“Further to FN0523, the
Department will be managing fisheries based on management zone 1 (i.e. returns
to the Fraser below or equal to 45,000 chinook) for Fraser Spring 5-2 and
Summer 5-2 chinook.”
In other words, with Fraser
chinook in low numbers, and the issue of First Nation request for these fish in
play, Victoria area fishery retention for chinook has been lowered. The regs
are in effect from June 18, until July 15, 23:59 hours.
Our waters are subareas 19-1 to
19-4 and Subareas 20-4 and 20-5, extending out Juan de Fuca – Cadboro Point to
Sheringham Point. The daily limit is two (2) chinook which must be either wild or
hatchery-marked if between 45 and 85 cm or hatchery marked if greater than 85
cm. The minimum length is 45 cm.
You can look at
the area maps here: http://www.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/fm-gp/rec/map-carte-eng.asp.
Shawn Kerr, DFO, Steelhead Society meeting: The Vancouver
Island chapter of the Steelhead Society based out of Courtenay would like to
get some involvement from other areas of VI by holding a couple of one-day
information sessions. They would like to start in Port Alberni and Victoria. Do
you have any suggestions on who might be interested in your respective area and
of a possible location to have a one-day info session/meeting? Shawn Kerr: Shawn.Kerr@dfo-mpo.gc.ca.
A:
I suggested the Esquimalt Anglers club house on Fleming: http://esquimaltanglers.ca/. I also
suggested getting in touch with the Haig-Brown Fly Fishing Association in town
as interested attendees. If you have any suggestions, please direct them to
Shawn Kerr.
Aaron
Hill ED, Watershed Watch: Getting DFO to do what the Trudeau
government has told us they will do.
Trudeau’s mandate letter for then Minister Hunter Tootoo,
included restoring habitat protection in the Fisheries Act, an oil tanker ban
on BC’s north coast and acting on the Cohen Commission recommendations for wild
salmon.
“But when we met with Minister Tootoo and senior DFO
officials in Ottawa in April, it was clear that the same bureaucrats who ran
DFO for the previous government were not in a hurry to follow their new orders.
According to DFO, “acting on” Justice Cohen’s recommendations did not mean
“implementing” them. Habitat provisions were not going to be returned to the
Fisheries Act until extensive consultations took place (which could take
years), and they were talking about rewriting the Wild Salmon Policy.
We were floored. But not for long. We got to work organizing and lobbying to get Minister Tootoo and DFO back on track. We drafted this letter to Minister Tootoo that was endorsed by aboriginal, conservation, and fishing groups, and two former Fisheries Ministers, making it clear that we expect action on his to-do list.”
We were floored. But not for long. We got to work organizing and lobbying to get Minister Tootoo and DFO back on track. We drafted this letter to Minister Tootoo that was endorsed by aboriginal, conservation, and fishing groups, and two former Fisheries Ministers, making it clear that we expect action on his to-do list.”
A:
Watershed Watch is a BC environmental NGO. You should read the letter and then
look at the long list of signees, including former Ministers David Anderson and
John Fraser. The habitat provisions are crucial to wild salmon, and just so you
know, West Coast Environmental Law is leading a legal challenge to reinstate
what was lost under Harper.
I did a formal Environmental Petition with the federal
Auditor General regarding Cohen/fish farm recommendations in 2014. You can see
it here: http://www.oag-bvg.gc.ca/internet/English/pet_353_e_39110.html.
I asked for a disaggregated budget and full time
equivalents (number of staff) that DFO has spent and dedicated to achieving the
Cohen recommendations. I received no attributed budget, only blanket figures, no
staff numbers and only generic pap regarding Cohen. In other words, DFO did not
answer the petition.
I know it is generic pap because when I worked for the
BC government I generated such generic pap.
If you wish to get in touch with Watershed Watch,
contact Aaron Hill: social=watershed-watch.org@mail167.atl101.mcdlv.net.
Jeff
Betts: I continue to dwell on news Canada is hatching
chinook (and others as you say) but not clipping them.....so that 18 lb or so
unclipped powerhouse I released Saturday morning could indeed have been from a
Canadian hatchery....and if the Americans clip theirs to create a 'take'
fishery, what do they think of us not doing so then regulating the possession
of marked fish, i.e. their marked fish?
A: The
reason for not clipping all of the more than half billion fry in Canada is cost.
Each fry has to be selected, anaesthetized, handled for marking, recover, and put
back into the pond before being let go. Do note that Puget Sound is only a part
of Washington, and so the marked fish are in a limited area.
The reason Puget Sound chinook fry are marked is for a
fishery. The reason we can catch their fish is that the Pacific Salmon
Commission that deals with USA/Canada fishery issues has specified that both
countries can take some of the other’s fish. In our case, Alaska takes some of
our chinook in its commercial fishery. The quid pro quo is that Canadians can
catch some American fish. We are the lucky recipients.
The other thing is that by taking marked fish, fish in
a slot limit, in Haro/Juan de Fuca straits, we are actually protecting mature,
spawning wild chinook in both BC and Washington State, Puget Sound. In BC, we
are protecting Fraser 4-2s and 5-2s, among others, for example, wild Cowichans,
and also Washington wild chinook runs that are rebuilding like the Nooksack and
Samish rivers in Puget Sound. The Americans like this.