Poll!! Should the Cowichan Sport Restrictions be lifted??

Should the Cowichan Sport Restrictions be lifted?

  • Yes

    Votes: 17 43.6%
  • No

    Votes: 10 25.6%
  • Not enough Data to confirm the recover more time needed.

    Votes: 12 30.8%

  • Total voters
    39
  • Poll closed .
Your welcome to take a crack at it.... https://www.rmpc.org/
It's been many, many years since I have pulled data from there but if you have time go for it. Last time I did it took days of reading cryptic directions and trial and error to get results. Perhaps this site has improved over the years.

I have an account I tried but honestly that website is one of the most complicated data bases and not user friendly. Ive spend over 10 hours on it and I never was able to drill down the area and stock i needed.

I commend you if you figured it out.
 
I am of the opinion that the recovery of the Cowichan River is due to 3 reasons
1. responsible Native river management
2. effective commercial and sport fishery restrictions.
3. no fish farms on the main migratory root.

IMHO the only reason why this run has recovered is that people, that cared, came together and did something about it.
They worked on the river like the clay bank stabilization.
They worked on the estuary by linking it together and restoring it.
They put together a water use plan.
They got funds to do these things.
http://www.cowichanstewardship.com/
 
Last edited:
From last year but even more relevant considering we have another year of data

http://www.theardentangler.com/index.php/management-of-cowichan-river-chinook/

"
Cowichan River chinook are an important stock on southeast Vancouver Island, with indicator status under the Pacific Salmon Treaty. They typically don’t roam far from home during their ocean lives and when conditions are favourable prefer to stay in the Strait of Georgia, especially the northern half. They are big contributors to the inside recreational chinook fishery and are important to the local First Nation’s food fishery. Although there is some enhancement of this stock the current abundance is largely from natural production with a spawning escapement target of 6500 adults, defined as age-3 or older fish. For some reason this chinook stock also has an unusually large number of age-2 fish returning to spawn but as these are always smaller males they contribute relatively little to production.

After a period of earlier decline Cowichan chinook rebuilt strongly through the 1990’s, with the return peaking at over 14,000 adult fish in 1999. Regrettably it was all downhill after that, with a return in 2009 of considerably less than a thousand adult fish. In response to this rapid decline management measures were put in place in an attempt to reverse the trend, with the implementation in 2006 of large terminal area closures adjacent to the Cowichan estuary and the five restricted zones in the north SoG mixed-stock fishery mentioned earlier. As well, starting in the early 2000’s significant work was conducted in-river to upgrade the habitat and this is thought to have been a major contributor to the current rebuilding trend.

And what a rebuild! Since the low in 2009 the return each fall has steadily increased, meeting the escapement target in 2015 and going more than a thousand adult fish over in 2016. And the return in 2017 was bigger yet, now estimated at 14,698 adult fish or more than twice the spawning escapement target and the outlook for 2018 is similar. Cowichan chinook went from being south coast problem child to gold star status in remarkably short order.

This background is important when considering the decision by DFO this week to keep the remaining restricted zones in the north SoG in effect. There has always been considerable skepticism regarding the effectiveness of these, as anglers have simply learned to fish around them. Acknowledgement of this by DFO stock assessment staff is found in a recent briefing note reviewing sport fishery management for Cowichan chinook that states, “There appears to be no significant change in ER in the northern areas despite 5 spot closures. More analysis is required, but effort appears to have redistributed around the closures with little reduction of impact on stocks of concern.”

The briefing note cites the expected return of Cowichan chinook in 2018 of somewhere between 10 and 15,000 adult fish (or about twice the spawning escapement target), with an additional 2 – 3,000 adult chinook expected as a result of the daily limit reduction for chinook in the Strait of Georgia recreational fishery, an action expected to reduce the exploitation rate on all chinook stocks encountered there by about 30%. The briefing note concludes by stating “The reduction in recreational catch limits is expected to be more effective in reducing the Cowichan exploitation rate than the spot closures” and “There is no evidence which would suggest the expected reduction in ER would change if the northern GST chinook closures were eliminated or adjusted.”

Given all this, one has to question why senior management staff insists on keeping the five spot closures in place because the decision is poisoning the relationship between the recreational fishery and DFO"
 
IMHO the only reason why this run has recovered is that people, that cared, came together and did something about it.
They worked on the river like the clay bank stabilization.
They worked on the estuary by linking it together and restoring it.
They put together a water use plan.
They got funds to do these things.
http://www.cowichanstewardship.com/

Finally a post I agree with. Correct. The water use plan and the improvements on estuary were huge.
 
I’ve seen multiple people post the Cowichan Chinook graph and actually claim BC’s Chinook are on the upswing.

It’s one of relatively few positive trends we’ve seen with Chinook stocks in the last decade. It should be proof that recoveries are possible with cohesive work but it’s far from a green light to increase catches.

Increase catches?? we could be facing a closure or hatch only fishery in parts the SOG. Other parts 1 daily

This measure alone would protect more cowichan fish in marine areas.

If we cant open areas when there has been 4 years of above escarpments? when can we?
 
Increase catches?? we could be facing a closure or hatch only fishery in parts the SOG. Other parts 1 daily

This measure alone would protect more cowichan fish in marine areas.

If we cant open areas when there has been 4 years of above escarpments? when can we?

Current SOG restrictions were not specific to just the Cowichan run. There were a number of stocks identified. I don’t agree at all with the proposed changes either, that’s a different topic.

My point is directed at the thread indicating pressure on the Cowichan run should be increased due to 5 years of strong returns. It’s a whack a mole mentality. One run pops it’s head up so we should beat it back down. Ten years ago this run had collapsed. Let’s give it some time to recover, learn from it and try to get more systems to follow this trend.
 
Last edited:
yes the proposed changes are for Fraser Stocks that are doing much worse then the cowichan. Given the fact that the Fraser measures overlap with the cowichan closures does it still make sense to keep the cowichan marine closures in place?

By that same logic if the cowichan marine closure works so well should we not then apply it to all the areas the fraser stocks migrate?

why are we applying different logic?

Also no one on here is saying the cowichan is recovering because of the closures yet they want to keep them?
 
Last edited:
What sport restrictions do you want lifted after seeing 5 years of stronger returns on the Cowichan? 2 per day in the SOG? Open the bay? Do you want a Vedder style gut fest on the river?

With the current state of our province's salmon stocks and the sudden political interests, it seems there could be a more constructive approach. Why not take this positive trending system, find out why it's suddenly doing so well and try to apply this to the rest of our province.
 
Last edited:
What sport restrictions do you want lifted after seeing 5 years of stronger returns on the Cowichan? 2 per day in the SOG? Open the bay? Do you want a Vedder style gut fest on the river?

I think he is referring to certain time specific closures in the SOG....

Cape Mudge Lighthouse (Campbell River) is one example. Closed July 15 - Aug 31.

My understanding is this was done specifically for the Cowichan fish.

There are others as well.
 
I think he is referring to certain time specific closures in the SOG....

Cape Mudge Lighthouse (Campbell River) is one example. Closed July 15 - Aug 31.
My understanding is this was done specifically for the Cowichan fish.
There are others as well.

Nanoose Bay and much of the water inside the islands from Nanaimo-Duncan were included as well in the august closures.

My point is if we really care about salmon stocks, why are we rushing to change regulations for a system that is just starting to recover. Spend your energy focusing on the positives of that graph and how we can get other rivers to follow suit. Or if you want to battle restrictions, focus on the major upcoming Chinook restrictions.
 
Last edited:
Nanoose Bay and much of the water inside the islands from Nanaimo-Duncan were included as well in the august closures.

My point is if we really care about salmon stocks, why are we rushing to change regulations for a system that is just starting to recover. Spend your energy focusing on the positives of that graph and how we can get other rivers to follow suit. Or if you want to battle restrictions, focus on the major upcoming Chinook restrictions.

I think the criticism is they were based on very loose DFO science at the time (at least some of them).
 
74880685_2660126600717517_543335666709168128_n.png
 
I think the recovery can be attributed to as GLG said, a lot of local investment in habitat improvement with solid ocean performance. The CWT performance indicators of the small hatchery production from Cowichan is very significant, again indicating strong ocean survival for SOG entrants of Ocean Type Chinook. And, I should point out, Cowichan have one of the highest ER in the rec fishery, and yet they continue to recover. Its not harvest that is inhibiting that recovery. So all those management measures up in Area 13 and 14 had little to no effect - as South Coast Stock Assessment pointed out. So those management measures are largely baseless and simply are a waste of time and should be removed.
 
I think he is referring to certain time specific closures in the SOG....

Cape Mudge Lighthouse (Campbell River) is one example. Closed July 15 - Aug 31.

My understanding is this was done specifically for the Cowichan fish.

There are others as well.

I could be mistaken, but was some of this not opened up last year? Cape midge stayed open from what I recall? Can’t remember the century and inside kitty off the top of my head.
I took a quick look at the FishingBC app and see no notice of non retention for any of them for 2020 either. Maybe I missed it??
 
I could be mistaken, but was some of this not opened up last year? Cape midge stayed open from what I recall? Can’t remember the century and inside kitty off the top of my head.
I took a quick look at the FishingBC app and see no notice of non retention for any of them for 2020 either. Maybe I missed it??

Some of it was lifted last year, but wondering what they are doing with the areas closer to the cowichan.
 
Back
Top