DFO 2020 Chinook Management Approach Letter

cohochinook

Well-Known Member
Please see attached a letter on the Department’s approach for developing fisheries management actions to address conservation concerns for Fraser River Chinook over the next year.


Feedback is requested in writing, before March 27, 2020 to the DFO Pacific Region Salmon Management Team at: DFO.PacificSalmonRMT-EGRSaumonduPacifique.MPO@dfo-mpo.gc.ca
 

Attachments

  • 2020 Chinook Management Approach Letter - 02MAR2020.pdf
    618.3 KB · Views: 77
Looks like its up to the SFAB for recreational fishermen to respond, Any Letters sent in by recreational fishermen will get referred to that body. At Least that's how i read it.


The Department is seeking feedback from First Nations and established advisory groups on potential adjustments to 2019 management measures or alternative approaches that should be considered for the period June 1, 2020 to May 31, 2021. Feedback is requested in writing, before March 27, 2020 to the DFO Pacific Region Salmon Management Team at: DFO.PacificSalmonRMT-EGRSaumonduPacifique.MPO@dfo-mpo.gc.ca. The Department will refer any feedback from stakeholders outside the established advisory process to the appropriate advisory body, including Sport Fishing Advisory Board (SFAB), Commercial Salmon Advisory Board (CSAB), Marine Conservation Caucus (MCC), contact for further consideration. Feedback received from First Nations and established advisory groups, will be summarized by the Department and any recommendations on harvest planning will be provided to First Nations and the Departments advisory committees, for further consideration.
 
I would highly recommend engaging with your sfab committees locally.

I also think DFO needs to hear from regular recreational anglers in some format?
 
DO NOT ASSUME that they always send everything to the SFAB.

I have noted that they took response from the West Coast Guide Association as well as the SFAB?
Yet the Chair of this group is the chair of the SFAB Groundfish committee so not sure how this happened?

So send in your replies and ask that they are treated the same as the WCGA.



Looks like its up to the SFAB for recreational fishermen to respond, Any Letters sent in by recreational fishermen will get referred to that body. At Least that's how i read it.


The Department is seeking feedback from First Nations and established advisory groups on potential adjustments to 2019 management measures or alternative approaches that should be considered for the period June 1, 2020 to May 31, 2021. Feedback is requested in writing, before March 27, 2020 to the DFO Pacific Region Salmon Management Team at: DFO.PacificSalmonRMT-EGRSaumonduPacifique.MPO@dfo-mpo.gc.ca. The Department will refer any feedback from stakeholders outside the established advisory process to the appropriate advisory body, including Sport Fishing Advisory Board (SFAB), Commercial Salmon Advisory Board (CSAB), Marine Conservation Caucus (MCC), contact for further consideration. Feedback received from First Nations and established advisory groups, will be summarized by the Department and any recommendations on harvest planning will be provided to First Nations and the Departments advisory committees, for further consideration.
 
Its a open process anyone person or group can send in comment. So whats the big deal u don't want people help defend the Public fishery ?
 
Pretty simple rules set out by DFO.
So why were they changed and if they make an acception for one then they must for all!
This question should be asked of DFO by the SFAB as the SFAB is the voice of Sports Anglers!

You Derek should be asking this at the South Board meeting on behalf of the Sports Anglers you represent.


The Department will refer any feedback from stakeholders outside the established advisory process to the appropriate advisory body!





Its a open process anyone person or group can send in comment. So whats the big deal u don't want people help defend the Public fishery ?
 
I did check in with a senior SFAB person on the question of public input and here's what they said "DFO indicates in their letter that unsolicited input from outside the accepted advisory processes would be referred to those bodies for consolidation into the advisory input. So anyone can send in, but recognize DFO will refer input to the SFAB is how I read the document. The SFAB is arranging a face to face meeting with all the SC SFAC Chairs and the DFO Salmon team to help run an analysis of available data and shape our advisory input. Week of March 20 is what we are looking at. Tight timeline for input."
 
Come on Jerry:rolleyes: The IFMP is a public document put out for open comment which anyone can & should send there comments in. I simply don't under stand why your are once again making this into some sort of controversy when it doesn't exist,
especially coming from someone who has been involved in the process in the past.. unless this is personal and if that is the case its just simply sad comment once again.:(
 
DFO set up a system, the Sports Anglers agreed with it, pretty simple.That system is the SFAB

Now it appears as shown via the IFMP that DFO has changed this policy?

This is not about you or me, this is about a perceived change of policy by DFO about how they are handling Sports Anglers input.

So, Why the change of information in the IFMP?
Are the Sports Anglers to now skip the SFAB process and go directly to the IFMP?

And these questions need to be asked of DFO as this is a major change by them.

Yes I was involved in the process and this change needs to be addressed.



Come on Jerry:rolleyes: The IFMP is a public document put out for open comment which anyone can & should send there comments in. I simply don't under stand why your are once again making this into some sort of controversy when it doesn't exist,
especially coming from someone who has been involved in the process in the past.. unless this is personal and if that is the case its just simply sad comment once again.:(
 
Last edited:
However, they did not do that, why?

The voice of the Sports Anglers at this time is the SFAB!

I did check in with a senior SFAB person on the question of public input and here's what they said "DFO indicates in their letter that unsolicited input from outside the accepted advisory processes would be referred to those bodies for consolidation into the advisory input. So anyone can send in, but recognize DFO will refer input to the SFAB is how I read the document. The SFAB is arranging a face to face meeting with all the SC SFAC Chairs and the DFO Salmon team to help run an analysis of available data and shape our advisory input. Week of March 20 is what we are looking at. Tight timeline for input."
 
The purpose of this Integrated Fisheries Management Plan (IFMP) is to identify the main objectives and requirements for the Groundfish fishery in the Pacific Region, as well as the management measures that will be used to achieve these objectives. This document also serves to communicate the basic information on the fishery and its management to Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO) staff, legislated co-management boards and other stakeholders. This IFMP provides a common understanding of the basic “rules” for the sustainable management of the fisheries resource.

This IFMP is not a legally binding instrument which can form the basis of a legal challenge. The IFMP can be modified at any time and does not fetter the Minister's discretionary powers set out in the Fisheries Act, Species At Risk Act, and Oceans Act. The Minister can, for reasons of conservation or for any other valid reasons, modify any provision of the IFMP in accordance with the powers granted pursuant to the Fisheries Act, Species At Risk Act, and Oceans Act.

Where DFO is responsible for implementing obligations under land claims agreements, the IFMP will be implemented in a manner consistent with these obligations. In the event that an IFMP is inconsistent with obligations under land claims agreements, the provisions of the land claims agreements will prevail to the extent of the inconsistency.

This IFMP is a living document that will be subjected to a review every two years for updates, with input from interested parties. Any changes required within a given fishing season will continue to be made as needed.

IFMP documents are available from the DFO Pacific Region Internet site: http://www.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/fm-gp/ifmp-eng.html.


This is straight out of the Groundfish pacifci Region 2019... is the the general Public not any other stake holders?
 
Pretty simple rules, yet why the change?
Is every group going to have their opinions dealt separately from the SFAB?
Where is the recommendations from the BCWF, BC Fly Fishers, Nanaimo Rod and Gun, Kitimat Rod and Gun, Bob Hooton , SFI .etc?

Not just picking on the WCGA, but on the reason they were separated from the SFAB.

Will this require a different system from the SFAB to deal with DFO?

Is the SFAB not considered the voice of the sports fishing group?

The Department is seeking feedback from First Nations and established advisory groups on potential adjustments to 2019 managementmeasures or alternative approaches that should be considered for the period June 1, 2020 to May 31, 2021. Feedback is requested in writing, before March 27, 2020 to the DFO Pacific Region Salmon Management Team at: DFO.PacificSalmonRMT-EGRSaumonduPacifique.MPO@dfo-mpo.gc.ca. The Department will refer any feedback from stakeholders outside the established advisory process to the appropriate advisory body, including Sport Fishing Advisory Board (SFAB), Commercial Salmon Advisory Board (CSAB), Marine Conservation Caucus (MCC), contact for further consideration. Feedback received from First Nations and established advisory groups, will be summarized by the Department and any recommendations on harvest planning will be provided to First Nations and the Departments advisory committees, for further consideration.
 
Last edited:
The IFMP and the draft IFMP is open to comment by anyone. The pre draft consultation for the IFMP was also open to anyone.

The latest ask/consultation is specific to the Fraser chinook 2019 measures and what to do about them. It appears they want to limit this to First Nations and the advisory bodies.

That does not mean that lobby groups and individuals can’t submit what ever they want to any process anyone is free to do so.

Personally I think if an individual wants to send in a letter to lobby for changes to the 2019 Chinook Measures I’d probably send that to your local mp, members of the fopo committee and the PMO office. That would probably be the best bang for buck but your free to send what you want to who ever you want.

Personally I think they are just trying to avoid getting 1000 form letters in this topic.
 
Pretty simple rules, yet why the change?
Is every group going to have their opinions dealt separately from the SFAB?
Where is the recommendations from the BCWF, BC Fly Fishers, Nanaimo Rod and Gun, Kitimat Rod and Gun, Bob Hooton , SFI .etc?

Not just picking on the WCGA, but on the reason they were separated from the SFAB.

Will this require a different system from the SFAB to deal with DFO?

Is the SFAB not considered the voice of the sports fishing group?

The Department is seeking feedback from First Nations and established advisory groups on potential adjustments to 2019 managementmeasures or alternative approaches that should be considered for the period June 1, 2020 to May 31, 2021. Feedback is requested in writing, before March 27, 2020 to the DFO Pacific Region Salmon Management Team at: DFO.PacificSalmonRMT-EGRSaumonduPacifique.MPO@dfo-mpo.gc.ca. The Department will refer any feedback from stakeholders outside the established advisory process to the appropriate advisory body, including Sport Fishing Advisory Board (SFAB), Commercial Salmon Advisory Board (CSAB), Marine Conservation Caucus (MCC), contact for further consideration. Feedback received from First Nations and established advisory groups, will be summarized by the Department and any recommendations on harvest planning will be provided to First Nations and the Departments advisory committees, for further consideration.[/QUOTE


This is pretty much like wrestling with pig in the mud... if you feel so strong about this then get a motion to your next SFAC meeting.. then it will receive the attention that u are desiring
 
This is an attempt by DFO to limit public input. After ignoring the SFAB on SRKW, open/close areas, prawn and other shellfish reductions this coming year, and refusing to increase open salmon areas where Fraser fish do not seasonally occur, ( and coho too....... Area 14 has been ignored on near to rivermouth unmarked coho opportunities in spite of there being 3 major DFO hatcheries that only mark a small portion of their fish, and several other volunteer production facilities that only mark a fraction of production or not at all ) So DFO has been pissing all over the SFAB for the last two years or more.. and now they want the public to send their comments to the very "advisory" process that they have ignored ???????

WMY said this : "
Personally I think if an individual wants to send in a letter to lobby for changes to the 2019 Chinook Measures I’d probably send that to your local mp, members of the fopo committee and the PMO office. That would probably be the best bang for buck but your free to send what you want to who ever you want.

Personally I think they are just trying to avoid getting 1000 form letters in this topic." Damn right--- dont forgo your right to go political and even to the press.
 
Here's someone who get's it....NDP Press Release on the subject....


Yes and no. In ms Blaneys personal press release she does not mention that in her riding there is little data based evidence to even have a closure in the first place which should be the biggest issue for her.
 
I think Blaney recognize that it’s almost impossible at this point to go against the press doom and gloom with regards to salmon. Pushing for a msf is easy to do while still acknowledging that there are stocks out there that need protection.
 
Very concerning to see that this letter above from DFO is asking for input is addressed only to FN's and advisory groups! More unacceptable BS from DFO!!! :mad:

What about individual citizens, town councils, chambers of commerce, mayors, politicians, fishing clubs, outdoor clubs, sector associations, industry associations, advocacy and lobbying groups, habitat and enhancement groups..., etc., the list goes on.

I get it that anyone can send DFO a letter - but this exclusionary process here is unacceptable! What concerns me is this new, narrow focus on who they are wanting to get input from! Seems like DFO is shutting down true consultation to only a selected few - total BS IMHO!

Time for the public fishery sector to get more unified, organized and political to get our side of the story and issues heard. In particular, we need to push hard for MSF, if not I wonder if we will face more area closures this year.
 
Back
Top