those who actually care.
I appreciate the desire for more revenue, but I would have a very difficult time paying licence fees plus salmon stamps with a 10 fold increase. If you want to make fishing for the elite, that level of increase is exactly what the doctor ordered. If you want a responsible angler who volunteers whenever he can, who brings his kids out and wants them to be part of this world...
I'm not saying a raise isnt fair or in the books, but be careful or you'll exclude those who actually care.
Filletandrelease
Well-Known Member
Point taken. But kids could be exempt. No one likes fee increases but there is power in numbers and it appears we as sport fishermen have the numbers. I have no idea if PSF has received this funding for the last 20 years as the chart previously posted may suggest. So that’s maybe 30 mil in 20 years? How about 200-300 mil over the next 20? That kind of access to cash would attract all kinds of new investment. Then the sport fishin industry would have some clout. IMHO.
Similar threads
