DFO Sportsfishing Survey?

[sammyslabber]

I received a dfo email requesting my participation in a saltwater fishing survey; does anyone have any opinions on its usefulness - judging their past/present track record they seemingly have ignored our sector's advice. Can I choose to ignore it or will it be similar - the Census survey; non - compliance is followed by repeated phone calls - pleading for your participation.

 

[sammyslabber]

Here's the copy letter:

1 November 2013<o></o>
Fisheriesand Oceans Canada (DFO) is responsible for estimating recreational fishingcatch. To estimate recreational catch in tidal waters, DFO is conductingan online survey of tidal water licence holders. You have been selectedto provide information on your fishing activity during the month of November2013. Youwere selected from those who purchased a tidal water fishing licence that isvalid during this period. If you do not fish during this period, you canrespond at the end of the survey period using a link to the survey from areminder email you will receive. The survey should take five to ten minutes formost respondents or somewhat longer for more active fishers. This emailrepresents an official request from Fisheries and Oceans Canada that youprovide information about your recreational harvesting activities. Yourparticipation is vital to DFO’s ability to estimate recreational catch. <o></o>
EKOS Research Associates,an independent consulting company, has been contracted by DFO to conduct thisonline survey, including contacting you by email. Your survey responseswill remain strictly confidential, and will be protected in accordance with theprovisions of the federal Privacy Act.<o></o>
You will receive a secondemail with the subject “Online Recreational Fishing Survey Details” fromEKOS Research Associates within a few days. That email will outline whatinformation will be requested and include a personalised link to the surveywebsite.<o></o>
Additional informationabout the survey is available at the following address (not a link to thesurvey):<o></o>
http://www.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/fm-gp/rec/irec/index-eng.html<o></o>
<o> </o>
Should you have furtherquestions or concerns regarding this survey, please do not hesitate to contact:<o></o>
SportCatchSurvey@dfo-mpo.gc.ca<o></o>
Or<o></o>
Derek Jansen <o></o>
EKOS ResearchAssociates <o></o>
Tel: (613) 235-7215 ext,112: <o></o>
e-mail: djansen@ekos.com <o></o>
Thank you in advance foryour participation in this important survey.<o></o>

 

[bigbruce]

I thought the current Halibut regulations are based pretty much entirely on advice from the SFAB - which presumably represents the recreational sector.
I would certainly participate in the survey if asked. Having the opportunity to provide input is always better than having no opportunity IMHO.

 

[GLG]

I got the same thing last year and it was easy to fill out.
Think mine was for October...
More data is better then less data.
Your choice...

 

[sammyslabber]

OK I'll move it from junk email - inbox.....see how my survey goes - then I'll move on to a study session...

 

[Sculpin]

I thought the current Halibut regulations are based pretty much entirely on advice from the SFAB - which presumably represents the recreational sector.
I would certainly participate in the survey if asked. Having the opportunity to provide input is always better than having no opportunity IMHO.

The current halibut regulations are based on what DFO rams down our throat. Period.

The SFAB tries their best to get the most out of options presented to them by the DFO. The DFO is in the drivers seat. Anyone blaming the whole SFAB process has never been to meetings or talked to the folks that go to battle for the rec fisher. I feel for them. Going toe to toe with commerial fisherman who have DFO in there back pockets.

Try doing this yourself. There are many more meetings than just the SFAC and SFAB meetings. The DFO is the one the focus should be on not the thankless souls that dedicate houndreds of hours a year to keep me and you fishing.

 

[bigbruce]

Sorry - guess I misunderstood all the earlier posts on the SFAB recommendations re-halibut.

 

[onefish]

Trollers were asked to fill out log books, scale samples etc etc etc. All the information was used for was to close areas and access. I would be very reluctant to participate if I was you.

 

[Whole in the Water]

Trollers were asked to fill out log books, scale samples etc etc etc. All the information was used for was to close areas and access. I would be very reluctant to participate if I was you.

One of the major issues used to hammer rec fishers, especially on Southern Vancouver Island (where we face the most regs. on salmon fishing) is that DFO does not have enough recent, accurate data to base their so called 'management' decisions on so they keep using the same old flawed, out of date data and keep extrapolating it until it bears little resemblance to reality. As Rec fishers we need to provide DFO with more accurate, up to date data to show them that their projections and subsequent regs. are flawed. If we don't they will use the same old data over and over, as they don't have the budget or the manpower to collect new data. If we want things to change we need to start providing better data so we can hope for better management decisions in the long run. I know that DFO has a poor track record, but with all their cutbacks things will just get worse if we don't start providing them with some newer, more accurate data and then work with them and if need be, demand better management decisions and regs. based on more accurate data (not just political whims) and hold them more accountable. Sticking our heads in the sand and refusing to cooperate by not providing data will just give us more of what we have gotten so far - unsound, management decisions and regs. that cause more problems then they are supposed to solve.. My thoughts on the matter.

 

[fish4all]

One of the major issues used to hammer rec fishers, especially on Southern Vancouver Island (where we face the most regs. on salmon fishing) is that DFO does not have enough recent, accurate data to base their so called 'management' decisions on so they keep using the same old flawed, out of date data and keep extrapolating it until it bears little resemblance to reality. As Rec fishers we need to provide DFO with more accurate, up to date data to show them that their projections and subsequent regs. are flawed. If we don't they will use the same old data over and over, as they don't have the budget or the manpower to collect new data. If we want things to change we need to start providing better data so we can hope for better management decisions in the long run. I know that DFO has a poor track record, but with all their cutbacks things will just get worse if we don't start providing them with some newer, more accurate data and then work with them and if need be, demand better management decisions and regs. based on more accurate data (not just political whims) and hold them more accountable. Sticking our heads in the sand and refusing to cooperate by not providing data will just give us more of what we have gotten so far - unsound, management decisions and regs. that cause more problems then they are supposed to solve.. My thoughts on the matter.

Bang on. They need all the help they can get.

 

[wolf]

Well I can personally tell you ive sat in many of these "meetings" done the math with and without them and have discussed VERY HARD the flaws only to be met with looks and disrespect, i personally hold my cards tighter than ever near them as they dont really want to listen it "appears" but do what you think is best. in your personal views, with ALL the cutbacks and more pending they really dont have a lot of options...

Good luck Wolf

 

[scott craven]

DFO don't make good use of information provided by the recreational sector.
I have my reservations about providing data that may lead to even more restrictions in the future.

 

[pescador]

I've heard the conspiracy theories. They may or may not be true. The fact is that the DFO needs more empirical data to make informed decisions. In the absence of it, they will decide based on their theoretical models. With it, at least there is a possibility it could be used for our benefit. Its evidence and they will be required to retain it. I personally believe it’s in our best interest to respond any time I get a question from DFO/Creel.

 

[scott craven]

A simple fix to the whole data model,
all sport fishing licenses to be turned in for review at the end of each season.
if an angler fails to submit, his on line ordering is blocked until he does so.
If they have enough staff to deal with surveys, there should be enough to
enter the license data and get a real and accurate model.

 

[bigbruce]

A simple fix to the whole data model,
all sport fishing licenses to be turned in for review at the end of each season.
if an angler fails to submit, his on line ordering is blocked until he does so.
If they have enough staff to deal with surveys, there should be enough to
enter the license data and get a real and accurate model.

That essentially is what the survey is doing - but on a sample basis, which is much easier to analyze, rather than dealing with the results from all fishers. As long as the sample size is statistically valid, the results should also be valid within the statistical sampling parameters.

 

[scott craven]

That essentially is what the survey is doing - but on a sample basis, which is much easier to analyze, rather than dealing with the results from all fishers. As long as the sample size is statistically valid, the results should also be valid within the statistical sampling parameters.

They are basically trying to obtain the same data twice.
Let them utilize the true data from the license, rather than a random survey
where there is no control over information provided.

 

[Gunsmith]

When you think of it, confirmed data such as a license return would be hard to cook or alter and the DFO would not want it.

 

[Whole in the Water]

We have asked them to use the data from returned licences for several years and they say that they would like to but don't have the staff resources (due to continual cutbacks) to process the huge amount of data that this would create. So they do the survey method as in their opinion it provides statistically accurate data without all the time/effort to crunch huge amounts of data from all the returned licences. This is why they do the survey. So if you want to provide more accurate and up to date info to help manage our fisheries then fill out the survey.

 

[scott craven]

Hmmm, take the time and put in the effort for an accurate model, or send out a survey hoping
for participation and truthful data ???
I know which one i would choose.

 

[Gunsmith]

I always try to help out when asked. Sitting here in Alberta we do not get asked for any input. I was not able to make it to salt water this year and hope to next year. I have a fair chunk of coin invested in just being able to enjoy what you have at your doorstep. I read avidly all that is being done about protecting this resource and support it. Sometimes it is difficult not to be cynical, hope you all bear with me in these times of cynicism.