The Road to Extirpation, by Bob Hooton

[OldBlackDog]

http://steelheadvoices.com/?p=2234&fbclid=IwAR1vxFyXfUE6_gTaj_9ALQ_qzAKxti2adiLtTdqDeBDPToNgyl5o74mWQpk


Taken from this: Finally, please don’t anyone try and sell the notion that all the court decisions pertaining to FN fishing rights should take precedence here. This is all about conservation, not allocation. Forget Sparrow, Van der Peet, Gladstone, Marshall and Ahousaht, as well as endless debate around today’s fishing methods of vastly greater indigenous populations exercising traditional rights. Our fish populations are obviously incapable of sustaining the mortality rates of the past, let alone those on the horizon. There is still supposed to be a Canadian Constitution that states plainly conservation prevails over food, social and ceremonial fisheries, however the latter is defined. If IFS doesn’t represent a conservation crisis that isn’t being addressed under the law of the day, what does? What purpose is there in any of us pushing for application of all the rules and guidelines we’re told should apply?

 

[searun]

Taking singular aim at gill nets seems to me to be aiming low at a far off target. There are other compelling causal reasons for Thompson steelhead declines - the role of pinnipeds for example is just one. Overly simplistic for us to think all will recover if we just remove the gill nets. That said, Bob does raise some good issues on that file...but sadly as much as I can agree with many of his comments, we all know those who could make change are hard wired to maintain the status quo. It just seems too little, too late for poor Thompson Steelhead.

 

[Whitebuck]

Gillnets are one of the main factors that can be controlled. Same with doing a seal cull.

Sacrificing our steelhead, wild coho and wild Harrison Chinook stocks for overseas sales of chum roe is a disgrace and sickening.

Once again Bob is spot on!

 

[Sharphooks]

Yes, searun....there are indeed compelling causal reasons for Thompson steelhead declines besides in river gillnets but when you have a returning spawning population that has been winnowed away over the last few decades from 5 digits worth of potential spawners to three digits of potential spawners, there is absolutely no logical reason or cogent argument that can be made to unleash a wall of gill nets on a low-value fish like a chum

This is a perfect recipe for extirpation of a genome....DFO must know that.....anyone who tries to make an argument for the selective fishing practices of drifting mesh at the peak month of steelhead movement through the system is either a liar or a fool....

A gill net stands in the way of the THompson steelhead’s last mile while “causal reasons” are stuck in a back eddy a mile downstream ..... And in exchange for what?...for a freaking chum!!

Are you kidding me???

 

[ericl]

we all know those who could make change are hard wired to maintain the status quo. It just seems too little, too late for poor Thompson Steelhead.

Sad, but true. We are much better at fixing broken stuff (often too late) instead of preventing stuff breaking.

nd in exchange for what?...for a freaking chum!!

I am sure that those that catch the Chum would disagree. Take a close look at their economic situation.The various governments involved have been enabling "commercial-style" fishing/ population increases/pollution/dams to drive various Salmon/Steelhead species to extinction for over 100 years.

Gillnets are one of the main factors that can be controlled. Same with doing a seal cull.

Very true, but in reality focusing on FN gill nets will make you appear to be a self-interested racist in the eyes of the majority whether you are or are not. The majority will be judge/jury on this & IMO instead of waiting & giving the finger to the firing squad, some on this forum are giving the finger to judge/jury before the trial begins. Maybe good for blowing off steam, but as far as winning friends & influencing people, not smart at all.

 

[Whitebuck]

Actually EricL up here in Canada our chum have gotten it from both commercial and FN this year.

So calling out the atrocities done by netting within the Fraser is racist? I’m sorry whatever user group that kills sturgeon,wild coho,steelhead and countless Chinook done by non selective fishing methods should be a thing of the past.

We also have a test fishery that has so far killed almost 2000 Chinook, most of these are endangered stocks that are in serious peril. This same test fishery has killed steelhead out of a run of less than probably a 100 this year. 75 sturgeon taken, as well as almost 600 coho this year. Killing endangered stocksand using science as a ploy when all these fish are sold is archaic and wrong.

My stance is gillnets have zero place on our river systems whoever the user group is.

 

[terrin]

Actually EricL up here in Canada our chum have gotten it from both commercial and FN this year.

So calling out the atrocities done by netting within the Fraser is racist? I’m sorry whatever user group that kills sturgeon,wild coho,steelhead and countless Chinook done by non selective fishing methods should be a thing of the past.

We also have a test fishery that has so far killed almost 2000 Chinook, most of these are endangered stocks that are in serious peril. This same test fishery has killed steelhead out of a run of less than probably a 100 this year. 75 sturgeon taken, as well as almost 600 coho this year. Killing endangered stocksand using science as a ploy when all these fish are sold is archaic and wrong.

My stance is gillnets have zero place on our river systems whoever the user group is.

Ask the FN's further up the Fraser River what they think of Gillnets. They likely have a different point of view than FN on the Lower sections of the Fraser so in that respect not Racist at all as EricL portrays it to be. For most people it is common sence to ban gillnets on the Fraser.

 

[OldBlackDog]

So the really sad thing on all this is the Governments have in fact said through there actions that Steelhead are not worth the time and dollars to bring them back.

The people who are effected by closures to help them are not on the side of doing this as it effects their life.

Remember this when the next thing will be there are no Chinook in the upper Fraser and soon no fish on many rivers on the coast as they are disappearing at a rapid pace right now.

The government and the people will do what they have done for the Steelhead and interior coho, nothing!

 

[ziggy]

I can appreciate that there is no “Silver Bullet” that will solve all the problems. I don’t agree with the “ if it ain’t a 100%” why bother. For too long the argument being made to justify doing nothing is that one action won’t solve the whole problem. Removing gill nets won’t solve the whole problem, but it’s a start and we have to start somewhere.
Arguably DFO has only used closures, their “Silver Bullet”and it simply doesn’t solve the problem. It’s a great way of deflecting from the myriad of other problems that they lack the means and will to take on. How many years of escalating closures have we endured with no noticeable change. Yet DFO seems to feel this one thing will save the fishery.
I think most of us would more readily accept things like closures if they were accompanied by other solutions. No one can deny the FN right to fish, but it is possible to encourage, expect that Conservation is respected and a more selective fishery must be used. Where are the ENGO’s on this issue they support closures, do they also support choke point gill netting? How much effort is being put into River rehabilitation? Are hatcheries a solution? If not is there a way to make them a viable option?
Like most I think it would be nice to see a political free holistic approach as opposed to the piecemeal, divisive, political course DFO tends to follow. A good start would be to take a hard look on whether or not all the areas and sub areas are really necessary. What science is being used? Why are fish from the same run treated differently as they transit through DFO artificial boundaries. Where’s the science?

 

[agentaqua]

Excellent post, Ziggy

 

[wildmanyeah]

Where are the ENGO’s on this issue they support closures, do they also support choke point gill netting?

we have contracted a number of people in the ENGO circles on this matter, They agree but have to walk a very fine line as First Nations are a very powerful tool for them. ENGO's for a number of years have been trying to get DFO to look into where the "missing" fraser spawners are going but you can imagine it's something they have to be very cautious of how they approach.

 

[ziggy]

we have contracted a number of people in the ENGO circles on this matter, They agree but have to walk a very fine line as First Nations are a very powerful tool for them.

That pretty much sums it up I’m afraid. Key word being a tool, which of course is a something that is being used either knowingly or unknowingly. Difficult as it is though they need to be constantly reminded of the hypocrisy of their organizations. It also needs to be exposed to the ENGO funding base and their Ecco warrior followers.

 

[OldBlackDog]

https://www.theprogress.com/news/ti...UFjmPC5FPBdE0cPCX28w9Ont6Uqiw5VJVERkLVN0YYcXk

 

[Sharphooks]

If I had a robust well-oiled ENGO and had the will and the energy to pursue it, I’d run calculations on the average annual market return in CAN$ to the FN for the Total value of their October and November chum, coho and chinook catch, (chum roe value included), then lay sacks of cash on the FN’s doorstep, consistent with the calculated market value of that resource in exchange for them to pull 100% of the Fraser and Thompson nets during that time period.

Then I’d do a joint venture with MOE in conjunction with, and with the blessings of, DFO , to offer shares to the general public for the option of fishing the THompson river from October 01 to December 31 st each year for a 100% C&R fishery, artificials allowed, zero bait, open access to anyone with a fishing license and a bone-fide share certificate

Who’s in on my plan?

 

[Whitebuck]

Yes...let's harass the last hundred fish for a select few. Definetly a great plan....not.

How about leave them alone for a few decades and let them recover rather than have a few ppl get shares on it. Almost as backwards as when we were down to a few hundred fish and certain groups wanted to still angle for them rather than let them be.

Great first part of your plan though...

 

[agentaqua]

Here's the observed steelhead bycatch in the Skeena by gillnets: https://data.skeenasalmon.info/data.../thomas-steelhead-bycatch-and-mortalities.pdf

 

[Whitebuck]

“The report concluded from these findings that the mortality of steelhead caught by gillnets was very high”.

 

[terrin]

Here's the observed steelhead bycatch in the Skeena by gillnets: https://data.skeenasalmon.info/data.../thomas-steelhead-bycatch-and-mortalities.pdf

That looks like an actuarial report. Sample size this and sample size that with voluntary monitoring you can make it say anything you want.

 

[agentaqua]

YA - it's a summary report Terrin - of a number of studies. Lots of different focii. I think the strengths are the long time frames that show a large reduction in steelhead catch. The steelhead interception rate for gillnets and seines looks to be ~1-2% of the total sockeye catch on average. Looks like weedlines helped considerably (table 6, page 27) on the gillnet interception rate. Seines caught about as much as a percentage but had a much better release survival than the gillnets (@ 60-70% mortality). The steelhead to chum catch ratio was quite low (Table 14, page 44) for gillnets ranging from 0-0.23%.

 

[Whitebuck]

AA, Can you find any data like this for in river fisheries on the Fraser as well as the Nass or Skeena ?