This whole thing about creating these orca refuge areas as a scientific pilot project is so laughable, anyone who honestly buys into this concept or believes that this setup with or without any other boat traffic could provide any scientifically useful findings has obviously not been involved in any science before. This is so ridiculously painted with a cheap label of science while being a stinky piece of political sh...t. I suggest you don't buy it and reject this cheap trap altogether. Bad try DFO, try again!
IMPORTANT: SVIAC Town Mtg w/ Mel Arnold MP Re Fisheries Issues
- Thread starter SVIAC
- Start date
SpringVelocity
Crew Member
The best quote in this entire thread.
searun
Well-Known Member
I think you are totally missing the point. The science is very clear - that it is important to remove the physical and acoustic disturbances - those come from vessel operators other than just rec fishers. That is THE point.
Until we can get a "refuge area" that is actually closed to all vessel traffic and complete a proper study to see if this strategy has any merit - then we will never really know if this novel concept dreamt up by the green ENGO's is effective. And, at this point it is the only strategy DFO will have in their play book - so expect more area closures - that is the point of the most recent consultation process which is open for input until July 14. DFO is looking at expanding the critical habitat refuge areas.
The Area 20 closure was supposed to be part of a scientific study - one where we actually determined if prey acquisition was enhanced by closures. With other vessels operating in this area, it will be impossible to gather the science to tell us one way or the other if this strategy actually is worthwhile....which BTW, I firmly believe there are other less invasive strategies that are equally effective.
What we also need tested is a comparative study to determine is an alternative such as a 400m mobile spatial exclusion zone or "bubble zone" can produce similar benefits with less socio-economic impact. We tried very hard to get the Minister to allow a small fishery along Pender Bluffs to test this...NO JOY. Its becoming increasingly apparent that these are politically motivated not science based decisions. We somehow need to get the Politicians to actually do what they campaigned on, which was science based decision making!
This isn't about picking a fight with whale watchers or commercial crab fishers, its more about creating a science based study to measure objectively if there is indeed ANY benefit to an area closure or not.
So, yes I would like to see that study, and yes it needs to include an area where all vessel traffic is excluded. I would like to see that in Area 20 and the Pender Bluffs.
Netpens by the way are not the answer either. They are a nice way to place a few fish into a local area, but the real benefit to SRKW is a much wider more diverse Chinook recovery strategy backed up by a strong bubble zone to reduce threat pillars impacting SRKW everywhere they range, not just a few spots on the map.
Again, explain to me where you are going to find a refuge area within JDF Strait without noise from vessel traffic? Are you going to make all the freighter, naval, commercial fishing, yachts, barges, log booms, and cruise ship vessels go up the inside and around the Island to get out to sea? There are still the same number of BC ferries going through Active Pass at speed now as before June 1st. I agree that the bubble is the better option by far...it can be in place on the entire coast and only impact anglers for a few minutes a year when they do encounter whales and move to allow them to pass. But as far as a proper scientific study on the refuge areas, it can't be done. There are just to many vessels in those waters and no government is going to shut it all down for science.
Sorry, searun, but what DFO is doing has nothing to do with science. And I think you know that. It is very troubling to see that you want to see such a "study" - or let's better call it the politically motivated death of sportfishing - in area 20 and 18. If that's the official stand by our sportfishing reps then help us god! We all should fight this nonsense to the nail and not play along with it, no matter where they propose this nonsense.
And btw, the netpens ARE one of the very few short term answers to the Chinook shortage. No other measure other than a seal cull and complete netting ban could make more fish very soon. Everything else is long-term.
wolf
Well-Known Member
I am going to say something now as some of you are missing the point the ENEMY is not the navy,whale watchers,commercial crabbers,tug boats,freighters. etc. its DFO and the total lack of mismanagement they got threated but certain groups to be sued and the minister caved in plain and simple.
SCIENCE has nothing to do with what is going on to shut down all these areas is only going to help one place ......... the FN fishery in the river.
We are lashing out at each other and other groups because we are hurt and ruling things on emotions not facts .
Trust me I get im pissed right off and not a pleasant person to be around right now, ive lost 8 days of trips because of all of this , im losing my livelihood and how I make a living. taking people out to enjoy a day of fishing and the way its going its going to end soon for ALL of us as the hippy and treehuggers and greens want more they wanted it all shut down THEY ARE THE ENEMY....that we have a very big uphill battle, that personally I doubt we will win.
So I say this now guys enjoy what little we have left as its going to be gone soon enough i saw this coming 10 years ago.
Good luck Wolf
SCIENCE has nothing to do with what is going on to shut down all these areas is only going to help one place ......... the FN fishery in the river.
We are lashing out at each other and other groups because we are hurt and ruling things on emotions not facts .
Trust me I get im pissed right off and not a pleasant person to be around right now, ive lost 8 days of trips because of all of this , im losing my livelihood and how I make a living. taking people out to enjoy a day of fishing and the way its going its going to end soon for ALL of us as the hippy and treehuggers and greens want more they wanted it all shut down THEY ARE THE ENEMY....that we have a very big uphill battle, that personally I doubt we will win.
So I say this now guys enjoy what little we have left as its going to be gone soon enough i saw this coming 10 years ago.
Good luck Wolf
Derby
Crew Member
Resources & Agriculture
Controversy sparked over chinook salmon closures
Debate over southern resident killer whale plight oversimplified: marine mammal expert
By Nelson Bennett | June 12, 2018
B.C.’s southern resident killer whale population has declined and rebounded four times since 1960
A recent Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) decision to close some B.C. areas to all recreational fishing this summer and implement restrictions on chinook salmon in others is a half measure that misses the boat, fisheries and marine mammal experts say.
In a move aimed at conserving declining chinook stocks, which make up 90% of the southern resident killer whale’s diet, the DFO has closed three orca foraging areas to all finfish angling: on Vancouver Island, from north of Sooke to Port Renfrew, the Gulf Islands and the mouth of the Fraser River. The DFO is also implementing zero retention for chinook in the Prince Rupert region and restrictions for chinook for the Nass and Skeena rivers. The closures and restrictions are aimed at reducing the chinook catch by 25% to 35%.
Without also restricting whale-watching in sensitive marine areas, the initiative could hurt B.C.’s sport-fishing sector with no guarantee of helping killer whale populations.
Alaska’s Department of Fish and Game last week also began instituting full chinook sport-fishing closures for some river systems. The B.C. closures will have a big impact on lodges, charters, guides and other businesses in the sport-fishing sector, said Owen Bird, executive director for the Sport Fishing Institute of BC.
“I don’t think even ‘devastating’ is too strong for these small communities that really rely on the sport-fishing economy,” Bird said.
Greg Taylor, a fisheries adviser and member of the salmon sub-committee of the Marine Conservation Caucus, said the closures and restrictions are half measures, partly because they don’t include a ban on whale-watching boats in critical orca foraging zones. Leaving some areas open to chinook fishing and others closed just redistributes the catch, Taylor said, so the closures are more about giving orcas room to feed than reducing chinook harvest levels.
Of 15 chinook conservation units, 11 are designated red (status poor). Neither of the units in the Nass and Skeena is red, so Taylor wonders why restrictions on chinook have been implemented there but not on the entire Fraser River system.
“If you look at how many chinook are returning to the Fraser River right now, no one should be fishing – no one,” Taylor said.
The southern resident killer whale population has fallen to 76 from a high of 98 in the mid-1990s.
A science panel struck to study the decline concluded in 2012 that fewer chinook isn’t the only challenge orcas face. If there is too much noise from small-boat traffic, they can’t use eco-location to hunt, so it might not matter how much fish is in the water if they can’t catch them.
Andrew Trites, director of the Marine Mammal Research Unit at the University of British Columbia, said the discussion over southern resident killer whales is being oversimplified.
While 76 is lower than average for the southern resident killer whale population, it has been lower than that. Over the past 58 years, that population has declined and rebounded four times, never going above 98.
Meanwhile, Trites said the northern resident killer whale population has grown to about 300. Their range overlaps, with the northern orcas coming as far south as Vancouver Island, so why is the southern population doing poorly while its northern counterpart is thriving?
“The simple narrative is always ‘It’s overfishing,’” Trites said. “Yet the truth of this story might be competition from northern residents. We’ve got increasing sea lion populations, we’ve got very abundant harbour seal populations. So on many levels, we’ve got an ecosystem for marine mammals that’s great, but we’ve got this one outlier that’s doing not well, and that’s the southern residents.
“You would expect that, if it was just a straight-up lack of prey, that the northerns should also be affected, and we’re not seeing that. And so it’s very possible that the northerns are excluding or pushing the southern s further south into marginal habitat.”
nbennett@biv.com
@nbennett_biv
Controversy sparked over chinook salmon closures
Debate over southern resident killer whale plight oversimplified: marine mammal expert
By Nelson Bennett | June 12, 2018
B.C.’s southern resident killer whale population has declined and rebounded four times since 1960
A recent Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) decision to close some B.C. areas to all recreational fishing this summer and implement restrictions on chinook salmon in others is a half measure that misses the boat, fisheries and marine mammal experts say.
In a move aimed at conserving declining chinook stocks, which make up 90% of the southern resident killer whale’s diet, the DFO has closed three orca foraging areas to all finfish angling: on Vancouver Island, from north of Sooke to Port Renfrew, the Gulf Islands and the mouth of the Fraser River. The DFO is also implementing zero retention for chinook in the Prince Rupert region and restrictions for chinook for the Nass and Skeena rivers. The closures and restrictions are aimed at reducing the chinook catch by 25% to 35%.
Without also restricting whale-watching in sensitive marine areas, the initiative could hurt B.C.’s sport-fishing sector with no guarantee of helping killer whale populations.
Alaska’s Department of Fish and Game last week also began instituting full chinook sport-fishing closures for some river systems. The B.C. closures will have a big impact on lodges, charters, guides and other businesses in the sport-fishing sector, said Owen Bird, executive director for the Sport Fishing Institute of BC.
“I don’t think even ‘devastating’ is too strong for these small communities that really rely on the sport-fishing economy,” Bird said.
Greg Taylor, a fisheries adviser and member of the salmon sub-committee of the Marine Conservation Caucus, said the closures and restrictions are half measures, partly because they don’t include a ban on whale-watching boats in critical orca foraging zones. Leaving some areas open to chinook fishing and others closed just redistributes the catch, Taylor said, so the closures are more about giving orcas room to feed than reducing chinook harvest levels.
Of 15 chinook conservation units, 11 are designated red (status poor). Neither of the units in the Nass and Skeena is red, so Taylor wonders why restrictions on chinook have been implemented there but not on the entire Fraser River system.
“If you look at how many chinook are returning to the Fraser River right now, no one should be fishing – no one,” Taylor said.
The southern resident killer whale population has fallen to 76 from a high of 98 in the mid-1990s.
A science panel struck to study the decline concluded in 2012 that fewer chinook isn’t the only challenge orcas face. If there is too much noise from small-boat traffic, they can’t use eco-location to hunt, so it might not matter how much fish is in the water if they can’t catch them.
Andrew Trites, director of the Marine Mammal Research Unit at the University of British Columbia, said the discussion over southern resident killer whales is being oversimplified.
While 76 is lower than average for the southern resident killer whale population, it has been lower than that. Over the past 58 years, that population has declined and rebounded four times, never going above 98.
Meanwhile, Trites said the northern resident killer whale population has grown to about 300. Their range overlaps, with the northern orcas coming as far south as Vancouver Island, so why is the southern population doing poorly while its northern counterpart is thriving?
“The simple narrative is always ‘It’s overfishing,’” Trites said. “Yet the truth of this story might be competition from northern residents. We’ve got increasing sea lion populations, we’ve got very abundant harbour seal populations. So on many levels, we’ve got an ecosystem for marine mammals that’s great, but we’ve got this one outlier that’s doing not well, and that’s the southern residents.
“You would expect that, if it was just a straight-up lack of prey, that the northerns should also be affected, and we’re not seeing that. And so it’s very possible that the northerns are excluding or pushing the southern s further south into marginal habitat.”
nbennett@biv.com
@nbennett_biv
wildmanyeah
Crew Member
We met with Andrew Trites about a month ago. He and his assistant wanted input from local fishing guides for a study he has been funded to conduct this summer around the south Island waters. He went over that graph and explained that the southern residents are not starving as much as they are sick. (toxins) He did say that the northerns are doing much better and they appear to be in better shape physically than the southerns......but photos of the southerns do not indicate they are starving. He also mentioned that it may be an act of nature that the northern population is just driving the southern population out of the area....as the northern population grows they will increase their foraging ranges to sustain the new ranks to their pod.
That graph shows the first dip from 1960 to 1970 and that was a result of the capture years. The following increase from 1970 to the 1990's resulted in more whales than in 1960 and corosponded directly to the introduction of SEP in the same time period of time....and when it was running at maximum production. More fish resulted in more whales! It is time to increase funding back to SEP.
High Time
Crew Member
The quiet foraging area off the Pender Bluffs which we now have closed to sport fishing for all finfish from May-Sept for the SRKW, although actually they aren't here because they are busy foraging off Tofino and likely won't return until Sept-Oct.when the chum runs enter the gulf, so the car carrier, container vessel and loaded log barge transiting the area aren't actually disturbing them. This is starting to sound like a Monte Python skit....
[/url][/IMG]
fish brain
Crew Member
Ah yes, but you can clearly see that there are no fishing vessels there to disturb them should they choose to return sooner due to all the peace and quiet.The quiet foraging area off the Pender Bluffs which we now have closed to sport fishing for all finfish from May-Sept for the SRKW, although actually they aren't here because they are busy foraging off Tofino and likely won't return until Sept-Oct.when the chum runs enter the gulf, so the car carrier, container vessel and loaded log barge transiting the area aren't actually disturbing them. This is starting to sound like a Monte Python skit....
[/url][/IMG]
searun
Well-Known Member
I'm done trying to reason with you guys who seem hell bent on avoiding doing the right thing to develop an objective science based solution. Enjoy the $$ whale watchers pump into the net pen project, and see how that gets played out. Area closures are a good thing apparently, as is allowing hard core physical and acoustic disturbance to continue, rather than facing the known facts about the merits of reducing it.
Time better spent organizing a different solution.
Time better spent organizing a different solution.
Searun...he just showed you a picture of the area 18 refuge quiet zone...how can you defend it as quiet and that any study would have any outcome with merit? The acoustic noise from those vessels in that one picture would be greater than the few sport boats that would be there if it was open to them. As Calm says and as Andrew Trite (a scientist who specializes on these whales) told us...any study with the lack of controls to prevent data corruption is worthless. I'm not apposed to a study being done to validate that quiet zones are beneficial to the whales. But DFO has to make it a quiet zone...no boats period. Not just anglers or as some here want no whale watchers....I'm not for excluding one or two...to make it a valid scientific study with results you can trust...all boats have to stay out.
casper5280
Crew Member
I believe that is what Searun is saying if you are TRULY going to make it a quiet zone make it one. We all agree this is a bunch of ********.
california
Well-Known Member
From a scientific standpoint the area doesn't have to have no noise or disruptions. Its completely valid if the premise that there is LESS noise and disruption underlies the study. There is no practical way to stop all transit through the SJF as its the approach for the Port of Vancouver. However disruptions can be reduced by eliminating some small vessel traffic, traffic that is concentrated in the areas the whales feed, like sport fishing and whale watching. From a scientific method perspective a control group is ideal, but lots of valid research uses uses observational or other endpoints when a full control is not possible as in many behavioral studies in native environments . Ideally there would be a run in period with no vessel restrictions followed by an experimental period with the restrictions where endpoints like number of whale excursions, time spent in the area, time actively foraging etc. were all recorded with the same methodology in the before (control) and after (study) periods . Instead they are using historical observations as the control, which is not as good. It is debatable if the study design, will show anything, particularly since a significant controllable disturbance (whale watching boats) has not been included, but the premise of a study is not negated by commercial ships still transiting the area.
Crab boats in there roaring around with diesel engines pulling and dropping stainless pots often of metal boats? That area is the most heavily potted spots along that section of the coast. This whole **** storm in area 19/20 is all about the inclusion of Otter Point to Sheringham at the last minute. That inclusion is killing the economic situation for many in the town of Sooke. And as we all know this is all BS...but we were prepared to live with some BS if it didn't hurt us unnecessarily and if it satisfied those wanting to conduct a BS study. What we got is not acceptable....it is seriously affecting peoples economic situation negatively. The weekend fishermen who can leave are doing just that as I've heard Port Renfrew is plugged with boats
Similar threads
