BC Fishing Reports banner
1 - 14 of 14 Posts

· Registered
Joined
·
1,165 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
The Fraser Salmon & Watershed Program (FSWP) in conjunction with the Department of Fisheries & Oceans (DFO) is conducting a sockeye hook and release pilot study in the Fraser River to determine the short term (24 hour) mortality of sockeye caught and released in recreational fisheries.

A contract biologist, Jim Thomas of JO Thomas & Associates (JOT), will be responsible for the operational aspects of the study.

We are seeking interested volunteers to assist us in the study. We need approximately 35 anglers each day of the study. If you are interested please join us at the location and time noted below.

Meeting Location and Time: Island 22 boat launch each day of the study at 8:00 AM

Location of Study: Grassy Bar: A portion of the bar will be marked off and used solely for the purpose of the study

Timing of Study: three 5 day time periods starting August 5th, August 18th and August 29th

:wallbash: :wallbash: :confused:
Wow is this a study or a way for the goverment to spin doctor the results to show why bottom bouncing should be closed. I guess you could always go for the free ride to grassy and bar fish for sockeye and hope for a spring.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
1,160 Posts
Actually this is more likely being done by the folks who enjoy flossing sockeye, I heard the pro flossers pushing this study at a SFAC meeting and can't believe we are spending money on it.

I would really be interested to see who all participates in this.
 

· Retired staff
Joined
·
6,673 Posts
Well, this is interesting isn't it...

I don't quite know what to hope for...On one hand I find myself hoping that the study shows low to zero mortality just because I would hate to see that the sockeye openings are causing harm to the fish...

On the other hand, since I feel the fishery causes a lot of secondary problems in the sportfishing sector, my hope is it results in closing down such openings and puts an end to the flossing debacle...

I will be very interested to see the results...
 

· Registered
Joined
·
606 Posts
Personally I don't believe in C&R for sockeye...I don't need a study to tell me the mortality is high..all my old crusty friends who have ocean fished sockeye have told me for years that they are the weakest of the salmon when it comes to C&R..Too bad they weren't as tough as sturgeon..
After the opening for socks I would rather see no catch and release for sockeye period,but how do we accomplish that???
I'm not even going to reopen that can of worms...
Have fun on the water folks,hope Grassi Bar can handle the study without having fights errupt between the study participants and any opponenets..
Take the high road folks,,,it leaves less marks... :cheers:
 

· Registered
Joined
·
1,165 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
Info can not hurt, what can hurt though is that they are doing this during a year where the stocks are low and every fish that gets on the spawing beds counts for the futture of this run. Why put even one fish in a position where they could possible die before spawning. Maybe someone should contact the humane society of BC as this would be inhumane to potentially kill a fish in the name of science.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
2,348 Posts
flyguy said:
Maybe someone should contact the humane society of BC as this would be inhumane to potentially kill a fish in the name of science.
Actually fish are killed every day by the Albion Test Fishery in the name of science (stock assessment)

I hope this study will be used to turn DFO's "requests" for use of selective fishing techniques into "legislated" use of selective measures.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
1,165 Posts
Discussion Starter · #9 ·
Pat AV said:
flyguy said:
Maybe someone should contact the humane society of BC as this would be inhumane to potentially kill a fish in the name of science.
Actually fish are killed every day by the Albion Test Fishery in the name of science (stock assessment)

I hope this study will be used to turn DFO's "requests" for use of selective fishing techniques into "legislated" use of selective measures.
The difference between the test fishery and this study is that the test fishery fish the sell and get consumed, this on the other hand will not. :naughty:
 

· Registered
Joined
·
466 Posts
I would assume that the objective is to determine whether bottom bouncing should be allowed when sockeye are NOT open for fishing, as this is when C&R would be required. Of course, there is also the loophole that when you've got your two sockeye, you can keep fishing for a spring (using bottom bouncing) and snag more sockeye (resulting in C&R).

If there is a conservation issue, it would seem sensible to ban BB outright unless there is a sockeye opening, and only have an opening if the projected retention and C&R mortality is acceptable.

Just out of curiosity, does anyone have any info on the number of sockeye caught by the commercial and native fisheries, vs the recreational fishery?
 

· Registered
Joined
·
1,165 Posts
Discussion Starter · #11 ·
EricNotTheRed said:
I would assume that the objective is to determine whether bottom bouncing should be allowed when sockeye are NOT open for fishing, as this is when C&R would be required. Of course, there is also the loophole that when you've got your two sockeye, you can keep fishing for a spring (using bottom bouncing) and snag more sockeye (resulting in C&R).

If there is a conservation issue, it would seem sensible to ban BB outright unless there is a sockeye opening, and only have an opening if the projected retention and C&R mortality is acceptable.

Just out of curiosity, does anyone have any info on the number of sockeye caught by the commercial and native fisheries, vs the recreational fishery?

I know that we take about 1%
 

· Registered
Joined
·
466 Posts
1%? Any idea where that number comes from?

If this is true, it kind of makes the conservation side of the flossing debate kind of moot, doesn't it? At least during any year that there is a commercial or native opening, anyway.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
2,348 Posts
flyguy said:
Pat AV said:
flyguy said:
Maybe someone should contact the humane society of BC as this would be inhumane to potentially kill a fish in the name of science.
Actually fish are killed every day by the Albion Test Fishery in the name of science (stock assessment)

I hope this study will be used to turn DFO's "requests" for use of selective fishing techniques into "legislated" use of selective measures.
The difference between the test fishery and this study is that the test fishery fish the sell and get consumed, this on the other hand will not. :naughty:
What difference does it make if the fish are sold at Bruce's and consumed by humans, from a stock conservation perspective? Will this make any difference in the tribs when there are less breeding pairs sitting on redds?

From a conservation perspective, dead fish are better of in the river than in Bruce's at least then the nutrients stay in the natural system and can be used by juvenile salmon.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
156 Posts
You look at the explosion in the growth of Vancouver and the surrounding area. There may come a time when all salmon making it up the river can not be kept. No taking home slabs of meat! I keep very few fish in the year and simply fish for the pleasure of fishing. Ironically over the last ten years I've kept more fish from 3 BC trips then I have fishing back home. Guides look disappointed if you have a conservation license.
 
1 - 14 of 14 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top