Your place to tell it all!
Shout it out with your voice
September 1
August 30th
This post is more for clarification than anything else; I'd appreciate lots of feedback/comments. It regards measuring a salmon.
Recently I landed a fish and, upon measuring, found it to be just under the 63cm limit. I measured it again to be sure (as I'm not interested in retaining an illegal, over-sized fish) and let the tape lay on the fish as I measured. This time it read 66/67cm. Kneeling directly over it with the tape on it's nose I measured it again and kept the tape tight; under 63cm to it's fork. I measured it again and let the tape lay down on the length of it and it's over 63cm. The girth of the fish clearly added another inch/inch and a half.
Better sense prevailed and the chunky fish went back in the river.
We've all hooked those "close" ones and most of us want to do the right thing...so how does one "properly" measure a fish?
I look forward to your comments/feedback/stories.
August 25th
After what happened to me last evening on the Lower Humber it seems quite clear that the fishermen are slowly being pushed away. Jet skis, jet boats churning up the pool right in front of me, 20 people in wet suits going right thru the pool directly in front of me, right after i had just rose a fish (one guy laughed and said " we will be out of your way in 5 minutes") . I realize that these people have a right to the river as much as I do, but a little common courtesy would be appreciated. I think we need to put a piece in the paper to at least address some of this behavior. Most of us have been fishing this river for years and I think it's about time we made public our concerns. At the very least, if someone is genuinely ignorant of their behavior and they happen to read about our concerns, then maybe the next time they will think twice about it.
August 20th
So, I was talking with a friend of mine last night and I mentioned how I may head to the cabin this weekend down near Clarenville. After chatting I said maybe I will head into South West River (Port Blandford) and try for a fish in by the falls. He stopped me right there and said "don't even bother. Poachers have got it cleaned out".
This disturbs me in more ways then I care to count. Some guys I know, were in there a month ago and for 2 thirds of the trio it was where they landed their first fish. They had a great time and hooked several fish between the 3 over 2 days. This is a place where fish can't go any further (Now maybe I am creating a whole new problem by posting this because if an true fishermen can get on here and read reports and find directions to unknown waters so can a poacher can't they?) this area is deep water and is a great place for fishing, not bc of its numbers but bc of the room to work a line and bc of the surroundings. Especially for someone just getting into it, you don't have to worry about getting timed out on a rock or having people cast over you, its hard to get to and bc of the moderate numbers of fish it is a lot of the times untraveled. I mean I understand DFO can't be everywhere all the time, and I am not making this a statement about DFO doing their job but I have heard before that this river is prone to poaching......I just hope people get what they deserve. I'll the one fish I have left in the freezer over the Lord-knows-how-many that these individuals have in theirs any day knowing I caught mine by the only method that is permitted.
Has anyone else heard of poaching activity occurring on this river to the extreme of what I have be made aware of?.......
I just don't get it and maybe its simply bc I'm a fair-play kind of person where by I use only what tags I purchase, I use what hooks I am bound by law to use, and I only retain/release (when fortunate enough to do so) the number of fish that is privy to me.
I'm sickened.....
ML
August 17th
To RW who indicated that he hooked and released 4 salmon on the Salmonier River..Then he counted 30 in the pool and he cold identify the 4 he hooked and released..Good for him..I cannot identify individual salmon in a pool...
To JW , yes I can fish everyday...If I wish ...but remember it was a scenario and just that..I think JW missed my point, and yes I do agree with him that there are salmon anglers out there that hook and release far more than they are legally permitted and yes there are anglers that take more than four and he didn't mention that there are still nets in our rivers..That I do not agree with.
But just look at the chief sponsors of ASF and what happened to the 30 million dollar salmon endowement fund...They only give monies from the interest on the 30 million to Salmon groups and for salmon study.
You can find some of the sponsors of ASF on their website and donations of over $5000.00 come from some interesting companies and family Foundations...and even some political parties....
WS
August 16th
Wow - WS really hates hook and release. I'll bet he doesn't consider this: I released 4 fish at a pool on the lower Salmonier one morning this summer. They all survived - I could see them in the pool. As I was leaving two anglers arrived. They wanted to retain fish and I said there were about 30 there. I saw them about 3 hrs later and they said they didin't even hook one. I figure I saved 4 salmon that morning......... R.M.
August 15th
As a conservation minded angler I appreciate some of the responses to SW's analisys of Catch & Release and mortality rates. Other than the actual numbers, to assume every angler could or would fish everyday of the season is way out there, then to assume every one of these anglers would release 4 fish per day is down right impossible. I'm an avid angler, I fish every opportunity I can and struggle to get 40 days per year in, most of the anglers I know fish only a fraction of that. I also fish some very good rivers at prime times, only occasionally do I release 4 fish per day and occasionally do I see or hear of other guys releasing 4 per day. Remember the fish don't alway cooperate and take the fly.
I do admit there are a handful of hook and releasers who abuse the system, just as there are a few hook and retain anglers who abuse system and take more than thier quota of 4 retained per year, this obviously hurts more.(great to see the new tag system working)
I guess in recent years more and more people are in fact releasing thier quota of 4 per day more often, but any logically minded individual know thats the direct result of imcreased fish in our rivers. I suggest SW look at the River Statistic link on this site. The information clearly indicates we are doing something right!!!
There has been some great work done by SPAWN and other conservation groups and we are seeing the results, On behalf of all anglers, both hook and releasers and hook and cookers may I say thanks for your tireless efforts in promoting conservation of this wonderful resource. It must be very satifying for you people to finally see the benefits of your hard work. Keep the pressure on, our children deserve to enjoy this sport as much as we do. JW
August 12th
I have sturred some comments in your anglers voice. My scenario was just that a scenario but a legitimate one at that....What I was talking about is I limited my 90 days to 60 to account for fishermen/women not catching any fish..so I have taken off the 30 days... but for those who want information on hook and release from my viewpoint and plus looking at data from the Ponoi river in Russia....that river is above the Arctic Circle and never get tempoeratures above 22 degrees C. This was a wier fishing river..The weir fishery was cancelled and the salmon increased and according to the study ...it purporated hook and release to be the magic bullett.But wouldn't the closaure of the Weir Fishery exhibit an increase in Salmon and I ask the author to loook at the studies cautionary aspects of hooking and releasing Salmon at temperatures above 22 degrees.
This person also quotes the river Alta study... but read closely and you well see that all of those Salmon that were tagged after hook and release went downriver and some back out to sea....They were not followed to see if they spawned. I have purposed to DFO that we do a hook and release study on a small nl. river...they are not interested. I spoke to an individual about a month ago from a university in Ontario and he said so what if I kill 5-6 fish if I hook and release..I am on the river keeping poachers away....If any of you want to read something I wrote on salmon got to www.nlwf.ca and you will find articles against hook and release.
To the individual who wrote to this anglers voice...I am educated with many degrees after my name, I was a high school principal for 15 years and I taught for 28 and I had a stroke, but I am not stupid yet... I have been salmon angling since I was 11 years old and I am now 54.. I was a guide but as I stated before I get no clients because I do not believe in hook and release... I have seen many big fish dead in the river and if they do survive do they spawn..
A study on the Conne River had hook and release salmon overnight in cages----I largepercentage of them died...Do a study on a smaller river in Nl.. and as I said before money talks
WS
August 11th
Hello: I read with interest the discussion on Catch and Release angling and find it disheartening that many Newfoundlanders and Labradorians are still opposed to such an important conservation tool. We remain the only province in Canada that restricts the number of caught and released fish and I believe, as do others, that this was only introduced as a method of keeping folks from hogging pools and has nothing to do with conservation. If it did, why doesn't New Brunswick, Quebec, Nova Scotia or any other province have it. Although it has taken a while and a number of studies later, we have come a long way in understanding how and when C & R is to be done to ensure the lowest mortality rates possible. But before I go into it I would like to chat quickly about some statements made previously against C & R. They state there is 10% mortality by DFO guidelines. I am not sure where that figure has been reported but for the purposes of this discussion let's assume accurate. By the same math I can release 40 fish before I have killed the same amount of fish as this individual. Being a meat fisherman, I am sure they will fill their two tags in August on the Gander, Humber, or Exploits. That brings my release tally to 60 released fish before I have killed the same amount as this individual. Obviously this equates to a lot of angling fun, 60 verse 6, but there are other benefits. I am on the river watching for poachers and spending my money in every community I visit...Which by the way, is a lot of time and money if I am to release 60 fish. Looking at this from another point of view, you can now have 15 anglers release 4 fish each verses one person catching and keeping 6 just for themselves. A pretty good resource sharing strategy don't you think. And let's not forget, a released fish for me is just as important as a kept one may be for you, except I get to do it 10 times as much.
Now on to the total mortality question of C & R. A statement was made regarding the total mortality in the province as a result of C & R; "How many dead fish by DFO 10% kill rate from guidelines.......Would I be totally wrong by multiplying 3x3000=9000. A very conservative estimate". I apologize in advance but my personal experience cannot support this. If this were any way accurate, we would regularly see white bellies float up on every river in the province. In reality, we are not seeing any of this. I fish, and I fish a lot through out the entire season and you simply do not see 5, 10, or 15 fish dead every second day. In fact, 99.9% of the days you see none! Unfortunately, I fear the logic here is to discredit catch and release simply as a means to get bigger kill limits.
On to the scientific studies to date...much work has been done and more should follow but key facts are starting to materialize. Here are just a few points from the studies that were done on Atlantic salmon specifically...
Positive population effects of C & R angling are indicated on the River Alta in Norway, where the number of spawning reds more than doubled after introduction of compulsory C & R. (Thorstad et al. 2000)
The results of salmon tagging on the rivers Rynda, Kharlovka and Eastern Litza where the fish were tagged individually under the dorsal fin. On the Kharlovka river during the season 2004 392 salmon were tagged of which 41 were caught for a second time; on the Eastern Litza 254 salmon were tagged and 59 were caught for a second time; on the Rynda 341 salmon were tagged and 43 caught again. This means 10 to 20% of fish were taking the fly for a second or even third time and did not look dying or exhausted by the previous catch. Normal activity of the caught and released fish is also proved by telemetric research (Kuzmin, the press) which was done on the Kharlovka in 2002 when 30 salmon caught by fly-fishing were radio-tagged and released back to the river and their migration within the river system was monitored during the whole summer until spawning. None died and all of them spawned successfully. (The Atlantic Salmon Reserve)
In the River Ponoi in Russia, densities of Atlantic Salmon juveniles increased after the introduction of C & R angling (Whoriskey et. al 2000)
The Ponoi studies showed very low mortality rates with a number of fish being angled a second and even a third time. They have confirmed that C & R fish have spawned and some C & R fish have returned as repeat spawners and were angled again. Overall, the study suggests that the river has been systematically underseeded for years and that C & R fishing regime is contributing to its recovery. (Whoriskey et. al 2000)
Water temperatures of 22 degrees Celsius and above increase the chances of mortality of C & R fish. Essentially warm water creates a higher mortality rate. But as every angler knows, when we have hot water conditions we catch far less fish, a kind of natural protection if you will.
The many studies of Dr. Bruce Tufts of Queens University showed low or zero mortality in most conditions, when the wild Atlantic salmon were carefully handled and kept in the water. Even more interestingly, ninety-eight per cent of the angled fish eggs survived, vs. 97 per cent of eggs from non-angled salmon. Thus Live Release did not impact the spawning success of the fish.
Ultimately, the key to successful catch and release fishing is to not play the fish to exhaustion and keep the fish in the water. Exposure to air increases the chances of mortality so pictures should be at a minimum and all efforts to keep the fish in the water made.
There is much more material in these studies and I suggest to any of you who have questions to read them, dry as they might be. In the end, these studies prove that catch and release works and more needs to be done on educating the angling public on doing it properly and the benefits that can be derived. I am not advocating the end of catch and keep fishing in any way, as I do love a meal of fresh salmon as much as the next person. I also believe a catch and keep fishery is critical if we are to keep all facets of the fishing community engaged in the sport. But C & R fishing is an important conservational component if we are to keep the resource healthy and raise the number of anglers entering the sport. If you look at the recent DFO statistics for this year, the island's rivers continue to improve and I strongly believe Catch and Release is critical if we are to see this continue into the future. BH
August 10th
Recently I met an angler from Burego while fishing on Harry's. I commented that he was a long way from home. He was fishing on Harry's because this was the only river that he knew that was a class II river. I commented that these two extra salmon were going to be awful costly. This got me to thinking that Harry's and Flat Bay were going to be having a lot angler pressure for the rest of the season. I've done a fair amount of fishing on Harry's this year. While the eariy returns looked promising the runs have slowed dramaticly since mid July. Personaly I feel that DFO has bowed down to pressure put on by some members of the Enhancement comittee, to have this river reclassified.I guess to some the salmon sports fishery is still a FOOD fishery. EDR
August 9th
- I would like to add the following comments to the post made on August 6th. This post is inaccurate to say the least. As the poster suggested we "Do the math". I did and they are totally wrong. Moreover, at least 15000 salmon licenses are sold each year (5X was is said here.) . Also there are 90 days for June-Sept (not 60).
According to this post we are to assume that each angler will hook 4 fish a day (wrong) and fish 60 days a year (I wish!). That is a total of 240 fish (this is technically correct). 10% of that is 24 fish (not "approximately" 3). If 3000 licenses are sold with this fishing activity that is a total of 72000 fish (not 9000).
My point is, that this exercise in math is full of invalid assumptions and is totally incorrect!
To try another way to looking at this. If 10% of the fish hooked and release die vs 100% die with only retention fishing. 10 times more hooked fish would survive with C&Release than C&Retain. Thus, C&R is better.
August 6th
Hello: I am aware of the hook and release rate over a period of days and I was aware of the number of fished released, but if 10% died that would make it approximately 2 salmon that died for this one fishermans pleasure..Let us assume that 5 people did this over a four day period and if they are telling an accurate story...That would constitute 10 dead fish..buy the 10% guideline....if you keep multipling by the number of licenses sold in Nl. Let us assume 3000 licenses sold(conservative estimate) , season is opened from june 1-sept.1 roughly... 60 days..you can kill four per license legally and can hook and release 4 per day legally for 60 days.that is 240 fish releases and 10% kill rate..that is approximately 3 dead fish per license.. 3000 licenses sold..Do the math ..How many dead fish by DFO 10% kill rate from guidelines to kill rate from hook and release..Would I be totally wrong by multiplying 3x3000=9000. A very conservative estimate. If four fish are permitted to be killed with 3000 licenses sold..Equal 12,000 taken and eaten, while 9000 allowed to die from hook and release. WS
Several thoughts concerning catch-and-release angling for Atlantic salmon:
1. Note to Co-Editor: Thank you for pointing out that within five days of fishing it is reasonable and within the regulations to hook and release up to 20 fish. I released 16. I did not exceed my daily limit.
2. Atlantic salmon cross vast oceans and swim miles upon miles upstream to spawning beds. They are genetically over-prepared for the task; the excess of energy serves to ensure survival in the face of environmental delays or obstacles. If played quickly (5-10 minutes) and then given ample recovery time in the angler's hands, a released salmon has expended only a miniscule fraction of its reserved energy. This of course holds true only when water temperatures are ideal, which they were in my case.
3. When aiming to preserve the health of a particular species, one must aim to secure the survival of as many individuals of the species as possible. Consider these three approaches to preserving individual Atlantic salmon. (1) One can refrain from fishing. This is most certainly the best way to protect the fish. (2) One can release the fish which one hooks. This places stress on the fish, but some science shows that Atlantic salmon are sufficiently resilient, if played quickly and handled and revived carefully, to continue and spawn. (3) One can catch and retain fish. This option guarantees a negative impact on the health of the species. Given these three options and the goal of preserving both the species, catch-and-release angling is worse than not fishing, but it is better than catch-and-retain angling. That is all that catch-and-release angling claims to be. No one says it's good for the fish. We only say it is better than catch-and-retain angling. Rather than killing the fish, one carefully revives it and lets it swim free. Of course the fish would be better off not getting hooked at all. We have to think of catch-and-release angling as a compromise between killing the salmon and not fishing at all. Catch-and-release angling regulations allow for the tradition of angling to continue, a revenue generating and relaxing recreational tradition in our province, all the while giving a reasonable and improved chance of survival to individual salmon. It isn't perfect; it's a compromise.
4. In summary, and regarding the comment of WS, "so much for salmon conservation", catch-and-release angling is a conservation measure that allows for the angling tradition to continue.
August 3rd
- Hello: I read your first report from August 3.. Look at the number of fished released.16 but again look at the rules for hook and release...and people tell me that people who hook and release follow rules and regulations.. I have been talking about such for a number of years...I have witnessed such...I used to be a guide...but no longer...I get no clients because I followed the rules. Do not forget it is not only tourists doing this but locals are doing this also...How many of those fished survived..DFO allows for a 10% kill rate in support of hook and release..So How many dead salmon? I am willing to bit more that 10% died. They do not die immediately but they do not make it to spawn either. (Please note: These releases were done from July 30th to August 3rd, a five day period! Anglers can legally release 4 per day. Co-Editor)
This will continue...you cannot police hook and release...I have had tourists (remember I was a licensed guide)...but I no longer get clients... I can hook and release all day...if I choose to do so and all I have to say or show is that fish got away and I can loose every fish I hook with a barbless hook...Don't get me wrong.barbless hooks are fine but they can be used to loose salmon....Where are we going from here..maybe nowhere because money talks and as for salmon conservation, I am at my wits end....hook and release are not policable..I guess so much for salmon conservation. WS (It's almost impossbile to control unless someone is watching every angler - that is an impossibility. Anyone have a solution?? Co-editor)- Co - editor - Doesn't the fact that we are the only jurisdiction in the world that places a limit on the number of fish that can be RELEASED tell you something. We are so far behing the times on release angling its not funny. Scrap the limit; it should be limitless and let people enjoy their fishing and there will be less ( not more ) hogging of pools. Just watch!!!!!!!!!! RM (With the estimated 10% mortality in release angling your suggestion would mean more mortality, wouldn't it? That hardly seems like a productive solution, but thanks for your input)
- Just a point of clarification regarding the Aug 3rd report on the Terra Nova river and the following email about releasing 16 fish over 5 days. In fact that section of river the person referenced fishing is Class IV, meaning they are only legally permitted to release 2 fish per day not the 4 as in most other rivers. As for policing the release fishing, from an eforcement perspective it is very difficult I am sure. Like most things it is left to the honour system and perhaps some self governance among fellow anglers.... too bad some people get greedy and hog the pools, releasing upwards of 20 salmon per day as has been seen this year. Some ideas would be good. SW
July 26th
Poachers A Plenty Being a Novice when it comes to Salmon Fishing, I strictly adhere to all the rules when I'm out for a flick as I would expect all anglers. This Summer while in Bishop Falls, it appears to be a joke fow a few Poachers to hook with their Barbed Flies, because as it was put " They have plenty of time to haul in their line or cut their the line " before being checked. ( Why not change the Rule, that all flies in your possession must have the Barb Pinched )Some of these fellows are also filling the tags for relatives not even present. So if they have family members with a license, they will fill what ever tags are available including their own. The possibilty of being checked is not great. I heard of one fellow who came a shore in the Fallsview Park area, who had eight untagged Salmon in his Boat. Only to put tags of relatives on the Salmon when they showed up in the Park.
On Middle Brook River in Gambo ( D.Smallwod Park ) I watched a Local hook a fish then pass the Rod to his buddy who then played out the fish then this chap put his tag on the Salmon.......... Salmon Fishing is wonderful opportunity to get out, get a bit of fresh air, relax and enjoy this wonderful Province. It's too bad we have a idiots, who continue to mis-manage this wonderful resource. I guess when rivers are closed because stocks are low, the same Poachers we have around the Province will be the first ones up to the plate, to complain the Government is at fault for low stocks. (We hear you...These are the kinds of things that are being addressed and action was taken in other locations where some of this was happening. Was any of this reported to IFE..their number is on your license?? - I'll pass this along just in case. Co-Editor)
July 23rd
Ok, all this talk about increasing the limits of Flat Bay and Harry's is plain crazy. I can't believe it, it floors me and drives me crazy that we are using all these theories about smolt production and carrying capacity, etc. When it comes down to it all these theories are just theories, the same ones you hear on the river banks about why salmon take or not take because of the weather, the wind direction, the ice in the ocean, etc. We in fact don't know what is going on in the ocean and we might and I use that work lighty might know what is going on in the rivers. For us to know exactly why some years are great and others are bad is far beyond us. We don't have gills and we don't live with the fish and there is no way to factor in all the variables about the survival possibility of a single egg through development.
NL is so lucky to have the returns they are having this year and the years before. In this era it is simply a marvel and wonder to sit on the bank of any river in the province and see natural, wild fish returning year after year with little to no help from us. I believe our negative impact on the rivers is so significant through other means such as burning fossil fuels, over fishing, garbage dumping, etc that it is pure miracle we have anything. People who don't know anything about the salmon affect the fish species well being by their actions. I don't mean to be downer about this but all you have to do is look west and south and you will see the bad shape salmon stocks are in the maritimes. The acid rain impact, over fishing, human population all are factors on the closure of the recreational fisheries there. Nobody there can just walk down over the bank and cast a fly for a silver leaper because they feel like it or want to fill their last tag. Anyone who reads this has heard it before.
As a displaced NFLD'er I have had to travel home to fish every summer for atmost 8 hours on a river. It takes a lot of $$ and time to be able to wet a fly and when you get the chance you appreciate NFLD and its salmon wealth a whole lot more than if you have the river next door all salmon season. I live near Halifax and the only salmon river nearby (Sackville River) is in rough shape. The local group does it fair share of work and it is a sin that a really nice river has so few salmon returning.
So to get back to my main point, I have not yet been home this summer but I hear, read and can see what is going on back home. The rivers seem to be doing fairly well and that is great, get out and enjoy it and make memories for we only get a limited time to be outside. But, what is with increasing the limit??? If we dumb it down and take away all the theories that nobody can quantify it simply means you are taking more fish from a finite supply. More fish taken out of the river means less spawners and grilse spawn too! We as humans are so set in our greedy ways. Does one need to look very far to see what has happened to greed upon a fish stock? COD, no need to say anymore. It's ridiculous and makes me so mad that as an arm chair quarterback I can see the greed set in after a couple "good" years on these rivers. Here is an idea, why don't we just let it alone? Let it continue to be good and bad and turn back to the rivers in 10 years or so to see what is going on. Nobody can argue that leaving a fish in the river is not a good thing, and offers one more chance at species survival. This is as easy as equating it to a long term investment like an RRSP.... good financial advice is to invest (leave fish alone to reproduce and possibly stock) and let your fund mature (let the river expand). Mother nature has a way of working out and is much more efficient than us.... after all she has no greed.
Something else too... I dump into the NFLD economy on each trip home $600-$1000 depending on what I do when I am home. Includes gas, food, parks, lodging, etc. I come home because of family but that will soon stop as they get older, but I will always come back for the salmon. No salmon, no reason to come back. I can spend my cash out west in the mountains or for the same price a week in Europe or a trip down south. How many tourist anglers are dumping what I am putting into your economy? The salmon is worth more in the rivers than on the plate. People have to get smart and realize that fish can generate money money money if used right. Trust me when I say there are some people that will spend much more than me to have a chance at our rivers and our fish. Unfortunately that is what its going to take for some people to connect and make an effort to preserve.
Thans for the rant. Chris Manuel
July 17th
Good Evening,
I would like to know more information concering guides from other provinces who come here on vacation and guide their friends while they are here. I can not go to their province and guide so why is it only in Newfoundland this is allowed? If this trend keeps up there will be no need for Newfoundland guides. As they get familar with the pools they will no longer need a guide from newfoundland. Just one of there buddies with a guide lience from their province.
(Actually, you can go to another province and guide. A reciprocal agreement was signed a couple of years ago between Provinces that allows a guide from one province to guide in another province. What you are saying re out of province guides guiding each other here is already happening - Co-Editor)July 14th
I would like to take the opportunity to respond to RM's comments concerning Harry's and Flat Bay. You make some very valid points, and I agree completely that "all you can ask any river system to do is to produce its maximum number of smolts". The problem is that this is not happenning. It is widely agreed upon that there are no longer any Atlantic salmon rivers, anywhere, that are producing a 'maximum' number of smolts. Even when rivers such as Harry's had runs nearing 15,000 fish, in the mid 1960's, there were no scientific indicators saying that there were too many juveniles in the system. But, because it is near to impossible to determine how many smolts a river system can sustain, DFO uses a minimum spawning "conservation requirement" to determine the status of the river. This "conservation requirement" is aptly named, because it will indeed conserve the salmon. As you correctly stated, assuming a smolt survival rate of only 2%, we would need 100,000 smolt to produce 2000 salmon in the next generation that return. And I guess that is sufficent enough for DFO to sustain, or "conserve" our decimated rivers. So in five years time, another 2000 fish will come back to Harry's river. Great! With DFO knowing full well, that the carrying capacity of smolt is far from being achieved, why not at least try to increase the number of smolt in the river? Maybe the river system can handle twice as many smolt, or ten times as many.
The fact remains that the science is not there to tell us how many there could be. When I first started fishing, more salmon went up Pinchgut river than are now going up Harry's, and it seems that DFO has all but forgotten this upstream tributary of Harry's in their "scientific" models.
This unknown carrying capacity I am sure would be greatly improved if all the habitat above George's Lake were factored in to play. I would not argue that we could gain a recovery in a single generation, but the whole idea of using a "conservation requirement" to maintain the pityful status quo for years to come is not going to cut it.
You are 100% correct in that conditions at sea are hurting the salmon big time! There is less prey, and more predators, as well as a host of other problems of which we are all well aware of. And I completely agree that sea survival rates need to improve. The fact remains, as you have correctly pointed out, that were only getting about a 2% survival rate. Well I would think that 2% of 200,000 smolt would put the river in a much better position than 2% of 100,000 smolt would. And again, there is no available science telling us that this system can't handle 200,000 smolt.
You ended off by saying that "We all should be striving to ensure adequate spawning first". Why not strive to achieve a spawning level that is above adequate? I understand where you are coming from, and I agree with much of what you had to say. But perhaps if we stepped away from the idea of a "conservation requirement" and looked more toward a "Recovery requirement", then we might actually start to see better improvements in the salmon stocks. The biggest fear I have concerning DFO's mandate of maintaing the status quo, is what happens in a few years time if the already poor survival rate drops any further? Yes, conditions at sea need to improve, drastically, but if less and less numbers of smolt are getting to sea, then the salmon will obviously have a lot less of a chance to recover. There remains much need for improvement, both at sea, and in our rivers, thats one thing we can all agree on. Tight Lines!!!
Good for DFO to increase the quota on Harry's and Flat Bay. They clearly believe the rivers will be adequately seeded. Many of you guys got it backwards - putting " extra " eggs in a river can actually hurt - too much competition. All you can ask any river system to do is to produce its maximum number of smolts. Lets say its 100,000 for Harrys. That can be achieved with 2,000 or 5,000 adults so what's the big deal!!! The problem is at sea when these 100,000 smolts go out 4 years from now. If 10% ( like it used to be ) survived you'd have 10,000 adults back; but now its only 2%, so 2,000 adults. If DFO would only fix that sea survival problem, we'd all have lots of salmon. The problem is at sea, not in our rivers - provided adequate spawning is met. We all should be striving to ensure adequate spawning first - then you can catch away. RM
Just seeing the DFO notice regarding the quota adjustment on Flat Bay and Harry's river. I can't comment on Flat Bay as I don't know the numbers on that river, but looking at Harry's it seems to me that someone is really jumping the gun here. Last year, the count for Harry's was less than 1700 fish, and angling log returns indicated that 730 were caught on the river. While many of these fish may have been released, i'm sure the numbers that were not reported caught, not to mention the ones that were taken illegally, would drastically alter the actual numbers of how many fish were taken from last years run. I have been fishing Harry's for 20 years, and I, along with many anglers have seen improvements in the runs on the river. But I remain concerned that these small improvements may not warrant an increased quota. I have never witnessed as many anglers on Harry's river as I have this year, every pool and hole on the entire river has had several anglers on it since mid June. With an increase to a four fish retention, this pressure will most likely increase. There never seems to be any consideration by DFO, given to the number of anglers a river system is seeing. Twice as many anglers will now be able to retain twice as many fish on Harry's river. So I truly hope that by some stroke of magical luck that we end up with 6 or 7 thousand fish through the counter on Harry's this year, because if the run is just early, and we only get the less than 2000 fish that the five year average points to, then this years run will be hard pressed to to reach the minimum spawning requirement. 730 reported caught last year, when you could retain two fish. Double that for a four fish retention and you get 1460 fish, assume there are twice as many anglers fishing... 2920 fish taken. So if were lucky enough to see 3000 through the counter I guess at least there are 80 spawners left! Obviously the numbers would not be as cut and dry as this, especially given the up river location of the counter, but I'm just using them as an example of what could be possible based on previous catch rates and the number of anglers on the river system. Not every fish will take, many will be released, several will be hooked and lost, and many may sail on through to the lake. But on the other side of the coin, many will be caught, several will not be reported, and sadly, several more will be taken illegally. The fact remains, that the only scientific numbers we have on this river, are how many fish pass through the counter above Gallants. Every other factor can only be used as an estimate. I personally hope that the run is not just early, that several thousand more fish make their way through Harry's, and that one day the run is strong enough to warrant DFO to allow a four fish retention, if not more someday. But I remain skeptical that this is just another example of how a fishery is being managed on the basis of poor science and misinformation, and it is very worrysome to think that several years of effort that have gone into restoring this once great river could be decimated by someone jumping the gun. The most troubling part for me, is that decisions are made today, and the consequences of these decisions will not be seen for another five or six years when the offspring of this run return. Sure it would be nice to keep a few more salmon, and because of the work of groups like Spawn, Saen, the ASF, and countless other river stewardship groups, I am confident that things will only get better. With that said, we all know it will take time and patience. I realize funding will always be an issue, but we could easily have a better system in place to determine the catch rates on our river system. If there were still a counter on Harry's river, in a location where the salmon were first entering the river, we could better determine how many of the fish that enter the system actually make it to the spawning grounds based on how many reach the counter nearer to George's Lake. It might not be perfect, but I think it would tell a lot more about what is going on in this river, not to mention giving all involved, a better scientific model to be considered for all our rivers. As well, when angling returns are filled out, catch data is seperated into released and retained fish, why aren't these numbers posted in the guide. With a counter on the top and bottom of a river, combined with information garnered about retained as well as released fish, we would all gain a greater understanding of what is actually happening in our rivers. Not to mention the light it would shed on catch and release angling, thereby dispelling a common myth about mortality rates in released fish. I appologize if I seem a little all over the place here, and I hope that anyone reading this doesn't think I, or anyone else, should begrudge them the right to keep a few salmon if the rivers can sustain it. In fact I am all for retention when it is feasible to have it. But based on the return numbers, and the pressure I have seen on Harry's river this season, I really feel that DFO is acting hastily based on some early return numbers, of what is possibly an early run of salmon, on a river that has seen a dramatic increase in fishing activity this year. As a side note, I have experienced some great fishing on Harry's in the last three years, and I'm sure we all hope it continues. I just hope that the good fishing this year, and the four fish quota, doesn't end up being at the expense of the fish that will return in five or six years. JG
(I/We agree 100%. This is crazy. At one time more fish were retained than is going through the counter...How many salmon entered the river then! They haven't come close to the numbers that Harry's can support. All this talk about having anglers on the river keeps poachers away does have some merit. However, most of the poaching isn't done in the daytime and that's a no-brainer for sure. The argument that changing the river from catch and release only to two fish retention only helps for a while if the anglers-on-the-river theory is correct. From what I've seen, once the two fish are caught the majority of the anglers give up - so it goes back to where it started. Then - increasing the limit to four certainly doesn't help. One, that means the possibility of double the loss of spawning salmon stock and two, it's ditto on the anglers leaving again once they get their extra two fish. Further, opening Flat Bay to four because of the Harry's trap numbers means extra pressure on those two rivers since all others in BSG are either closed or Class 3. This is all about local politics and nothing more. Don't get me wrong - if the river (or any river for that matter) can support giving up extra fish then so-be-it. Not a problem and it never was with SPAWN. Thank you for your comments. - Co-editor)The argument that changing the river from catch and release only to two fish retention only helps for a while if the anglers-on-the-river theory is correct. From what I've seen, once the two fish are caught the majority of the anglers give up - so it goes back to where it started. Then - increasing the limit to four certainly doesn't help. One, that means the possibility of double the loss of spawning salmon stock and two, it's ditto on the anglers leaving again once they get their extra two fish. Further, opening Flat Bay to four because of the Harry's trap numbers means extra pressure on those two rivers since all others in BSG are either closed or Class 3.
This is all about local politics and nothing more. Don't get me wrong - if the river (or any river for that matter) can support giving up extra fish then so-be-it. Not a problem and it never was with SPAWN.
Thank you for your comments.
July 2nd
My son and I took up salmon fishing on the West coast a couple years ago, this is our 3rd year on the rivers. During the last 3 summers we have met many of you on the rivers, about 99.9% of the gents we bump into have been very helpful and friendly. Most people have been only too eager to offer some pointers on when, where and how to fish a particular river or pool. Some of of you have even given us one of your personal favorite flies to try.
Recenly we bumped into a couple of gents from St Johns, after a brief chat, and we went our seperate ways my son said " dad we sure do meet a lot of nice people on the rivers hey "
To all of you TRUE sportsmen I say thanks.
Tight lines all. DB (true enough...A Port aux Basques angler gave me a couple of his favourite flies at Grand Codroy and wouldn't take any in exchange - Also gave tips on where to fish- Editor)
June 29th
- Thanks to the honest anglers on Flat Bay River. I left my good rain jacket on the sandbar at Walker's Pool yesterday evening. When I left there was four anglers there. I suddenly realized at 6:30 this morning that I' didn't take it. Didn't think there'd be a chance in hell of it being there. When I arrived there was 5 anglers fishing...My jacket was still where I left it! How about that. Way to go guys! KP
June 26th
Just a comment on the new tags. Personally, I don't have any problems with them but I know for some people the very fine print on the tags is difficult to see. I helped a fellow angler this past week who was having trouble seeing the day of the month. He nearly clipped the wrong date which could have been trouble, especially with his grandson there with him. Perhaps, next year the print can be a little larger. Outside of this, I like the new tag system. DB
On another note, there is an issue I have with the new tag system. I have my tags in my backpack and I did not leave them in a bag. Yesterday, I also had my fly repellent in the same pouch as my tags. When I returned home, I was taking all of my gear out of the backpack so I could wash it, and I discovered that on one of my tags, the print was almost completely gone as some fly repellent had gotten on it. This is a caution to other anglers that this could happen, and now on that tag I cannot see the dates in some places. I guess I will have to go to DFO to get a replacement tag. Bit of a pain in the you know where, but I am glad that tag is not the tag I would have had to use yesterday because there is no way I would have known where to punch the date out because it is completely illegible in some sections. Thought that I would pass that on as a warning to other anglers that you should keep the tags in a bag, and keep it away from your fly repellent. DR
2009
July 21st
Pack it in - Pack it out
"This is more to vent my frustrations because I'm sure most people reading this message on Spawner is a true sportsman/woman and cares about our rivers and the environment. It really bothers me to walk down my favorite fishing spot to find, plastic bottles, empty cigarette packs, beer bottles, chip bags and etc. I thought those days have past where you leave your garbage behind, but it's not the case. I only think it's getting worse, at least the rivers I fish. Every time I walk back up from the river I bring back the garbage left behind from some people that just don't care. If your reading this message and it relates to you, 99.9% of the time the garbage your leaving behind is alot lighter then when you carried it there. And for those people that care, lets all make an effort to keep our rivers clean. If you got room in your backpack, why not take some else's garbage with you. Please keep our rivers and woods clean. Love your website and keep up the great work." JG
Big Falls - Angler etiquette missing
"I fished the upper Humber at Big Falls from June 8th to July 8th and can say it was a challenging year for many anglers. The first decent sign of fish was June 17th but from then on it was spotty fishing. Consistently there were small runs of fish moving through for a few hours and if you were there when they did you may have experienced decent fishing for a short while. It would die off as quickly as it started with as much as 2 days before another run would come through. All this brought out the worst in a lot of fishermen. Guys hogging pools, sometimes standing side by side taking turns while other anglers waited for hours on the bank for a chance. One guy in particular, very well known in the area and can cast 120+ feet of line was very bad indeed. This guy, who probably hooks and releases 100 or more fish a year, still felt the need to hook and release fish while those on the bank who are looking to hook their first fish could do nothing but sit and watch. Other very experience anglers were complaining about the inexperienced guys " F$&King up the pools " Wow, It must be great to have started Salmon fishing as a Pro!!I have been fishing at the falls for 15+ years and in that time I have not seen the unsportsmanlike conduct of this season. I witnessed many overplayed fish, Illegally tagged fish and fish not tagged at all. I witnessed an arguement that nearly came to blows on the river and for the first time I have heard of theft in Sir Richard Squires.
Not to be all negative, some of the regulars that I have come to know over the years are still holding true to river etiquette. Many could learn a lesson from these "Gentlemen".
One last word. The tag system is the shits. I have heard of a few different ways in which guys are re-using them. Why can't DFO devise a better tag system. We really need to start making a lot of noise about this." SE