MultiSectoral Prawn Meetings

[Fishing Guide]

Cheers All,

Currently our local SFAB Rep (Clyde Wicks) is at the Prawn Multi-Sectoral Meetings and they are being beat up by commercials with no support from DFO. If you value your access to prawns you might drop a short note to the the following expressing your desire to prawn, your thoughts on the access to the resourece along with the manner in which the commercial has been almost given the entire resource. Short and blunt works!


Laurie Convey: Laurie.Convey@dfo-mpo.gc.ca



Sue Farlinger: Susan.Farlinger@dfo-mpo.gc.ca



Paul Sprout: sproutpa@pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca



Randy Kamp: Kamp.R@parl.gc.ca



Minister Shea: Shea.G@parl.gc.ca




Here is a copy that I sent:


Dear Sir and or Madame,

RE: PRAWN MULTI-SECTORAL MEETINGS



It was with great concern and deep disappointment that I heard about the proceedings at the current prawn multi-sectoral meetings. However, upon reflection, I also discovered that I was not surprised at either the position held by the commercial fleet nor the stance taken by DFO. It takes me back to the halibut allocations and the abandonment the sports fishermen were confronted with in establishing that fishery. That will NEVER occur again!

The commercial catch has grown from one million pounds a couple of years ago to over 6 million pounds last year. Each and every year their catch increases. The result? Last winter the recreational fishery where I live was shut down for ‘conservation’ reasons. And, when the recreational sector – through their duly elected representatives - ask for reason and sanity to prevail, as the resource cannot stand that type of pressure, they are ridiculed by the commercial side and again abandoned by DFO.

The commercial sector is claiming “ownership” of every prawn that swims in the ocean and this is not correct. The resource belongs to Canadians – each and every one – with equal access for all and not simply a few commercial interests.

Firstly I request that you stand up for the resource and curtail the rape of the sea by the commercial interests and secondly provide for equal access to the resource for the tax paying recreational fishermen who bring a lot more money to the pot from their access to this resource than the commercial interests.

Please be advised that I do not take kindly to your lack of action in defence of the resource, the bullying and pressure tactics by the obviously biased commercial sector nor being shut out from a recreational pursuit - through over exploitation by the commercial sector - of a most enjoyable past time. Please stand up – loud and clear – for the resource, for the recreational fishermen (who pay for your salary) and to send a loud message that this resource belongs to ALL Canadians and not simply a few commercial fishing thugs. And I don’t think I would be amiss when I request that our representatives be provided a civil and professional arena in which to convey our messages.

I thank you for your timely attention to this matter,

Sincerely,

Mr. Gerald J. Rupp
Nanaimo, BC
Taxpayer and Recreational Prawn User


Fishing Guide
www.invictuscharters.com
BC Outdoors Pro Staff
www.fishingvancouverisland.org

 

[tubber]

quote:Firstly I request that you stand up for the resource and curtail the rape of the sea by the commercial interests and secondly provide for equal access to the resource for the tax paying recreational fishermen who bring a lot more money to the pot from their access to this resource than the commercial interests.

Just to play devil's advocate, let me throw this idea out. The above quote seems fair and logical on the surface, but please prove this part "....recreational fishermen who bring a lot more money to the pot from their access to this resource than the commercial interests."
If you think we, as citizens of BC, deserve equitable access to the resource, use that as your main argument, because the other part is weak, vague, and easily refutable.
The average BC rec fisherman will only spend part of his disposable income in BC. Some of his money goes for American boats and offshore gear (prawn rope, trap netting and floats for example). The same can be said for commercial guys.
My point is, BC residents will spend their money on something (fishing, gardening, golfing, beer or any other hobby) without adding anything to the economy. The only people that add</u> to our economy are from out of province, whether they be guest prawners or out-of province diners eating BC prawns.

Just because we spend money on fishing doesn't mean we are adding to the economy, because we would have spent it on something else anyway.
FYI, I have never prawned commercially and don't believe I have ever met anyone that does.

Good luck with your battle.

 

[IronNoggin]

quote:Originally posted by tubber

If you think we, as citizens of BC, deserve equitable access to the resource, use that as your main argument, because the other part is weak, vague, and easily refutable.

And it is NOT the point here. Collusion</u> between DFO and the Commercial Interests very much ARE what this issue is about!

Like fishing prawns? Best get on the Band Wagon and drop a note or two. It AIN'T</u> going well for our interests! [V]

What I have fired off:

quoteear Minister Shea and DFO Representatives,

I am writing to express my concern and dismay regarding reports received from the proceedings at the ongoing prawn multi-sectoral meetings. I find the bullying and pressure tactics taken by the commercial sector, and the stance apparently favoring their position by DFO repulsive. These positions smack of collusion between the Department and a single user group, at the expense of all others who both use the resource, and care deeply about its' well being / sustainability.
It is more than a little reminiscent of the unilateral allocation regarding halibut access, and the quagmire we are now all immersed in as a consequence of that unfortunate action.

From DFO's own data base it can be drawn that the commercial catch has grown from one million pounds a few short years ago, to over 6 million pounds last year. This harvest rate has grown annually under your "management" policies. The results have to date been borne by the recreational sector, now facing "Conservation Closures" in many areas in an attempt to rebuild the stocks in order to support the next round of increased pressure from commercial interests. It would appear that there is no parity nor consideration being leveled towards the recreational sector, nor the resource itself in these decisions.

Although the commercial stance is one which expresses dominion over every prawn that exists in our waters, I always understood that this resource belongs to ALL Canadians, which includes equal access for all sectors, not simply regulated to a "possession" of the commercial fleet. Have I been in error in this belief? Is there yet another mechanism being undertaken to hand a public resource over to a private interest, turning what was once a "Common Property" now into a "Commodity" (as was undertaken in the case of the halibut allocation)?

From the reports generated from the sectoral meetings, it is becoming apparent that when duly elected representatives of the recreational fishery note the same type of concerns I am writing to express today, their concerns are simply ridiculed and rejected by the commercial sector representatives. While I do not personally find that all too surprising, the subsequent abandonment of the expressed recreational interests and concerns by the Department is more so. This leads to the question of whether the Department is truly considering the concerns of ALL sectors, or simply catering solely to those of commercial interests?

I am understandably quite disturbed by your lack of action in terms of responsible resource management in these matters. Further I find your catering to the pressure tactics openly displayed by the obviously biased commercial sector particularly nauseating. Catering to those interests has caused the recreational sector to realize limited, and at times, denied access to the resource due to over-exploitation of said resource via commercial fishery activities. This does not represent "responsible" management nor "equal consideration" in a great many folk's eyes.

I therefore call on you to responsibly manage the resource for the sake of its' conservation and sustainability, provide for equal access by ALL sectors when the populations are robust enough to support that, and to cease catering to a single (commercial) sector's interests above all else in these considerations. Further I would strongly suggest that as Stewards of the Resource, you provide the elected representatives of the recreational sector with a congenial atmosphere, representative of civility and professionalism, in which to present our sector's concerns - without the belittlement and ridicule that appears to be carrying the day within the ongoing discussions.

Time is pressing on this issue, the meetings are already underway, and obviously being side-tracked by the commercial sector. Your attention to these issues will greatly help in dissipating concerns regarding the Department's collusion with the same.

I would appreciate the courtesy of a response from each of you.

Sincerely,

J. M Stabler
Port Alberni
Concerned Recreational Prawn Fisher

CC:
SFAC Port Alberni
SFAB South Coast

 

[tubber]

You can always be counted on for clarity and enlightenment. Letter being composed (ok, mostly copied)

 

[slaydown]

How in this day and age can a Fisheries Minister not be a Marine Biologist with extensive knowledge on marine ecosystems.Minister Shea was first elected in April 2000 and was appointed to the provincial cabinet as Minister of Community and Cultural Affairs where she was responsible for the Status of Women, the Worker’s Compensation Board and the Island Waste Management Corporation.How she went from that to managing our most priceless resource boggles the mind and speaks volumes on the way our country is run from the bottom to the top.This issue with the prawns is just another example of both Shea's and the DFO's incompetence in making the right decisions. Sorry for getting a little off the prawn topic but I am so frustrated.And I have too sent off some emails, hope it helps

 

[JuandeOne]

Emails sent to all links provided. Thanks!

 

[seagal]

E-mails sent. Thanks all.

 

[prawnme]

Captain Gerald, Invictus Charters, please tell us what the difference is between a commercial prawn fisherman who pays into and manages the resource in a sustainable manner, to ensure that he will have viable fishing in the future, and a commercial fishing operator who takes untold #s of clients out every day and charges a big dollar and has no accountability re the amount of prawns taken from 'our' waters?

The big difference is that the commercial fisherman fishes for approximately 2 months, to a predetermined spawner index, then stops fishing for the following 10 months to allow the prawns to breed, lay eggs and replenish the population. You as a commercial sport fisherman are allowed to fish for 12 months and keep 200 prawns per day, including females loaded with eggs, all winter long. In your case it is 200 prawns times the number of clients on board each day plus the 200 per day for yourself. Just how much access to the resource do you feel you are entitled to? How much is enough? You still want more?

Do you have any idea what the topic has been at the prawn sectoral meetings? No, you obviously do not nor does your SFAB Rep who apparently sat in on the last meeting but had no idea what was going on or why he was there. Not once was it mentioned that commercial fishers are wanting to keep sport fishers from fishing prawns.

Your trashing of DFO is so far out of line that you make sport fishers look stupid. I hate to say but DFO was actually on your side. To be fair to your fellow fishers you really should get your facts straight before you send other naive people out on a witch hunt. Talk about shooting yourself in the foot.

So, keep those letters going out...you are doing a great job of looking foolish.

Do you truly represent the average recreational fisher or are you really only defending your commercial recreational fishing interests?

 

[island idiots]

Emails sent.

"We must strive to touch the land gently and care for it as true stewards, that those who follow us and assess our record may see that our mark on the land was one of respect and love, not cruelty and disdain."
-Robert B. Oetting

 

[GLG]

Prawnme Explain how your industry can go from 1 million pounds a few years ago to 6 million pounds last year. Is that what you call “manages the resource in a sustainable manner”

It matters not what you say the proof is in your actions.

GLG

 

[coho17]

GLG I'll explain it tou you.

First your numbers are quite off. From the DFO annual review, the fleet has caught:

2001/4.62million pounds
2002/4.18million pounds
2003/ 5.28 million pounds
2004/4.4million pounds
05/4.62 million pounds
05/5.3
07 6.26
08/4.6


Not exactly sure about '09 but it may be in the 7 million range. In 2009 there were less traps in the water than any previous year.

Commercial prawning is one of the most sustainable fisheries around. Trap limits, large mesh, monitoring, sampling, size limits, release of berried prawns. A short season leaves the species 10 months undisturbed to eat, grow and reproduce.

This is one of only a few species whos stocks are rising. Isn't that a good thing?

The issue is DFO allocation.

 

[IronNoggin]

quote:Originally posted by prawnme

Do you have any idea what the topic has been at the prawn sectoral meetings? No, you obviously do not nor does your SFAB Rep who apparently sat in on the last meeting but had no idea what was going on or why he was there. Not once was it mentioned that commercial fishers are wanting to keep sport fishers from fishing prawns.

Were You there? If so, you obviously had your head in the sand (or up your butt as the case may be). The minutes of that meeting have received wide circulation, and it is there in black and white for anyone to determine just what your sector's antics and thrust were. It is NO secret that amongst your cronies, they would like nothing better than the "sporties" to simply go away.

Nice SLAM of the recreational sector's representatives (3 in case you missed that). But then again, given your team's school-yard bullying tactics and disruptive manner, who could possibly be surprised? [B)]

Was it you who shouted: "the sporties have taken away our salmon but the same will not happen with our prawns with out a fight"??

quote:Your trashing of DFO is so far out of line that you make sport fishers look stupid.

As far out of line as the childish antics of you and your fellow commercial crews? Your trashing of the concerns and interests of the recreational sector at every turn, and VERY</u> much the ways that you conducted yourselves, make your sector look like a mean-spirited school yard bully with an axe to grind. Unfortunately that behavior did have an impact on DFO: "DFO is still putting forth the one year plan to manage the fishery in these areas that were closed but admit that the lobbying pressure by the commercial is having its effect. This was a full court press by the commercial sector."

Now when the sport sector cries foul over this immature behavior you cry "stupid"? Why am I not surprised? Had the commercial sector conducted itself in a civil and professional manner, there would likely be no need for this type of recourse. By your own actions, you pretty much forced our hands to respond and note that the type of unprofessional behavior displayed has NO room in such negotiations. You reap what you sow.

quoteo you truly represent the average recreational fisher or are you really only defending your commercial recreational fishing interests?

I have been a guide on the West Coast for many years. And I can tell you first hand that NO-ONE I am aware of has ever conducted business like the situation you so erroneously suggest. NO-ONE charters a fishing guide to target prawns. In the very few instances there is time left over from targeting salmon and halibut, there might be a possibility of pulling up a few traps for dinner. But the catches are nothing like what you suggest, especially after you and your Ladz have finished vacuum cleaning nearly each and every area. Prawns are NOT the target of constant harvest by any guide groups nor their clients, despite your misguided assertions to the contrary. A nice attempt to paint the kettle black, but in this case you very much missed the boat.

I'd suggest you stick with your own rather than trying to convince anyone here that your behavior "wasn't all that bad" and that your intent includes participation by recreational fishermen. That horse has already left the barn, and you are simply furthering the understanding of your REAL desires and intent by doing so.

quote:Originally posted by coho17

...The issue is DFO allocation.

Yes. The issue is indeed based on DFO siding with one sector over another in terms of fair and equitable allocation. And the tactics employed by the commercial sector to ensure that is maintained in their court.

Regardless of what our interloping commercial poster would have you believe, these letters are NOT "foolish" by any means. They DO inform DFO that we will not sit idly by and let these school-yard Goofs take away our access to this resource like their counterparts did with halibut. Keep 'em coming!

Cheers,
Nog

PS: Anyone not on the distribution list for the minutes I referred to feel free to shoot me an Email and I will pass them along.

 

[Fishing Guide]

Cheers prawnme,

Thank you for your response for it is in discovering the issues that we will also advance the solutions. I am at a bit of a disadvantage as while your response suggests you are a commercial fisherman, your lack of identification causes me to stop short of classifying you as such.

You will notice that my letter to DFO and others was under my personal name. That was deliberate. I am a charter captain, and I do own my own business but I spend way more time prawning recreationally than under charters. In fact I do very little when the commercial fleet is on the water due to their fond nature of pulling traps or simply cutting them. I have watched in disgust as they have laid their traps through popular recreational prawn fishing areas with total disregard for existing traps and, when they have fouled that gear, they act in total disregard for that fishermans ability to retreive his equipment. But I digress.

Please go back to your post and think through your response. I am a professional in every sense of the word. My service is to provide access to common resource (in this case prawns) that is owned by all Canadians and not simply a few commercial fisherman. That I charge people to use my boat, my equipment, my insurance, my fuel, my electronics or even my time - I think you get that point - is not the issue or is it?

In a convoluted and narrow fashion you may be correct that I have no legal accountability. I do not fish my guests to my license. Each and every person on board - be it friends, Canadian paying guests, or visiting guests, have purchased a license and are not only allowed to catch their 200 prawns/ day but are encouraged to do so. They have the blessing of DFO and legal authority to do so. The accountability lies with the license so, to be legal about it, the accountability lies with the license holder and, as such, they are the ones who are ultimately responsible - for their catch. The guests ensure they stay within that limit and, as a redundancy, so do I.

As a side note I will state the obvious that those guests put a hell of a lot more money into the economy per individual shrimp/prawn than any commercial prawn fisherman could ever contemplate. Not in an idividual boat for I could never alone put a dent in that number but it is the 'death of a 1,000 cuts' where all the recreational fishermen - using sports licenses (resident or guest) - vastly outnumber and make that final number quite impressive.

So what makes me a commercial operator is my status under Transport Canada as my guests are paying for my excursion but they are catching their prawns under their license. That therefore excludes me as a commercial prawn fisherman. There is a huge difference between a commercial guide and a commercial fishing operator. Please take note.

However I am accountable for the prawns taken out of the water on other levels. As a resident I care about my environment and the damage we do to it. I live overlooking the ocean and my legacy is to future generations. I am by trade a school teacher with 4 university degrees who has spent many years nurturing future generations of students so I care that there will be prawns for those future generations. I am accountable.

I have my own fishing license and I ensure that I stay within those limits that have been laid out. I catch my 200 prawns and do not exceed that limit. That limit has been there for years and has not changed. I am not taking more of this resource every year but, rather, staying within the same fixed guidelines. I am accountable for my actions.

I take friends out and ensure that they stay within their limits of 200/license. I am accountable.

I own my business and I understand that if we exceed a threshold then the resource suffers and, as such, so does my ability to attract customers. I have as much invested as in this resource as any commercial operator as I am accountable to my livelihood. I am accountable.

When fishing for prawns I ensure that not only do I but that my guests as well return berried females to the water. I have had conversations with regards to the survivial rate of prawns released and am told that due to sunlight on their sensitive eyes as well as the slightly less saline construct of the upper water column that the berried prawns do not survive as well but I still release them. I also note that according to regulations that I am not 'forced' to release them but that commercials are required to do such. Also, data strongly states that the mortality of the berried prawns would not adversely affect the final numbers in determining catch limits. However I do release them. I am accountable.

I fish within the legal limit of traps - 4 / license. I am accountable.

I do not keep my limits when fishing with guests on board. I am accountable.

I know exactly what is occuring at the prawn sectoral meetings. I not only attend my local SFAB meetings but also the ones on the other side of Vancouver Island as I also fish there. I have telephone conversations with my SFAB representative who is acting on all recreational fishermens behalf. I have emails regularly from my SFAB Representative. I am accountable.

My SFAB Rep - who I have the utmost confidence in without question - knows exactly what is transpiriing at the Prawn Sectoral Meetings and it was exactly his understanding that has prompted my response. He is accountable.

You ask me the questions: Just how much access to the resource do you feel you are entitled to? How much is enough? You still want more? In the immortal words of Jack Nickleson, "You want the truth? You can't handle the truth!"

I want the resource handled in a fashion that will provide for future generations. I want prawns for every citizen of Canada who wishes to explore the saline parts of our country in search of adventure and recreation. This is not a courtesy extended as a token but a integral part of being Canadian. This means that ALL resources - wood, water, air, land and, yes...even prawns belong to ALL Canadians and not a select few.

I do not wish a repeat of the Atlantic Cod Fishery where commercial interests raped the sea until she finally gave up in exhaustion. Cries of protest were ignored and to this day that resource is in question as to whether it will return in our lifetime - or ever. That will not occur here on my watch.

I believe that the TAC should be scientifically determined to provide for sustainablility. Not numbers derived from thin air but numbers that will provide for not only sutaining this increadible resource but numbers that will allow it to thrive. Then that TAC should be divided 50% to the commercial and 50% to the recreational. No exceptions. Then, if the TAC assigned to the recreational angler is not to be utilized in any year or given set of years, then it can be LEASED back to the commercial and the funds used for recreational fishing support. Perhaps fish hatcheries. Stream restoration. The ability to spend that income is already in place and it is only the income stream that is lacking. And, as DFO cries poverty at every rooftop, this income streame is sorely needed.

I am not trashing DFO - they do that on their own. It was under their watch that the Atlantic Cod Fishery occured. It was under their watch that the Pacific Halibut Allocation took place which saw the interests of the recreational fishery trampled under the demands of the commercial fleet. It was under their watch that the Pacific Prawn Fishery went from 1,000,000 pounds per year to 6,000,000 pounds per year while the recreational fishery was either curtailed, cancelled for months (Nanaimo) or pulsed. If this is the extent of the 'support' we receive from DFO perhaps then we need to seek alternative resolutions to these problems as, under DFO, we are not seeing good things occur. We need vocal and unwavering support in the recognition that the resources of Canada are a common resource and not simply there for the commercial taking.

You can rest assured that the letters - and if necessary - funding for legal objections to mismanagment of common resources will continue. If I look foolish - so be it. I don't know if I represent the average recreational fisher - as I am speaking on my behalf as one Canadian who owns part of this resource. You will have to ask others what they figure. My suspicion is that you will find I am somewhere in the middle with some more militant and others more forgiving. I can only speak for myself but I do know that "for evil to flourish good men only need do nothing."

As for myself - I AM CANADIAN AND DEAR SIR AND, AS I AM ACCOUNTABLE, I DOTH PROTEST!

Fishing Guide
www.invictuscharters.com
BC Outdoors Pro Staff
www.fishingvancouverisland.org

 

[Fishing Guide]

Cheers prawnme,

I would humbly suggest that if you take the time to read Iron Noggin's post, others sentiments on this subject.

One other item does come to mind: If given the choice I would limit commercial prawn fishing to areas outside of the accessibility of recreational fishermen. Perhaps a 30 miles exclusion zone around any city in excess of 30,000. Commercial fishermen have the ability to travel safely where many of the recreational do not. Having a commercial free zone would allow access to this resource without the interference and intimidiation of the 'big boats!' I would also suspect the damage and loss of recreational traps would be eliminated as would the potential for commercial gear of being vandalized by angry recreational fishermen.



Fishing Guide
www.invictuscharters.com
BC Outdoors Pro Staff
www.fishingvancouverisland.org

 

[Fishing Guide]

Cheers All,

Hmm...if the total biomass of prawn is rising and that each year commercial harvests has increased, then why are the residents of Nanaimo looking at a 3 month closure? See my comments earlier!

Fishing Guide
www.invictuscharters.com
BC Outdoors Pro Staff
www.fishingvancouverisland.org

 

[ratherbefishing]

Nice job FG.

 

[Whole in the Water]

I just sent my letters to the DFO hacks. Let's keep the letters going out and the pressure on.[}]

Long live wild salmon!!!
&gt;&lt)))&gt;

 

[bigchrome]

Yes Good Job FG and Nog [8D]

 

[Cuba Libre]

Great replies FG.

I would suggest that any of you who even remotely value maintaining thier rights to prawns take Noggin up on his offer to forward the March 23rd Prawns Sectoral Meeting Summary that was written by Chuck Ashcroft and Paul Ricard to you. Its an eye-opened. Be especially concerned if you are a guide as the commercials have you firmly in thier sights
From the Summary:

quote:-Another concern (from the commercial side) is that there should be absolutely no commercial guiding by lodges and guides especially with out of Country clients when the commercial fishery is shut down. One commercial entity has no more rights than another; (interesting comment that can go both ways).
-The language went a little too far when one of the commercial area reps stated that Paul and I had to be in the pockets of the lodges and Oak Bay Marine Group to stand and defend the actions of the lodges and guides. We needless to say had to defend that charge.

This is a time for all of us to stick together and get some MORE letters of to Minister Shea, RGD Paul Sprout and her west coast advisor, Dan Cody. Cody has been off the radar, but very definately should be included as he has direct access to the Minister. His email is &lt;Dan.Cody@dfo-mpo.gc.ca&gt; .

And also I would suggest that it is important to keep the message going that for the recreational fishery --- reasonable expectation of access to OUR resource is paramount. And the pressure tactics from the commercials should not be allowed to influence best management practices .

20ft Alumaweld Intruder

 

[coho17]

Way to go OBH, topping an ignorant post with an even more ignorant post.

Comparing trap fishermen to drift netters?

Do you even know the issues at hand?

The commercial fleet is not asking for more of the resource. No one is trying to eliminate prawns as a public resource or eliminate the competition.

Most commercial prawners have no problem with sportsprawning as long as regs are followed. Rec fishers have all the grounds open 12 months a year in most areas. In lower stock seasons upcoming it's 9 months a year in some areas. Go ahead, fish, enjoy.

Commercials are not killing every prawn. The opposite is true. This species seems to thrive when it is fished properly. Commercial traps feed juvenille prawns without disturbing them. 4th year prawns are harvested leaving first and second year prawns an abundance of food. This seems to let each year class thrive. It is much easier to catch a feed of prawns now than it was for your parents or grandparents. What we're doing works.

Commercial fleet was angered when DFO decided on a whim to raise the spawner index in some high use areas. This decision will close subareas around Powell River and Sechelt much earlier than usual displacing boats to the rest of the coast and forcing those areas to close earlier. In my opinion, taking about 10 days off a 60 day season. Can you understand the commercial concern over this?

There is no attempt to end rec prawning. Status quo was working, I thought all users were satisfied until this reallocation by DFO.