B
Brisco
Guest
Now Skeeter, we don't want any trouble up here. 
Columbians "Myth or Fact" & "POST"
- Thread starter Charlie
- Start date
scott craven
Well-Known Member
IMHO, Charlie knows what he's talking about...
there's backup to prove it....
suggest everyone chill out a bit and wet a line and
go catch a "columbian" or any other blunt headed ,football, dumptruck
style fish, whatever you want to call it !
there's backup to prove it....
suggest everyone chill out a bit and wet a line and
go catch a "columbian" or any other blunt headed ,football, dumptruck
style fish, whatever you want to call it !
scott craven
Well-Known Member
IMHO, Charlie knows what he's talking about...
there's backup to prove it....
suggest everyone chill out a bit and wet a line and
go catch a "columbian" or any other blunt headed ,football, dumptruck
style fish, whatever you want to call it !
there's backup to prove it....
suggest everyone chill out a bit and wet a line and
go catch a "columbian" or any other blunt headed ,football, dumptruck
style fish, whatever you want to call it !
B
Brisco
Guest
I would tend to agree with Charlie that the shorter, fatter fish are likely American.
B
Brisco
Guest
I would tend to agree with Charlie that the shorter, fatter fish are likely American.
Charlie
Well-Known Member
Well some of them are in my second post. That is right from "POST", if you can't read it I will be more than happy to send it to you in either PDF or Excel or both?
There was a study done in 2007 and I can't remember the web address, but if you want to continue your research you can google it. That is how I found it! It was done by the U.S. and a research vessel plotted all the salmon catch or lack of catch from Oregon to the Bearing Strait. I would help you out, but you have me writing way to much as it is!
As far as, a Spring Columbia run, you can go to the dam counts:
http://www.fpc.org/currentdaily/HistFishTwo_7day-ytd_Adults.htm
Of course, the main dam is Bonneville, as it is the first in the chain of the 400 dams on the Columbia. Right now the YTD Spring Chinook count is 85,732. These returning salmon are mostly coming in from what is now being called the "Highway". However, look at some of the other dams that will show you where these fish are headed. If you look at McNary with a count of 37,410 passing YTD. Then look at Ice Harbor with a count of 27,317. That tells you how many fish went up the Snake River! Not bad for an extinct species, right! Wrong! It is the Snake Fall Run that is on the verge of extinction. These fish are actually headed back to Dworshak National Fish Hatchery.
Most of the Columbian showing in Juan de Fuca is actually from the Dworshak National Fish Hatchery. They start showing around the last week of March, give or take and some can be taken throughout the season. Dworshak is the largest combination producer of steelhead trout and spring Chinook and Coho salmon in the world. The hatchery is located in north-central Idaho at the confluence of the North Fork and the main Clearwater River, just below Dworshak Dam. The dam blocked migrating steelhead from natural spawning grounds on the North Fork of the Clearwater River. The hatchery was constructed because the Dam blocks returning adult steelhead and salmon from reaching their historic spawning grounds on the North Fork-Clearwater River. The Dworshak are then followed by the Snake River Hatchery Run. They usually start showing in May. Yep, FACT!
Now, Priest Rapids, the count of only 3,319. Most of those other 7,000 Spring Chinook went into the Yakima River! The Yakima has had a very strong return for quite a few years now. I used to see Springs come up the river where you could walk across their backs, they were so thick (not literally)! If you really want to follow the fish, you can look at the dwindling counts as you go up stream and figure their home river. The Yakima Run will begin showing in June. Again, most of these fish are returning from the "Highway". This has all been proven! It is fact and again, you are going to have to "google" it! I all ready know the facts!
A few years ago, it was thought they went out across the ocean to Alaska as the diagram you posted showed, but it has since been proven these fish follow the Continental Shelf, right up the Washington and WCVI coastlines, past QCI, and some follow the route as I posted in the Strait of Jaun de Fuca. Why they come in the Strait of Juan de Fuca? I don't know and I can't find, but I know they due, as I have caught them. That is Fact! And, I believe most Guides on the south end of Vancouver Island has, too! A simple yes or no will suffice here, Mr. Wagner! Most Marine Biologist believe they follow the Continental Shelf as salmon do NOT like clear water and there is more food within the more murky and richer (as in food) waters of the Continental Shelf. go "google"!
While most of the smaller salmon tend to travel in "schools", the larger salmon tend to travel more to their selves; all use the tides to their advantage. The larger ones tend to travel with the tides and hold up in the back eddies, holes, pockets, and behind structure. This is where you will usually find the larger salmon and most commonly within the 80 foot contour line, be it Frazer or Columbian; however, the Frazer's tend to be more active and will usually chase bait. When they hit, you know you have a fish on as your line will be peeling off. Whereas, the large Columbians tend to be very lazy and will just set in a back eddy waiting for the tide to change. They usually will not chase, but will lunge at the bait. More often, that is when you think you have snagged the bottom, and then when the fish realizes it is hooked, the fun begins. Hence, Frazer's are usually caught a little farther off shore, while a large Columbian will be in that back eddy close to shore or behind structure. This is based on my experience and again I know it is fact, because I have caught them. You don't have to "google" this!
I have found the large Columbians are usually caught outside the surf line north of Estevan Point and closer to shore south of Estevan. Now, don't ask me why and this is purely a personal opinion!
But, when your rod tip goes down and you think you just snagged bottom, hang on! Be it Columbian or Frazer, you have a nice fish!
Now, since I mentioned the "Highway". Everyone thinks the Highway is a mythical road on the 50-fathom line, which follows the Continental Shelf. That is NOT true! The "Highway" starts at the Continental Shelf at approximately the 50-fathom line and runs all the way to the "Surf" line. Salmon can and will be found anywhere in between, but very seldom outside the 50-fathom line this is believed more do to the clarity of the water then anything else. Nevertheless, this is the main reason DFO limitations and restrictions are always in relation to the "Surf" line. If a fish is inside the surf line, it is probably Canadian and they want to protect your fish. Make since? That's Fact!
FYI - since the early 1970s, hatchery salmon makes up more than 80 percent of commercially caught salmon in the Columbia River. This is also, Fact!
Oh, I forgot... Post has tracked 92,859 Chinook in the Strait of Juan de Fuca from the Columbia Basin between May 2005 and September 2007! If you want I can post all 1,239 pages? That is also, FACT! [8D][8D]
Charlie
Well-Known Member
Well some of them are in my second post. That is right from "POST", if you can't read it I will be more than happy to send it to you in either PDF or Excel or both?
There was a study done in 2007 and I can't remember the web address, but if you want to continue your research you can google it. That is how I found it! It was done by the U.S. and a research vessel plotted all the salmon catch or lack of catch from Oregon to the Bearing Strait. I would help you out, but you have me writing way to much as it is!
As far as, a Spring Columbia run, you can go to the dam counts:
http://www.fpc.org/currentdaily/HistFishTwo_7day-ytd_Adults.htm
Of course, the main dam is Bonneville, as it is the first in the chain of the 400 dams on the Columbia. Right now the YTD Spring Chinook count is 85,732. These returning salmon are mostly coming in from what is now being called the "Highway". However, look at some of the other dams that will show you where these fish are headed. If you look at McNary with a count of 37,410 passing YTD. Then look at Ice Harbor with a count of 27,317. That tells you how many fish went up the Snake River! Not bad for an extinct species, right! Wrong! It is the Snake Fall Run that is on the verge of extinction. These fish are actually headed back to Dworshak National Fish Hatchery.
Most of the Columbian showing in Juan de Fuca is actually from the Dworshak National Fish Hatchery. They start showing around the last week of March, give or take and some can be taken throughout the season. Dworshak is the largest combination producer of steelhead trout and spring Chinook and Coho salmon in the world. The hatchery is located in north-central Idaho at the confluence of the North Fork and the main Clearwater River, just below Dworshak Dam. The dam blocked migrating steelhead from natural spawning grounds on the North Fork of the Clearwater River. The hatchery was constructed because the Dam blocks returning adult steelhead and salmon from reaching their historic spawning grounds on the North Fork-Clearwater River. The Dworshak are then followed by the Snake River Hatchery Run. They usually start showing in May. Yep, FACT!
Now, Priest Rapids, the count of only 3,319. Most of those other 7,000 Spring Chinook went into the Yakima River! The Yakima has had a very strong return for quite a few years now. I used to see Springs come up the river where you could walk across their backs, they were so thick (not literally)! If you really want to follow the fish, you can look at the dwindling counts as you go up stream and figure their home river. The Yakima Run will begin showing in June. Again, most of these fish are returning from the "Highway". This has all been proven! It is fact and again, you are going to have to "google" it! I all ready know the facts!
A few years ago, it was thought they went out across the ocean to Alaska as the diagram you posted showed, but it has since been proven these fish follow the Continental Shelf, right up the Washington and WCVI coastlines, past QCI, and some follow the route as I posted in the Strait of Jaun de Fuca. Why they come in the Strait of Juan de Fuca? I don't know and I can't find, but I know they due, as I have caught them. That is Fact! And, I believe most Guides on the south end of Vancouver Island has, too! A simple yes or no will suffice here, Mr. Wagner! Most Marine Biologist believe they follow the Continental Shelf as salmon do NOT like clear water and there is more food within the more murky and richer (as in food) waters of the Continental Shelf. go "google"!
While most of the smaller salmon tend to travel in "schools", the larger salmon tend to travel more to their selves; all use the tides to their advantage. The larger ones tend to travel with the tides and hold up in the back eddies, holes, pockets, and behind structure. This is where you will usually find the larger salmon and most commonly within the 80 foot contour line, be it Frazer or Columbian; however, the Frazer's tend to be more active and will usually chase bait. When they hit, you know you have a fish on as your line will be peeling off. Whereas, the large Columbians tend to be very lazy and will just set in a back eddy waiting for the tide to change. They usually will not chase, but will lunge at the bait. More often, that is when you think you have snagged the bottom, and then when the fish realizes it is hooked, the fun begins. Hence, Frazer's are usually caught a little farther off shore, while a large Columbian will be in that back eddy close to shore or behind structure. This is based on my experience and again I know it is fact, because I have caught them. You don't have to "google" this!
I have found the large Columbians are usually caught outside the surf line north of Estevan Point and closer to shore south of Estevan. Now, don't ask me why and this is purely a personal opinion!
But, when your rod tip goes down and you think you just snagged bottom, hang on! Be it Columbian or Frazer, you have a nice fish!
Now, since I mentioned the "Highway". Everyone thinks the Highway is a mythical road on the 50-fathom line, which follows the Continental Shelf. That is NOT true! The "Highway" starts at the Continental Shelf at approximately the 50-fathom line and runs all the way to the "Surf" line. Salmon can and will be found anywhere in between, but very seldom outside the 50-fathom line this is believed more do to the clarity of the water then anything else. Nevertheless, this is the main reason DFO limitations and restrictions are always in relation to the "Surf" line. If a fish is inside the surf line, it is probably Canadian and they want to protect your fish. Make since? That's Fact!
FYI - since the early 1970s, hatchery salmon makes up more than 80 percent of commercially caught salmon in the Columbia River. This is also, Fact!
Oh, I forgot... Post has tracked 92,859 Chinook in the Strait of Juan de Fuca from the Columbia Basin between May 2005 and September 2007! If you want I can post all 1,239 pages? That is also, FACT! [8D][8D]
G
Gooey Bob
Guest
Interesting thread, first, a question, then an observation...
Are the "recoveries" here actually CWT recoveries of cuught fish, or are they fish that are carrying acoustic tags and then the "recovery" is the recognition of that acoustic signature by the POST system? If it is the latter, then I'd suggest that the data in no way actually represent the migration pattern of any large stock group like "Columbia River Chinook" (which is actually broken down into several smaller stock groups like "Upriver Brights, Tules, etc) but rather a smaller subset of fish that are marked as part of the POST program.
Secondly, and assuming these are CWT recoveries and not POST hits, I wonder just what Canadian fisheries management area is covered under the heading "Juan De Fuca" in the data Charlie has presented here. My guess is that its all of areas 19 & 20. Considering that area 20 extends up as far as Bonilla Pt. its not hard to imagine that Columbia bound fish will end up being caught there. IMO, in this debate, "Juan De Fuca" caught fish would be more in the Sherringham and points east zone. Renfew is to Juan De Fuca, like outer Barkley Sound is to Alberni Inlet. Sure you'll catch Robertson Creek Chinook at Swale Rock, but you're just as likely to catch a Yakima River fish there too. Its a serious mized stock fishery at Renfrew, and they do catch a lot of US produced fish. CWT data show that. It makes sense that you'd recover a fair number of chinook of Columbia origin at Port Renfrew, but I'd bet my Islanders that there is a direct negative relationship between the frequency of catching Columbia Bound mature Chinook (feeders can show up anywhere, but typically aren't 40 - 60 lbs)and the distance east from the open pacific you are in Juan De Fuca.
Couldn't resist...
Gooey
Are the "recoveries" here actually CWT recoveries of cuught fish, or are they fish that are carrying acoustic tags and then the "recovery" is the recognition of that acoustic signature by the POST system? If it is the latter, then I'd suggest that the data in no way actually represent the migration pattern of any large stock group like "Columbia River Chinook" (which is actually broken down into several smaller stock groups like "Upriver Brights, Tules, etc) but rather a smaller subset of fish that are marked as part of the POST program.
Secondly, and assuming these are CWT recoveries and not POST hits, I wonder just what Canadian fisheries management area is covered under the heading "Juan De Fuca" in the data Charlie has presented here. My guess is that its all of areas 19 & 20. Considering that area 20 extends up as far as Bonilla Pt. its not hard to imagine that Columbia bound fish will end up being caught there. IMO, in this debate, "Juan De Fuca" caught fish would be more in the Sherringham and points east zone. Renfew is to Juan De Fuca, like outer Barkley Sound is to Alberni Inlet. Sure you'll catch Robertson Creek Chinook at Swale Rock, but you're just as likely to catch a Yakima River fish there too. Its a serious mized stock fishery at Renfrew, and they do catch a lot of US produced fish. CWT data show that. It makes sense that you'd recover a fair number of chinook of Columbia origin at Port Renfrew, but I'd bet my Islanders that there is a direct negative relationship between the frequency of catching Columbia Bound mature Chinook (feeders can show up anywhere, but typically aren't 40 - 60 lbs
)and the distance east from the open pacific you are in Juan De Fuca. Couldn't resist...
Gooey
G
Gooey Bob
Guest
Interesting thread, first, a question, then an observation...
Are the "recoveries" here actually CWT recoveries of cuught fish, or are they fish that are carrying acoustic tags and then the "recovery" is the recognition of that acoustic signature by the POST system? If it is the latter, then I'd suggest that the data in no way actually represent the migration pattern of any large stock group like "Columbia River Chinook" (which is actually broken down into several smaller stock groups like "Upriver Brights, Tules, etc) but rather a smaller subset of fish that are marked as part of the POST program.
Secondly, and assuming these are CWT recoveries and not POST hits, I wonder just what Canadian fisheries management area is covered under the heading "Juan De Fuca" in the data Charlie has presented here. My guess is that its all of areas 19 & 20. Considering that area 20 extends up as far as Bonilla Pt. its not hard to imagine that Columbia bound fish will end up being caught there. IMO, in this debate, "Juan De Fuca" caught fish would be more in the Sherringham and points east zone. Renfew is to Juan De Fuca, like outer Barkley Sound is to Alberni Inlet. Sure you'll catch Robertson Creek Chinook at Swale Rock, but you're just as likely to catch a Yakima River fish there too. Its a serious mized stock fishery at Renfrew, and they do catch a lot of US produced fish. CWT data show that. It makes sense that you'd recover a fair number of chinook of Columbia origin at Port Renfrew, but I'd bet my Islanders that there is a direct negative relationship between the frequency of catching Columbia Bound mature Chinook (feeders can show up anywhere, but typically aren't 40 - 60 lbs)and the distance east from the open pacific you are in Juan De Fuca.
Couldn't resist...
Gooey
Are the "recoveries" here actually CWT recoveries of cuught fish, or are they fish that are carrying acoustic tags and then the "recovery" is the recognition of that acoustic signature by the POST system? If it is the latter, then I'd suggest that the data in no way actually represent the migration pattern of any large stock group like "Columbia River Chinook" (which is actually broken down into several smaller stock groups like "Upriver Brights, Tules, etc) but rather a smaller subset of fish that are marked as part of the POST program.
Secondly, and assuming these are CWT recoveries and not POST hits, I wonder just what Canadian fisheries management area is covered under the heading "Juan De Fuca" in the data Charlie has presented here. My guess is that its all of areas 19 & 20. Considering that area 20 extends up as far as Bonilla Pt. its not hard to imagine that Columbia bound fish will end up being caught there. IMO, in this debate, "Juan De Fuca" caught fish would be more in the Sherringham and points east zone. Renfew is to Juan De Fuca, like outer Barkley Sound is to Alberni Inlet. Sure you'll catch Robertson Creek Chinook at Swale Rock, but you're just as likely to catch a Yakima River fish there too. Its a serious mized stock fishery at Renfrew, and they do catch a lot of US produced fish. CWT data show that. It makes sense that you'd recover a fair number of chinook of Columbia origin at Port Renfrew, but I'd bet my Islanders that there is a direct negative relationship between the frequency of catching Columbia Bound mature Chinook (feeders can show up anywhere, but typically aren't 40 - 60 lbs
)and the distance east from the open pacific you are in Juan De Fuca. Couldn't resist...
Gooey
migration patterns are an intersting topic. my only question, without reading a thousand pages of data, is just how were these fish identified?? was this via wire tag or some other sure fire means?
thanks for doing all the leg work charlie and presenting an interesting set of information for all of us to mull over.
thanks for doing all the leg work charlie and presenting an interesting set of information for all of us to mull over.
migration patterns are an intersting topic. my only question, without reading a thousand pages of data, is just how were these fish identified?? was this via wire tag or some other sure fire means?
thanks for doing all the leg work charlie and presenting an interesting set of information for all of us to mull over.
thanks for doing all the leg work charlie and presenting an interesting set of information for all of us to mull over.
Excuse me Charlie but let me summarize your facts that apparently prove that the early run through the JDF consists of Columbian fish:
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
7)
8)
That might be your only statement that is even remotely interesting to the subject. But as I said before, the POST list you posted before showed a few Columbians but not nearly close to spring time and since it includes the west entrance of JDF (Neah Bay etc.) it is inconclusive if the recorded Columbian fish actually migrate into the Strait or just follow the shore and go down the coast passed the JDF west entrance.
You know, based on this you know nothing. Sorry but that is just the only fact you have proven
1)
[?]
2)
...
[?] Can't see the relevance!
3)
...
[?] So, that is what your statement but hardly a fact. Where is the proof? And then where do they show in May? In the JDF? How would you know? At the hatchery?
4)
[?] What's that got to do with springs in JDF? And your believe is hardly a fact.
5)
Nice fact! And the ones you caught probably had an US hatchery baseball cap on, right?
6)
Praise Charlie as his "knowledge" are facts! You would make a great BC politician!
7)
Fine, but how again does this prove a Columbian run in JDF in spring time?
8)
quote
That might be your only statement that is even remotely interesting to the subject. But as I said before, the POST list you posted before showed a few Columbians but not nearly close to spring time and since it includes the west entrance of JDF (Neah Bay etc.) it is inconclusive if the recorded Columbian fish actually migrate into the Strait or just follow the shore and go down the coast passed the JDF west entrance.
You know, based on this you know nothing. Sorry but that is just the only fact you have proven
Excuse me Charlie but let me summarize your facts that apparently prove that the early run through the JDF consists of Columbian fish:
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
7)
8)
That might be your only statement that is even remotely interesting to the subject. But as I said before, the POST list you posted before showed a few Columbians but not nearly close to spring time and since it includes the west entrance of JDF (Neah Bay etc.) it is inconclusive if the recorded Columbian fish actually migrate into the Strait or just follow the shore and go down the coast passed the JDF west entrance.
You know, based on this you know nothing. Sorry but that is just the only fact you have proven
1)
[?]
2)
...
[?] Can't see the relevance!
3)
...
[?] So, that is what your statement but hardly a fact. Where is the proof? And then where do they show in May? In the JDF? How would you know? At the hatchery?
4)
[?] What's that got to do with springs in JDF? And your believe is hardly a fact.
5)
Nice fact! And the ones you caught probably had an US hatchery baseball cap on, right?
6)
Praise Charlie as his "knowledge" are facts! You would make a great BC politician!
7)
Fine, but how again does this prove a Columbian run in JDF in spring time?
8)
quote
That might be your only statement that is even remotely interesting to the subject. But as I said before, the POST list you posted before showed a few Columbians but not nearly close to spring time and since it includes the west entrance of JDF (Neah Bay etc.) it is inconclusive if the recorded Columbian fish actually migrate into the Strait or just follow the shore and go down the coast passed the JDF west entrance.
You know, based on this you know nothing. Sorry but that is just the only fact you have proven
walleyes
Crew Member
Chris,,
Just a thought here,, instead of just picking apart charlie's post's how about some solid info from you. I do see charlie coming up with some very interesting information and all thoe it may have some holes in it which we can all accept it obviuosly has some truth to it and has to have some acuracy to it as well.
So please rather than just being the oposition and waiting in the wings and picking apart the info like a scavenger lets see some numbers from your camp.. Because so far all I have seen from you is blah blah blah...
Just a thought here,, instead of just picking apart charlie's post's how about some solid info from you. I do see charlie coming up with some very interesting information and all thoe it may have some holes in it which we can all accept it obviuosly has some truth to it and has to have some acuracy to it as well.
So please rather than just being the oposition and waiting in the wings and picking apart the info like a scavenger lets see some numbers from your camp.. Because so far all I have seen from you is blah blah blah...
walleyes
Crew Member
Chris,,
Just a thought here,, instead of just picking apart charlie's post's how about some solid info from you. I do see charlie coming up with some very interesting information and all thoe it may have some holes in it which we can all accept it obviuosly has some truth to it and has to have some acuracy to it as well.
So please rather than just being the oposition and waiting in the wings and picking apart the info like a scavenger lets see some numbers from your camp.. Because so far all I have seen from you is blah blah blah...
Just a thought here,, instead of just picking apart charlie's post's how about some solid info from you. I do see charlie coming up with some very interesting information and all thoe it may have some holes in it which we can all accept it obviuosly has some truth to it and has to have some acuracy to it as well.
So please rather than just being the oposition and waiting in the wings and picking apart the info like a scavenger lets see some numbers from your camp.. Because so far all I have seen from you is blah blah blah...
Charlie
Well-Known Member
quote:Originally posted by chris73
Excuse me Charlie but let me summarize your facts that apparently prove that the early run through the JDF consists of Columbian fish:
You know, based on this you know nothing. Sorry but that is just the only fact you have proven
Well Grasshopper... Rather than picking everything I say apart, why don't you get off your rump, start doing your own research and PROVE ME WRONG!
Charlie
Well-Known Member
quote:Originally posted by chris73
Excuse me Charlie but let me summarize your facts that apparently prove that the early run through the JDF consists of Columbian fish:
You know, based on this you know nothing. Sorry but that is just the only fact you have proven
Well Grasshopper... Rather than picking everything I say apart, why don't you get off your rump, start doing your own research and PROVE ME WRONG!
Charlie
Well-Known Member
quote:Originally posted by Gooey Bob
Interesting thread, first, a question, then an observation...
Are the "recoveries" here actually CWT recoveries of cuught fish, or are they fish that are carrying acoustic tags and then the "recovery" is the recognition of that acoustic signature by the POST system? If it is the latter, then I'd suggest that the data in no way actually represent the migration pattern of any large stock group like "Columbia River Chinook" (which is actually broken down into several smaller stock groups like "Upriver Brights, Tules, etc) but rather a smaller subset of fish that are marked as part of the POST program.
Secondly, and assuming these are CWT recoveries and not POST hits, I wonder just what Canadian fisheries management area is covered under the heading "Juan De Fuca" in the data Charlie has presented here. My guess is that its all of areas 19 & 20. Considering that area 20 extends up as far as Bonilla Pt. its not hard to imagine that Columbia bound fish will end up being caught there. IMO, in this debate, "Juan De Fuca" caught fish would be more in the Sherringham and points east zone. Renfew is to Juan De Fuca, like outer Barkley Sound is to Alberni Inlet. Sure you'll catch Robertson Creek Chinook at Swale Rock, but you're just as likely to catch a Yakima River fish there too. Its a serious mized stock fishery at Renfrew, and they do catch a lot of US produced fish. CWT data show that. It makes sense that you'd recover a fair number of chinook of Columbia origin at Port Renfrew, but I'd bet my Islanders that there is a direct negative relationship between the frequency of catching Columbia Bound mature Chinook (feeders can show up anywhere, but typically aren't 40 - 60 lbs
Couldn't resist...
Gooey
Here is a link you might find interesting: http://www.plosbiology.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pbio.0060265
They use a V9 Coded Transmitter
265
Here is the locations of POST receivers. I can't tell for sure,but it looks like two in the strait, one on both sides. I probably could find that if you really want to know? Also, notice the release sites!
Both "Tracking" and "Recovery" data is actually uploaded to the POST Website. If you go to the website and go to database you can see where the uploads are listed. As far as receivers... check out the first map! Their tracking information is right smack in the middle of the Strait. Sorry, NOT Sherringham or Port Renfrew, but look more like Sooke and Pillar Point?
I am not trying to suggest all these fish are 40 to 60 pounds. If I did I surely want to retract that! But, do want to refer that a LOT of them are in the 40 - 60 class!
Do you want to mail me your Islanders? Or, should I plan on picking them up?
Similar threads
