Qualicum river

[calmsea]

... LMAO...

So you laughed your a$$ of - what's left of you then? Good that way!

 

[searun]

Looks like our friend is indeed forgetting the true essence of what my post was really about. Let me be perfectly clear. The rich steelhead angling heritage in BC dates back to days when both drift and fly fishers could freely pursue their sport together on all our BC rivers. There was no exclusionary regulations that pitted one angling method or group against the other. Period the end.

All the fear mongering posted above about being first to kill 40 fish, is nothing short of that. Seriously! No one today would ever dream of that, nor was I ever suggesting that. Those were different times, with abundant stocks, when little was understood by anglers of the fragility of our steelhead stocks. To suggest my posts are implying we return to those days is simply disingenuous (big words around, you are full of BS) - when it was clear my posts are simply saying we should not forget or devalue our rich angling heritage and protect it.

Tho protest too much - of course this is about ensuring the current FFO regulations continue to be protected and expanded...why else would one lobby protest when it is being suggested we need to re-open waters to all anglers and simply get rid of FFO regulations. Heck, if you are all fired up about "conservation" and limiting angling "effectiveness" what is wrong with "Artificial Flies Only"? Maybe its because the hordes of drift guys (your competition) would flock to the rivers ruining the efforts thus far to rid the earth of the evil ones.

Lastly, all the mumbo jumbo science posted is simply a bunch of trout studies using worms, not steelhead in BC caught on our tackle. If you want real science, then perhaps refer to the LGL study in BC. Looks to me like the science clearly indicates that a massive hook mortality of 1.1% from release to spawn over a 2 year study period is clearly demonstrating there is no statistically valid scientific reason that would support a connection between hook and released steelhead in BC waters and legitimate "conservation concerns".

Oh, take care...seriously...we all need to work together to protect our fish and rich angling heritage.

 

[Dave H]

I don't know you Dave, and you seem like a nice guy, but I have a sneaking suspicion that your sign off...."take care...." has very little to do with caring but seems to imply some taking.

I also noticed that when you sign off with..."I'm Out of Here....", you rarely stray too far.

Most people I know who fish from the heart say what they mean and mean what they say

Take Care

"I'm out of here" meant the other thread, not this one nor the site.

And I type "Take care" on every post I make on every site I goof around on and I have for a decade or more.

So sorry you have a problem with it.

And I do say what I mean, albeit not always in the most clear way, but then I'm not perfect.

And the reason I jumped on Searun's post here is because it's almost a repeat of the same appeal to tradition post he made on the other thread and as I'm out of there I replied to it here.

And I have a sneaking suspicion that your long and interesting post on the other thread can be distilled down to a type of appeal to tradition too.

Traditions seldom look good when it's shown more graphically as to what they really mean, as I tried to do with my obviously facetious post above.

You could be useful here though. Can you share with us how many times you've been excluded from angling anywhere because of a "tackle box" regulation?

Perhaps you could help out SpringVelocity and Hambone with explaining how a return to our roots and/or traditions is going to help steelhead.

They both fell for Searun's appeal to tradition post on the other thread so they apparently approve of having no meaningful tackle restrictions and certainly nothing that would restrict their ability to catch lots of fish.

Or am I mistaken in that and they just haven't explained what they really mean??


Take care.

 

[searun]

So Dave, are you suggesting that FFO is helping save steelhead? Seriously! Let's see, 1.1% mortality from release to spawn...can you explain how that is statistically significant in harming a steelhead population? Don't think so.

This debate is really about open access to all our rivers, not restricting a particular group of anglers from fishing their chosen method on 17 rivers on Vancouver Island alone. And, what is wrong with ensuring some kid can go fishing on a river like the Heber with his spinning rod? Can you explain that one for me?

 

[Dave H]

Looks like our friend is indeed forgetting the true essence of what my post was really about. Let me be perfectly clear. The rich steelhead angling heritage in BC dates back to days when both drift and fly fishers could freely pursue their sport together on all our BC rivers. There was no exclusionary regulations that pitted one angling method or group against the other. Period the end.

There are no regulations today that are exclusionary or pit one angling method against the other.

There are only anglers who choose to not fish under tackle regulations they don't like and who would rather ***** and moan about them and pine for the good old days.

All the fear mongering posted above about being first to kill 40 fish, is nothing short of that. Seriously! No one today would ever dream of that, nor was I ever suggesting that. Those were different times, with abundant stocks, when little was understood by anglers of the fragility of our steelhead stocks. To suggest my posts are implying we return to those days is simply disingenuous (big words around, you are full of BS) - when it was clear my posts are simply saying we should not forget or devalue our rich angling heritage and protect it.


Would you like to meet some old members of the Kingfishers who participated in a few "first to 40" derbies back in the day??

And mentioning historical facts is not fear-mongering my friend, just facts.

What were you suggesting then if not a return to the old days/old regulations?

You did post this: "My personal bottom line is we need to leave the tackle box out of the whole approach to regulations."

So what does that mean in reality if tackle regulations can't be used?

And your post from the other thread is right below your quote here so we can all see what you typed and if that's not implying we return to the old days what does it imply?

And no, it's not clear "my posts are simply saying we should not forget or devalue our rich angling heritage and protect it" at all, hence my questioning.



Tho protest too much - of course this is about ensuring the current FFO regulations continue to be protected and expanded...why else would one lobby protest when it is being suggested we need to re-open waters to all anglers and simply get rid of FFO regulations. Heck, if you are all fired up about "conservation" and limiting angling "effectiveness" what is wrong with "Artificial Flies Only"? Maybe its because the hordes of drift guys (your competition) would flock to the rivers ruining the efforts thus far to rid the earth of the evil ones.

Sorry. I'm not part of any lobby and once again you've trotted out the old crap about the fly guys afraid of the competition and all that. This is the same stupid argument used way back in the Gold River bait and powerboat debates in the 90's.
It was particularly hilarious then given it was being levelled against the members of the then Campbell River Branch of the SSBC, some of whom were and are extremely serious and excellent steelheaders. But, according to the pro-bait crew, the CR guys couldn't stand the competition from the visiting guides in their powerboats using roe so that's why they (the SSBC) went after bait and boats.
Funny to see a variation of the same old crap being used today.


Lastly, all the mumbo jumbo science posted is simply a bunch of trout studies using worms, not steelhead in BC caught on our tackle. If you want real science, then perhaps refer to the LGL study in BC. Looks to me like the science clearly indicates that a massive hook mortality of 1.1% from release to spawn over a 2 year study period is clearly demonstrating there is no statistically valid scientific reason that would support a connection between hook and released steelhead in BC waters and legitimate "conservation concerns".

I wonder how closely that study mimicked some of the things one sees when out angling on crowded rivers where bait is used?

My personal experience tells me that notwithstanding the mortality rate, (make it same for bait and fly...say 2%) it's the overall number of fish hooked played and released that actually counts and for winter steelhead in Vancouver Island rivers bait will outfish flies by a considerable margin day in and day out. More fish hooked and fought the more fish will be damaged or killed. Really simple thing to grasp. If you can't support tackle regulations designed to limit our effectiveness at hooking steelhead then you seem to want to support using the most effective method to hook steelhead.

Which is it?

Oh, take care...seriously...we all need to work together to protect our fish and rich angling heritage.

"Interesting read for sure...last few pages have been most entertaining. Sharphooks, my hat is off to you man. That is THE best post ever. Pretty much sums up how I feel about the whole issue, and have for many years. My personal bottom line is we need to leave the tackle box out of the whole approach to regulations - instead lets focus on keeping rivers open to anglers, regulations simple and easy to follow, and encourage all anglers to participate in the fishery. We can all agree that snaggers and poachers (whether they use flies or trebble hooks) are bad dudes, and we can deal with those guys through enforcement and education. To use them as an "excuse" to change regulations to remove a segment of the angling community is simply wrong. We are all missing the point...if we don't find ways to encourage more new anglers to take an interest and develop a passion for these fish and our sport, then there will be NO ONE left to speak for the river and our fish. Our angling heritage is worth protecting. So too is the notion of all anglers working in solidarity for our fish."


The bolded part above again shows how strange some of your concepts are.

So somehow putting in FFO regs will get rid of bad actors???

I guess you don't fish much in fly only waters 'cause when I did I would find gear remnants, roe remnants and sometimes a gut pile where some local yokel "harvested" one for the table on a regular basis.

Given the miniscule enforcement we have these days you can close a river completely and there will still be goofs in there poaching or whatever.

I seriously doubt anyone ever changed to a fly only regime to "remove a segment of the angling community."

I mean really.........................



Take care.

 

[Bear]

It would appear that the reason given for such low mort rate was because of the expert angler knowledge on proper realease methods. I participated in a Dept of Fisheries survey a number of years ago. They were looking at mort rates of single hook compared to treble. The conclusion was, proper method of release.

There are to many inexperienced anglers using bait and do not know how to properly release fish. Let's be honest, bait is prefered by some because it catches more fish.

More fish caught, more fish die. 5% of five is less than 5% of fifty.

 

[Aces]

Well.....this thread went off the rails.


Ran out of popcorn

 

[SpringVelocity]

I can't believe some of the comments on here honestly.... It actually proves why we should get rid of these.

 

[Derby]

I asked RVP his thoughts about the fly vs. gear online controversy, he states the following;

"Below the clouded layer of regulations and bureaucracy that over shadows each of our passions reguarding the sport of fishing, is a thin crust covered in anxiety over the sense of loss...a man made feeling. I am happy that I have been able to help individuals reignite the fire in their bellies - something that is fueled by their passion for fishing.

Now let's take that same energy and actually do something for the fish first...ingnore your pride and anxiety over your potential sense of loss.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bd3map-AIug

 

[Rum Buddies]

This debate is really about open access to all our rivers, not restricting a particular group of anglers from fishing their chosen method on 17 rivers on Vancouver Island alone. And, what is wrong with ensuring some kid can go fishing on a river like the Heber with his spinning rod? Can you explain that one for me?

You're imposing this restriction and creating 2 user groups, no one is limiting your access to fly fishing gear? Many anglers on the island fish gear and fly and use what method is best suited or regulated, it's not that big of a deal.


Why can't you take your kid down to the river and teach him how to cast a fly? Who's stopping you?



Is it elitist that they don't allow downriggers in the tyee pool at campbell river?

 

[Dave H]

So Dave, are you suggesting that FFO is helping save steelhead? Seriously! Let's see, 1.1% mortality from release to spawn...can you explain how that is statistically significant in harming a steelhead population? Don't think so.

This debate is really about open access to all our rivers, not restricting a particular group of anglers from fishing their chosen method on 17 rivers on Vancouver Island alone. And, what is wrong with ensuring some kid can go fishing on a river like the Heber with his spinning rod? Can you explain that one for me?

So no tackle restrictions should be used if it somehow restricts "a particular group of anglers from fishing their chosen method"?

Sure, that makes a lot of sense. LMAO

And I'd wait a couple days before taking a kid and his spinning rod to the Heber.

It's probably pretty blown out right now.

Wait until it settles down then take him.

Use a silver bladed Silvex spinner with the green body and you'll have a ton of fun.

Remember it closes at the end of November though.



And would you mind addressing some of my questions rather than shifting off topic all the time??

You must have some real argument as to why we shouldn't look at the tackle box with regards to regulations.

Let's hear them.

And maybe Hambone could answer my question as to what group he is referring to in his initial accusations.

Pretty sure no lawyer will come after him.

Is it those nefarious characters in the Haig-Brown Fly fishing Association?

The terrible Totems?

Friends of the Cowichan??

I mean what do those guys know?? Sheesh.

Some other group I'm unaware of??

Fine kettle of fish we've got now eh? LOL


Now I'm off to dodge spider webs and mudholes whilst bushwacking up a couple of creek branches.

Later.



Take care.

 

[hambone]

Dave, I'm done with these arguments, clearly there's a few people with differing opinions. But I've already answered your latest question so if you'd like me to copy and paste my response I could do that.... From the other thread:

"I already stated my post was my own personal opinion, and I stand by what I said. You're calling me out and going over my post with a magnifying glass as if I've personally attacked you or a particular flyfishing club or something?? I couldn't even name a group let alone a person lol, so you clearly need to relax. Sorry, maybe I should have said certain "individuals" instead of "groups", then maybe you wouldn't be so worked up."

I don't really know what else you want me to say.... I don't like the FFO reg and feel that we've proven there's no need for it. Thankfully, someone else must feel the same way as there has been a few FFO's lifted here on the island. I know there is still someone or some group of people that still try to make FFO proposals... I don't know who they are..... But I disagree with what they are trying to accomplish, regardless of their motives. Do you understand now? Lol. I'm not interested in wasting anymore time on here with you.

Take care

 

[Wyrguy]

Well.....this thread went off the rails.


Ran out of popcorn

I don't have a 'dog' in this fight... but it's still nice to know that there is passion from so many that really have a common goal (protecting the fish and also all of our access to them) just that they have a different path to get there. My $0.02

Rick


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[CVmike]

When the tourists come, and others to the back country they are expected no trace outings,if your cattle or transportation has been in the river and streams the owners fined.so why can't we as fishers evolve and have equal opportunity at the waters edge and stay out of the fish's rivers and streams all year.Or do we wait till the rest of the world to frown upon us so the commies have to sell brokers that market to the states because the world has boycoted canadian fish, without commies the feds will close more hatcherys.If we step back as sport fishers and kayaks and swimmers.then the only ones mismanage the resourse is a few members of 1st nations ,(four dead steelies in one gill net set on the somas riv), they will be photoed and posted globally , change will come.I think blockades are up, so we don't see the pitlampping that's going on.Take a bucket up the stream dave, shooms are in abundance,it will pay ,and so good to eat. Qualicum riv has a good trail system never needed more than gumboots same with many rivers on the coast. Evlove for the future of fishing.Back country river pass required? phone ahead and reserve your day ,so gov knows who's where and when public ,others are near the rivers. .

 

[Dave H]

Dave, I'm done with these arguments, clearly there's a few people with differing opinions. But I've already answered your latest question so if you'd like me to copy and paste my response I could do that.... From the other thread:

"I already stated my post was my own personal opinion, and I stand by what I said. You're calling me out and going over my post with a magnifying glass as if I've personally attacked you or a particular flyfishing club or something?? I couldn't even name a group let alone a person lol, so you clearly need to relax. Sorry, maybe I should have said certain "individuals" instead of "groups", then maybe you wouldn't be so worked up."

I don't really know what else you want me to say.... I don't like the FFO reg and feel that we've proven there's no need for it. Thankfully, someone else must feel the same way as there has been a few FFO's lifted here on the island. I know there is still someone or some group of people that still try to make FFO proposals... I don't know who they are..... But I disagree with what they are trying to accomplish, regardless of their motives. Do you understand now? Lol. I'm not interested in wasting anymore time on here with you.

Take care

First off, I have no idea who you are and nothing personal against you at all.

Now, let me apologize for not realizing you considered your post #19 an answer to my question. I guess the fact it didn't answer my question fooled me.

Everyone's opinion about things is their "personal opinion" so that doesn't answer anything either.

And I didn't "call you out". I responded to a post you made in which you made some ridiculous accusations against some unknown group or groups.

I advised that your premise was a crock-o-crap, as it is, and asked you a simple question.

It's been a shuck and jive ever since with no real answer.

And I know you didn't attack me personally and I don't belong to any fly club or fishing related group and haven't for many years. I simply don't like abject BS being posted and will call it out regardless of who posted it. This time was the first time in a very long time I've gotten involved in much of anything save my Tyee Pool thread and posting links to UFC pay-per-views, but this topic and the false accusations found so often in it irked me enough to ask one question, and here we are.

You sound like a BCFDF disciple or something though. If you are then that explains a lot.


And finally, this statement of yours pretty much sums up why I tend to wonder about the way some of you think.

"But I disagree with what they are trying to accomplish, regardless of their motives."


Really???


Sounds pretty anti-conservation to me, when you word it that way.

Better think about that "regardless of their motives" bit too, 'cause it isn't what you keep believing it to be.

"What a tangled web we weave"..........











Take care.

 

[searun]

I simply don't like abject BS being posted and will call it out regardless of who posted it.

Finally, something we can both agree on! Nice to get one straight answer. Its the kind of mud slinging where you are trying to pin "anti conservation" on anglers who choose to gear fish as opposed to fly fish that makes me call BS. I got so tired of all that kind of BS that I quit fishing rivers 6 years ago...so hard to pin any "steelhead morts" on me bud. My hands are clean on that count...I wonder how many steelhead have met their maker at your hands - certainly way more than me.

These days I find it way more peaceful to strap on skis and go have some fun where I'm not made to feel guilty over my choice of boards.

Maybe one day when all this finger pointing about tackle methods ends, you might see me back on a river.

 

[Dave H]

Finally, something we can both agree on! Nice to get one straight answer. Its the kind of mud slinging where you are trying to pin "anti conservation" on anglers who choose to gear fish as opposed to fly fish that makes me call BS. I got so tired of all that kind of BS that I quit fishing rivers 6 years ago...so hard to pin any "steelhead morts" on me bud. My hands are clean on that count...I wonder how many steelhead have met their maker at your hands - certainly way more than me.

These days I find it way more peaceful to strap on skis and go have some fun where I'm not made to feel guilty over my choice of boards.

Maybe one day when all this finger pointing about tackle methods ends, you might see me back on a river.

So you don't have a kid with a spinning rod who wants to fish the Heber then?

Too bad 'cause it should be good when the water drops a bit, probably in a day or two.

And I stopped fishing steelhead seriously nearly 15 years ago now and I was a catch and release angler starting in the 60's when I used to catch them after work in the Gold just for something to do. As a single guy living in the bunkhouse I rarely killed one unless somebody asked me for one.

However..................

I just flashed on the season I killed the most steelhead I ever did in a year and the number was 22.

I checked back and I beached 71 and killed 22 that year while thinking what a hero of conservation I must be because I didn't kill 40. LOL


Ah yes, this whole thread reminds me of how much I've forgotten about the good old days.

But a lot can change in half a century too, as any old fart will attest.

Next time I encounter one I'm going to ask him about that.

Ha ha.


Take care.

 

[sammyslabber]

 

[onefish]

So, how is the fishing on either of the Qualicums, or the Thompson for that matter?

 

[Sharphooks]

Give Dave a snickers, he'd eat for a day. Teach Dave how to snicker, we'd eat for a life time

sorry Dave...couldn't resist..