“Random” iREC Fishing Survey

[Floater]

Can you substantiate why you feel that DFO can’t be trusted? I’m not trying to argue your position, I’m trying to understand.

Because of past policy and future proposals that have politically expedient but not hitting the root causes of the problem.

FN issues are a big part of that. Slot limits. Wild v hatch retention.

I’m open to having my mind changed, but I’ll never blindly trust this authority.

 

[capt hook]

They (DFO) has soooooo much data over the years and still do nothing with it , except grow bigger departments within departments ,with in dept,and grow a new dept.
I saw a comparison study of what Iceland does with their dfo management with 10% of the budget and employees....
and they get 1000% more accomplished.
DFO needs a total RE-BOOT
We change governments thinking and hoping it will change things , but the same beaurecrats stay in power and at the same desk , doing **** all waiting for the big federal pension.
Next time we demand change it needs to start in house and clean out the paresites first , then go on up to the Ottawa lawyers who make changes in rules and law and dont know difference between a bullhead and a halibut. And this DFO Minister is a handmedown from his Daddy and is dangerous. Anything can happen with this group in power. If you see him and our PM (mr. dressup) in a FIN (orca) costume....its over.

 

[Rockfish]

I got picked for May and I'm diligently filling it out. One major oversight by the survey seems to be no place to record over slot wild chinook. That's one of the most important aspects of the survey IMHO and as far as I can tell it does not collect that data.

Keep in mind that just because a Chinook is not clipped does not mean it is wild. Our own hatcheries are not allowed to clip Chinook unless they have a wire tag in them and almost all of them don't. As I understand it Clipped Chinook without wire tags are considered to be US fish even though some are from Canadian Hatcheries. I don't know if all US Hatchery Chinook are clipped but suspect not.
I think this has something to with a international agreement between Canada and the USA where clipped Chinook that don't have a tag to identify them as Canadian origin fish are considered to be US origin fish even though some are Canadian origin. This has something to do with US wanting credit for their Hatchery Chinook from Washington and Oregon being caught in Canada in order to offset Canadian concern about all of the Canadian origin salmon being caught in Alaska. It's Politics.
This was not an issue when there were no slot restrictions but now that we have them we end up having to release Canadian Hatchery Chinook as wild Chinook when they are over slot when in fact they are not wild at all. So with the relatively new and increasing use of slots, Canadian anglers increasingly can't keep our own hatchery Chinook even though many of those Chinook exist only because of the fund raising and volunteer labor of anglers. Lets hope our Canadian Government can clean up this mess and get us a new system whereby we actually get to keep all of our own angler produced hatchery Salmon when we catch them. I am not holding my breath waiting for that to happen.

 

[Che]

Properly planning and managing the fishery? Shows your lack of understanding of how DFO misuses survey data, fails to properly account for survey bias, survey uncertainty and massive error range. ... Ukee

And where did you complete your Masters in Marine Biology again?

When I see a creel surveyor at the dock, I wait in line to speak to them. If I have a fish, I make sure they get a scale sample. When I'm selected for these angler surveys, I participate. Every angler should participate. The larger the data set, the smaller the error margins.

 

[UkeeDreamin]

SFU.

And larger data sets do not necessarily result in smaller error, particularly non-randomized surveys like directed creel surveys the way DFO deploys them. I’ve said it again and again, the rec sector needs to organize so they can hire the proper professionals to call out DFO on their bs data collection, models and mgmt approaches for our sector. Well meaning folks like Che, who think they know the subject matter but clearly don’t, just doesn’t help.

Cheers!

Ukee

 

[Che]

Not filling out these surveys, because either you say there are erroneous and are just guess work, or because of this ridiculous notion that there's some secret fish conspiracy to shut down fishing to everyone but Aboriginals, is just silly ignorance.

People need to accept that DFO is in charge of the fishery. This adversarial political struggle for control of the scarce resource, fish, is not going to be won by anyone but them. So, the DFO is/are not the enemy here. There really are no enemies, because we all want the same thing; lots of fish! People seem to get butt hurt all day long about anything they decide to do or not do. It's always this emotional outburst and F'n DFO this and F'n DFO that. Its like telling a spoiled child they can't have any more cookies. Grown butt men, pouting and having tantrums.

Is the DFO perfect? No. Are their estimating formulas accurate? Not entirely, we've all seen how they can be way off. But those estimates are being put forth with the best effort to manage and maintain a fishery. In spite of what these butt hurt individuals might be grumbling about, DFO wants everyone to go out and catch fish and they work hard at ensuring that.

So to make better estimates, participation in creel surveys, be they accurate or not, helps.

 

[profisher]

I have filled out log books and collected DNA over several years and then stopped doing the DNA when I found out my samples were still sitting on a shelf as they didn't have the budget to test them. And those samples (over 100 of them) were from Area 20 where you would think they would want lots of data. I've since been assured there are funds to process the DNA so I began taking samples again last year. I participate...but Che the creel data and fly over counts combine for some way out to lunch catch numbers in areas 19/20. There are so few boats on the water now in May and June because many anglers have lost interest. When you are down to being able to keep a 9 pound maximum size wild fish, the masses don't fish and wait until later in the summer. Yet we still see big numbers of Chinook taken in the creel data for those months. I could go out tomorrow and see 3 trailers at the Sooke public ramp and spot 12-20 boats between Secretary Island and Sheringham Point and that is a Saturday during what should be the start of the peak summer fishery.

 

[UkeeDreamin]

No ones not accepting DFOs in charge and I don’t know who you feel is wallowing because they feel, as you eloquently state, “butt hurt”? I’m simply pointing out that no matter how forcefully you rant hyperbole and your poor assumptions and understanding of survey data and it’s use, it doesn’t change the fundamental fact that non-randomized dock surveys, over flights and emailed online surveys with no QA/QC control are amongst the least valuable data source. Such data has massive uncertainty and error, which multiplies as more than one source is utilized and as it’s plugged into various models. In such scenarios, if error and uncertainty are properly calculated and reported, the error bars and range of possible results are so large the results aren’t remotely reliable.

My point has always been that you can continue to bury your head in the sand and pretend it’s alright, or the rec sector can organize, raise funds and lobby as the other sectors have to a) demand DFO employ their Science sector to design a science-based data collection model for the rec sector and/or b) for our sector to hire our own scientists to do the same.

Cheers!

Ukee

 

[profisher]

Or just put a fee onto the license with the funds being directed to a 100% mandatory reporting program so that we get real data that we can accept...good or bad. But that makes to much sense and too easy. DFO seldom works that way.

 

[mbowers]

Keep in mind that just because a Chinook is not clipped does not mean it is wild. Our own hatcheries are not allowed to clip Chinook unless they have a wire tag in them and almost all of them don't. As I understand it Clipped Chinook without wire tags are considered to be US fish even though some are from Canadian Hatcheries. I don't know if all US Hatchery Chinook are clipped but suspect not.
I think this has something to with a international agreement between Canada and the USA where clipped Chinook that don't have a tag to identify them as Canadian origin fish are considered to be US origin fish even though some are Canadian origin. This has something to do with US wanting credit for their Hatchery Chinook from Washington and Oregon being caught in Canada in order to offset Canadian concern about all of the Canadian origin salmon being caught in Alaska. It's Politics.
This was not an issue when there were no slot restrictions but now that we have them we end up having to release Canadian Hatchery Chinook as wild Chinook when they are over slot when in fact they are not wild at all. So with the relatively new and increasing use of slots, Canadian anglers increasingly can't keep our own hatchery Chinook even though many of those Chinook exist only because of the fund raising and volunteer labor of anglers. Lets hope our Canadian Government can clean up this mess and get us a new system whereby we actually get to keep all of our own angler produced hatchery Salmon when we catch them. I am not holding my breath waiting for that to happen.

I understand your comments. The wild vs hatchery is directly from the irec website survey. As can be seen in the picture there is no where to record over slot "wild" fish so how many fish we release does not get counted. I don't believe DFO is intentionally misusing data but that survey seems to be useless for gauging how effective the wild release slot is.

 

[onefish]

This is pure ignorance.

Just for background info, I was an area G westcoast troller for 30 years. We were given the logbooks to fill out and help DFO to "collect data" to help manage the fishery. Two years later we were shut off of all coho fishing and shoved off all the traditional areas on the bank ( you know, the areas where you guys all fish now). A little while later we were shoved right off the water for the whole damn summer. In good faith we participated in the demise of our own fishery.
Therefor I stand by my original warning that the data you provide can and will be used against you.

If you really believe in giving them data then start recording each and every undersized chinook and coho you release ( be truthful now don't fudge the numbers to make it look better). Make sure to keep track of all those you keep too even if you end up tagging out your license. Also keep track of any other bye catch of the various cod species you encounter. When DFO gets a true picture of the numbers of fish handled you might not like the outcome.

 

[bMcN]

No ones not accepting DFOs in charge and I don’t know who you feel is wallowing because they feel, as you eloquently state, “butt hurt”? I’m simply pointing out that no matter how forcefully you rant hyperbole and your poor assumptions and understanding of survey data and it’s use, it doesn’t change the fundamental fact that non-randomized dock surveys, over flights and emailed online surveys with no QA/QC control are amongst the least valuable data source. Such data has massive uncertainty and error, which multiplies as more than one source is utilized and as it’s plugged into various models. In such scenarios, if error and uncertainty are properly calculated and reported, the error bars and range of possible results are so large the results aren’t remotely reliable.

My point has always been that you can continue to bury your head in the sand and pretend it’s alright, or the rec sector can organize, raise funds and lobby as the other sectors have to a) demand DFO employ their Science sector to design a science-based data collection model for the rec sector and/or b) for our sector to hire our own scientists to do the same.

Cheers!

Ukee

A little late here, but wanted to add that the biggest issue with "convenience" samples like these is bias -- you never know what population your sample is representative of, and how that relates to the population of interest.

 

[SpringVelocity]

Just for background info, I was an area G westcoast troller for 30 years. We were given the logbooks to fill out and help DFO to "collect data" to help manage the fishery. Two years later we were shut off of all coho fishing and shoved off all the traditional areas on the bank ( you know, the areas where you guys all fish now). A little while later we were shoved right off the water for the whole damn summer. In good faith we participated in the demise of our own fishery.
Therefor I stand by my original warning that the data you provide can and will be used against you.

If you really believe in giving them data then start recording each and every undersized chinook and coho you release ( be truthful now don't fudge the numbers to make it look better). Make sure to keep track of all those you keep too even if you end up tagging out your license. Also keep track of any other bye catch of the various cod species you encounter. When DFO gets a true picture of the numbers of fish handled you might not like the outcome.

We need to move on from this concept that data is evil and it will close down fishing. Do you think is a coincidence that certain areas favored better than others with the restrictions in our fisheries this summer DFO purposed? For example in the Straight of Georgia if DNA data wasn't done extensively the outcome would have been worse. Look at area 19/20 they could have had a proper DNA program but didn't do it. Now look at the result. Slot restriction till end of July on top of forage closure. Push back on data then expect a bad outcome. It will be mandatory anyway coming up that guides have to fill out logbooks anyway same should go with i-rec. Data is important.

 

[UkeeDreamin]

No arguments with your statement that GOOD data is important but that doesn’t change the fact that non-random, biased data, such as that collected from dock interviews and voluntary online surveys, does not accurately reflect the “population” being studied. Use of such low grade data in models where error multiplies generates results that are highly inaccurate and imprecise. That’s just mathematical/statistical fact. DFO, and if we’re being honest our sector, are guilty of being lazy in not addressing the rec fish data quality issue such that rec fisheries can be managed based on good science.

Cheers!

Ukee

 

[Aces]

We need to move on from this concept that data is evil and it will close down fishing. Do you think is a coincidence that certain areas favored better than others with the restrictions in our fisheries this summer DFO purposed? For example in the Straight of Georgia if DNA data wasn't done extensively the outcome would have been worse. Look at area 19/20 they could have had a proper DNA program but didn't do it. Now look at the result. Slot restriction till end of July on top of forage closure. Push back on data then expect a bad outcome. It will be mandatory anyway coming up that guides have to fill out logbooks anyway same should go with i-rec. Data is important.

Yes, you are right on the mark there

 

[Islander57]

We need to move on from this concept that data is evil and it will close down fishing. Do you think is a coincidence that certain areas favored better than others with the restrictions in our fisheries this summer DFO purposed? For example in the Straight of Georgia if DNA data wasn't done extensively the outcome would have been worse. Look at area 19/20 they could have had a proper DNA program but didn't do it. Now look at the result. Slot restriction till end of July on top of forage closure. Push back on data then expect a bad outcome. It will be mandatory anyway coming up that guides have to fill out logbooks anyway same should go with i-rec. Data is important.

I've never had a problem complying with creel census, license holder surveys, etc. Maybe the data isn't all used to it's full potential, but certainly I would think some of it serves a very useful purpose. Fact is, we can't have it all. Adapting hasn't really been an issue for me. I respect everyone elses opinions here. I don't however feel this is all one big evil plot to take away as much as they can from the sporties. Commercial guys have been hit too, as well as FN fisheries.

 

[SpringVelocity]

No arguments with your statement that GOOD data is important but that doesn’t change the fact that non-random, biased data, such as that collected from dock interviews and voluntary online surveys, does not accurately reflect the “population” being studied. Use of such low grade data in models where error multiplies generates results that are highly inaccurate and imprecise. That’s just mathematical/statistical fact. DFO, and if we’re being honest our sector, are guilty of being lazy in not addressing the rec fish data quality issue such that rec fisheries can be managed based on good science.

Cheers!

Ukee

Yes exactly what you just said I agree with it. That's why DNA program that is used in SOG fishery is what we need to do more of in conjuration with these surveys, creel etc. I agree with population size statistical model used is not good enough on its own. You also agree by collecting different data such as irec you can sometimes compare things if you see outliers that skew the other data. In engineering we look for that data all the time especially with statistical data. I am not and expert in the statistical model DFO uses but understand the math used.

 

[UkeeDreamin]

No, I’m saying the extremely biased and non-randomized data collected by voluntary survey and dock interview is junk data that is virtually useless and the way DFO uses it in modelling is often irresponsible. I do agree that DNA data collected provides presence/absence information of the various species and stocks, which is important, but without properly structured study design and data collection to remove bias and ensure random, or stratified random, sampling more valuable insight into proportions and ratios of stocks encountered in various fisheries can’t be concluded with any defensible scientific rigour.

Anyone who claims otherwise without showing how the bias and randomness error and uncertainty are properly characterized and accounted for, how the error and uncertainty are calculated within the modeling and what the final confidence intervals and error range of the results are (and that all of these were subjected to a proper peer review process) is mischaracterizing the data quality and results ... which is essentially what regularly occurs with rec fish data presented by DFO.

Anyway, imho the saying “continuing to do the same thing, but expecting different results is insanity” applies to the sentiment that these surveys and data collection methods are better than nothing because poor data misused is a dangerous thing!

Cheers!

Ukee

 

[wolf]

Look at area 19/20 they could have had a proper DNA program but didn't do it. Now look at the result.

********!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I filled out that thing diligently along with many others and thats 2 times now they kicked us when it matters most ... it wouldn't have mattered IF everyone who ever fished area 19/20 filled out a data book !!!!!!!!!!!
They had it set in their mind to **** us over plain and simple, they dont give a **** how many peoples jobs this is effecting .
It is really sad to see our marina half full and sunny shores with a whopping 12 boats. The other day they was 6 boats fishing in the area i was at they have accomplished what they wanted KILLING our community...and guess what not once has SRKW been off our waters...

 

[wildmanyeah]

Can't compare the JDF to SOG, one has restrictions to protect Fraser River early/summer 4-2, 5-2 spring 5-2 summer run chinook and one has protections to protect harrison stock. The Natives on the fraser solidified area 19/20 fate, not sure any amount of data would have changed that considering that the regulations go back over 10 years.

here is a graphic from 2008 keep in mind its out dated, The nicola mouth sport fishery has been eliminated, the fraser river sport has been eliminated, The JDF sport has seen slot limits but nothing has been done about FN net fisheries!!!



Here is the more recent graphic, im sure you have all seen it, Now FN are the biggest user group still and again nothing being done... Just more restrictions in the JDF where there is barely any blood left to squeeze.



Just think soon DFO will be forced to squeeze a FN commercial fishery out as well, well guess where that allocation is going to come from! us!



the SRKW closures tho is ridiculous, Total finfish closures are completely unjustified.