Fisheries and Oceans Canada makes improvement to recreational fisheries reporting in B.C.
- Thread starter wildmanyeah
- Start date
SerengetiGuide
Well-Known Member
When have they ever used data we give them to benefit us? When the data does they ignore it and screw us anyway. When it hurts us they use it as ammo. Fact.
SpringVelocity
Crew Member
Without data all of we would have gone non retention across board. Look we did get screwed no one denies that. But the data was used in some cases to save areas. I am not saying they didnt screw other areas that had the data saying there was no interception of Fraser. It is one of those evils. Don't do it and you have no leg to stand on. Do it and maybe find out you may have some stocks you were not aware of. Either way data is important in our fishery. If you dont think data was useful than how do think wcvi got that 1nm surfline.
searun
Well-Known Member
Completely agree. Without the DNA and Guide Log Book data there wouldn't have been the 1 nm corridor opening along the surf line from Area 123 to 127, and certainly there wouldn't have been retention fishing taking place in Barkley Sound, Nootka Sound and Quatsino Sound. If people somehow want to protest by not providing data, while an understandable way to vent your frustration, I think if we stop providing data we are really just hurting ourselves. No data, no fishing opportunity.
OldBlackDog
Well-Known Member
And yet the decisions made were totally political.
The decision to close was not done by any science but by political pressure.
The opening on the west coast was a bone thrown out to make it look like they cared.
Science is not going resolve this, politics is the only hope.
The decision to close was not done by any science but by political pressure.
The opening on the west coast was a bone thrown out to make it look like they cared.
Science is not going resolve this, politics is the only hope.
SpringVelocity
Crew Member
exactly
OldBlackDog
Well-Known Member
And yet you did have science, but here we are.
The competition, ( Green’s) make up their own and win.
Then as noted in MPA meetings use our information against us.
They play by their rules and win.
The game has changed and sportsfishermen are not prepared.
The competition, ( Green’s) make up their own and win.
Then as noted in MPA meetings use our information against us.
They play by their rules and win.
The game has changed and sportsfishermen are not prepared.
SpringVelocity
Crew Member
No you are there and we are here. Look we can go around in circles and play games online for hours. We need data.
A
Well that’s all fine and dandy but not a single fish from the stocks of concerned was ever caught in area 12 above Malcolm island.
.i.e. area 12-16 etc
That is hard data
Lots of creel and logbook data...tons
So not only is that area not allowed to be open
It’s also only 1 retention as of July 15...not two
It’s absolutely disgusting that that simple political decision has completely destroyed our local community and all the data is there so ya....it’s not working....for us at all.
Well that’s all fine and dandy but not a single fish from the stocks of concerned was ever caught in area 12 above Malcolm island.
.i.e. area 12-16 etc
That is hard data
Lots of creel and logbook data...tons
So not only is that area not allowed to be open
It’s also only 1 retention as of July 15...not two
It’s absolutely disgusting that that simple political decision has completely destroyed our local community and all the data is there so ya....it’s not working....for us at all.
wildmanyeah
Crew Member
I believe the one retention is to limit other stocks of concerns. Lots of different issues kinda being all merged together. SRKW (provide more abundance of Chinook and create sanctuary), Early Fraser Chinook protection (no retention), Then the 1 retention is to help with pressure on other Chinook stocks ( Skeena, Nass, and Fraser River origin Chinook salmon) that are doing poorly or to just limit the rec take in general.
If you have all the data to support your claim, then start making noise about it, Compile the data and share it with others.
Yes lots of its political but I beleive if you have data at the end of the day to support your claim, then hopefully one day it will help.
Last edited:
OldBlackDog
Well-Known Member
IronNogginWell-Known Member
Ms. Reid - DFO RDG Pacific Region:
Nice Form Letter Ms. Reid. However you did not address any of the topics or concerns outlined in my letter to the minister. From that I guess it is safe to infer that no-one read the letter I sent, and that you were simply directed to answer a set of email addresses who had submitted their own letters. The fact you chose to do so via a one-size-fits-all generic form letter says a lot about the level of concern this matter has within the Department.
You suggest that "The Department sought input from, and carefully considered advice and recommendations provided by, Indigenous peoples and all stakeholders, including commercial and recreational harvesters, environmental organizations, and the public. Advice gathered from consultations led DFO to modify the original fishery proposals." There was no real consultation in this matter. Your department knew prior to engaging with anyone the direction they who took a large number of these samples and trained others to do the same. Yet In effect, the Department did NOT base its' actions on science, but rather on politics. It is quite widely understood that you callously did so to cater to the demands of Fraser First Nations, in effect, paying their demanded blackmail at a grievous cost to anyone and everyone else going to take. DNA evidence from Area G Troll well indicates their May fishery impacts less than 1 % Canadian Origin stocks. I know this as fact, as I was the one who took a large number of these samples and trained others to do the same. Yet that information was tossed aside. Several recreational fishing areas can and did indicate much the same. Again, that information was tossed aside. In effect, the Department did NOT base its' actions on science, but rather on politics. It is quite widely understood that you callously did so to cater to the demands of Fraser First Nations, in effect, paying their demanded blackmail at a grievous cost to anyone and everyone else.
The effects these decisions have had are immense. Many shops are closing their doors. Restaurants, tackle shops, hotels, airlines and more are suffering directly due to your Department's incompetent handling of this matter. The impacts will be felt for years, and is a serious blow to the province's tourism industry. While guides and the fishing public have taken a large hit over this, perhaps the largest is being felt by the commercial troll sector. A sector which has worked diligently with the Department to avoid the stocks in question, and have well proven they do so. Your Department holds 17 million US which was earmarked as to "offset the hardships incurred when Area G Fishers are kept off the water." Yet you refuse to even consider expending any of it as it was explicitly designed to be? Shameful.
At this point, and contrary to your assertion that FN's will be held in check until 15 July, your Department has let no less than 19 openings specifically for FN's in the Fraser - targeting the most endangered runs of Chinook the Fraser has. Several of these were five days to a week in duration. And for most of those openings, the Department provided NO monitoring of those fisheries. Please to not try this smoke & mirrors tactic again. We all see right through it at this point.
In the WCVI area Area G was forced off of for April and May by Wilkinson's imposition of restrictions, a full fleet of FN trollers are working today. While you suggested the Area G restriction was due to "conservation concerns" it is downright flabbergasting those concerns literally vanished when the consideration came to the FN fishery in the exact same waters.
The final blow came yesterday, when Liberal MP's shut down the proposed study into the impacts your closures have imposed upon BC. I would hazard a guess this will cause them the loss of valuable seats in BC this October, and consider that just under these circumstances. My only regret in this matter is that you yourself, and other senior bureaucrats cannot also be held to the same level of account.
Simply shutting down fisheries will not have the desired effect of increasing endangered Fraser Chinook populations. There MUST be a dedicated program oriented towards predator reductions (seal & sea lion populations are out of control), habitat enhancements, and directed population enhancement programs. Without these, there is no point in the former. Yet your Department has not addressed any of these outstanding concerns to date beyond simply suggesting more studies. Do you ever plan on enacting such programs, or is the Department content to simply do the "easy thing" and continue shutting any but their preferred sector down?
In closing, you and your Department have made a large mistake in BC. That will help this country get shed of those politically responsible, mark my words. In the meantime, you might want to suggest to your boss that he wrap his mind around finding some way to offset the damage he has done to this province. FAR too many lives, families and entire Communities have been simply tossed aside as if they do not matter. As we all understand, had this occurred on the East Coast, reparations would have been swift and generous. The time to end the open discrimination against the west coast is now. I strongly suggest you get on with it.
Regards
Ms. Reid - DFO RDG Pacific Region:
Nice Form Letter Ms. Reid. However you did not address any of the topics or concerns outlined in my letter to the minister. From that I guess it is safe to infer that no-one read the letter I sent, and that you were simply directed to answer a set of email addresses who had submitted their own letters. The fact you chose to do so via a one-size-fits-all generic form letter says a lot about the level of concern this matter has within the Department.
You suggest that "The Department sought input from, and carefully considered advice and recommendations provided by, Indigenous peoples and all stakeholders, including commercial and recreational harvesters, environmental organizations, and the public. Advice gathered from consultations led DFO to modify the original fishery proposals." There was no real consultation in this matter. Your department knew prior to engaging with anyone the direction they who took a large number of these samples and trained others to do the same. Yet In effect, the Department did NOT base its' actions on science, but rather on politics. It is quite widely understood that you callously did so to cater to the demands of Fraser First Nations, in effect, paying their demanded blackmail at a grievous cost to anyone and everyone else going to take. DNA evidence from Area G Troll well indicates their May fishery impacts less than 1 % Canadian Origin stocks. I know this as fact, as I was the one who took a large number of these samples and trained others to do the same. Yet that information was tossed aside. Several recreational fishing areas can and did indicate much the same. Again, that information was tossed aside. In effect, the Department did NOT base its' actions on science, but rather on politics. It is quite widely understood that you callously did so to cater to the demands of Fraser First Nations, in effect, paying their demanded blackmail at a grievous cost to anyone and everyone else.
The effects these decisions have had are immense. Many shops are closing their doors. Restaurants, tackle shops, hotels, airlines and more are suffering directly due to your Department's incompetent handling of this matter. The impacts will be felt for years, and is a serious blow to the province's tourism industry. While guides and the fishing public have taken a large hit over this, perhaps the largest is being felt by the commercial troll sector. A sector which has worked diligently with the Department to avoid the stocks in question, and have well proven they do so. Your Department holds 17 million US which was earmarked as to "offset the hardships incurred when Area G Fishers are kept off the water." Yet you refuse to even consider expending any of it as it was explicitly designed to be? Shameful.
At this point, and contrary to your assertion that FN's will be held in check until 15 July, your Department has let no less than 19 openings specifically for FN's in the Fraser - targeting the most endangered runs of Chinook the Fraser has. Several of these were five days to a week in duration. And for most of those openings, the Department provided NO monitoring of those fisheries. Please to not try this smoke & mirrors tactic again. We all see right through it at this point.
In the WCVI area Area G was forced off of for April and May by Wilkinson's imposition of restrictions, a full fleet of FN trollers are working today. While you suggested the Area G restriction was due to "conservation concerns" it is downright flabbergasting those concerns literally vanished when the consideration came to the FN fishery in the exact same waters.
The final blow came yesterday, when Liberal MP's shut down the proposed study into the impacts your closures have imposed upon BC. I would hazard a guess this will cause them the loss of valuable seats in BC this October, and consider that just under these circumstances. My only regret in this matter is that you yourself, and other senior bureaucrats cannot also be held to the same level of account.
Simply shutting down fisheries will not have the desired effect of increasing endangered Fraser Chinook populations. There MUST be a dedicated program oriented towards predator reductions (seal & sea lion populations are out of control), habitat enhancements, and directed population enhancement programs. Without these, there is no point in the former. Yet your Department has not addressed any of these outstanding concerns to date beyond simply suggesting more studies. Do you ever plan on enacting such programs, or is the Department content to simply do the "easy thing" and continue shutting any but their preferred sector down?
In closing, you and your Department have made a large mistake in BC. That will help this country get shed of those politically responsible, mark my words. In the meantime, you might want to suggest to your boss that he wrap his mind around finding some way to offset the damage he has done to this province. FAR too many lives, families and entire Communities have been simply tossed aside as if they do not matter. As we all understand, had this occurred on the East Coast, reparations would have been swift and generous. The time to end the open discrimination against the west coast is now. I strongly suggest you get on with it.
Regards
Last edited:
Similar threads
