Port Alberni Sockeye Fishery Shut Down For All

Discussion in 'Conservation, Fishery Politics and Management.' started by IronNoggin, Jul 16, 2019.

  1. IronNoggin

    IronNoggin Well-Known Member

  2. Spring-time

    Spring-time New Member

    Well when your forecasts are coin tosses it’s about what I expect. Well it could be 25% of that year or 25 % of that but it could be this so let’s go with that and don’t blame us when we get it wrong
     
  3. Whitebuck

    Whitebuck Well-Known Member

    Maybe we should be allowing for escapement before nets wipe everything out!
     
  4. Thunder21

    Thunder21 Well-Known Member

    I mentioned a month ago how the FN had nets in the water every single day for 6 weeks straight hammering sockeye and whatever else. I was told this river was the gold standard of fisheries management. Apparently not.
     
    ILHG, Dave H, fishinforever and 3 others like this.
  5. IronNoggin

    IronNoggin Well-Known Member

    At the outset it was well known that Great Central Sockeye needed a good escapement this year to compensate for a couple disasters in the past. Everyone understood that. Everyone also said they understood (and those that live here an know these fish should) that the GCL fish are almost always the earliest component of the run.

    And guess which component got literally HAMMERED by one sector, while the much touted round table looked on and said nada.
    I actually believe the round table can work.
    But not like this, and not with DFO at the helm any more.

    Nog
     
    cohochinook likes this.
  6. agentaqua

    agentaqua Well-Known Member

    negative, Nog - GCL come in a bit later than Sproat.
     
  7. IronNoggin

    IronNoggin Well-Known Member

    Wrong. We've marked them (and caught a few to verify) as early as the beginning of May up there, and more as that month progresses.
    Personal experience trumps whatever the computer types may offer every single time.

    Cheers
     
    Whitebuck likes this.
  8. agentaqua

    agentaqua Well-Known Member

    Incorrect yet again Nog on your 2 assumptions. Note the average escapement timing and compare the dates on the bottom of the 2 graphs. Pretty self evident to the other posters on this thread that the average escapement timing for GCL lags behind Sproat. There are always a few "stragglers" for both runs in early. But as far as which run is most impacted by early Tsu-ma-uss EO/FSC river fishing - it's Sproat not GCL that takes the brunt of the catch. That may be different in the inlet verses the river. As you said - data and experience trumps whatever computer types may offer.

    GCL.jpg

    sproat.jpg
     
    Last edited: Jul 17, 2019
  9. Fishmyster

    Fishmyster Well-Known Member

    Hey Agent. I’ve seen this data you posted earlier. I’m not a professional graph reader so maybe you could help me understand the graphic information on these two rivers I have spent years on? The information in the graphs does match my personal recollection of run timing and historical divide of abundance to each river system. From what I can see it looks like this season the gcl run has considerably less returning fish than the sproat when when comparing with the forecast models. What I can’t figure out is how you think this could be possible? I know nobody will believe me there are chemistry issues in fw. I’m curious as to how you think it could be possible for these two sister streams which had historic runs of similar abundance now be having different ocean survival rates???
     
  10. IronNoggin

    IronNoggin Well-Known Member

    You just keep relying on government data and their interpretations all you wish.
    I'll stick with my own personal observations that happen to mesh perfectly with the vast majority of those who live and fish here.

    Cheers,
    Nog
     
  11. kelly

    kelly Well-Known Member

    In high school I wrote letters to a number of area 23 and SSS dfo reps about this issue. It’s been ongoing for decades. Hammer runs right away and hope escapement is met. Aside from the obvious final escapement issues, I wonder what this approach has done to run timing. Ken and Matt, you would know much better but I believe the sockeye and Chinook used to have a more run diversity than we see now?
     
    Last edited: Jul 18, 2019
  12. Fishmyster

    Fishmyster Well-Known Member

    I personally feel dfo has done a good job enumerating the salmon returns over the years. I also don’t believe any of the harvest practices are the cause of the downfall in salmon stocks. To just blame dfo and not look at the natural environments production trend is not scientific rather than the typical blame game. The stamp river has also lost its nature Steelhead population without any harvesting just like Gold and many other rivers. My beliefs come from analyzing the natural fw environments lack in productivity witch is not Dfo’s fault. The stamp river like many other streams has acidified badly and lost the supporting ecology that’s necessary to produce abundance healthy outgoing juveniles. So not sure why everyone has to keep blaming dfo for every fishery that doesn’t produce consistent numbers. Maybe people should get out and look for themselves in stead of just blame blame blame!

    The graphs posted by AA should paint a clear picture of the drastic change in fw production over the years. I can post videos of a stream with collapsed ecology but nobody will acknowledge it. Now it is in graph form the home based biologists should be able to see clearly that there are issues with fw.

    So we could blame logging for the change of productivity but Sproat watershed has been logged more than the Stamp and productivity is better in Sproat. We could blame global warming but Sproat rivers is the warmer of the two streams and production is better. We can blame urban development but yet again the gcl system has less of that then Sproat yet has collapsed. We could blame the early harvesting practices but they should have been effectively harvesting more Sproat fish which are not suffering the same fate. We could blame ff’s and ocean conditions but how could any of them have effected one run of fish more than the other??? Maybe we should just stop blaming everyone, start from the bottom up and do some water chemistry science for a change.

    Maybe GlG can provide his “mountain of evidence” indicating ocean survival is the main issue wrt downward salmon trends and not fw issues. Let’s look at that all info and see how it stacks up to the data AA posted?
     
  13. kelly

    kelly Well-Known Member

    Enumeration has been good in the SSS with comparison to the rest of the province but management has not. Cycles are natural and difficult to predict, nobody blames dfo for that. The issue is they repeatedly allow harvest based off a pre season forecast then get caught when fish don’t show. Chinook 5-6 years ago is the best example when they could barely scrape brood. Sockeye with more natural spawning cycles are more important to get on the spawning beds in escapement numbers.

    Clearly you don’t want to discuss anything but freshwater productivity which is important but not the only factor.
     
    Last edited: Jul 19, 2019
  14. GLG

    GLG Well-Known Member

    For this watershed system I would go with what was in the article that was posted in the first place not some acid rain that affects one but not the other.

    https://www.albernivalleynews.com/news/somass-river-sockeye-fishery-estimates-cut-in-half/

    Somass River sockeye fishery estimates cut in half

    Local fisheries closed; poor ocean survival a prime suspect

    Mediocre best describes the Somass River sockeye fishery this season, said Dave Rolston, Tseshaht First Nation fisheries manager.

    That’s doubly disappointing for a fishery that was supposed to make up for a lean sockeye season prematurely shut down to conserve the Great Central Lake stock in 2018.

    “I think people were expecting more opportunities with the original run size,” Rolson said. “It’s definitely changed things.”

    DFO downgraded its run size estimate late last week after a seine test fishery indicated there were just 8,000 sockeye beyond 10 Mile Point and 5,000 inside. The run is now projected to reach 200,000 sockeye returning to the river, far short of the pre-season estimate of 350,000 to 500,000.

    Somass sockeye were supposed to be one of only three B.C. sockeye runs to improve this year, the other two being the west coast of the Island and the Skeena River.

    As a result of the low return, openings have been few. Quotas have been reduced for First Nation commercial and community fisheries. The Somass Park sports fishery was closed July 5 and the Area 23 recreational sockeye fishery was closed Sunday.

    At this point, there are no Hupacasath, Tseshaht or Maa-nulth fisheries planned.

    Although there are multiple challenges confronting the productivity of the Somass watershed, Rolston suspects the cause of depressed returns lies offshore.

    “If I had to peg one cause, it would be the marine survival rate,” he said. “It may have something to do with the so-called Blob.”

    The Blob, a huge mass of warm water off the coast of North America, was first identified six years ago. First thought to have subsided in 2016, the phenomenon resurfaced and may continue to affect plankton production.

    Average weight of the returning sockeye has declined from the normal five to seven pounds to between four and 4.5, he noted. “Obviously they’re not getting enough to eat.”


    Due to the difficulty in tracking migratory stocks, it is difficult to conclusively determine the cause of the run’s decline, Rolston said. While low water levels have been a concern due to a prolonged drought, river temperatures haven’t reached a point where they may cause in-stream fish mortality.

    Usually, a Tseshaht freezer allocated for community purposes and ceremonial uses is filled with as many as 500 sockeye at this point.

    “I don’t think we have any in the freezer this year,” Rolston said.

    There remains the hope that other fisheries will help fill the gap. Springs are forecast to return in record numbers.
     
  15. Fishmyster

    Fishmyster Well-Known Member

    Of course fw chemistry is not the only factor but it is the most ignored factor.
     
  16. Fishmyster

    Fishmyster Well-Known Member

    Another typical response from you glg where you copy and paste someone else’s beliefs.

    Acid precipitation does effect all streams differently based on geology and soil buffering.

    Just like normal you refuse to accept any information indicating fw chemistry issues. How do you feel all the blob harvest practices or other ocean survival factors could be having such a varied effect on the individual streams like the graph stats indicate???
     
  17. GLG

    GLG Well-Known Member

    Great ... why don't you school us on the geology of that area to prove your point.
     
  18. Fishmyster

    Fishmyster Well-Known Member

    The geology of gcl system has less calcium or magnesium as indicated with the alkalinity of gcl water. Water at the outlet of gcl is barely 20ppm which is the bottom of what is deemed safe for ecology in the Canadian standards for water quality. Gcl has been variable around 14ppm for many years until just recently rising. Even the private hatchery at gcl has to raise the alkalinity of gcl water for their fish so nitrifying bacteria will convert ammonia to nitrate. Yes the natural water is not suitable for fish culture as it is. Sproat lake water is over 30ppm and neutralizes acid imputes better and is indicative of more calcium in the geology.

    So now why don’t you school me on how to read these graphs posted by aa and explain how the ocean survival is creating such a change in productivity as a posed to historical
     
  19. GLG

    GLG Well-Known Member

    Links to this evidence because it's one thing to claim it and another thing to back it up.
     
    pennel likes this.
  20. Fishmyster

    Fishmyster Well-Known Member

    Just google acid rain and geology. There will be all kinds of material for you to learn.

    How about we get back on the topic of the sockeye stats. Looking at the graphs it is obvious there is something wrong with gcl water as to now it doesn’t produce fish anything near the Sproat even though it did more in the past. Are you not able to read this or are permanently blocked from believing this??
     

Share This Page