Southeast Alaska is shutting down their chinook fisheries...gulp

Fish Camp said:
In the last article posted by agent ,at the beggining of the paragraph,stated a chinook must be of 40 pounds,hence the problem with commertial hi- grading their limited pieces of catch for larger average pounds per fish.The smaller fish are releaced for a larger fish to make the average size better for more profit.
Click to expand...


Up at Hippa once the commercial opens you catch lots with part of the face missing. The fish are starving and left to die. All because they higrade. It's a god dam shame
 
Lots of holes and bs in that article.
The fish are starving cause they can't feed ILovehaida Gwaii? Yet you still can catch them?:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:
 
Fish Camp said:
In the last article posted by agent ,at the beggining of the paragraph, stated a chinook must be of 40 pounds,hence the problem with commertial hi- grading their limited pieces of catch for larger average pounds per fish.The smaller fish are releaced for a larger fish to make the average size better for more profit.
Click to expand...


That's not really what it says but it is badly worded.

They don't have to be (must be) 40 pounds but rather the intent was to say they can often be 40 lbs, and then show the value per pound.

Reading the article quickly I see that the Blob, the last El Nino and a generally warmer ocean regime are all noted as contributing factors to the decline of Chinook.

Watching for over a quarter century now I agree with those observations without discounting the other things that helped get us here, such as sport-fishing and commercial fishing for them often using almost the same electronics and other technology to access them, electric down-riggers, sonar, fish-finders etc.

Over 20 years ago I listened to a talk by Dr. Kees Groot, then a recently retired DFO scientist who specialized in climate change and the effects on salmon that would/might bring, and he predicted in a very clear way that Chinook salmon would be the first to suffer greatly and we might lose them first, as the freshwater environment so vital to their early years, along with Coho and Steelhead too, is being so badly degraded by climate related changes that he feared they would be gone in a not too long a period of time.

It wasn't an encouraging talk to hear at all, looking further ahead.

Sometimes I'm glad I'm old.





Take care.
 
Dave H said:
...Over 20 years ago I listened to a talk by Dr. Kees Groot, then a recently retired DFO scientist who specialized in climate change and the effects on salmon that would/might bring, and he predicted in a very clear way that Chinook salmon would be the first to suffer greatly and we might lose them first, as the freshwater environment so vital to their early years, along with Coho and Steelhead too, is being so badly degraded by climate related changes that he feared they would be gone in a not too long a period of time...Take care.
Click to expand...
Think I attended the same talk, Dave H. He also talked about the salmon moving into the arctic - which they now are - about fires and pine beatles ravaging the boreal forests - which they have - and species ranges moving North - which they have. Only the Alt-Right in the cities - removed from observation and common sense believe global warming is not already here.
 
agentaqua said:
Opinion
Canada’s move to keep fishing Chinooks is short-sighted
MISTY MacDUFFEE and GREG TAYLOR
Contributed to The Globe and Mail
https://beta.theglobeandmail.com/op...ng-chinooks-is-short-sighted/article36109935/
Click to expand...

Good read but a divisive peace that that puts Canada VS USA. It's super Ironic too...

I am for a coastal wide ban that includes northern Alaska as well as all types for salmon. Until that happens one group calling out another group is just pure polices for their own self interests.
 
You know who macDuffie and Taylor are - and whom they represent??
 
agentaqua said:
You know who macDuffie and Taylor are - and whom they represent??
Click to expand...

Yeah its deferentially not one of macDuffie better peaces for being a guro of salmon conservation. I'm surprise she took part in such a divisive peace. I have a mountain of respect for her and her work.

I certainly don't care as much about our lazy residence killer whales, who can't be bothered to eat a seal now and again. Who have become so selective in their feeding habits that they look like lazy bastards compared out other killer whales around the world.

"So we must commend the Alaskans for looking out not just for their own Chinook, but for those returning to Canada"

But praising the Alaskans and calling out canada in a decision that was made by PSC Chinook committee (one that is made of Canadians and Americans). Also never mentions that Alaska Fish and game don't want the closure and were forced into it. Also does not mention that the decision was made after the Alaskan commercial fishery already had their take.

I am honestly surprised
 
Agree with your above post wildmanyeah - except to point-out that the Southern residents aren't necessarily "lazy" - but their main food source is Chinook - not marine mammals. The Transients are the seal-eaters....
 
Stats from SEAK fisheries say average size of troll Chinooks is 11.82 lb dressed. Quota is fleet-wide, so there is zero reason for a fisher to hi grade.

If you are catching damaged fish it's from them shaking free on their own.

Stats i saw indicate that SEAK did not get their quota before the closure. Agree with wildmanyeah that SEAK was TOLD to close.

Between this stuff & the Orca situation I believe BC will get TOLD soon.
 
agentaqua said:
States restrict chinook fisheries
Extreme climate conditions over recent years pummeled the king of Western salmon.
Elizabeth Shogren News Aug. 23, 2017
http://www.hcn.org/issues/49.15/fish-states-restrict-chinook-fisheries
Click to expand...

"Climate models don’t project average water temperatures this warm in the northern Pacific for decades. So cooler, more productive waters likely will return. The fishing community is hoping that’s the case and that the restrictions on fishing this season will help ensure more robust numbers of chinook — and less encumbered fishing — in the future. “We strongly support sustainable management and can only hope that conservation will truly be served by this action,” says Dale Kelley, the executive Director of the Alaska Trollers Association, which represents the 1,000 or so businesses that fish for chinook with hooks and lines. In the meantime, though, they’re hurting: She estimates the troll fleet and its processors will lose $6 million this year because of the cancellation of the chinook fishery. "

I hope so
 
The closure of the Chinook fishery in B.C. would have far reaching negative effects
on the economy of the province.
I certainly hope if the day comes, all groups would be closed to harvesting.
Wondering if a catch and release fishery is permitted in those states that have had closures in the past ?
 
Hi Scott. According to the data I posted right above BC catches a large number of their own Chinook while SEAK does not. I have read some of the Salmon Treaty & the "ownership" of fish (what river they originate from) seems to be a major factor that is well-accepted. That makes me think that catch restriction would be more likely than a closure.

As of right now in WA there are defined open seasons for Salmon in general that last 1-4 months. During these seasons some Salmon must be released. Time, length of season & what must be released vary by area (area's are similar in size to those in BC. There are 13 marine area's.
It is not specified, but I am quite sure that outside of the seasons there is no fishing for Salmon. Some area's have quota's based on "encounters" (encounters is used in the Salmon treaty & seems to equate to how many fish are hooked where some are retained, some are released & live & some are released & die. Poor release techniques by sports anglers has been a major issue with FN's down here in WA. Treble hooks are illegal & bringing a fish to be released over the gunnel is illegal.

For the past 2-3 years there have been about 5K Chinook "encounters" allowed in Puget Sound which equates to a 2 week season. According the the above data I posted about 80% of these same endangered Chinook are caught in southern BC & I would be surprised if this continues for long.
 
We have also been faced with restrictions for many years now.
A slot size is in place from March 15- June 15 approx.
We must return oversize fish, although there are other area's and user groups who do not.
While I would much prefer this to a closure, I fail to see how this lends to conservation.
 
At least in this article - MacDuffie and Taylor acknowledge (at the bottom of the article) their affiliations - and with that - biases.

There should be a question asked of Taylor in his capacity of "buyer for Oceans Seafood", though: Does it financially benefit him and Oceans if they buy from inriver [Fraser], verses offshore commercial suppliers? What do they pay the inriver suppliers and bands $ per lb verses offshore??? What does that save them wrt costs and profits?? Is there a financial incentive to advocate for the closure of marine fisheries???
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Derby
Cracking the Code: Scientists Use DNA to Examine Differences between Hatchery and Wild Chinook Salmon in Southeast Alaska
Replies
0
Views
343
Derby
Derby
searun
UVIC & SFI Research - Effects of Management Measures
Replies
2
Views
298
searun
searun
Eden Island
Chinook Management Measures - Areas 11 to 20, 111, and Subareas 29-1 to 29-5 - Effective April 1, 2024
Replies
35
Views
4K
CalCom
C
SVIAC
IMPORTANT: Feb. 27 Fisheries Town Hall Mtg. in Langford
Replies
13
Views
2K
PEETZcanada
PEETZcanada
islandboy
Fisheries notices
Replies
74
Views
7K
Eden Island
Eden Island
Back
Top