DFO IFM Plan 2021/22 For Review

[SpringVelocity]

Political or not Area 20 needs more DNA that is bottom line. Needs to be done.

 

[wavetamer]

I will say this again if DFO was making proper educated decisions based on data and or science the Fraser river would be void of gill nets. I don't believe they don't have enough data for area 20 when we could fish there were always some placing heads in the freezer. There isn't any one out there any more , its a shame . ITS LIKE SAYING OUR LITTLE KICKERS BOTHER THE WHALES, when we had a great solution about distancing our selves, its all optics.

 

[Derby]

So your blaming the guides for not putting in data and that's why were closed down ?? , that has nothing to do with it !!!, how do we give them data when were closed down most of the time. Even if they had all the data there still closing us down. DFO HAS TONS OF DATA of the SALMON MIGRATING up the FRASER RIVER but yet they ALLOW GILL NETS. There is no trust in the process to make a difference where educated decisions can be made, we give and give and what do we receive in return.
not even a kiss on the cheek for the screwing they are giving us. what they are asking us shouldn't have to be defendable , we should all want to be part of the solution .

We should be advising DFO if you want the data let us fish, at least hatchery. The Vancouver area has awesome data that supports a hatchery fishery , how is that working out for them, I feel for all the hard work and dedication all the volunteers have done but no one is listening. I hate to tell you but most have given up on this process which is a real disappointment.

So.. here we are agian in this annual convesation If you were part of last night SFAC meeting for your area..Which I wasnt but know what was going on there. What the 1st thing that would have caught my ears... When Martin Paish (The Chair of the SFAB) is Quoting 2009 DNA data & limited CWT numbers for your area..What does that tell u??? The area's that are starting to see these oppurtunies! There purposal are are fully supported by both up to date DNA samples & the CWT heads (hatchery clip fish_) period. To some it may seem to be just bread crumbs ! However its a good start & a whole lot bettter then where we were a couple years ago. Rome wasnt built in day folks & getting back fishing oppurtunies will require us to roll up our sleves put our collective heads together & do the hard work that is required.. Guides & Sporties a like can and should be involved.. its not hard any average person can do it? Its actually fun and always intersted in see what info comes back. Shaping your future fisheries is now in all your hands .. So either sit back pointing fingers & bitching about DFO ect or get the hell out of the way and be part of the solution.. like it or not this is the current reality.. period...

 

[wolf]

I asked many many many a time and have NEVER gotten an answer how much "data" do they need as the DNA I have and say from 2017/18 has more then enough info again almost 6200 bits to it, im not here to argue with you pointing out facts and an answer to my QUESTION , I can tell you one thing if they made a deal like the do with other groups in certain areas to "allow" us to fish then id be the first to step up and say YES ill do it.. I did DNA for years and years a only to everytime get more restrictions put on us . AND i tell you something I did over 100 samples one year with Rollie and in the meeting they told us only (wilf) said they only used about 50 or so of them??? Rollie and I both looked at each other and said WHAT as he submitted a whack and so did I , I even asked where is my data ...oh uuumm well umm sorry its all gone... and you expect us to trust them ??? its like a relationship if you keep getting beat up would you still stay?? and how can you get CWT when we cant KEEP FISH !!!!!!

And for another thing last year we were told NOT to filet fish as the 80 cm rule was in effect supposed to leave whole with head on .. alot of heads I KNOW for a fact were not turned in I did everyone of them FYI, as until i was told or saw on paper other wise NOT to filet fish I did it anyways so they could get there fucken "data" as I was prepared to fight it if I got nailed...maybe bring that up too!!!!!!! DFO and the idiot ways they run a fishery ...and BTW wilf thanks for allowing a commercial net fishery last year in the sooke river and basin...

 

[Whole in the Water]

I get the logic behind providing data for Area 20 and I support it. However, to make progress on this issue IMO the SFAB and DFO need to work together to commit to some kind of well reasoned plan of action (more then just DFO delaying tactics by always saying we need more studies) that hopefully can benefit both the fishers and the fish, when DFO has the data they need. Then DFO and the SFAB need to communicate the benefits this program (after consulting with Area 20 fishers).

The idea is to lay out some proposed management options if we have, or don't have the data needed. Right now DFO is just saying collect the data, give it to us, and trust us that somehow it will get better for Area 20. Many Area 20 fishers don't have that level of trust. So why not lay out some possible positive management outcomes for Area 20 if we have they data, and if we do get it, then DFO needs to stand by the positive outcomes proposed earlier. This can provide the positive re-enforcement and incentive for more fishers to collect the required data. If not enough data is collected, then Area 20 fishers make their own bed to lie in. I know doesn't sound like how things usually work currently, but we need to start trying some new ideas because what we have been doing sure as hell ain't working!

If we don't do something different the resistance in the fishing community will continue to exist. Why? Because many fishers simply do not trust DFO to make science based decisions over political ones. So to solve this problem with a lack of data there needs to be some trust built up between DFO and Area 20 fishers. Won't be easy, but will be worth it for the pubic fishery and more importantly the fish in the long run if done well. Might be pie in the sky, but it is worth trying. Just some thoughts on how we might move forward on this tricky issue.

 

[Saratoga]

Have to get data though C@R, in vancouver last summer where there is "no fishing for salmon" they were giving out permits for avid anglers to do DNA in that area but you are right there is Significantly less people who do C@R and therefore its gonna be a growing challenge to get that data.

Though you are right there are areas that have good data that will be remained close because of political reasons and to pass fish to first nations.

We only received the revised permits to sample Chinook DNA a few months after the closure for “no fishing for Chinook” was implemented. It took many many weeks to convince senior DFO decision makers that preventing the collection of data might not be a great idea. So there was quite an extended period of prime DNA data collection that didn’t happen in Vancouver last year. Collecting the DNA data is really the only option available to advance our position from a scientific basis. Clearly it doesn’t mean that science based decisions will always be made. Political leadership at DFO has clearly demonstrated they are quite willing to make decisions to avoid conflict and then try to re-interpret the data to support the decision they were planning to make anyway. That said, eventually, the data provides a basis to push back and challenge decisions. Without it, it’s hard to argue against and challenge politically driven decisions to drive change.

 

[wolf]

IF anyone ants to see the 2018 data please email me and ill gladly share it with you as it shows 6181 units once you spend a few hours looking at it you will see if they based it on "science" we would have a fishery whoever is running that Soos river system in the states is doing a great job

Thank you

 

[Derby]

I asked many many many a time and have NEVER gotten an answer how much "data" do they need as the DNA I have and say from 2017/18 has more then enough info again almost 6200 bits to it, im not here to argue with you pointing out facts and an answer to my QUESTION , I can tell you one thing if they made a deal like the do with other groups in certain areas to "allow" us to fish then id be the first to step up and say YES ill do it.. I did DNA for years and years a only to everytime get more restrictions put on us . AND i tell you something I did over 100 samples one year with Rollie and in the meeting they told us only (wilf) said they only used about 50 or so of them??? Rollie and I both looked at each other and said WHAT as he submitted a whack and so did I , I even asked where is my data ...oh uuumm well umm sorry its all gone... and you expect us to trust them ??? its like a relationship if you keep getting beat up would you still stay?? and how can you get CWT when we cant KEEP FISH !!!!!!

And for another thing last year we were told NOT to filet fish as the 80 cm rule was in effect supposed to leave whole with head on .. alot of heads I KNOW for a fact were not turned in I did everyone of them FYI, as until i was told or saw on paper other wise NOT to filet fish I did it anyways so they could get there fucken "data" as I was prepared to fight it if I got nailed...maybe bring that up too!!!!!!! DFO and the idiot ways they run a fishery ...and BTW wilf thanks for allowing a commercial net fishery last year in the sooke river and basin...

Happy to set up a conversation with Martin anytime you want it... just have your questions ready & be prepared to listen.. ..... DNA & CWT data is the only way thru this for area 20 period & that is a maybe depending on what the data shows... Do it or Don't do it that is your choice if Martin is using 2009 data and asking for more to help for DNA out area 20 there is a good reason for that....I dont no anything about your commercial fishery.. was it a FN terminal clean up fishery ?

 

[wolf]

Happy to set up a conversation with Martin anytime you want it... just have your questions ready & be prepared to listen..

Trust me i have had many a conversation with him and you know that...And if you read what I wrote I put EVERY hatchery head in last year so I did "do" my part ...

 

[wavetamer]

what a mess

 

[SpringVelocity]

I really wish the area 20 guys posting on here were on our call tonight for Area 17. Such a difference between areas. The DNA component became clear just when we started talking about the Chinook fishery. Having lots of stock compensation data is critical. Push back on it face closure or no case to back up your claims.

Anyways I will be taking my DNA data down there where I can on my south island trips. Every bit helps.

 

[Unreel]

I think the biggest issue is that most believe the govt has its plans already that are NOT based on science yet on politics and pleasing the fn. Even when proposals have been voted on and submitted to dfo that meet the target goals they just ignore it and go with what they were planning on doing anyway. The fact that their has been lots of dna and cwt data for the sog for years now and it gets ignored and more blanket restrictions get put in place just proves they are not listening to our user group.

 

[Derby]

what a mess

Best described as flogging a dead horse...

 

[wildmanyeah]

They would be hard pressed in area 20 to find area where stocks of consern are similar to that of area 17 at 0.2% of a percent.

they could not even get thrasher open because there was an extermly small less than 1% of stocks of concern. Spring Fraser 4.2 in June but perhaps that’s because they could not get the data down to location specific it was creel Ispacfic.They were even considering how MSF would increase effort and the possibility of release one of these unicorn stocks of concern.

not saying the DNA is not important it was obviously very important in getting the areas open In the proposal.

im just saying that the bar to open is basically having zero stocks of concern present and that’s going to be very difficult on some areas and time’s.

 

[wavetamer]

yep and that is why were in the position were in.

 

[pescador]

Being we are in the middle of a pandemic you’d think our government would show some mercy and reduce restrictions materially for one year and let families enjoy some time together on theirs boats fishing in their bubbles following COVID guidelines. Just one year with less restrictions when it’s so badly needed for our well being. It’s heartless of our elected officials

 

[Derby]

Trust me i have had many a conversation with him and you know that...And if you read what I wrote I put EVERY hatchery head in last year so I did "do" my part ...

First of all anytime someone says trust me .. Its usually someone trying to convince themselves of something..How many years have you guided & fish your Sooke area ??? Only last year for CWT heads. That being said great to hear that you are and hope that you and many other start doing so ever year ... its really not that hard to return the heads It gets rather tiresome seeing CWT heads being dump over the side and then have the same folks cry about fishery closers..Dam that DFO

 

[SpringVelocity]

Agree. The data needs to collected every year to see any kind of benefit at all. Trusting DFO or not if it isn't done on larger scale it will be really hard to get any opportunity at all. And yes you can sit there/say this is all political, but other areas will get these opportunities unfortunately that have better data. We have many that don't want us on the water period. If we have no current data how can we push back at all? Is Area 20 political? Of course it is as most of other areas. No one denies that, but sitting back and taking it are not going make things easier either. If they keep using 2009 data it's going to get a lot worse over time. Wolf I would take Derby on that advice reach out to Martin, and pull the pride aside. The past is the past, and time to move forward.

 

[scott craven]

Yeah but it's hard to turn in CWT heads when your area is closed for retention,
like it has been for the past 2 years

 

[SpringVelocity]

Yeah but it's hard to turn in CWT heads when your area is closed for retention,
like it has been for the past 2 years

While that may be true for turning heads in it isn't for DNA data collection. So that argument doesn't fly. Either does this statement that we need to retain fish just to do some DNA sampling. Area 20 isn't closed to fishing just non-retention. For example someone could easily do DNA this year while fishing for other species etc. SOG anglers do it all the time.

Be thankful your in Area 19. Your area is being considered because the data is current. Sorry to go on about this. Just bugs me to see these areas closed when they shouldn't be. Hope you get Oak Bay opened a bit Scott.