scott craven
Well-Known Member
Agree 100% also, Foggy nailed it.
the voodoo science that has baffled us doesn't work.
DFO can't determine which routes these fish will take.
New chinook regs for early fraser river run!!!
- Thread starter sammyslabber
- Start date
Agree 100% also, Foggy nailed it.
the voodoo science that has baffled us doesn't work.
DFO can't determine which routes these fish will take.
fish stalker
Active Member
You know I think the DFO is a lot more organized then we give them credit for. They are 'researching' and 'doing studies' to exactly the point were they just get the right amount of info (or 'lack of info') they need to make the deceptions/decisions they want to make.
Theb55
Active Member
This is frustrating. We tend to hand out here, critiquing DFO and doing little else when we should be meeting and developing a strategy. PM Harper's favorite tactic is to divide and conquer. As long as we hang out here, DFO will proceed. We must amalgamate, match power with power! Remember the saying: The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.
GLG
Well-Known Member
My whole point is show us the data to support your argument.
Make your case and I will be there to support you.
We have CWT and DNA samples for the whole coast over many years.
Get after DFO as this is your area and you should be the ones to take care of it.
Just like many of us in other areas watch out for our rivers and runs.
Do I think it's fair how you guys have slots when others do not?
Well it depends if it can be proven that others are having an effect on your run.
If you guy's have the evidence that say's area 17 is taking 10% then that's a case that should be looked at.
Do the area g trollers take 10% of the early timed 4-2 and 5-2 Fraser Springs?
Make your case so that we can help you and your run.
SFAB has a working group for Chinook and Coho and I think Jeremy Maynard is on it.
Has anyone asked him for info and if so what is the working groups position.
Help us help you with your effort to help conserve these fish.
Like I said before, I don't know your area or your runs but I can't support closures without facts.
GLG
Make your case and I will be there to support you.
We have CWT and DNA samples for the whole coast over many years.
Get after DFO as this is your area and you should be the ones to take care of it.
Just like many of us in other areas watch out for our rivers and runs.
Do I think it's fair how you guys have slots when others do not?
Well it depends if it can be proven that others are having an effect on your run.
If you guy's have the evidence that say's area 17 is taking 10% then that's a case that should be looked at.
Do the area g trollers take 10% of the early timed 4-2 and 5-2 Fraser Springs?
Make your case so that we can help you and your run.
SFAB has a working group for Chinook and Coho and I think Jeremy Maynard is on it.
Has anyone asked him for info and if so what is the working groups position.
Help us help you with your effort to help conserve these fish.
Like I said before, I don't know your area or your runs but I can't support closures without facts.
GLG
Last edited by a moderator:
Dennis.t
Active Member
Commercial Trollers taking 50,000 pcs when sports guys are restricted is ridiculous. What a shame!
Dave S
Active Member
"Your case" "Your run".......... the fraser chinook are not our case or our run. Prove to us that these fish don't go along ecvi. Prove to us that these fish are in trouble because of sport harvest. It's very obvious why your defensive. Just as obvious is our defense that we shouldn't be the only area to take a hit, if a hit is needed. Maybe if we approach these battles as a group, we'd be stronger in our fight.
scott craven
Well-Known Member
I think the argument is not which area is taking the fish,as they are everywhere...
instead why south island is being penalized
more than any other.
GLG
Well-Known Member
Have any of you guys looked at the salmon sport head recover program letters that are sent to you when you turn in a clipped fish head? I know it's not the best evidence to prove one way or another but I will give you the data that was sent to me on the 2009 report.
Georgia Strait South
(17-19,26,29)
May 100% Puget Sound fish
June 100% Georgia Strait fish
July 67% Georgia Strait - 33% Puget Sound fish
JDF
(19-20)
May 20% upper Fraser watershed - 60% Puget Sound - 20% Lower Columbia fish
June 5% lower Fraser watershed - 14% upper Fraser watershed - 55% Puget Sound - 9% Lower Columbia - 14% Upper Columbia.
So that's what I have (and most guy's on this site have if they bother to read) for evidence.
You tell me should we be restricting area Georgia Strait South (17-19,26,29) based on this data?
Like I said get your data together and present a case.
You will find that most on this site will listen if you data is sound.
Ask me to prove your case is absurd as you are the ones bring forward your concerns.
GLG
Georgia Strait South
(17-19,26,29)
May 100% Puget Sound fish
June 100% Georgia Strait fish
July 67% Georgia Strait - 33% Puget Sound fish
JDF
(19-20)
May 20% upper Fraser watershed - 60% Puget Sound - 20% Lower Columbia fish
June 5% lower Fraser watershed - 14% upper Fraser watershed - 55% Puget Sound - 9% Lower Columbia - 14% Upper Columbia.
So that's what I have (and most guy's on this site have if they bother to read) for evidence.
You tell me should we be restricting area Georgia Strait South (17-19,26,29) based on this data?
Like I said get your data together and present a case.
You will find that most on this site will listen if you data is sound.
Ask me to prove your case is absurd as you are the ones bring forward your concerns.
GLG
fogged in
Well-Known Member
Hello GLG
Nice to see you have so much faith in DFO’s management abilities despite their dismal failures.
You are right when you say “I know it's not the best evidence to prove one way or another”
But then you go on to say you have proven your case in your support of DFO’s decision to leave the adjacent areas to the closed area’s open.
So would you say as an example years ago that when they closed Cowichan Bay from Separation Point to Cherry Point, the Chinook that many caught fish right along the border of that closure were not Cowichan Bay Chinook?
Look at the closure map. PART of area’s 29-4 and 29-5 are CLOSED (those area’s cover Galiano and Valdes)
This is the area many of these Chinook are being caught and most well off shore.
I can’t remember the last time I heard of anyone catching a clipped WILD FRASER RIVER Chinook (poor joke)
Thanks for offering your opinion on this subject GLG, but I for one disagree!
AND I for one have VERY LITTLE FAITH IN DFO’S CHINOOK MANAGEMENT model from which they make all these brilliant decisions.
GLG
Well-Known Member
Salmon Sport Head Recovery Program Report 2008
Georgia Strait South
(17-19,26,29)
May 57% Georgia Strait - 43% Lower Fraser watershed fish
June 50% Georgia Strait - 50% Puget Sound fish
July 50% Georgia Strait - 50% Puget Sound fish
JDF
(19-20)
May 100% Puget Sound
June 30% upper Fraser watershed - 30% lower Fraser watershed - 30% Puget Sound - 10% Upper Columbia.
July 10% Georgia Strait - 5% lower Fraser watershed - 14% upper Fraser watershed - 52% Puget Sound - 10% Upper Columbia - 10% lower Columbia
foggedin
So I found data from a 2008 report and posted it here.
I'm not trying to press for a closure or an opening.
I'm trying to get you to give us the facts so we can make an informed decision.
Someone posted a link to PSF CWT info, have you looked at the data?
Have you posted your results?
No you point here and you point there but no data to backup your view.
I get it, you have been here a long time and your feelings about where the fish are golden.
Sorry but some of us need facts before we jump on your band wagon.
This is not the first time this issue has come up on this forum.
Wolf has posted data before and it would be nice to get that as part of this thread.
If I recall he posted that only 5% of the run is taken by JDF fishermen.
Again .... get us some numbers so we can see what is going on.
Don't post up a picture and claim it's fish that are from a ET Fraser 4-2 and 5-2
That's just silly.
GLG
Georgia Strait South
(17-19,26,29)
May 57% Georgia Strait - 43% Lower Fraser watershed fish
June 50% Georgia Strait - 50% Puget Sound fish
July 50% Georgia Strait - 50% Puget Sound fish
JDF
(19-20)
May 100% Puget Sound
June 30% upper Fraser watershed - 30% lower Fraser watershed - 30% Puget Sound - 10% Upper Columbia.
July 10% Georgia Strait - 5% lower Fraser watershed - 14% upper Fraser watershed - 52% Puget Sound - 10% Upper Columbia - 10% lower Columbia
foggedin
So I found data from a 2008 report and posted it here.
I'm not trying to press for a closure or an opening.
I'm trying to get you to give us the facts so we can make an informed decision.
Someone posted a link to PSF CWT info, have you looked at the data?
Have you posted your results?
No you point here and you point there but no data to backup your view.
I get it, you have been here a long time and your feelings about where the fish are golden.
Sorry but some of us need facts before we jump on your band wagon.
This is not the first time this issue has come up on this forum.
Wolf has posted data before and it would be nice to get that as part of this thread.
If I recall he posted that only 5% of the run is taken by JDF fishermen.
Again .... get us some numbers so we can see what is going on.
Don't post up a picture and claim it's fish that are from a ET Fraser 4-2 and 5-2
That's just silly.
GLG
fish stalker
Active Member
also mabey how many actual heads made up those survey numbers.
It's Obvious the F/N's don't give a Damn of their future fishery ......... No government official has the balls to stand up to the abuse and waste that continues throughout the entire coast. Pt. Alberni F/N sockeye dumps of rotting flesh are just a prime example. What a JOKE !
HT
Continue hammering on the Sprortfisher DFO, ......... see ya to tourism and the thousands of jobs and family that depend on it. These Spring and Hally restrictions are an absolute FARSE !
HT
Continue hammering on the Sprortfisher DFO, ......... see ya to tourism and the thousands of jobs and family that depend on it. These Spring and Hally restrictions are an absolute FARSE !
GLG
Well-Known Member
Thanks fish stalker, I could not agree more as we don't have context to those numbers.
Could be 2 heads or it could be 200 heads, we don't know.
Thanks Steelheader1 for your info and I only posted what was on the Salmon Sport Head Recovery Program Report.
It only has 2 sets of data for the Fraser, it's weak I know.
My whole point is lets get some data so we can see whats going on.
Nobody has put forth anything that we can use to make decisions.
Except the info that the whites are not the stock of concern.
Should we have a C&R for May and June around the whole Island to protect ET Fraser 4-2 and 5-2?
I'm all for it IF it can be shown, with facts, that it would do some good.
Are poachers in the rivers and ocean doing the most harm?
I would not doubt that but we better be sure that it's poaching as I don't what to paint innocent fishermen with that brush.
How many people live along the Fraser?
Is there not someone over there that has answers?
I'm suggesting that we take care of our rivers that we are close to.
I'm doing my part around my area as many of my friends and neighbors are doing also.
We fight the battles here and where ever our fish travel.
Currently that means fish feedlots and oil pipelines for me and my friends
I don't think someone should just claim harm and not put forth any real data to support it.
Yup I mean you foggedin. Do your homework and get back to us.
Asking me to do your homework is absurd.
GLG
Could be 2 heads or it could be 200 heads, we don't know.
Thanks Steelheader1 for your info and I only posted what was on the Salmon Sport Head Recovery Program Report.
It only has 2 sets of data for the Fraser, it's weak I know.
My whole point is lets get some data so we can see whats going on.
Nobody has put forth anything that we can use to make decisions.
Except the info that the whites are not the stock of concern.
Should we have a C&R for May and June around the whole Island to protect ET Fraser 4-2 and 5-2?
I'm all for it IF it can be shown, with facts, that it would do some good.
Are poachers in the rivers and ocean doing the most harm?
I would not doubt that but we better be sure that it's poaching as I don't what to paint innocent fishermen with that brush.
How many people live along the Fraser?
Is there not someone over there that has answers?
I'm suggesting that we take care of our rivers that we are close to.
I'm doing my part around my area as many of my friends and neighbors are doing also.
We fight the battles here and where ever our fish travel.
Currently that means fish feedlots and oil pipelines for me and my friends
I don't think someone should just claim harm and not put forth any real data to support it.
Yup I mean you foggedin. Do your homework and get back to us.
Asking me to do your homework is absurd.
GLG
ChoveyRoller
Member
Great article in the TC opinion sec today Scott!
scott craven
Well-Known Member
Thanks Chovey, thought it should be mentioned so people are aware of the frustration we face.
GLG
Well-Known Member
SH1 .... No I meant poachers.
Any country or any colour makes no difference to me.
As an example.
Remember a few years back when guy's from China were sending boats out with 40 km. long drift nets.
http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/media/npress-communique/2008/hq-ac10-eng.htm
Added another link
http://www.rcaf-arc.forces.gc.ca/19w-19e/nr-sp/index-eng.asp?id=4391
Some 5-2 are OK....See I don't know that much about your area, I thought it was all ET Fraser 4-2 and 5-2
I have a keen interest in Coho and have been keeping up with issues around that in my area.
Fraser Chinooks .... well I'm not up to speed except the white and the red.
GLG
Any country or any colour makes no difference to me.
As an example.
Remember a few years back when guy's from China were sending boats out with 40 km. long drift nets.
http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/media/npress-communique/2008/hq-ac10-eng.htm
Added another link
http://www.rcaf-arc.forces.gc.ca/19w-19e/nr-sp/index-eng.asp?id=4391
Some 5-2 are OK....See I don't know that much about your area, I thought it was all ET Fraser 4-2 and 5-2
I have a keen interest in Coho and have been keeping up with issues around that in my area.
Fraser Chinooks .... well I'm not up to speed except the white and the red.
GLG
Last edited by a moderator:
Dave S
Active Member
GLG, the problem with this whole situation is there is no data to put forward. Going off of the % from the Salmon Head Recovery Program is bollucks. We all know how accurate those numbers actually are, and really how many 4-2 and 5-2 wild chinooks are clipped? NONE! So all we are saying over here on the jdf is that if there are reductions in harvest needed to protect the run, then reduce in all areas that these fish will likely be found. We are under slot restrictions now to protect these fish, what more can we do. I think they need to look elsewhere for reductions. Whether it is ECVI sport, Commercial trollers, FN, etc. But the JDF sport is doing it's part to save these runs, so ease up on the "prove it" or "show me data" ****.
Charlie
Well-Known Member
I for one - would certainly be asking for “prove it” and “data”; however, some might be asking the wrong ones to do the “prove it” or “show me data”? The country of Canada (DFO) should be the ones proving and/or showing data, before closing down a fishery! They need to start doing their damn job!
There IS data! There IS also data that DFO can obtain and collect. Simply put… if it is not required, the government of Canada (DFO) is not going to do anything for or to protect the Pacific wild salmon. Canada has made that quite clear, they are NOT going to spend the time or money - as there is no value in British Columbia Pacific salmon. DFO really is dividing the fishery between the sectors. If they allowed the government of Canada will allow the British Columbia’s entire Pacific salmon to go extent! The Pacific salmon IS in Harper’s way!
The CWT programs is actually accurate. There is “current data” for the Nicola 4-2. There is CWT anywhere from SEAK to the Oregon coast. Be careful what some are asking for in the “then reduce in all areas” as that would mean the same slot limit for all Chinook fishing in Canada? FYI… if you check, you will find the majority of Nicola 4-2 are taken by commercial fleet off QCI and the FN in the river itself. Good luck on that! As what is left of the commercial fleet will never be shut down or closed. They actually target U.S. Chinook and that is the only way the government of Canada can “get their share” of our U.S. Chinook. The government of Canada does NOT have the authority to do much of anything with a “non treaty” Indian (AKA First Nations). So, just for clarification DFO already knows where and when those Nicola 4-2 migrate and when they are caught and by who, whether it be commercial, sport, and FN it is - 100% POLITCAL!
There is actually quite a lot of “old data” on the other 5-2 stocks. The data is from before Canada stopped their CWT program on those fish – would have to look but believe that was in 2005, if memory serves correct? That data can still provide valid information, as historically Chinook follow the same migration routes year after year, unless there is an environmental change. The lack of current data is not the sport fishermen problem, it is with DFO, as they choose to stop the CWT. It was deemed there wasn’t a need; therefore you are now paying for THEIR mistake - no “current” “CWT” data. DFO is now simply launching a PR program (grasping for straws) to cover-up their lack of doing anything and their negligence of a problem they (and most of us others) have known existing for years. Canada has NO intention of spending time and money on protecting British Columbia Pacific salmon – there it has no GDP value to Canada. IMHO that is also - 100% POLITICAL!
Per the Pacific Salmon Treaty, DFO is required to provide CWT information to ‘The Regional Mark Processing Center (RMPC)’ and the public has access. ALL CWT information in the data bank can be found here: http://www.rmpc.org/
Personally, I’d be asking to see the current data on their “genetic identification” and the results of ALL that data already collected. If they say they don’t have it – I be saying then they need to go “fishing” and getting some valid data before closing anything to any sector! DFO just wants to shut down the sector that will create the least amount of “heat” and trouble for them, without spending time and money on something that has NO VALUE. Sorry, with just a couple of newspaper headlines about conservation, that sector would be none other than the “sport fishery”! It really is about dividing a fishery that they will manage to extinction and is - 100% POLITICAL!
If you don’t think they can (or already have) the information read this, it is available:
Working with fishermen on the water, Scott and fellow researchers analyze scale and fin clip samples gathered by commercial fishermen from the salmon they catch. The genetic material in these samples tells the team which river or stream the salmon originated from, and where they are returning in an effort to spawn the next generation of wild salmon.
The Ocean Genetics Project is merging at-sea spatial information with genetic identification and satellite imagery. The collaboration is investigating the relationship between fish movement, environmental conditions, and fishing effort.
There is limited information about wild fish in the ocean, and specifically for Chinook salmon. The main units of information are coded-wire-tagged hatchery fish, in which a small wire has been placed in the snout. This process estimates catch rates, and uses tag groups as proxies for wild stocks. Yet, as weak stocks of salmon continue to limit fishing, and require care to get them on a positive population trajectory, better information is needed about wild fish in both fresh water and salt water.
Let me be clear here – there are a lot of Chinook salmon in the ocean, but the mixing of weak stocks and strong stocks is a vexing problem, and a general trend is continued downward pressure on harvest. We need innovation and different ways of doing business if we are going to maintain critical activities like commercial harvest in the era of listed populations. The Ocean Genetics Project is a means of getting higher resolution information about wild fish at sea and also can be used as a model for improving fishery information. This project is also a means to imagine a different future where managers have information streaming at them about environmental conditions, stock distributions and harvest of wild Chinook.
During the catastrophic collapse of the Oregon and California Chinook fisheries in 2005 and 2006, not surprisingly, there was new motivation to understand stock distribution patterns and avert these large-scale fishery closures. Now remember, Washington had an open fishery those years. The more refined location information is, the better off we are. Over the last few years, a remarkable collaboration has developed among commercial trollers in California, Oregon, and Washington, the research staff in those states, and fishery managers to protect stocks, sustain harvest and improve economic opportunities.
As trollers go to sea, they run a GPS, and when they catch a fish they make a waypoint. The waypoint is written on a coin envelope in which a tiny fin clip is placed – a waypoint and fin clip for each fish. When the troller returns to port, the location data is downloaded and envelopes are mailed to the genetics lab. In the lab each fish is genotyped and its genotype is compared to a large reference database that contains hundreds of known collections. This process takes a few hours, and the comparison allows us to identify each troll-caught fish to its location of origin. The real beauty here is the linked waypoint, which allows the merger of many streams of information. We know when a fish was caught, where it was caught, its stock, along with overlaid satellite (sea surface temperature, productivity) and buoy (current, wind) information. When expanded out along the coast, you see when stocks show up, the effort it takes to catch them, and associated environmental data.
The whole article is here:
http://fnonlinenews.blogspot.com/2011/06/genetic-markers.html
So, I guess there just might already be data available, and/or could be implemented if DFO really wanted? But again – why would Canada want to support anything THEY have determined has “NO” value?
Which, it will be interesting when the current Pacific Salmon Treaty comes up for renewal. I can already see Canada asking for another $100 million (they already have received over $200 million) for the interception of Canadian salmon. The U.S. response is going to be, what Canadian Pacific salmon – they are extinct? Yep, another Salmon War in the making!
Concerning the CWT programs, it usually, takes about 60,000 CWT fish needed in a coded-wire tag group in order to get enough adults back for meaningful results.
http://www.fws.gov/lsnakecomplan/Re...Idaho FRO-Project Reports/FINCLIP.Kooskia.pdf
Concerning white-fleshed comments, the Fraser River by far produces the most white and marble-fleshed Chinook; however, just because it isn’t red doesn’t mean it is Fraser. Some of those could be both Columbia and/or Puget Sound fish. If it has the adipose fin that doesn’t mean it is not marked or isn’t hatchery. Less than 40% of Columbia hatchery are marked, leaving that 60% hatchery unmarked - that is a whole lot of Chinook. Our Puget Sound hatchery Chinook are 100% marked and has been for several years; however not all have the adipose removed. For example, the White River Chinook will have the adipose and will be missing a ventral fin.
http://nwifc.org/2012/03/puyallup-tribe-helps-spring-chinook-program-continue/
FYI… Both wild and hatcher can be marked and identified all sorts of ways: Adipose, Adipose Left Ventral, Adipose Right Ventral, Right Ventral Only, Left Ventral Only, Anal, No Clip with CWT, Left Maxillary, Right Maxillary, Left Pectoral, Anterior, Right Pectoral, Anterior, Lower Caudal, Upper Caudal, Dorsal. So turn those head in! Just for the record, some ESA wild salmon are caught on the out migration and they will usually be marked by the removal of a ventral fin! If you see ANY red or white-fleshed salmon missing a ventral fin, it is ESA – LET IT GO!
There IS data! There IS also data that DFO can obtain and collect. Simply put… if it is not required, the government of Canada (DFO) is not going to do anything for or to protect the Pacific wild salmon. Canada has made that quite clear, they are NOT going to spend the time or money - as there is no value in British Columbia Pacific salmon. DFO really is dividing the fishery between the sectors. If they allowed the government of Canada will allow the British Columbia’s entire Pacific salmon to go extent! The Pacific salmon IS in Harper’s way!
The CWT programs is actually accurate. There is “current data” for the Nicola 4-2. There is CWT anywhere from SEAK to the Oregon coast. Be careful what some are asking for in the “then reduce in all areas” as that would mean the same slot limit for all Chinook fishing in Canada? FYI… if you check, you will find the majority of Nicola 4-2 are taken by commercial fleet off QCI and the FN in the river itself. Good luck on that! As what is left of the commercial fleet will never be shut down or closed. They actually target U.S. Chinook and that is the only way the government of Canada can “get their share” of our U.S. Chinook. The government of Canada does NOT have the authority to do much of anything with a “non treaty” Indian (AKA First Nations). So, just for clarification DFO already knows where and when those Nicola 4-2 migrate and when they are caught and by who, whether it be commercial, sport, and FN it is - 100% POLITCAL!
There is actually quite a lot of “old data” on the other 5-2 stocks. The data is from before Canada stopped their CWT program on those fish – would have to look but believe that was in 2005, if memory serves correct? That data can still provide valid information, as historically Chinook follow the same migration routes year after year, unless there is an environmental change. The lack of current data is not the sport fishermen problem, it is with DFO, as they choose to stop the CWT. It was deemed there wasn’t a need; therefore you are now paying for THEIR mistake - no “current” “CWT” data. DFO is now simply launching a PR program (grasping for straws) to cover-up their lack of doing anything and their negligence of a problem they (and most of us others) have known existing for years. Canada has NO intention of spending time and money on protecting British Columbia Pacific salmon – there it has no GDP value to Canada. IMHO that is also - 100% POLITICAL!
Per the Pacific Salmon Treaty, DFO is required to provide CWT information to ‘The Regional Mark Processing Center (RMPC)’ and the public has access. ALL CWT information in the data bank can be found here: http://www.rmpc.org/
Personally, I’d be asking to see the current data on their “genetic identification” and the results of ALL that data already collected. If they say they don’t have it – I be saying then they need to go “fishing” and getting some valid data before closing anything to any sector! DFO just wants to shut down the sector that will create the least amount of “heat” and trouble for them, without spending time and money on something that has NO VALUE. Sorry, with just a couple of newspaper headlines about conservation, that sector would be none other than the “sport fishery”! It really is about dividing a fishery that they will manage to extinction and is - 100% POLITICAL!
If you don’t think they can (or already have) the information read this, it is available:
Working with fishermen on the water, Scott and fellow researchers analyze scale and fin clip samples gathered by commercial fishermen from the salmon they catch. The genetic material in these samples tells the team which river or stream the salmon originated from, and where they are returning in an effort to spawn the next generation of wild salmon.
The Ocean Genetics Project is merging at-sea spatial information with genetic identification and satellite imagery. The collaboration is investigating the relationship between fish movement, environmental conditions, and fishing effort.
There is limited information about wild fish in the ocean, and specifically for Chinook salmon. The main units of information are coded-wire-tagged hatchery fish, in which a small wire has been placed in the snout. This process estimates catch rates, and uses tag groups as proxies for wild stocks. Yet, as weak stocks of salmon continue to limit fishing, and require care to get them on a positive population trajectory, better information is needed about wild fish in both fresh water and salt water.
Let me be clear here – there are a lot of Chinook salmon in the ocean, but the mixing of weak stocks and strong stocks is a vexing problem, and a general trend is continued downward pressure on harvest. We need innovation and different ways of doing business if we are going to maintain critical activities like commercial harvest in the era of listed populations. The Ocean Genetics Project is a means of getting higher resolution information about wild fish at sea and also can be used as a model for improving fishery information. This project is also a means to imagine a different future where managers have information streaming at them about environmental conditions, stock distributions and harvest of wild Chinook.
During the catastrophic collapse of the Oregon and California Chinook fisheries in 2005 and 2006, not surprisingly, there was new motivation to understand stock distribution patterns and avert these large-scale fishery closures. Now remember, Washington had an open fishery those years. The more refined location information is, the better off we are. Over the last few years, a remarkable collaboration has developed among commercial trollers in California, Oregon, and Washington, the research staff in those states, and fishery managers to protect stocks, sustain harvest and improve economic opportunities.
As trollers go to sea, they run a GPS, and when they catch a fish they make a waypoint. The waypoint is written on a coin envelope in which a tiny fin clip is placed – a waypoint and fin clip for each fish. When the troller returns to port, the location data is downloaded and envelopes are mailed to the genetics lab. In the lab each fish is genotyped and its genotype is compared to a large reference database that contains hundreds of known collections. This process takes a few hours, and the comparison allows us to identify each troll-caught fish to its location of origin. The real beauty here is the linked waypoint, which allows the merger of many streams of information. We know when a fish was caught, where it was caught, its stock, along with overlaid satellite (sea surface temperature, productivity) and buoy (current, wind) information. When expanded out along the coast, you see when stocks show up, the effort it takes to catch them, and associated environmental data.
The whole article is here:
http://fnonlinenews.blogspot.com/2011/06/genetic-markers.html
So, I guess there just might already be data available, and/or could be implemented if DFO really wanted? But again – why would Canada want to support anything THEY have determined has “NO” value?
Which, it will be interesting when the current Pacific Salmon Treaty comes up for renewal. I can already see Canada asking for another $100 million (they already have received over $200 million) for the interception of Canadian salmon. The U.S. response is going to be, what Canadian Pacific salmon – they are extinct? Yep, another Salmon War in the making!
Concerning the CWT programs, it usually, takes about 60,000 CWT fish needed in a coded-wire tag group in order to get enough adults back for meaningful results.
http://www.fws.gov/lsnakecomplan/Re...Idaho FRO-Project Reports/FINCLIP.Kooskia.pdf
Concerning white-fleshed comments, the Fraser River by far produces the most white and marble-fleshed Chinook; however, just because it isn’t red doesn’t mean it is Fraser. Some of those could be both Columbia and/or Puget Sound fish. If it has the adipose fin that doesn’t mean it is not marked or isn’t hatchery. Less than 40% of Columbia hatchery are marked, leaving that 60% hatchery unmarked - that is a whole lot of Chinook. Our Puget Sound hatchery Chinook are 100% marked and has been for several years; however not all have the adipose removed. For example, the White River Chinook will have the adipose and will be missing a ventral fin.
http://nwifc.org/2012/03/puyallup-tribe-helps-spring-chinook-program-continue/
FYI… Both wild and hatcher can be marked and identified all sorts of ways: Adipose, Adipose Left Ventral, Adipose Right Ventral, Right Ventral Only, Left Ventral Only, Anal, No Clip with CWT, Left Maxillary, Right Maxillary, Left Pectoral, Anterior, Right Pectoral, Anterior, Lower Caudal, Upper Caudal, Dorsal. So turn those head in! Just for the record, some ESA wild salmon are caught on the out migration and they will usually be marked by the removal of a ventral fin! If you see ANY red or white-fleshed salmon missing a ventral fin, it is ESA – LET IT GO!
Last edited by a moderator:
Similar threads
