Vancover Island

Barnyard · 01-25-2001, 07:03 AM

Does anyone else think the reason for the improved return of Kings & Silvers to the Columbia the last two years is because of the ban on netting the West coast of Vancover Island. The treaty signed with Canada expires in a year or two, will the runs still be as good?

Mike Gilchrist · 01-25-2001, 07:38 AM

Answer: Yes, no question.

I think we have until 2007 or something, but would have to look it up again to be sure. The last couple of years are stagered as to level of Canadian fishing allowed.

After that ??????? - Canadian Politics.

Centerpin · 01-25-2001, 10:33 AM

I didn't think there was any netting of chinook and coho. You must mean the troll fishery. Your brothers in AK are the biggest problem to the whole coastal fisheries management issue. They take the majority of chinook and coho before they even hit BC waters. I don't even think BC has a viable fishery for these two species. When it comes time to bargain we should team up and give AK a kick in the nuts.

------------------
Support BC Steelhead Recovery... check out http://www.bcfff.bc.ca/

My Photos... http://msnhomepages.talkcity.com/RallyRd/centerpin/

Barnyard · 01-25-2001, 10:55 AM

Center untill 2 years ago the did net the West coast Van. Island. The agreement was negotiated by Curt smitch and the "former fisheries minister for B.C. a guy named Anderson.

Barnyard · 01-25-2001, 10:58 AM

Sorry Center i posted before finishing your post. You won't get any arguement from me on the Alaska situation..The agreement was for us in the States to lay off your Frasier river sockeye in return for no King & Coho fishery

Predator Dawg · 01-25-2001, 01:22 PM

Centerpin -

I agree with you completely. The part thats kinda strange is to watch WA and OR complain about Alaska also, when a decent percentage of the sea rapers live in the two states and just go up to Alaska for the annual slaughter. What a crock. I sure would like to see WA, OR and BC team up against the crap that they are pulling up there.

SJ

Centerpin · 01-25-2001, 03:35 PM

It is not economically viable for BC commercial guys to target chinook and coho. Essentially a majority of the West Vancouver Island troll fleet has been put out of business by low prices and limited opportunity. We have also come to grips with the situation and found that sportfishing generates more $$ per fish. Right now we pretty much operate on the big net fisheries of the Fraser sockeye and Skeena/Nass sockeye. It seems that Alaska is at the top of the of the migration hierarchy. There is nobody above them that will cause any negative effects.

I think you guys are mistaken about your run sizes being smaller than ours. I think the whole Skeena only gets about 120-160,000 chinook each year. I hear you guys talking in the half million numbers. You have more steelhead too!

------------------
Support BC Steelhead Recovery... check out http://www.bcfff.bc.ca/

My Photos... http://msnhomepages.talkcity.com/RallyRd/centerpin/

corrirod · 01-25-2001, 03:50 PM

Last year while fishing with a guide out of Tofino, on Vancouver Island, the guide told us that a few years ago B.C. got ticked off about the U.S. for something and sent all it's trollers out to try and deplete our(U.S.) runs and it turned out that they damn near wiped out their own coho runs. He said the B.C. government thought they were catching our salmon and it turned out they were actually catching theirs. Any truth to that? If so, any other details.

finclipped · 01-25-2001, 11:29 PM

I'm not pretending to be an expert on Canadian fishery's, but they are typically the first one's at the table when it comes to discussing fish allocation. From what I have seen, Alaska is reluctant to even sit down, and Oregon, Washington & California only sit down when there is something in it for them.

I heard that due to Canadian harvest restrictions, Tillamook and all Oregon coastal streams are expecting a 20% increase in chinook returns next year.

In addition to that, Canada has done a better job at limiting damaging hatchery practices, and are willing to take steps to improve salmon habitat. There answer to lower sockeye runs was to let more fish spawn; what an original concept!! Years ago in the dam building days, Canada made the decision not to dam the mainstem Frasier, instead targeting areas beyond the salmon spawing areas in the river. I think that has made a difference today. Sounds pretty good to me, aye.

Ramstrong · 01-25-2001, 11:40 PM

I'd Have to agree with Finclipped. They are by no means free from salmon management issues. But seem to have done a much better job managing the resource than the states. I was able to go up to the lower mainland this year and fish some of their "depressed" salmon runs, and that was the most incredible time of my fishing life. It's funny to read some of the canadian BB's and hear them complaining about it up there. I'd be the first to trade run sizes with them. The only thing I didn't like is there was a lot more garbage stream side then on any of the rivers I've seen here. By the way, my objectivity on this post was by no way, shape or form tainted by the fact that I'm married to a Canadian.

------------------
-Ryan
www.xprt.net/~ryandsar
ramstrong@hotmail.com

Penn · 01-26-2001, 02:46 AM

Centerpin you hit it pretty much right. I go up to Vancouver Island every year and fish for about a week. Our guide said a couple of years ago that the ministry told the sainers (spelling)and commercial guys that BC lost nearly 350million in sports money a couple years ago and enough was enough. They were told for the time being, sports fishing will come first.
Yes that may be why our runs seem to be recovering this last year but it is going to take all of us changing our habits to make this thing work.

Steelheadman · 01-26-2001, 05:02 AM

Centerpin, I think Steve J has a point. A couple of years ago the salmon fishermen from Puget Sound were going up to Alaska on the inside of Vancouver Island and the Canadian authorities were charging these fishermen $700-1000 a boat. I think this put pressure on the US to negotiate a deal with the Canadians. I think the US ended up reimbursing these fishermen.

Its amazing that the commercial fishermen have more clout than the sportsfishermen.

THE REEL HEY_YALL · 01-26-2001, 06:31 AM

$700 - $1000 a boat? What's that, like a buck twenty five in American dollars?

Centerpin · 01-26-2001, 09:15 AM

You guys have to remember that BC does not have a say in how the salmon fisheries are managed. This is a federal issue run by the rejects back east in Ottawa. BC can only manage its freshwater species which ironically includes steelhead. The distinction is that the feds run all commercial fisheries and commercial species. The provincial guys run the freshwater species. The federal mandate has been to manage the fisheries based on commercial use. This has changed in the last few years. It makes the ******* made but the sporties benefit from closures.

I think BC commercial out of Prince Rupert even blockaded a US ferry to AK as protest to their ignorance to the Pacific Salmon Commission.

------------------
Support BC Steelhead Recovery... check out http://www.bcfff.bc.ca/

My Photos... http://msnhomepages.talkcity.com/RallyRd/centerpin/