Spey Pages banner

1 - 4 of 4 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
688 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Our AGM is on January 24th, the book raffle ends on the 15th, the scissor deal ends on the 31st and we sent out our bi-annual news letter just the other day. If you are a member, have your email up to date with us but didn't receive it, please check your junk/spam folder, or check your internet security settings. Its been a busy year indeed with a number of habitat projects undertaken and completed, with still others in the pipe line so to speak. We even have reports from the Northern branch as well as the Comox branch on Vancouver Island in this issue. Please take the time to check out all of the links, as there is lots of interesting stuff there to read. Below is a link to it for those who didn't receive the news letter. Please consider supporting us volunteers and our grass roots organisation by becoming a member. Thanks

http://www.steelheadsociety.org/sites/default/files/SSBC Newsletter January 2015 Final.pdf
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
200 Posts
Read the letter with interest. Couple of questions

Saw a comment that the Society wanted to make the Copper River fly-only from mid-October onward due to excessive catches on gear on fish that are kegged up in winter-over tanks.

Mention is also made that maybe there should be hook size restrictions, too.

And then there's the proposal to make it illegal to take a to-be-C&R'ed fish's head out of the water.

* * * * *

At least the first one is going to be quite controversial. Can your colleagues and you provide more background on the thought processes behind these recs?

If our joint goals are to unite sport fishermen to preserve the resource, and help reduce pressure on steelhead then there may be alternatives. For example, simply ban boats from one or more rivers, or sections of certain rivers.

I fear that we Sporties are the Rebel Alliance against the Empire, and I don't think Hans and Luke should be debating the finer points of whether certain water should be fly-only vs. allowing gear. We have to all stay on the same page. A recent reading of Hooton's book certainly drove that point home.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
688 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
In general these sort of proposals have to be vetted through the Executive of the Society. This group of proposals comes from the Northern Branch (NB). This is a small group have been involved with Steelhead management in some way shape or form in BC for many decades. As VP, I can't speak for them directly but will say this, its not the policy of the SSBC to be involved in managing anglers or dealing with tacklebox issues. These are divisive issues and as such the Society avoids them simply for the fact that we strongly feel rather than dividing the angling public, time is better spent accomplishing positive outcomes. The SSBC tries hard to be a builder of consensus by being inclusive. You will see that most of the efforts of the SSBC in recent years has been in areas of steelhead management that have nothing to do with angler management, things like initiating habitat restoration projects for example. We are involved with other initiatives as well and are actively engaged in areas of steelhead management on the provincial level also, such as the Provincial Angling Advisory Team (PAAT).

It would likely be best if you took your concerns to those who are initiating these proposals directly. The bottom line is I cant speak for those who are initiating these proposals. I will pm you contact info.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
200 Posts
Thanks for the sensible response

Glad to read that one the reasons I supported SSBC to begin with is still official policy. Completely agree that there are plenty of things that can be done to help steelhead in BC that don't involve distinctions in methods used.

The SSBC does great work on habitat restoration and in advising policy makers on fishy issues. Here's hoping to a successful 2015!
 
1 - 4 of 4 Posts
Top