We have offshore poachers,

We have offshore poachers, loss of habitat, fish farm sea lice, a huge sport fishing industry, in almost every community on the Coast some employing floating resorts, loss of shade along rivers and lakes allowing the waters to warm up, pollution, siltation, milfoil in Rivers like the Nechako, sewage running into rivers along with pesticides herbicides fertilizers to mention a few reasons for the decline and you are concerned about some bands selling food fish?

The biggest threat to the Salmon industry is in my opinion the Provincial and Federal governments. Fools.

Cheers.

Ursus

All of your concerns are quite valid, Ursus, but they have nothing to do with the sharing of what AT THIS POINT IN TIME IS AVAILABLE.

Are you saying "first come, first served" is OK?

"traditional"

Yup back in the good old days they used to load up their pickups er.... canoes and run big loads over the mountains to Alberta.

For years I watched the food fishery in the Fraser canyon and one of the hallmarks was the beat up old pickups parked everywhere. As soon as the FNs were allowed to sell some of the catch there was a proliferation of new vehicles.

I am actually in favour of this as it is a way to spread the bounty of the catch further inland but it also requires more management which may or may not be effective.

ursus:

There are more than "offshore" poachers to take in to account.

No, I am not in favour of

No, I am not in favour of first come first serve, I suspect that is happening before the Salmon get to the river, which was in part my point, how many lodges are catching Fraser Salmon, how many commercial boats?

What I am saying is that this situation is a result of poor management by our politicians dfo and forestry and that if things continue as they are, we will have no Salmon. If you judge them by their actions and the state of our fisheries, you might come to the conclusion that it is their intent to destroy the Salmon!

I know what the Salmon population used to be like on the Stellako River in the late 50s early 60s and the way it is now is disgusting, btw Fraser Lake used to be clear it is now full of milfoil and getting quite disgusting, Francois used to be crystal clear in fact you could see the fish swimming below your boat off of an area called Blacks Point where it was fairly shallow with a sandy bottom.

No doubt from all the toilets and the clear cutting in most of the tributaries and again milfoil, no wonder we have no fish between pollution, stupidity, and corruption they don't have a chance! Privatising the Nechako hasn't helped either, that river is almost dead, full of weeds slow moving and dirty looking.

Take a look at the area in Google Earth, you can easily see the clear cuts. If shell is allowed to extract coal bed methane in the headwaters of the Skeena that river will be in the same shape as the Fraser if not worse and what about the Nass and Stikine?

The tailings from Endako Mine is huge you can see it in Google Earth west of Fraser Lake, more toxic waste!

Cheers.

No fishing from Columbia River south thru CA

Fishermen have already been interviewed in CA and OR as a result of the closures there. They say they are heading north to fish. What's to stop them from catching salmon before they reach BC?

Have to wonder if they will

Have to wonder if they will bring a Coast Guard cutter with them like they did on the A B line which I recall hearing or reading prompted the fisherman to surround the alaska ferry in Rupert.

So they have mismanaged polluted and destroyed enough habitat in Or and Washington that they lost their Salmon fishery and now want to do the same here and in Alaska? I hope DFO shows some courage this time to keep them from killing our fish.

I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for either gordo or harper to stand up for Canadian interests, remember what happened to Clark.

Cheers.

Allocate in accordance with law

In my view the allocation of wild salmon in British Columbia, if there is a significant shortfall, must be in accordance with Canadian and International law. Section 35 Charter rights and the definition of 'genocide' are germaine - especially when there is solid scientific evidence of the negative impact of 'fish farms' on wild salmon and the perception amongst many in the Tyee/public forum, of the BC & Federal govn'ts willful blindness, negligence and recklessnes related to the impacts of open pen Atlantic salmon fish farming on wild salmon. Here is the definition of genocide:

"genocide" means an act or omission committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, an identifiable group of persons, as such, that, at the time and in the place of its commission, constitutes genocide according to customary international law or conventional international law or by virtue of its being criminal according to the general principles of law recognized by the community of nations, whether or not it constitutes a contravention of the law in force at the time and in the place of its commission.

more on definition of genocide & allocation of salmon

This all relates to the issue of allocation of wild salmon.

Genocide” is an amalgam of the Greek genos (race or tribe) and the Latin cide (killing), speaking literally to the destruction of a group. The term was conceived in 1944 by Raphael Lemkin, a Polish law professor who narrowly escaped the Nazi occupation of his homeland. In Axis Rule in Occupied Europe, a seminal text on Nazi race policy, Lemkin noted that genocide signifies:

a coordinated plan of different actions aiming at the destruction of essential foundations of the life of national groups, with the aim of annihilating the groups themselves. The objectives of such a plan would be disintegration of the political and social institutions, of culture, language, national feelings, religion, and the economic existence of national groups, and the destruction of the personal security, liberty, health, dignity, and even the lives of the individuals belonging to such groups. Genocide is directed against the national group as an entity, and the actions involved are directed against individuals, not in their individual capacity, but as members of the national group.

Lemkin described eight dimensions of genocide—political, social, cultural, economic, biological, physical, religious, and moral—each targeting a different aspect of a group’s existence.

excellent point - Peter Dimitrov

You've found the crux of the biscuit.

genocide ???

Peter, NO FN person is going to starve if the salmon don't show up. Native people are provided a generous "social safety net".

If the collapse of the salmon stocks ia a focussed "genocide" upon FNs, then what term would you use for hardship this also visits upon the even greater numbers of "white" fishermen and shorworkers?

And as many posters have pointed out, why shouldn't FNs who cheat and break the rules also take their share of the blame? If Lower Fraser FN poachers sell fish, and Upper Fraser FNs then do without, Who's to blame?

If DFO and its Officers fear arresting people, since when they do they get accused of "racism", who should do the policing?

If nobody does, then that makes it a clear case of "genocide", eh Peter?

Forced assimilation

Genocide refers to the wiping out of a group. It's not necessarily necessary to kill all individuals to wipe out the group.

Rape is often used as a weapon in genocide, on the grounds that the children that result will not be accepted by the group as members, and the women who are their mothers will be shunned by the group, and lost to it as contributors to it's future.

In that case nobody is killed, quite the contrary. But the reasoning and the effect is still genocide. Some Nazis felt a more humane final solution would be forced sterilization, rather than mass murder. Same reasoning there.

People of the salmon, deprived of salmon, are no longer members of an identifiable group separate from the group which wishes to eliminate them, so Mr Dimitrov's use of the word seems appropriate and measured.

Maybe affected bands should claim a few million salmon from the pens as a way to fulfil their treaty right to a subsistence fishery and to replace the lost trade fish.

Whoa ME2

ME2...you are making up your own dots and connecting them in your own mind. I have referenced s. 35 Charter rights and various dimensions of the definition of 'genocide' - not any of the matters/"dots" you speak of.

As mentioned, Lemkin described eight dimensions of genocide—political, social, cultural, economic, biological, physical, religious, and moral—each targeting a different aspect of a group’s existence.

Whether the facts presently exist to support any of the dimensions of genocide I do not know - and as a consequence, I have made no assertions in that regard. But, in my mind, looking back over my lifetime, the trend line is pointing to the possibility, perhaps probability, of some of the dimensions of genocide happening in the future. Surely, it is good to alert the public to the multi-dimensional definition of 'genocide', when decisions respecting 'allocation' must be made to meet FN's social, cultural, economic, spiritual needs as a " people" with rights under the Charter and under international law. That is all I am saying.

Bailey

What a load of pure, unadulterated claptrap, Bailey.

I am unaware of rape or forced sterilisation being practiced upon FNs as a means of cultural genocide in the past, and certainly not today.

Furthermore, in order of priority re who gets the salmon, it is written and enforced DFO policy that FNs come first and foremost. If I recall correctly, it is precisely this that the Sparrow decision guaranteed, and is what non-FN Fraser River fisherman have been protesting

It is long past time that FNs started taking ownership of self-inflicted problems and stopped hiding behind the illusion that ALL their problems, large and small, are due to a conscious "Dominant Society" policy of "Genocide".

I defy you to show me ANY dominant cultural majority anywhere, past or present, that has striven as hard as we have to help a minority adapt (and adapt FNs must) into the mainstream.

OTOH, it is easy to show other cultures all over the world, past AND present, which have simply slaughtered or enslaved minorities, or scattered them to the winds, rendering them powerless.

It doesn't matter how many billions of dollars are put into FN rejuvenation, Bailey, FNs and people like yourself will continue to say it isn't enough yet, and will continue to find more gripes. It's become an "industry".

I'll say it again - It's long past time FNs took ownership of those problems - and there are many like the one under discussion - that are SELF-INDUCED.

Peter Dimitrov

Peter, my understanding of a culture is very different from today's preference for taking a slice of time, and depicting the culture found within it as the one definition for all time to come.

Viable cultures have to be plastic, ready to adapt to the internal and external environment in which they are found. If they are small, and fail to do this, they are squashed, if they are large, they simply absorb the smaller ones, or, as we see all to often, they embark upon genuine Genocides.

In a benevolent society, minority groups are allowed to keep customs which can blend into the majority's customs and laws, and this is Canada's "Mosaic" objective.

However, I do not know of any Society which hasn't had severe problems with minority cultures (and religions) which oppose the majority's laws and traditions. This problem arises because leadership in the minority group stresses it's differences from the surrounding majority along with perceived insults in the past, usually generating ill-will and hate toward the majority as a "glue" to enforce group solidarity.

IMO, this characterises current FN propaganda, and if it is allowed to persist and a genuine "cross-cultural" dialogue does not take place (and here I don't mean the upcoming Recrimination Hearings), eventually we are going to see some really genuine racial strife.

Fraser River Dam Not New

A reading of the history of Pacific salmon will introduce one to the long held efforts to dam the Fraser. The US began damming rivers in the Pacific Northwest fairly rapidly, and expected Canada to follow suit. Amazingly, Canada (then) retained its own policies, which focused on the value of the wild fishery. And thus the Fraser was spared. Those days sadly are now being left behind. Even Washington State lobbied for the the damming of the Fraser. An excellent primer is found in Salmon Without Rivers, a sobering account of the Pacific Northwest destruction of wild fish.

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3854/is_200007/ai_n8914246

I expect the 'usual suspects' have banded together again to look for any grounds to permit a new dam, with a ton of cash to follow. So the closure of river after river to fishing, and more announcements of collapsed salmon stocks are likely. Then, we can truly have the 'run of the river' turned into hydropower.

One can't help but look to First Nations for leadership in this area as it is apparent BC's government has quit listening to its own citizens. First Nations in BC have very significant veto power in a number of important areas. I hope they continue to focus their efforts in continuing to protect BC's natural environment. I for one support them completely in their efforts.

Great article Tyee!

self-induced?

ME2:

I think you should consider the fact that indigenous people the world over face many of the same issues that North American First Nations people are dealing with.

Be they Australian Aborigines, the Innu, Ainu, Hawaiian people, Laplanders, or what have you... wherever the European culture and mindset has contacted the traditional residents of the that particular region, we see the same sad drama played out again and again. This suggest to me the problem is systemic, rather than the failing of any particular culture... or that the problems are self-induced.

I'd agree with you that cultures must be flexible to survive, but it seems to me that 'our' First Nations people have been bending over backwards to accommodate us, ever since we (the white European culture) showed up on their shores, while we have done little to adapt to their world-view.

Further, we have demonstrated again and again that our word and promise is worth little, from the first contact to the Kelowna Accord. I think I'd be making my own rules by this point too!

Here's another point to consider. Recent experiments in a return to a traditional diet in Alert Bay have shown the health benefits for First Nations people in consuming their traditional fare -- rather than the processed food which has in large part replaced the predominantly salmon and seafood diet that has been their staple for thousands of years. The argument as I understand is that their physiology has adapted to those foods and a Western diet has definite disadvantages in terms of excess weight, diabetes, etc. Forcing people into ill-health smacks slightly of genocide to me.

Your contention that no one will starve might (might!!) be true. But, there will certainly be a negative health impact from the loss of salmon as a staple of the coastal First Nations' diet.

I'd suggest to you that further self-education in this arena might help you to better understand this point. The myriad, complex factors which contribute to the pit of despair many First Nations communities must contend with is anything but self-induced.

Of all the self-induced sins, surely willful ignorance is among the most easily corrected n'est-ce pas?

Stump

Stump, I'm 73 now, and I've been interested in "Indians" ever since I found my first artifact when I was 18 or so. I began a serious interest around the age of 25, (ca 1960) questioning native and white old-timers, some of whom were around in the days of early colonisation (late in BC) in the late 1800s and early 1900s.

In the process, I've had to shed the subtle racism I was taught as a child, and learn that the West was very unlike the Cowboys n Injun movies I watched in my childhood days.

I've studied the books, read the novels, and have become personal friends with archaeologists on their digs. In that process, I've tried very hard to understand the problems that FNs had to overcome in coping with a hostile environment without all the modern accoutrements we enjoy today. Without such an understanding, it is impossible to undertand the adaptations that were necessary to survive in pre-contact days.

Those adaptations were uniquely cultural - and despite Suzuki's flowery depictions of those days - by far the majority unsuitable for today's use.

I've spent many, many hours wondering how I would have treated FNs had I been an early "white", and despite the acknowledged injustices our bureaucracies visited upon FNs, I stand by my earlier comments that we Canadians stood then - and still do today - head and shoulders above all other colonisers in our treatment of FNs.

One simply cannot judge any of those actions of the past - of BOTH FNs and "Europeans" - using knowledge and standards that have become available only in the mid Twentieth Century. Judging history out of context is a fool's game.

Just for your own interest, try to understand the difficulty both aboriginals and "Europeans" have faced in overcoming the language and cultural barriers posed by virtual stone-age cultures adjusting to our highly "civilised" one.

What would have happened to them without the reservations? Where would they be without the Indian Act?

It is not good enough to say "Well we shouldn't have come". Nonsense, humans have always colonised other people's lands - FNs did it themselves, and with less concern than us for the original inhabitants, I might add.

Until a truthful recounting of what actually transpired during and after contact times - minus the current revisionism - the hard feelings will persist.

Salmon People

While people lay blame the salmon disappear!

Arguing about who has the right to catch the last fish!

Yes their is poor leadership, but on all sides, meantime species disappear!

the not-so-stone age

I'd take issue with characterizing the First Nations' esp. here in North America as virtually 'stone-age'. There's too much evidence of highly-evolved cultures to suggest primitivism. What we do find are cultures designed to meet the needs of its peoples, using the materials available in each unique environment. This is true the world over.

It seems to me we judge their cultures by the mantra of the Euro-mindset, namely that growth is good. We are now learning that unlimited growth is a cancer on the Earth and there's much good to be found in the 'steady-state'.

My issue is not so much with whether or not we should have come, or how we treated the people we met when we got here. Your point that the West Coast First Nations have been treated much better than some other cultures is well taken... but really, that's about a sad a commentary as one is likely to see! It was convenient and utile to treat them as 'savages' and there were plenty of people who knew otherwise. But, then and now, gov'ts sure like to believe the experts who give them the answers they want.

But my main objection to your position is that the problems are 'self-induced'. To use an example of another minority, let's consider the 'gifted' child. Time and again we see these kids ill-served by an education system that cannot meet their needs... and the same behavioural problems cropping up again and again. Are the child's challenges self-induced? Of course not. It's a failing of a system that cannot encompass the exceptional or unique.

To reiterate, I don't think we would see the same problems cropping up again and again with every indigenous culture that I can think of off the top of my head if the behaviours were self-induced. Heck, even white folk demonstrate the self-destructive activities so prevalent in First Nations communities, usually for much the same reasons.

I certainly agree with you that we need to get past the blame game and move forward. But I think that beginning that process by saying that First Nations cultures have brought this situation upon themselves is erroneous and counter-productive.

I'd also invite you to reconsider your position that the loss of the salmon is no real hardship. As I mentioned in my previous post, there's plenty of evidence to suggest otherwise.

137 species depend on wild salmon

Here is the list folks:

Harlequin Duck • Osprey • Bald Eagle • Caspian Tern • Black Bear • Grizzly Bear • Northern River Otter • Killer Whale • Cope's Giant Salamander • Pacific Giant Salamander • Pacific Coast Aquatic Garter Snake • Red-throated Loon • Pied-billed Grebe • Clark's Grebe • American White Pelican • Brandt's Cormorant • Double-crested Cormorant • Pelagic Cormorant • Great Blue Heron • Black-crowned Night-heron • Turkey Vulture • California Condor • Common Goldeneye • Barrow's Goldeneye • Common Merganser • Red-breasted Merganser • Golden Eagle • Bonaparte's Gull • Heermann's Gull • Ring-billed Gull • California Gull • Herring Gull • Thayer's Gull • Western Gull • Glaucous-winged Gull • Glaucous Gull • Common Tern • Arctic Tern • Forster's Tern • Elegant Tern • Common Murre • Marbled Murrelet • Rhinoceros Auklet • Tufted Puffin • Belted Kingfisher • American Dipper • Steller's Jay • Black-billed Magpie • American Crow • Northwestern Crow • Common Raven • Virginia Opossum • Water Shrew • Coyote • Gray Wolf • Raccoon • Mink • Bobcat • Northern Fur Seal • Northern (Steller) Sea Lion • California Sea Lion • Harbor Seal • Pacific White-sided Dolphin • Gyrfalcon • Peregrine Falcon • Killdeer • Spotted Sandpiper • Snowy Owl • Willow Flycatcher • Tree Swallow • Violet-green Swallow • Northern Rough-winged Swallow • Bank Swallow • Cliff Swallow • Barn Swallow • Harbor Porpoise • Dall's Porpoise • Snapping Turtle • Western Pond Turtle • Western Terrestrial Garter Snake • Common Garter Snake • Pacific Loon • Common Loon • Yellow-billed Loon • Horned Grebe • Red-necked Grebe • Western Grebe • Sooty Shearwater • Brown Pelican • Great Egret • Snowy Egret • Green Heron • Trumpeter Swan • Mallard • Green-winged Teal • Canvasback • Greater Scaup • Surf Scoter • White-winged Scoter • Hooded Merganser • Red-tailed Hawk • Greater Yellowlegs • Franklin's Gull • Mew Gull • Black-legged Kittiwake • Pigeon Guillemot • Ancient Murrelet • Gray Jay • Winter Wren • American Robin • Varied Thrush • Spotted Towhee • Song Sparrow • Masked Shrew • Vagrant Shrew • Montane Shrew • Fog Shrew • Pacific Shrew • Pacific Water Shrew • Trowbridge's Shrew • Douglas' Squirrel • Deer Mouse • Red Fox • Gray Fox • Ringtail • American Marten • Fisher • Long-tailed Weasel • Wolverine • Striped Skunk • Mountain Lion • White-tailed Deer • Black-tailed Deer • Minke Whale • Sperm Whale • Humpback Whale • Northern Rightwhale Dolphin

Might Take Flak for This...

But a large dam upstream in the Fraser Basin, probably not right on the Fraser, may ironically be the solution.

The 90s were all about sediment control in forestry and urban development. Now the concern is water temperature. As the temperature rises to ~12ºC, parasites begin to explode in numbers and take what little piss out of the sockeye that is left. Plus warmer water also saps the salmon's energy when swimming.

Impounding a large amount of water during freshet and then gradually releasing during the summer months would be a potential solution to cooling the river. Now you will say "but won't creating a lake heat up the water?". Yes and no. The lower layers of the lake would remain a cool 4ºC all year round - a low-level outlet would release this cool water.

Don't discount this idea based on emotion. We won't have glaciers to provide cool water through August and September in 30-100 years, and that alone should be enough to wipe out salmon stocks if they last that long. Or maybe nature will develop a new strain of disease and temperature-resistant salmon - not likely. A man-made band aid may be the only treatment.

The Harper Government to the Rescue

http://www.newswire.ca/en/releases/archive/May2008/22/c3488.html

Dam

The Nechako River is directly affected by a dam in the control of Alcan and if you take a good look at that river you might change your mind!

Cheers

Stump

Well, Stump, I had a response prepared, and then this GD Microsoft program ate it - just one of a recurrent variety of similar incidents.

So, this will be fairly brief, and then I will go visit a friend who will install Linux for me, OK since I do not play those stupid games which demand MS

Please do not respond to me unless you check the accuracy of accusations you level against me.

Please keep your responses directly relevant to the issues you or I have already raised – there is plenty of time to discuss others in their turn. Otherwise the discussion just becomes a childish game of seeing who can assemble the fullest grab-bag of issues to hurl at the other. I do not see this discussion as a “contest”.

Please do not put words in my mouth, and then expect me to defend myself.

I did not say FNs are not entitled to the Salmon resource

You admit that ill-treatment of aboriginals is world-wide, but then deny the practice is ages-old by posing it as an “Euro mind-set”. That’s just twaddle.

You refuse to see that “Stone Age” has everything to do with the evolution of a culture in the absence of foreign technical and cultural infusions (most particularly the acquisition of metals) and says nothing about the evolution of sophisticated customs within those cultures. This lack of modern technologies says nothing about the intelligence of aboriginals, since our own technological prowess is only the result of uncountable sharings of ideas between thousands of cultural groups.

And re Self Induced, please read again what I wrote and get it right this time. I’ll even hilite the relevant phrase :

"I'll say it again - It's long past time FNs took ownership of those problems - and there are many like the one under discussion - that are SELF-INDUCED."

Peter Dimitrov

Only partly true. The Spotted Towhee that lives in my back yard wouldn't know anything about salmon and would continue to exist quite nicely if they vanished from the face of the earth tomorrow.

The fallacy of posting a list like this is that it is correct only when a species is exposed to and exists in salmon habitat.

A significant number of the creatures you listed would continue to flourish in their existing habitats even without salmon returning yearly. Furthermore they can also survive quite nicely in habitats that have never seen a salmon of any sort, dead or alive.

I am aware of the nitrogen factor that is created by dead fish and droppings from animals that have eaten same but for the most part unless a significant portion of a species diet is fish the species will not be endangered. IMHO

That being said the resource should still be managed better than it is by all parties. We should strive to maintain it in all of it's original habitats.

Thanks Snert

well I did not compose the list- if you google 'salmonnation' -it is there. Nonetheless, your insights are valuable, and indeed the point you make is true: we could manage this resouce much better for all concerned. I remember quite sometime ago - attending lectures given by Professor Buzz Hollings who was at the Institute of Animal Resource Ecology (or whatever the name is) at UBC - he was an expert on the topic of 'species population resiliency" and managing 'uncertainty'. I wish DFO had taken his ideas more into account in managing the east & west coast fishery, and more proactively employed the precautionary principle -but it seems in the modern world, the only thing rising (via inflation) is monetary capital, while ecological and social capital is dwindling. ...we have sophisticated computer modelling, but the assumptions and default values that go into building the models are questionable ..in addition to the 'facts' that we input into the model. "Garbage in - Garbage out" -it is called.

Peter

As big a problem as anything, Peter, is the lack of lack of research by DFO. It's focus upon economics only has led to management of commercial species by consistently harvesting up to the point when returns begin to dwindle.

Playing this game with the East Coast Cod without knowing anything about its life history led directly to the collapse.

And if DFO knows dick about "target" species, it knows SFA about "junk" species. The ocean's just a big cash register to them, Peter, one which never has to have any cash put back in to it.

Draggers

I have met a few guys over the years who worked on draggers and they say that they have to throw any species they are not licensed to catch overboard, the fish are dead and they throw them overboard.WTF!

They are not even supposed to keep any salmon or halibut for eating on board, one guy told me that they throw approximately half their catch overboard. So as an example if the boat carries 100 tons of fish they kill 200 , if this isn't the ultimate in stupidity I don't know what is.

I have also heard read that dfo has more economists working in Ottawa then fish cops in the west, wouldn't surprise me.

Cheers.

Missing more than salmon

Impose a ‘moratorium” on salmon for 8 years? Agreed.
Ursus has an awesome list of things to do and consider in that time.
When numbers permit, after the old way of counting is brought back, permit First Nations to possibly be the only ones to fish? Agreed.
And there lies the problem.
Most of the parties involved, especially the ones making noise, do not want to relinquish their stranglehold for a second, never mind 8 years.
The DFO is incompetent, spineless and responsible for the lack of salmon as well as many other species. The new concern of warming waters should be a serious consideration, not simply their scapegoat. If the DFO would have done their job all these years, they’d have some actual insight and data…but this is not the case. You could shut most of them down and no one would know. The money saved should be redirected to First Nations. Their ridiculous income must be finally amended or the above posts apply. Funding is full of arguments but they don‘t belong here. The fact is the salmon are missing. Shut down SARA. They simply duplicate or undermine the good work of COSEWIC. There, lots of funds.
It is damn nervy of the DFO to ask the FN how to share-now that there is nothing to share. Is this because they found out the FN constitutional right to fish cannot be manipulated? If only some commercial fishers could wrap their head around that fact. Or the fact there are no salmon for them.
The posted species list is missing People! The 139th species could be the white sturgeon. As well as missing salmon, the sturgeon is missing oolichan and... The ban on the harvesting sturgeon was initiated by First Nations out of concern for the mighty species. They were right on; many devastating blows are currently still very much in play. But the catch and release industry created a “conservation society” that aggressively painted a picture of well being and stability, supported mostly by their own numbers from their very own, very short tagging program as well as a healthy manipulation of facts and priorities. Some of their actions were blatantly unsporting. SARA ignored COSEWIC recommendations to condone catch and release. Pushing for international customers even as SARA “considered” their recommendation, the sturgeon catch & release industry is thriving...
It’s a sad day when the mightiest species are reduced to a struggling shadow of their former selves. A lot of fishers have got to let go or what little is left will certainly be lost.

Rationalising the ocean harvest.

Beyond any question, weirs at the river mouths make the most sense, since fish caught there are at their maximum size, best condition, most economically processed, and accurate counts for management are made possible.

Local bands should be employed to operate these facilities, and management should be a LOCAL, cross-cultural exercise, (not the present "nation-to-nation" BS) and so Prov - Fed political meddling will be denied.

Only closed-containment fish-farming s/b allowed.

Seine and gillnet licences should then be bought out and permanently retired.

Bottom-trawling s/b permanently banned, and the sustainability of mid-water trawling given more study, and likely curtailed.

The biomass harvest of forage fish such as herring, anchovy and sandlance s/b banned, with only the harvest of roe-on-kelp (Ka'aw) by FNs allowed.

A coast-wide re-introduction of the Sea otter must be begun.

Add-ons

A small fleet of trollers should be allowed, in order to supply the high-end market for fresh-caught fish.

In order to break the present choke-hold the large processors have on the market, fishers should be allowed to sell their fish piece by piece at the dock. Gov't concerns re Health issues are contrived to favour processors, just as are their concerns re farmers selling their animals directly to the public.

The objective of all these rules is to foster the LOCAL economy and the small producer,

ME2

Makes a lot of sense to me. The headline in one of the ubiquitous CanWest dailies says today that a 30% reduction in the Chinook catch off the west coast of the Island would doom the troll fleet and wreck small coastal communities.

The usual complaint being, of course, 'We ain't doing nuttin' unless the boyz from Washington and Oregon cooperate too.

I thought there was an agreement (or the suggestion of one) that the US would cut its catch too.

In the end, unless some of your suggestions are adopted - all along the coast - we're going to be talking about the salmon in ten years the way we've been talking about the northern cod for the last 15.

ME2

Sorry ME2, I agree with a lot of what you say here, but I don't think it's a contest, merely that I disagree with some of the underpinnings of your position.

I'm unclear exactly what problems in your opinion are related to the First Nations are "self-induced' esp. when considering the scale of commercial fisheries vs native food fisheries, the history of colonization (the world over).

You made a pretty blanket statement about First Nations (spot the pun) and I responded.

Your mind appears pretty made up that you have an opinion that works for you however, so I'll bow out right now rather than argue a position tha makes your general statement somehow specific.