Letter to Gordon Campbell(nets on rivers)

[Gooey Bob]

Actually, when it comes to the Cowichan, I believe that River Hunter has it right. As part of the local SFAB here in Duncan, I had the opportunity to meet with Cowichan Tribes fishery managers as part of the marginally successful effort to get a Coho opening on the Cowichan this past Autumn. (Hey, I guess 3 weeks is better than nothing!)DFO had more to do with the screw ups associated with that opening than Cowichan Tribes, but thats another story.

The people I met with were reasonable, well informed and well educated fish managers who agreed that they certainly had more in common with the recreational fishery than differences. Their goal was simply to provide access for their people to the fish resources of the river, and to ensure that there were fish for them to pursue in the future. Kind of like us, I found out.

Cowichan Tribes fisheries, from what I understand, does not endorse the illegal netting of Steelhead, any more than the SFAB or Steelhead Society endorses the illegal use of bait (even Roe Bags!)in bait banned streams.

The quote I most remember from the head of their fish management team went something like this: "we aren't going anywhere, and neither are you, so I guess the sooner we learn to share the river and its fish the better".

The members of Cowichan Tribes who choose to put gill nets in the river for steelehad are poachers, plain and simple. I beleive that the fishery managers from Cowichan Tribes like them abut as much as we do.

As the SFAB does not have official responsibilities to deal with Steelhead, perhaps the Drift Fishers Assoc or Steelhead Society, or both, should meet with Cowichan Tribes in a reasonable manner to try and see what can be done.

If you do get a chance to meet with them, I do know that the Cowichan Tribes people will tell you about the garbage they find along the river, the verbal abuse and disrespect their fishery guardians are shown by drift boat and bank anglers alike and will probably ask you what can be done about it.

I beleive thats the best approach. If Cowichan Tribes are the problem, and our Government Officials won't do anything about the problem, then meet with Cowichan Tribes and see what you can do.

It worked with Coho.

Bob.

 

[Gooey Bob]

Corky:

The escapement of Coho in the Cowichan is, from what I know, estimated by a combination of smolt production, fence counts, in river observation by snorkelers, and anecdotal information provided by people who have a history of spending a lot of time on the river.

As to what amount of Coho is required to trigger an opening, you'd have to ask the stock assesment people at DFO that question. One way to get in touch with them is to attend a local SFAB meeting - they're open to everyone with a current fishing license.

Once stock assessment determines there's enough fish to warrant a retention fishery, its up to DFO managers with advice from bodies like the SFAB to figure out how the opening would take place. As I am not a trained biologist, I don't feel its my place to second guess the stock assessment guys. If they tell us its safe to fish, then I take them for their word.

Allong that line though, one thing that is kind of irritating to me is how the holier than thou C&R types tend to confuse personal ethics with science. It appears that a significant portion of the angling public, including myself, actually like to eat some of the fish they catch and as long as its done responsibly what on earth is the problem? No one forces the C&R purists to kill fish, do they? As long as the runs can take it, allowing a few people to keep fish for dinner is an important part of the angling experience in my opinion. In my opinion, its up to the guys who do this for a living to determine if the run can take a harvest, not a bunch of armchair biologists like you find on every river bank, especially in fly only portions of the river...

Anyone who spent any time on the Cowichan this fall had to notice that the abundance was way up over previous years. The couple of hundred fish that were harvested by local anglers was deemed insignificant as far as the run was concerned from what I've been told.

As far as allowing the Cowichan Tribes access to 500 late run Coho that impacted on early timing steelhead, this is the first I've heard of it. In fact, what I was told,is the reason the recreational retention fishery had to close on Dec. 1st was to protect late run Coho. Sounds kind of contradictory but I cant confirm the Cowichan Tribes did or didn't net.

As far as the guys at steelhed recovery are concened I really can't feel to bad for them. The folks in provincial fisheries are completely unwilling to engage in any kind of meaningful public consultation about anything, but are willing to whine about not being consulted on a issue like this. Kind of arrogant if you ask me.

Thats it. Keep your gear in the water...

Gooey.