Pacific Salmon Foundation Gala Dinner

[el.Pereh]

Great event May 10th. From funding scientific research to habitat restoration projects, he PSF basically does everything you want done for salmon. The Gala Dinner and Auction in Vancouver is their biggest fundraising event. The food is always fantastic with a great venue in the convention center ballroom facing coal harbour. Always a good party and tons of great silent and live auction items each year. I am on a 4 year hot streak going fishing the next day too, I think it is good karma!

Tickets are available here: https://www.psf.ca/event/2019-vancouver-gala-dinner-auction

Now it is more important than ever to support the PSF. We need them and they need us.

el P

 

[calmsea]

Don't get me wrong, I like PSF and have always supported them but I fear that many 'forced to retire' anglers will find very little incentive to support organizations like PSF now. I hope I am wrong but heard lines like that already from some I know.

 

[el.Pereh]

Don't get me wrong, I like PSF and have always supported them but I fear that many 'forced to retire' anglers will find very little incentive to support organizations like PSF now. I hope I am wrong but heard lines like that already from some I know.

I hear you calmsea, I dont expect businesses that are fighting for their survival will be too quick to open up their wallets.

That being said, those that can should. I for one am not going to be financially impacted by these closures. I will be going to the DFO meetings and attending any sort of protest that gets cooked up but I am also going to increase my contribution to the PSF.

How many on this site have made the good point that the price of a salmon stamp is too low? This is our chance to make it right.

 

[cohochinook]

I have attended the PSF gala for the last couple years. It's a fun event and a great fundraiser. I would definitely recommend going if you can!

I wasn't sure if Calmsea was referencing the remarks that were made in the Victoria Times-Colonist by Dr Brian Riddell? See attached statement on it from the PSF.

 

[wildmanyeah]

I don't see anything wrong with the comments, Tho I think it would of been nice if he would of commented on if the closures will actually produce more salmon. Maybe he did and it was cut dont no


https://www.timescolonist.com/news/...gh-restrictions-on-chinook-fishing-1.23793196

Brian Riddell of the Pacific Salmon Foundation said the federal government has tried to take into account the social, cultural and economic impacts of its decision. “But if what they’re saying about the chinook trends is correct — and I think I have to agree from everything I’ve seen — I don’t see that they had many options. They were backed into a hard place.



“I think one of the really strong points is that the declines we’re seeing in chinook in southern B.C. are going on pretty much coast-wide right now from Alaska down into California. So we know that there are significant reductions in their production and the rate of production, so there’s really not an allowable harvest in the strict sense for chinook in our area, right now.”

 

[el.Pereh]

I have spoken to someone at the PSF personally about these comments. They were taken completely out of context from a 30 minute interview that was meant to explain the nuances about the state of different chinook stocks and the proposed management scenarios

"So we know that there are significant reductions in their production and the rate of production, so there’s really not an allowable harvest in the strict sense for chinook in our area, right now" - missquoted and was speaking specifically about the thompson and nicola stocks

“I think one of the really strong points is that the declines we’re seeing in chinook in southern B.C. are going on pretty much coast-wide right now from Alaska down into California." - this is pretty well true and he was speaking from a perspective of a 50 year time scale.

One other thing worth mentioning is that the interview took place before the closures but the story was run after the closures. From that perspective, considering that option B was on the table and was considered by most the be the most likely outcome, I think you can see how they were taken out of context.

Another example of the media's preferred narrative coming out.

 

[cohochinook]

I have spoken to someone at the PSF personally about these comments. They were taken completely out of context from a 30 minute interview that was meant to explain the nuances about the state of different chinook stocks and the proposed management scenarios

"So we know that there are significant reductions in their production and the rate of production, so there’s really not an allowable harvest in the strict sense for chinook in our area, right now" - missquoted and was speaking specifically about the thompson and nicola stocks

“I think one of the really strong points is that the declines we’re seeing in chinook in southern B.C. are going on pretty much coast-wide right now from Alaska down into California." - this is pretty well true and he was speaking from a perspective of a 50 year time scale.

One other thing worth mentioning is that the interview took place before the closures but the story was run after the closures. From that perspective, considering that option B was on the table and was considered by most the be the most likely outcome, I think you can see how they were taken out of context.

Another example of the media's preferred narrative coming out.

Good points and I heard the same in my conversations with the PSF.