Stopping chinook fishing

Let’s be clear, the science has been done on the Puntledge river.
Killing Seals is proven to work.

They have to do this if they believe in facts.




Yes, @OldBlackDog , the mention of a seal cull was brought up at the symposium (and article below). There is mounting evidence that harbour seals are eating a large percentage of juvenile salmon (chinook and others) as they leave river estuaries for the Strait of Georgia. This evidence is still be gathered through (http://marinesurvivalproject.com/) and will be used in in future policy making going forward no doubt. The seal population in the SOG has held constant at around 40,000 seals since the early 1990's. It was also estimated to be around that level in the early 1900's but did drop off massively (down to around 5,000) when the cull was in place. As has been mentioned before there are no quick and easy fixes to this problem. A cull could be part of it perhaps but it alone won't save our chinook. It's a complex issue that requires a complex solution. Some aspects of the solution can be done now (ie. cull; increased chinook net pets; eel grass transplants; fishing regs, etc) but others are mid-long term.



---

Stopping all fishing of chinook, including harvesting by First Nations, likely won’t provide an instant food solution for endangered Southern Resident killer whales, the president of the Pacific Salmon Foundation said Tuesday.

Brian Riddell, a former senior official with Fisheries and Oceans Canada, said in an interview there are limited options to help the whales other than to stop fishing. “Can you do it? Certainly. That’s something that could be done right now, if that was the priority. You could stop all fishing and put all the fish on the spawning grounds.

“It depends how far you want to take it. These things have repercussions — First Nations’ use, for example. I think everything’s on the table.”

The Pacific Salmon Commission reports a total catch of 1.69 million chinook in 2016, including 1.15 million by Americans and the rest by Canadian fisheries.

Riddell said he is not convinced that taking “large-scale immediate actions are going to make an immediate difference” for the whales. He also believes it is possible to provide limited in-river First Nations chinook catches without having a major impact on productivity. In Canada, only conservation takes priority over First Nations’ food, social, and ceremonial fishing.

What is needed over the longer term is to increase the overall abundance of chinook, including protection of their habitat, while acknowledging the impact of other marine predators on those same chinook, he said. “That’s probably the only way we’ll make a significant difference.” One option for increasing productivity is to acclimate chinook smolts through their transition to sea water by feeding them in temporary sea-pens.

Chinook is the largest species of Pacific salmon and the preferred diet of the Southern Resident killer whales, especially in summer. The fish typically has a five-year life cycle.

“There’s no question the whales are struggling in terms of diet,” Riddell said. “We have to make a major change. If the decision is that Southern Resident orcas are the priority for recovery, then we’ll have to provide additional food and other actions as well.”

Southern Residents are thought to number just 76 in three pods after a young male showing signs of malnutrition disappeared last month. Lack of chinook is thought to be a leading cause of their decline, with other factors including pollution and vessel noise.

Riddell also said that ongoing research involving the foundation and the University of B.C. shows that harbour seals can have a substantial impact on juvenile chinook migrating downriver to sea and that society at some point may have to consider culling seal populations.

“If you show evidence … I’m quite sure that option is going to be brought up,” he said. “There are a lot of seals around. They’re a significant source of (chinook) mortality.”

Full article: http://vancouversun.com/news/local-...-to-help-hungry-killer-whales-salmon-official
 
Really?
The only way to save chinook salmon is for all user groups to wake up see the writing on the wall; most stocks are well and truly endangered, some possibly past the point of recovery due to, among other reasons, a lack of genetic diversity.
All user groups must stop fighting over the right to harvest the remnants of these fish and just stop killing them, plain and simple.

Like we did for Coho? It's been 20 years of not keeping wild coho in the SoG and how are the stocks doing now? **** poor if you ask me. What makes you think that if we try that same experiment that things will turn out any different?
 
You and I have discussed this GLG on another thread. I suggested comparing coho and chinook habitat needs are like comparing apples and oranges.
 
habitat and non-retention are 2 very different issues...
Agreed, but in this case it is relevant. I believe non retention for early run Fraser River chinooks would benefit them because imo, spawning and rearing habitat for these stocks is in abundance. Coho simply don't have the quality habitat available to them like they did until relatively recently.
 
Well, some assumptions there. Like that habitat verses another impact is THE issue wrt coho - seems that some in DFO would disagree w you - otherwise they wouldn't have changed the SF regs...
 
Hey fogged in, hadn't looked at this thread in a few days. I'd say that plenty examples of "proper solutions" have been presented, but the scope seems to be limited to Fraser river issues. Also it seems southern Orca population recovery throws a bit of a twist in that Chinook populations could start increasing on the rivers that spawn their meals, but until Orca numbers increase I would not expect fishing restriction to ease. Probably talking a good 5 years easy. I'd say a proper solution addresses all the issues causing declines in many Chinook populations. Restricting fishing & killing pinniped's would have an immediate effect. Haven't fired a gun since the military (1971) but I'd be first in line these these.

Hatchery's would take a year or 2 assuming that many Chinook such as Puget Sound & Elway fish grow-up locally versus up north.
Longest would be habitat restoration - they are saying 20 years for the Elway habitat restoration to take effect. I think hatchery's will need to be around until the habitat is recovered.

Take a look at this picture:

http://wildfishconservancy.org/images/news/CaughtFarFromHome2011journalchart.jpg

Fraser fish are in light green, Puget Sound fish in brown. It is likely that these two chinook populations compose a large majority of what the Orca's in question eat. If you fish where the pie slices of these 2 groups are large, you will most likely be unhappy in the near future.

Also, some on here seems to equate terminal area fisheries as meaning FN's on the Fraser. I don't think this is true. If you look at the chart again, you will see that in SEAK they catch Chinook from everywhere BUT SEAK. Some conservation groups see this as a major problem. Read this:

http://wildfishconservancy.org/abou...d-fishery-chinook-catch-composition-1999-2010

Let's use WCVI Chinook as an example of what I believe is meant by terminal fishery.

According to the pie chart 68% of all WCVI Chinook that are caught are caught in the SEAK troll fishery. Current method of determining harvest is to use 20+ indicator streams to determine projected Chinook abundance. To the best of my knowledge hatchery runs & runs where they are counted at fish ladders are used for the abundance index. I don't have the full list at my fingertips but google is your friend.
Based on the abundance index, Chinook harvest is established for all Pacific Salmon Treaty waters. This fishery is known as the AABM fishery (Aggregate Abundance Based Management).
So the fleets get unleashed & catch whatever is swimming in the area they are fishing. They are fishing what is referred to as "mixed stocks" meaning Chinook from thousands of streams are caught.
There has been groups of conservation minded folks that think this is insanity, as many of the fish caught are the one's we should not be catching Furthermore, this leads to smaller Chinook as the larger fish spend more years in the area of mixed stocks & therefore have a greater chance of being caught.. Instead, they advocate harvesting health runs in "terminal areas" where the harvest is predominately healthy runs.
So for WCVI Chinook, the hatchery runs would be OK but not the wild runs. Fishing inside waters like area 23 would be OK but area 123 might be a different story.

One could argue that catching any Chinook has a possible impact on southern Orca's, but judging from the past I would hope that a more reasonable approach based on minimal impact would be used.
 
Hey fogged in, hadn't looked at this thread in a few days. I'd say that plenty examples of "proper solutions" have been presented, but the scope seems to be limited to Fraser river issues. Also it seems southern Orca population recovery throws a bit of a twist in that Chinook populations could start increasing on the rivers that spawn their meals, but until Orca numbers increase I would not expect fishing restriction to ease. Probably talking a good 5 years easy. I'd say a proper solution addresses all the issues causing declines in many Chinook populations. Restricting fishing & killing pinniped's would have an immediate effect. Haven't fired a gun since the military (1971) but I'd be first in line these these.

Hatchery's would take a year or 2 assuming that many Chinook such as Puget Sound & Elway fish grow-up locally versus up north.
Longest would be habitat restoration - they are saying 20 years for the Elway habitat restoration to take effect. I think hatchery's will need to be around until the habitat is recovered.

Take a look at this picture:

http://wildfishconservancy.org/images/news/CaughtFarFromHome2011journalchart.jpg

Fraser fish are in light green, Puget Sound fish in brown. It is likely that these two chinook populations compose a large majority of what the Orca's in question eat. If you fish where the pie slices of these 2 groups are large, you will most likely be unhappy in the near future.

Also, some on here seems to equate terminal area fisheries as meaning FN's on the Fraser. I don't think this is true. If you look at the chart again, you will see that in SEAK they catch Chinook from everywhere BUT SEAK. Some conservation groups see this as a major problem. Read this:

http://wildfishconservancy.org/abou...d-fishery-chinook-catch-composition-1999-2010

Let's use WCVI Chinook as an example of what I believe is meant by terminal fishery.

According to the pie chart 68% of all WCVI Chinook that are caught are caught in the SEAK troll fishery. Current method of determining harvest is to use 20+ indicator streams to determine projected Chinook abundance. To the best of my knowledge hatchery runs & runs where they are counted at fish ladders are used for the abundance index. I don't have the full list at my fingertips but google is your friend.
Based on the abundance index, Chinook harvest is established for all Pacific Salmon Treaty waters. This fishery is known as the AABM fishery (Aggregate Abundance Based Management).
So the fleets get unleashed & catch whatever is swimming in the area they are fishing. They are fishing what is referred to as "mixed stocks" meaning Chinook from thousands of streams are caught.
There has been groups of conservation minded folks that think this is insanity, as many of the fish caught are the one's we should not be catching Furthermore, this leads to smaller Chinook as the larger fish spend more years in the area of mixed stocks & therefore have a greater chance of being caught.. Instead, they advocate harvesting health runs in "terminal areas" where the harvest is predominately healthy runs.
So for WCVI Chinook, the hatchery runs would be OK but not the wild runs. Fishing inside waters like area 23 would be OK but area 123 might be a different story.

One could argue that catching any Chinook has a possible impact on southern Orca's, but judging from the past I would hope that a more reasonable approach based on minimal impact would be used.

Do you want all other places closed because you can't fish in your area ? Yes or No? You keep going on but all your post seem to come back to that. I think it is ridiculous to insist another area is closed just because you have no access. Many US anglers stay up here and even cross our borders to fish. Your country is restricted up North because it over harvested. Now you want to share the pain. What we are going through has a lot to do with Fraser not Puget sound fish. Your spilling that issue into this. Not getting it at all.

Look at area 19/20 for years slot restricted and screwed over. Other areas are open and I don't complain. I just deal with it and go fish other areas if I can. What 19/20 goes through I wouldn't want others to share the same fate. I just keep my mouth shut and am thankful we have an option. If I was a Puget sound angler I would be thankful I had that option to come up here if needed. Just my opinion.
 
Last edited:
@ericl another interesting bit of info from the symposium was re: orca diet. As mentioned already, chinook salmon are by FAR the biggest part of the SRWK diet (80% +). However, the SRKW seem to be superbly picky in that they target large, high-fat content chinook over other types of chinook. Specifically, the diets samples taken during Summer months show the vast majority of the SRKW comes from Harrison & South Thompson chinook. It is amazing the information that has been gathered on this topic, albeit largely Summer diet. However, if orca recovery is the primary concern for the feds, it's not just a matter of pumping out more hatchery fish randomly or killing a few seals. It will take a serious effort involving experts in many areas to ensure the 'right' killer whale food is produced.

Fraser fish are in light green, Puget Sound fish in brown. It is likely that these two chinook populations compose a large majority of what the Orca's in question eat. If you fish where the pie slices of these 2 groups are large, you will most likely be unhappy in the near future.
 
https://www.canada.ca/en/fisheries-...communitymarineindustryandgovernmentpart.html

News Release
From Fisheries and Oceans Canada

Vancouver, British Columbia– Today marks the conclusion of the Southern Resident Killer Whale Symposium in Vancouver. The Symposium brought together Indigenous groups, the scientific community, marine industry representatives and government partners, including from the United States, to address challenges facing this killer whale population.

The Southern Resident Killer Whale is listed as an endangered species under Canada’s Species At Risk Act, and faces challenges relating to the availability of prey, noise pollution and marine contaminants. The Government of Canada is committed to the protection and recovery of the Southern Resident Killer whale, which is an iconic species of Canada’s west coast, and one that holds significant cultural value for Indigenous and First Nations peoples.

Last November, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau launched the $1.5-billion national Oceans Protection Plan. This historic investment is designed to create a world-leading marine safety system that creates economic opportunities for Canadians, while also safeguarding the integrity of our coastlines and marine ecosystems.

As an important part of the Oceans Protection Plan, and following months of scientific work and public consultation, participants of the Southern Resident Killer Whale Symposium worked together to deepen the understanding of the threats facing this whale population, and to assess tangible solutions to help their recovery.

Discussions resulted in a number of concrete suggestions the government can undertake with the help of its partners to move beyond mitigation towards population stabilization and enhancement. While many and varied views were heard over the course of the symposium, a strong consensus was established on the following:

  • We must continue to seek the inclusion of traditional knowledge and expertise of Indigenous and First Nations peoples as we work in partnership to address the challenges facing the SRKW.
  • In all key areas relating to the survival, protection, and restoration of this iconic species, it is necessary that innovative, near-term solutions are developed and acted on in the areas of noise mitigation, prey availability and contaminants.
  • We must consider additional temporal and spatial protection measures for the habitat of the SRKW and its prey.
  • We must continue to work closely with domestic and international partners to explore options to reduce vessel noise and contaminants that threaten the SRKW.
  • We must collaborate closely with the United States on SRKW protection measures.
  • We must improve monitoring of SRKW.
The Government of Canada will publish a summary of what we heard at the symposium within three months. Combined with our commitment to act to reduce the impact of contaminants on the Southern Resident Killer Whales, improve their access to an adequate food supply, and reduce the underwater noise levels within their habitat, we will lay out a path forward with key action points for the immediate and longer term.

The Government of Canada looks forward to collaborating with all sectors to protect and recover the Southern Resident Killer Whale population.
 
Coastal wide closure from California to Alaska for the ocean is the only way I see it. Only have in river fisheries and you can actually manage returns to thoes systems.
 
I've always thought that fishing them in the rivers (especially with nets) was the most harmful as that's where they are stacked up often and are at there most vulnerable. They've made the journey of life through countless obstacles and predators, just kinda seems a shame to get them at that point when they're on their way or close to their spawning beds. I've fished for them myself in many rivers lots, prob more than in the ocean, but being a little older now it's just the way I feel. Prob didn't think about it alot when I was younger..
Will still fish them in the rivers given a chance as long as the run is healthy. But doesn't do the same for me as fishing them in the ocean. Maybe I'm a bit spoiled now.
 
I hate so say this..but it does make some sense..doesn't it?
DFO's guesstimates on runs are, in many forum members words..
"soo far off with most fisheries"
(we've all heard many comments on this in the past.."wedgie board" "dart board" "spin the wheel")

Now think,if you wait till the fish stocks are in closer to their river systems of origin, the stocks "should" then be counted with almost no error, and at the very least a "smaller" % of error than in the past...yes this would impact almost all of "us" in some very big ways..
Anything's possible

Interesting times are ahead for sure
 
Yes, @OldBlackDog , the mention of a seal cull was brought up at the symposium (and article below). There is mounting evidence that harbour seals are eating a large percentage of juvenile salmon (chinook and others) as they leave river estuaries for the Strait of Georgia. This evidence is still be gathered through (http://marinesurvivalproject.com/) and will be used in in future policy making going forward no doubt. The seal population in the SOG has held constant at around 40,000 seals since the early 1990's. It was also estimated to be around that level in the early 1900's but did drop off massively (down to around 5,000) when the cull was in place. As has been mentioned before there are no quick and easy fixes to this problem. A cull could be part of it perhaps but it alone won't save our chinook. It's a complex issue that requires a complex solution. Some aspects of the solution can be done now (ie. cull; increased chinook net pets; eel grass transplants; fishing regs, etc) but others are mid-long term.

looking at the grand scheme of things, this is what I see - several sources and DFO state there are around 105,000 seals now in BC waters - average food 5lb/day, lets say salmon 10% of that which seems average, translates to 19 million lbs of salmon, then from timeline articles, I see stellar sealions since mid 80's have gone from 1200 to 19000 in BC - they apparently consume around 1lb/day salmon (states only a few % of their total diet), which is 7 million lbs a year also, also add the 3 million consumed by the 4000 california sea lions during their 8 month stay up here, and we are talking about 29 million lbs of salmon annually. That seems like a pretty big chunk of salmon right there does it not? Compared to the mid 80's where the numbers would have translated to 8 million lbs overall. I'm no scientist, but purely what I read, this is a huge impact. Even at that, I find the numbers conservative - one stolen fish off a line represents 20-40 average days of food? I call voodoo calculations right there! ha Regardless, to me, seals doubling and sea lions going up over 15 fold since 80's is an issue and seems justification for a cull. Or just have a word with the transients and tell em to pass on the secret to the southern pod that seals are yummy!
 
Now think,if you wait till the fish stocks are in closer to their river systems of origin, the stocks "should" then be counted with almost no error, and at the very least a "smaller" % of error than in the past

You are relying on systems on the water to count however...
will that happen ?
 
You are relying on systems on the water to count however...
will that happen ?

I can't answer that..but..You'd have to believe the counts and assessments of runs should be much more accurate the closer the run gets to their home system no matter how they decide to do it.

Then grant an opening to the commercial harvest in shore(not in river) vs off shore (when #s are educated?guesstimates) after a more accurate count has been done.
Maybe error on a smaller harvest than what has been done in past for a few yrs to see if any results are had?
I think resolving the issue at hand must include many ideas however hard they might be to hear..

p.s. not avocating any shut down of any sector but maybe the commercial sector (if its agreed that its the largest harvesters) now fishes closer to the runs "home river" after more accurate #s are assessed?
 
SpringVelocity:

No I don't want to see other area's closed/restricted just because my area is - I still like fishing, have fished BC since 1977 & haven't fished down here much since then.

Yes I do expect it will happen

Yes, I want more restrictions on BC catches of Puget Sound Chinook.

Do you want more restrictions on SEAK catches of endangered WCVI Chinook?
 
Back
Top