Slot limit announced....

Don’t take it personally FT, I know darn well not everyone out there agrees with these ENGO groups and enviro maniacs but the west coast is where they got their foothold in our country and it’s where they have their loudest voice, you know it and everyone else in the country knows it and it’s quite apparent by what’s been taking place the last few years.

First they were financed and welcomed in to fight the logging companies, then they were financed and given power to fight the fish farms, then they were given more power and money and the groups expanded to fight the pipelines, then more money to fight the damns. Then they went after your hunting, they are starting with the Grizzly hunts and now moved on to the fishing, what makes anybody think they will stop, they won’t man, they will keep going until we are all living in the cities living government funded regulated lives. They want every aspect of your life watched and regulated as to not offend or harm anyone or anything they deem not appropriate. It’s right there man in front of our faces smacking us in the face and still, people will deny it.

I was wondering if anyone else was going to make the connection. Some of the loudest in this thread were cheering on these same groups a year or less ago. Take it one step further and realize that percentage wise the rec sector takes about as many fish as Canada contributes to global co2 emissions (ie; rounding errors). If you're pissed about retention and still want certain segments of the economy at minimum severely restricted or at max done away with totally I suggest applying your same logic where "everyone has to do their part" (no matter the overall effectiveness) and take your lumps. Don't forget your logic that we can be leaders and set an example for the rest of the world because that's worked so well with our competitors regarding enviro standards, human rights, woman's rights, democracy etc. Use the same logic, certainly the FN or other user groups getting fingers pointed at them here will see the rec sector take the hit in stride and follow their lead on retention. Seems plausible eh?

Where is Horgan in all of this? I don't care if DFO is Federal, so is the NEB and he doesn't hesitate to jump in there.
 
Here is something to think about...who said there is any illegal netting happening? If DFO offers a group openings, but closes access to another, is it actually illegal? Or is that race based politics? Who's fault is it? I have $2000.00 of my own personal money on the line looking for an answer...let's find the correct reason and take DFO and the corporation Government of Canada to task in front of a Judge.
Are we talking about suing the government of canada for racial discrimination?
 
I am asking to find the correct reason to litigate DFO and the Corporation Government of Canada and then I will be awarding $2000.00 of my own money up front to start the process.
But all the good lawyers still get to swoop in on a helicopter to some lodge, sit around for a day getting drunk on nice scotch because there's 2' swells, catch their two day limit in one day, have it all packed up and chopper on out of there. :rolleyes:

I'm kidding of course. I'd love to see where this goes. Would be willing to pony up myself if there's a real case there.
 
Here is something to think about...who said there is any illegal netting happening? If DFO offers a group openings, but closes access to another, is it actually illegal? Or is that race based politics? Who's fault is it? I have $2000.00 of my own personal money on the line looking for an answer...let's find the correct reason and take DFO and the corporation Government of Canada to task in front of a Judge.
Any openings should at least be publicly monitored so there is openess and integrity in the system. Try walking out of a gold mine with a few rocks in your pocket and see how far you get. The public is kept in the dark and that creates a lot of potentially misinformed ussumptions.
 
From FB

AGM of Avid Anglers. Data issued to us show % of 4/2 caught and sampled was .5% 5/2 was .6%. Absolutely impossible to manage down to this small number and show results.

There you have it...

Cutting back fisheries ain't gonna do sh*t.

I wish we had a government who would publicly state that.
 
Well DNA books helped us ?? how!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I got and received all the DNA last year all 6181 samples and guess what not alot of fish of concern and you say it helped us cmon DERBY im not blaming you but your statements is what bugs me laughing about it such its really wrong man , maybe its your way of lashing out I dont know. point is this is now a HUGE mess no one is to blame except for DFO .our message from SFAB is not working plain and simple they dont give a **** about us. we all know they havent based any of this on science we all know that . we are all upset about it. its sad to see

That’s a fair comment. If data ever does help us 99% of time Dfo ignores it anyway but when it hurts us they use it. Fact.
 
DNA got u the 1 mile surf line didn't it ? As for the SFAB its under a new chair and the model is changing starting in the fall.. Romeo wasn't built in a day now was it..........
 
Honest Question: Does the Saltwater Rec fishery have a public image problem?

I get the frustration and outrage with the unjustified restrictions imposed this year and recently extended. But, at the same time, the angling out there right now and for most of the spring/summer in most locations up and down the coast has been quite good, if not outstanding. The fact many on here, as well as in the media, continue to trumpet the empty marinas and sentiments like “it’s not worth it” sends a message that the vast majority in this fishery only want to fish if they can harvest something ... which is very different than many of the most lucrative fisheries around the world. Folks spend over 100k to travel to the remotest parts of Russia, Scandinavia, Iceland and Labrador to C&R Atlantic salmon; folks spend millions travelling to C&R fish flats spp like bonefish, tarpon and permit; our PNW steelhead fisheries are largely C&R but are amongst the most lucrative for gear and tourism providers; same goes for fly fishing for trout: whether in Montana, Interior Stillwater’s, the Bow, the Elk, etc, etc it’s 90+% C&R.

I’m not saying we shouldn’t be enraged and in fact I think if we organized and harnessed our true united voice and economic/political power we should be litigating the **** out of the feds/DFO and the Province over the mismanagement of the interior chinook, coho and steelhead mess. However, the fact that it seems like 80-90% of “us” are only interested in this fishery if we can kill something can’t be helping our public image and I would expect it hinders our arguments and messaging.

Cheers!

Ukee
It's not worth it, because to most of us this is a food fishery. How many locals in the fisheries you note are taking part in those fisheries? Do you see 200 locals out participating on a July afternoon, or just the tourists paying $100k to catch and release a fish? Our fishery might come to that, I'd rather it didn't
 
How do you explain the fact that most people are saying this is the best fishing in 20 yrs. In my experience the straight has been seeing stronger and stronger numbers, there was a period of time where a guy would fish for days without a bite in parts of the straight, the last quite a few years have been great
The reason for fishing being better then 20 years ago is that 20 years ago their was more pressure, the effects of the destruction of the east coast of Vancouver island from logging were still hampering survival and less hatchery fish were being pumped out. the inside waters were at one of their lowest points 20 years ago and comparing to 20 years ago doesn't prove fish stocks are safe or healthy. Its called a diminished baseline and comparing to the lowest numbers makes anything seem good. Compare today to 200 years ago instead of 20 if you want to know what stocks should look like, how many 60 pounders were caught last year on the whole coast of bc, 200 years ago there were more 60 pounders in most rivers then the whole province today and sports fisherman have played a roll in the decline definitely not the biggest but here we are like it or not. Trying to maintain the status quo in the face of change doesn't do us any good in the long run and admitting that salmon stocks are in trouble is an important way for sports fisherman to become a part of the discussion and not be left on the sidelines while money and influence controls the agenda until there's nothing for any of us.
 
Dead fish pics already making their way onto social media this morning way to go boyszzzzz go get em!!!
 
Hey Steeler, I guess you are on this fishing site because you love to troll!!

Everyone has an impact. Not everyone works hard at mitigating or improving the stocks or the environment.
I have been very active in both the commercial and sports sectors.
The sport sector, through the efforts of individuals and organizations, goes way above and beyond in improving the stocks and supporting environment.

Give your keyboard a rest and get out there.
 
The reason for fishing being better then 20 years ago is that 20 years ago their was more pressure, the effects of the destruction of the east coast of Vancouver island from logging were still hampering survival and less hatchery fish were being pumped out. the inside waters were at one of their lowest points 20 years ago and comparing to 20 years ago doesn't prove fish stocks are safe or healthy. Its called a diminished baseline and comparing to the lowest numbers makes anything seem good. Compare today to 200 years ago instead of 20 if you want to know what stocks should look like, how many 60 pounders were caught last year on the whole coast of bc, 200 years ago there were more 60 pounders in most rivers then the whole province today and sports fisherman have played a roll in the decline definitely not the biggest but here we are like it or not. Trying to maintain the status quo in the face of change doesn't do us any good in the long run and admitting that salmon stocks are in trouble is an important way for sports fisherman to become a part of the discussion and not be left on the sidelines while money and influence controls the agenda until there's nothing for any of us.

I like the slot limit size and should be everywhere. 80cm, 32" is a little small and I would be happy with 37" (Around 20lb limit) Best eating fish is 10-20lbs. Lets get the big brood stock back again.

Rob


Chinook Salmon Weight Conversion Chart

25 in 6.49 lb
26 in 7.28 lb
27 in 8.12 lb
28 in 9.02 lb
29 in 9.99 lb
30 in 11.02 lb
31 in 12.12 lb
32 in 13.29 lb
33 in 14.53 lb
34 in 15.84 lb
35 in 17.23 lb
36 in 18.70 lb
37 in 20.25 lb
38 in 21.88 lb
39 in 23.59 lb
40 in 25.38 lb
41 in 27.27 lb
42 in 29.24 lb
43 in 31.31 lb
44 in 33.47 lb
45 in 35.72 lb
46 in 38.08 lb
47 in 40.53 lb
48 in 43.08 lb
49 in 45.74 lb
50 in 48.50 lb
51 in 51.36 lb
52 in 54.34 lb
53 in 57.43 lb
54 in 60.63 lb
55 in 63.94 lb
56 in 67.37 lb
57 in 70.92 lb
58 in 74.59 lb
59 in 78.39 lb
60 in 82.30 lb
 
can somone post a link to the actual notification/regulation change? I am sorry if it is posted within the post somewhere, but i am on my way out the door fishing.....dont have time to go through it all.

thanks in advance....
 
can somone post a link to the actual notification/regulation change? I am sorry if it is posted within the post somewhere, but i am on my way out the door fishing.....dont have time to go through it all.

thanks in advance....
If you’re heading to an area that was closed until July 15, read the regs carefully as 2 per day any size is open in some areas.
 
I would like to organize a strike for next year. Please do not buy your licenses until at least May 1st in 2020
 
Ok, I'm from the US and haven't really looked at the regs closely because typically when I'm fishing in BC I'm not keeping anything that isn't well over the minimum size for Chinook. But, with the maximum size limit now, I have a question. The regs say a fish length is, "The distance measured from the tip of the nose to the fork of the tail; where there is no fork, to the tip of the tail." So, I know coho clearly have a forked tail. It seems like Chinook do not have a forked tail? So do I measure for maximum 80 cm length to the tip of the tail or to the middle of the tail where a fork length would be theoretically? It's quite a difference for the max size we can keep... so I'd like to get it right (and NOT get a ticket!). Thanks for any input.
 
Last edited:
The middle of the tail (fork). There is less of a fork on Chinook to be sure, but there is still a slight fork there.
 
Back
Top