Sports Fishing has Little Effect on Resident Orcas
- Thread starter Oceaneco
- Start date
Foxsea
Well-Known Member
It's ridiculous we are dealing with sport cutbacks of chinook when they are saying a big factor for both orca and salmon mortality is U.S. Navy bombing. WTF? Can't they find another country to bomb that doesn't have whales and salmon?
Little Hawk
Active Member
Good read!
Here's an idea: Provide "quiet-places" for Orcas with a total ban of motor vessels (and bombing).
It could be certain gathering places or known feeding, breeding or resting places scattered around the Coast; refuges they could run to to get away from it all...
Would be an interesting experiment to see over time if they actually used them. Maybe they could teach us something.
Here's an idea: Provide "quiet-places" for Orcas with a total ban of motor vessels (and bombing).
It could be certain gathering places or known feeding, breeding or resting places scattered around the Coast; refuges they could run to to get away from it all...
Would be an interesting experiment to see over time if they actually used them. Maybe they could teach us something.
Foxsea
Well-Known Member
That's a great idea, L.H.! ... and why not?
As far as teaching humans, it appears that we'll do what we've always done: allow the powerful and greedy to destroy another "civilization" and this time we'll be taking out the natural world, too. Some famous guy said the only thing without limit in this world is stupidity. He sure got that right. I'd add human arrogance.
Kind of like Rockfish Conservation Zones but with the added provision of no marine traffic.
Practically I am not sure this would work, Forget about Transients, even Resident Killer whales range over huge areas even in a day. They can be at the mouth of JDF in the morning and off Bellingham in about a day.. They are almost always moving and seldom stay in one place any length of time and may not do that in the same place for a year or so. They have been doing this long before local marine traffic was only canoes. Basically I think you would have to protect travel routes and the Killer Whale Conservation Zones would need to be huge, perhaps all of the coast.
There is also the human factor, I would not want it to be all of JDF (arrogant self interest I know) but would be just fine with all of the waters closed to marine traffic around the Gulf Islands; except when I want to take a ferry to Vancouver; I would be lobbying for a ferry exception. Not that it is ever going to happen in either location.
http://www.trailpeak.com/trail-Robson-Bight-near-Port-Hardy-BC-862
Perhaps you could get approval with a million dollar campaign for closure of a smaller location like Robson Bight. It is world famous for killer whale sightings and they do seem to spend a little more time there than most places and they do help support the local tourist industry. Unfortunately it is also on a major shipping route. Even if you could get it approved past the commercial lobby, you would likely need to position motorized patrol boats there to keep out marine traffic and that would kind of defeat the purpose. My guess is Mr. Harper does not have money for this and is more likely to be persuaded by the commercial sector lobby.
If we really want to help Killer Whales stop polluting the oceans with things like persistent pesticides and mercury that as pinnacle predators goes up the food chain and gets concentrated in them damaging their immune system. That in my opinion is the single largest of their many survival challenges. Not much good for us humans either, since we also are pinnacle predators and eat a lot of seafood on this coast. I suspect taking this on will keep you busy for some time.
Last edited by a moderator:
Whoa.. I am afraid that over the last few decades, our Government has gone from one knee-jerk reaction to another and simply begun depriving Canadians of access to the resource. Before anyone proposes I loose ANY damn right to use the waterways, I want concrete proof that:
1) Boat traffic actually is a problem for the orcas. The awesome shows they put on during the summer hunting salmon right in the middle of the guide fleet says no.
2) That we are a signifigant part of the apparant starvation problem. That is, divide home much salmon a whale eats, how much of that is caught by the pittance the government gives the recreational fleet, and see if it's even signifigant. I last heard 14 days. Sorry guys, I don't buy it. I also don't buy the Commercial Fleet's current 40,000 piece catch not being a part of that food supply. When you cut, you cut from the biggest part first.
3) How about pretty much the whole 1900's, when there was a hell of a lot more marine traffic in the Strait of Georgia in the form of a real rec fleet, a commercial fleet (Hundreds of single and two man operations), much more traffic in the way of logging and log booms, and the whales were doing just fine. You had a hole Hook and Line fleet from Sidney to Hardy in the live cod fishery. Whales didn't seem to care.
Before anyone dares suggest I loose any more, please provide me credible proof that I am a problem.
We have to watch what is happening here, our government and DFO has found it's easy to just shove legislation down our throats as more and more people in government take on what I call "pet projects". Look at the Gun Registry, our draconian 0.05 DUI laws that came into play, the beginning of the rise of the commerical salmon fleet on WCVI while a whole sport fishery is sidelined. Look at the BS Transport Canada has shoved up the wazoo's of the Fishing Guide Fleet, although it's a great idea, what has happened to the body count of dead guided guests on this coast? Nothing? Then, what was the damn point?
No more speculation, no more taking away without COLD HARD FACTS. Regretably, that's not amicable with a gravy train Parliment position where you only have to think 4 years in advance.
I did not mean to derail the topic, but what they are babbling about whales is exactly the same style of crap they have been trying to feed us for years, with the current track record of Canada's marine management strategy, I am afraid the credability of everything they say is in question. Say NO to cuts without some proof..
1) Boat traffic actually is a problem for the orcas. The awesome shows they put on during the summer hunting salmon right in the middle of the guide fleet says no.
2) That we are a signifigant part of the apparant starvation problem. That is, divide home much salmon a whale eats, how much of that is caught by the pittance the government gives the recreational fleet, and see if it's even signifigant. I last heard 14 days. Sorry guys, I don't buy it. I also don't buy the Commercial Fleet's current 40,000 piece catch not being a part of that food supply. When you cut, you cut from the biggest part first.
3) How about pretty much the whole 1900's, when there was a hell of a lot more marine traffic in the Strait of Georgia in the form of a real rec fleet, a commercial fleet (Hundreds of single and two man operations), much more traffic in the way of logging and log booms, and the whales were doing just fine. You had a hole Hook and Line fleet from Sidney to Hardy in the live cod fishery. Whales didn't seem to care.
Before anyone dares suggest I loose any more, please provide me credible proof that I am a problem.
We have to watch what is happening here, our government and DFO has found it's easy to just shove legislation down our throats as more and more people in government take on what I call "pet projects". Look at the Gun Registry, our draconian 0.05 DUI laws that came into play, the beginning of the rise of the commerical salmon fleet on WCVI while a whole sport fishery is sidelined. Look at the BS Transport Canada has shoved up the wazoo's of the Fishing Guide Fleet, although it's a great idea, what has happened to the body count of dead guided guests on this coast? Nothing? Then, what was the damn point?
No more speculation, no more taking away without COLD HARD FACTS. Regretably, that's not amicable with a gravy train Parliment position where you only have to think 4 years in advance.
I did not mean to derail the topic, but what they are babbling about whales is exactly the same style of crap they have been trying to feed us for years, with the current track record of Canada's marine management strategy, I am afraid the credability of everything they say is in question. Say NO to cuts without some proof..
Last edited by a moderator:
I think we are on the same page Last Chance. I was just trying to be polite and indirect in saying not a workable, or effective idea with no real hope of being implemented anywhere on our coast especially in heavily developed areas. At best you will see a slight expansion of close range exclusion zones around whales and that is already being done.
Sorry if that came across as pointed at you Rockfish, that wasn't my intent. However, untill recently, I was somewhat involved with our local fisheries department regarding early timed Fraser fish, what they used for "science" would get you thrown out of an elementry school science fair, so I tend to question anything coming out of the department without facts.
We already have to stay 100M away from them.. Where is the proof that this is a problem, that's all I am asking. Really, there is no skin off of my back if it's 100 or 200M, but slowly nibbling away at our rights on the water without proof sets a dangerous precident.. If we begin to see whales beach themselves around heavy traffic, or act erracticly, and record this in a detailed, scientific manner, then yes, let's put it on the table.
But since the allegged whale problem comes from the same place that figures a sport fleet in JDF is wiping out the Mighty Fraser in spite of gillnets, commercial fisheries, and gravel quarries leads me, and I should expect everyone to question any broad statement from the department issued without proof. This study comes from a department that time and time again has demonstrated a lack of credability, and accountability, and the adoption of a policy consisting of garnering support from those Canadians who react with emotion and not brains to the sight of a beached whale, or a salmon on the deck of a boat.
No proof? No evidence? Sorry, then leave me, and my 120 square foot "footprint" on the water alone.
We already have to stay 100M away from them.. Where is the proof that this is a problem, that's all I am asking. Really, there is no skin off of my back if it's 100 or 200M, but slowly nibbling away at our rights on the water without proof sets a dangerous precident.. If we begin to see whales beach themselves around heavy traffic, or act erracticly, and record this in a detailed, scientific manner, then yes, let's put it on the table.
But since the allegged whale problem comes from the same place that figures a sport fleet in JDF is wiping out the Mighty Fraser in spite of gillnets, commercial fisheries, and gravel quarries leads me, and I should expect everyone to question any broad statement from the department issued without proof. This study comes from a department that time and time again has demonstrated a lack of credability, and accountability, and the adoption of a policy consisting of garnering support from those Canadians who react with emotion and not brains to the sight of a beached whale, or a salmon on the deck of a boat.
No proof? No evidence? Sorry, then leave me, and my 120 square foot "footprint" on the water alone.
Last edited by a moderator:
I think that they are just trying to keep the whale watching boats farther away from them. The Feds. know that when we are fishing we don’t want to go anywhere near resident killer whales as most of us believe they scare the fish away and there have been rare incidents of them grabbing fish off our lines. If the whales chose to swim right up alongside of us, we can try to keep away from them but they are a lot faster than us unless we stop fishing, pull the gear, start up the main motors and take off at speed; which would be a lot more disturbing for them I would think.
Last edited by a moderator:
Hit em Hard
Member
I am more than happy to give the orcas or any other species of whales lots of room however I have noticed they don't seem to feel the same about me. There have been a couple of times when they have scared the **** out of me by getting way too close to me for my liking.
h.e.h.
h.e.h.
Foxsea
Well-Known Member
I've sat in J, K and L pods many times over the years, with engines off. The orca usually maintained their course and actually swam very close by our boat on more than one occasion. We have some great pictures taken near San Juan Island - an adult surfacing 10 feet away, looking right at us - that's eerie and thrilling at the same time. Years ago, in the Wallaby Derby, the boat trolling along side us near Aldridge Pt., boated the front half of a big spring. An Orca took the back half right in front of us. There was a picture of the half-eaten fish at Pedder Bay Marina for quite a while.
As for refuge, I think where we started on this thread was suggesting that a refuge away from destructive activity (like naval bombing and intense sonar blasts) would benefit both whales and salmon. I have never had the impression that us trolling bothered the orca - we are slow and non-threatening. Boats rushing toward them or getting in really close for a "good look" are another story - that's harassment. A law is one thing and enforcement ... well, there is next-to-none. If we could get a grip on the constant stream of pollutants flowing into the JDF (unlikely) that would be an outstanding improvement for all life.
FWIW: Michael Bigg and Graeme Ellis were both from B.C. Bigg was a founder of modern orca research. Ellis pioneered the photo I.D. of the members of J,K and L pods. Their fathers were both prominent in the Cowichan Valley - Padre Patrick Ellis would often officiate on Nov. 11th services, while Andy Bigg published a Duncan newspaper for many years. Bigg died in 1990 while Ellis continues his orca research.
Last edited by a moderator:
Dogbreath
Well-Known Member
Point taken.
beemer
Well-Known Member
The new law in the US states that it is illegal to be within 200 yards of a killer whale under ANY circumstance. Canada will more than likely be adopting the same rule , this includes fishing or if "they come to you". I have spent a great deal of time around these animals as a whale watch operator and whales really don't give a rats butt about random boats in their vicinity.
The three real main issues that have been scientifically proven are 1. Lack of prey 2. Pollution ,mainly PBDEs which are pumped out of Clover Point on a daily basis 3. Lack of males and genetic diversity , most of the 100 odd animals that were "collected" in the 1960s and 1970s were males. We now have a huge age gap in the group profile , unfortunately if you do the math and extrapolate the numbers it does not look good for the Southern Resident population.
Closing fishing or creating habitat routes won't really resolve anything and lets face it we are competing for the same fish and calm water that the killerwhales are.
beemer
It will be very interesting indeed if Canada adopts that US definition and tries to enforce it absolutely. People in Kayaks get approached by orca fairly frequently and they have no hope of ever keeping away from them if the whales decide to approach.
It should be an interesting first test case if they go after someone within 200 meters of one who has tried everything to avoid it and attempts to increase their distance but are unable to do so. I have lawyers in the family, I think I will ask. It is equally true of fishing boats with gear down or anchored for Halibut, sail boats in light wind and any boat if a whale is not seen until the whale surfaces right beside the boat. Even police, DFO and Coast Guard boats could have this happen to them. There are videos online of whales broaching and smashing down on sailboats wrecking them that were never seen before they wrecked the boat.
I have also been on a BC ferry in the narrow part of Active Pass on more than one occasion with a pod swimming 30 or 40 feet beside a BC Ferry with no maneuvering room at all for the Ferry and the captain on the speaker system telling all the tourists to go have a look.
So the options will be:
- selective prosecution or exemptions for some, never a winner for any government politically and possibly not in court. The public generally is not tolerant of a citizen being charged and found guilty of an offence that is not willful and for which they had no ability to avoid, because they vision themselves in that person’s situation and instinctively identify with the lack of fairness.
- charging the captain of a BC Ferry and/or the BC Ferry corp. and others for each incident of unavoidable intrusion within 200 meters of a whale.
- forcing for example BC ferries to change their route and go the long way around adding hours and huge increase in cost which will be passed on to passengers who I remind you vote. Not to mention shortening the lifespan of the ship and much quicker replacements costs. It would also greatly increase the cost of transporting goods and retail costs. You think people are pissed about smart meters or the HST, just try that one.
I think I can say with some degree of confidence that neither the Federal or Provincial Government will be prepared to commit political suicide by doing so.
I understand there is already an exclusion zone around whales and I suspect thousands of violations. I am curious how many successful prosecutions there has been.
As a fisherman I will do everything in my power to stay outside of an imposed exclusion zone around a whale but I suspect I will be OK if through no fault of my own, I am unable to do so.
Last edited by a moderator:
I think common sense is disappearing just as fast as the Orca's and the early timed Fraser Chinook. I wonder what kind of penalty you should get for blowing up a whale? Nothing? But don't let them swim to close while your fishing. I can just see someone trying to write out 75 tickets at the "Trap" on a weekend morning. :0
Better yet a couple of years ago when I was coming in on a friend’s boat from an evening sailing there was a whale on the inside of the Oak Bay Marina breakwater swimming in and around all the boats anchored and transiting there and apparently had been there for about a week. That is one heck of a lot of possible violators including us, visiting tourists and perhaps even a police officer or politician or two.
Last edited by a moderator:
Theb55
Active Member
I can see someone going out to see whales would have to keep their distance. But WTF. Whales coming to you. I cannot tell you how many times my first sighting of an Orca is when it is right beside my boat. By the time I would pull my riggers it would be a mile away. Of course, military which always seems to have dead whales around after their "military exercises" is exempt. Makes no sense to me. Guess I will have to store that with trying to teach Orcas to eat seals instead of salmon. Talk about a win-win on that one!
Similar threads
