Fraser Sockeye Run A Major Bust in 2007

Monday, August 13, 2007 03:58 AM

Sockeye Salmon, photo courtesy Department of Fisheries and Oceans Canada

The Chief Biologist with the Pacific Salmon Commission, Michael Lapointe, says over harvesting of the Sockeye salmon on the Fraser River system is not the reason for their serious declines.

Lapointe says 2003 was the brood year for the four year sockeye which live in the Fraser system "We had 2 million sockeye enter the system that year which should have made for a decent return. "

The Stellako and Stewart Run are a different matter says Lapointe "We have been watching a long term decline in this sockeye fishery. Both runs in the Stewart River the early and summer run sockeye have been on a steady decline. At one time the sockeye fishery on these systems was contributing about $70 million a year to the economy."

As it now stands, Lapointe says this won't be lowest sockeye return ever to the Fraser system, "but it certainly could be the second or third lowest return of sockeye in the history of counting going back to the fifties."

And it isn't just the Sockeye.

Lapointe says, the Coho have also taken a major hit. "We are seeing a return here of about .05% out of 1,000 fish, that’s five out of a thousand that went to sea."

The demise of the fishery on the Fraser is, according to Lapointe, perhaps tied to climate change. "The Fraser River salmon fishery is located at the southern extremity of their natural occurrence and other than a few places in Washington State and the Okanagan they are located the furthest south of their limits. It is unfortunate , for example the Skeena and other systems to the north have faired very well. In some cases the warming of the ocean waters has benefited the sockeye, the warmer temperatures up north have given them more feed and they have enjoyed better growth."

The Skeena, he added, isn’t hit as hard by the four year cycle as the Fraser because there are a lot of five year fish returning and so the collapse of one year doesn’t necessarily affect them as much.

Talking about the huge decline in Steelhead, the lead biologist says that is also a concern "We have tried to implement some measures to prevent a major take of the fish during the sockeye migration, but it always is a problem and the Steelhead don’t win out." Reports from Terrace indicate that this will be one of the worst returns of Steelhead in recent memory.

Previous Story - Next Story

Email |

Print |

Facebook |

Twitter |

Digg |

Del.icio.us

Posted on Monday, August 13, 2007 03:58 AM in News by 250 News

Return to Home

Comments

Posted by: YamaDooPolCat on August 13 2007 7:12 AM

Well I'm glad over harvesting is not a the problem, it should be OK then to buy those fish from the Indian salmon peddlers that were by the other day.

Posted by: metalman on August 13 2007 8:11 AM

So how about limiting the Indian harvesting of these declining fisheries? I realize that a statement like that may be inflammatory to some, or even racist, but should'nt we reduce the overall catch, to enable more fish to get to their spawning beds? It seems to me that the returns would gradually increase, even though 'global warming' may also be a factor. Do our politicos have the intestinal fortitude to close certain fisheries to our native brothers?
It remains to be seen.
metalman.

Posted by: seamutt on August 13 2007 9:16 AM

Climate change! Ocean Warming! where's the proof? Might be other reasons. Mismanagement might be a very good reason, but hey we can cover that up by saying climate change. I that is the reason then lets see the proof. If something is going to be said, then back it up.

Posted by: Chadermando on August 13 2007 2:49 PM

Isn't it obvious that these salmon in the south have to swim past the fish farms and their lice in order to reach the Fraser River, and the salmon in the North do not.

Thus the Salmon in the north are OK for today, and the salmon in the south are being replaced by privately owned farmed salmon.

How do we even know the smolts survived getting past the farmed salmon to begin with, much less make the return trip?

Posted by: Palopu on August 13 2007 7:59 PM

Three pulp mills in Prince George spewing crap into the Fraser River. In addition we have two pulp mills in Quesnel doing the same thing. This has been going on since the mid sixties. Could this have any bearing on the Salmon problem. Who knows;

I can tell you one thing, I wouldnt eat any fish caught South of Prince George and Quesnel, at least until Spences Bridge.

The release from the Pulp Mills in Prince George keeps the rivers open year round. In the 40's and 50's the rivers froze over every year. Warmer weather is part of this problem, however warm water release from the pulp mills is also part of it. Add to this the diversion of the water for Kemano, and you have a double whammy. Plus the sewage release from Vanderhoof, Prince George, and Quesnel.

Put it all to-gether, and is it any wonder the fish are having a problem.????.

Posted by: kitkat on August 13 2007 8:29 PM

The state of many of our provincial rivers is sad indeed.
I'd like to know what people think can be done about it.
Should the 'evil' main employer in PG shut down a pulpmill or two?
Should the city route the sewage somewhere else?
No more oceanic fish farms?
Ban on native fishing? (Let's include sportfishing too).
Drain Ootsa?
Everyone is so good at finger pointing but if any of these actions occurred it would be front page news for years.
Seriously - What is the solution? More regulations? Better enforcement? Education? Should we become a tourist based region? All of the above?
Is it time to think outside the box?
I don't have answers to these questions but I challenge everyone reading this post to start doing the little things they can do that will have a positive effect on the life blood of our region.

Posted by: jonnypg on August 13 2007 11:17 PM

Right on, Palopu!

Posted by: acrider54 on August 14 2007 4:20 PM

How can the fish get that far up the river when the natives have the whole river covered in Lillooet