Check out how DFO is handling Thompson River Steelhead consultation.

[searun]

Bob...over to you? Bob?

I don't think anyone is suggesting Thompson Steelhead are not worth saving - that is a mis-representation.

I think what I'm questioning is the scientific strength to the linkage some are making to mixed stock fisheries and the smoking gun cause of steelhead declines. All the evidence points somewhere else! Why for example, are steelhead in dire trouble on rivers where there is NO commercial fishing? Please answer that, and if you can then maybe there is some truth to what you suggest.

You guys are practicing faith based science here. You believe you know the answer, and are afraid to open your minds to test that belief with other science. Meanwhile, that approach distracts us from finding the actual smoking gun wasting a lot of good time and talent in the process. That is my issue with the legions of doom approach being used to attack FN and commercial fishing as the answer to recovering Thompson Steelhead. Its a fools game IMO because the interception fisheries are now statistically insignificant as a causal factor...and time is indeed running out on finding the real problem, and therefore the real solution.

 

[Dave]

Searun, we all know its over for these fish, no question about that. There are just too many reasons as to why we can never bring them back. What people are upset about is we know their numbers are at historic lows but we still allow a chum roe fishery that is impacting the last fish before they hit the T tribs. It should not be happening. Period.

 

[wildmanyeah]

Pulling the nuclear option and listing them not only does it stop fishing but it also forces the government to come up with a recover plan and spend money on freshwater habitat and monitoring.

Unfortunately it all comes as a package or not.

The government is not going to spend the money on these fish unless their forced too under a listing.


So what we are going to end up with is shittty fishing restrictions on the river because they are still going to do something but it’s never going to get better.

 

[OldBlackDog]

Well let’s see.
DFO was not responsible for Steelhead as they gave them to the Province.
DFO did not really get involved with the Thompson stock until it appeared they would get listed.

So the people who were really involved were the provincial staff.

And guess where Mr Hooten spent his career.

So saying that DFO knows what is or is not happening is very questionable.

There are probably no people presently within DFO who even have a working history with Steelhead.

DFO history with Thompson Steelhead is probably equal or worse than what they have with Killer Whales.

Yes we should look at all the possible effects .

We should look at why the chum fishery off Nitnat had an effect on their return?

Everything should be on the table if we actually care.

 

[OldBlackDog]

Remember that there are now runs of Chinook that can become listed.
Using Killer Whales as the reason to list them will ensure the Greens are on board to push this.

By the way let’s not forget Thompson Coho.

Pulling the nuclear option and listing them not only does it stop fishing but it also forces the government to come up with a recover plan and spend money on freshwater habitat and monitoring.

Unfortunately it all comes as a package or not.

The government is not going to spend the money on these fish unless their forced too under a listing.


So what we are going to end up with is shittty fishing restrictions on the river because they are still going to do something but it’s never going to get better.

 

[agentaqua]

so appreciative of your input on this forum, Searun. Voice of reason....

 

[wildmanyeah]

I have not been a big Fan of FWR in the past. However people should no Rod, Like Searun has been the voice of reason in the past. Encouraging all stakeholders to work to work together and often putting out fires in the rec community. His about face on this topic, should be a warning sign to all that recreational anglers on the Fraser have had enough.

 

[agentaqua]

DFO was not responsible for Steelhead as they gave them to the Province.

For clarification - for many, many years - DFO has operated with most provinces using an MOU over what fish are responsible by what authority - with the difference in jurisdiction being those fishes in "tidal" waters are federally regulated verses those in "non-tidal" being Provincial. Most posters on here already know this.

But this is more challenging with rainbow/steelhead - as they are anadromous - or can be for different races/clades (then called steelhead). It is an imperfect delegation of authority IMHO - but that is what we have. DFO does get involved (in this case) with steelhead as they are listed or being threatened to be listed in the federal COSEWIC/SARA process, since for aquatic animals - the DFO minister is the appropriate minister to sign-off (or not) on the proposed listing. And - as far as I am concerned - the COSEWIC/SARA process is not really a fisheries management system and doesn't engage well with the existing systems - or lack thereof.

Ya - it's an unfortunately complicated situation since DFO purportedly manages all intercept fisheries (commercial, FSC and rec) and sometimes does stock assessment on all the other species of salmon with the exception of steelhead - which the Province does sometimes, someplaces.

Steelhead are therefore the forgotten component of federal fisheries management IMHO.

 

[wildmanyeah]

Time to add IFS Steelhead to the list??....

60% of world's wildlife has been wiped out since 1970
https://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/living-plant-wwf-2018-1.4882819

Also something in their for you OBD

"In Canada, he says, political leaders have committed to do that via the UN Convention of Biological Diversity, by protecting 10 per cent of marine areas and 17 per cent of its land, though we are not close to meeting those goals.

"We're quite far behind," he added."

 

[OldBlackDog]

By Bob Hooton
Plans and pronouncements that aren't worth the paper their printed on! (For some background on who's who relative to the comment below, call up the Fraser River Aboriginal Fisheries Secretariat web site.)

Check out the message delivered to the Fraser River Aboriginal Fisheries Secretariat back in March re the intentions around management of FN fisheries influencing endangered interior Fraser steelhead in 2018. Dear DFO, tell us how that has been delivered. How were all those closures you alluded to implemented and enforced? Now that we're on the precipice of the worst ever return of Interior Fraser Steelhead, who among you is accountable for your total abrogation of responsibility?

http://frafs.ca/sites/default/files...Q33oGRsPFmGmkguF7nnXBt6qOSNf6JtXZt0OLJqSwpCIQ

http://frafs.ca/…/2018%20IFR%20Steelhead%20Information%20Pa…

 

[searun]

Well its time to switch approaches. By-pass the middle man, and sit down with FN's with a different approach. They are a harvest culture - perhaps its time to talk respectfully about the opportunities that could be created for FN communities if they became world class leaders in selective harvest, and marketed their fish accordingly at a higher price. Lets talk in terms of increasing their fishery, not reducing it. Talk about increasing the value they get from the fish which would be caught selectively and sustainably, then marketed as such. They would have a corner on the market that other fishers simply would not have, and derive increased benefits for their communities. Attracting more bees with honey approach, is likely better than wagging fingers at the FN communities and leaders I suspect.

I personally do not support the wagging fingers approach, nor do I support infringing on FN's rights to fish. But I do support working together respectfully to develop a truly world class selective fishery. And, for the record, still don't believe there is sufficient scientific evidence to support branding these in-river fisheries as the smoking gun responsible for the demise of steelhead. That said, supporting selective fisheries as a helpful tactic is a good idea, not necessarily "the" wonderful solution that some purport it to be. If it was, then what explains other world class rivers such as the Gold River steelhead slipping away into extirpation?

 

[Whitebuck]

Searun...you are grasping at straws with your Gold river comparison. As someone who spent much of Feb and March on the gold over the last couple decades I can tell you as soon as the upper watershed got.logged the steelhead numbers dropped instantly.
Once again you seem out of touch with the fisheries you are speaking about.
Would love see a partnership with FN...most would be for.conservation. However I'm sure the lower Fraser bands want nothing to do with that!

 

[wildmanyeah]

We have went through this exercise before, Perhaps it needs to be done every 10 years lol

https://www.psf.ca/sites/default/fi...liance_Forum_Summary_Oct_21-22_2009_draft.pdf

Searun, The local groups have gone though this exercise, You don't think people have tried to do that in the last 20 years? Look at the people who have been involved in this exercise you may even no some of them.

You may even not that some of the groups starting the media wars today previously agreed that it was a poor idea to do so 10 years ago.

what has changed in the last 10 years? less recreational fishing opportunities

 

[Dave]

Searun...you are grasping at straws with your Gold river comparison. As someone who spent much of Feb and March on the gold over the last couple decades I can tell you as soon as the upper watershed got.logged the steelhead numbers dropped instantly.

Exactly so. Hooton's second book, "Days of Rivers Past", describes the death of the Gold very well.
Perhaps more people should read his books - he does have a shitload of experience and expertise. He calls it as it is, not wrapped up in pretty paper.

 

[Whitebuck]

As soon as Upana, upper muchalat and Gold were logged it went to ****.
The most stable river in BC went to one of the worst.
Read the books...but what might be even more useful....spend some time on the Fraser in the summer and fall, spend some time on the boats in the chum fishery in the chuck. Spend some time on our rivers.See what our fisheries are facing....

 

[OldBlackDog]

https://docs.wixstatic.com/ugd/4d43cb_de7e388ad33d4d76a75c7fa21dc13dac.pdf

 

[searun]

We have went through this exercise before, Perhaps it needs to be done every 10 years lol

https://www.psf.ca/sites/default/fi...liance_Forum_Summary_Oct_21-22_2009_draft.pdf

Searun, The local groups have gone though this exercise, You don't think people have tried to do that in the last 20 years? Look at the people who have been involved in this exercise you may even no some of them.

You may even not that some of the groups starting the media wars today previously agreed that it was a poor idea to do so 10 years ago.

what has changed in the last 10 years? less recreational fishing opportunities

This isn't at all what I'm talking about - its not about measurement, monitoring and compliance. That's why what your friends are promoting is going to make any difference - that is our focus, not theirs. We need to look at a new paradigm shift away from finger wagging, and towards working as partners with FN's to find sustainable ways to harvest and market that catch at higher market values. If we want to continue pursuing "compliance" objectives aimed at somehow controlling or stopping a rights based fishery it will take us no where. Waste of effort.

So too is attaching blame and pointing fingers. That's analogous to me saying your recreational fishing has to stop because it is unregulated, unmonitored and grossly out of control...that, you sporties who play with your food by releasing fish are being cruel to fish....you will get your back up and close down.

And, if we want to blame logging for steelhead decline in all the other rivers along our coast that too is a very significant stretch of the truth. We have many rivers that are stable, pristine watersheds that are virtually devoid of once abundant steelhead - why is that related to commercial and/or FN netting when there is none on those rivers?

Even Bob Hooton said this of the Gold; "Some will be quick to note that my case for habitat degradation pursuant to the November 13, 1975, flood event being responsible for diminished fish returns doesn't fit with the catch success many of us experienced eight to ten years later. I've struggled with explaining that myself."

Of course he struggled - we saw many decades of incredible fishing on the Gold (one of my favourite rivers next to the Squamish) in the years after the 1975 flood, and many others since then. The Gold did however spiral down over a very short period, to where it sits today...and to suggest logging is the culprit alone is again similar to blaming the demise of Thompson steelhead on in-river gill net fisheries...its highly over-simplistic.

There is something much more significant going on coast-wide other than logging, habitat degradation, and gill netting. Of course those also contribute, but things in nature are very complicated and rarely is there one single reason.

 

[OldBlackDog]

So, here we are at possibly the end of the Thompson Steelhead run.

All the groups that have been involved throughout the slow demise of these fish have signed on to move them to SARA as a last Hope.

Yes, they all know the effect this will have on all including themselves.

People have had years to provide ideals and yes Searun yours has been heard before, yet here we are.

So if they are not listed then they will be gone.

No government will care any further why they are disappearing, they will just be happy they can move on and save money.

Sad.

 

[wildmanyeah]

I don’t think they will be gone, if you study fish populations that crash they don’t tend to go extinct. Instead they tend to stay at crazy low levels. Depensation, critical mas ect.. is a thing

Them going extinct might better for thoes managing fisheries. Instead what we are luckily to see is more closure windows.

that why some of these groups just don’t care anymore and world prefer a listing.

Steelhead closure window, coho closure window, spring chinook closure window

These groups are not my friends, I left the river behind and fish the ocean. However some of thoes issues left behind are now starting to creep into my ocean fishing.

 

[Fishmyster]

So, here we are at possibly the end of the Thompson Steelhead run.

All the groups that have been involved throughout the slow demise of these fish have signed on to move them to SARA as a last Hope.

Yes, they all know the effect this will have on all including themselves.

People have had years to provide ideals and yes Searun yours has been heard before, yet here we are.

So if they are not listed then they will be gone.

No government will care any further why they are disappearing, they will just be happy they can move on and save money.

Sad.

I don't think they are going to be gone!

The rain pH has averaged 6.3 or so this fall. I have not seen it below 6 since last spring. So compared to the average of 4.3 and a couple heavy doses of mid 3's in 1994 there has been some major changes in precipitation water quality since then. Heavy rainfall events won't be corrosive on the soils and surface waters as it was in the 1990's. For almost three decades the rain has been toxic to fish and ecology and in the last few years it has improved a lot. How long it will take for food webs to repair is to be determined. It's too bad guys like Bob didn't study stream ecology and chemistry back in the 1970's or ever. If he did he would fully understand why a flood in the 1970's did not wipe out Gold sh for the 1980's and there are no fish now.

Oddly, rain with a ph of 5.6 is considered to be clean rain with co2 adding carbonic acid being the influence causing slightly acidic rain. There has been a recent and drastic rise of co2 in the atmosphere over the last few years yet the rain pH still is rising. Present day field facts contradict past common belief in rain quality. For the rain to now be averaging over 6 when 5.6 was considered "clean" then now it must be "cleaner than clean". Hummmm. Maybe some of you computer scientists out there could educate me on how this could be so? I have my ideas but would like to hear yours?

I did hear from a fisher friend who heard from a friend who said he seen flying caddis at the Thompson this year like he had never seen there before. The guy had only been fishing there for about 10 years so...possibly good news! In this area the Didymo algae died off early and the dead salmon started to started to decompose again. Hopefully what is going on with the high pH rain chemistry will be good for fish because it sure doesn't look good for cedar trees!!