: A few stats!!!
01-27-2009, 02:12 PM
Thought this might interest you.
Estimated salmon runs in our area;(by govt' and river managements)
297 grilses (20.%)
725 grilses (34.8%)
277 grilses (29.8%)
596 grilses (49.5%)
183 grilses (25.%)
176 grilses (28.9.%)
612 grilses (55.9%)
111 grilses (27%.%)
199 grilses (37.1%)
Your thoughts ??? :roll:
01-27-2009, 02:16 PM
My thoughts? Good spawning in 2008, but over and above, with the number of grilses, we will have a VERY good season in 2009 :)
01-28-2009, 08:52 AM
How about the declines in big fish in the St. Jean and the Dartmouth? Did the kill fishery run again on the St. Jean last year? Seems like the Dartmouth is barely holding on.
01-28-2009, 09:11 AM
That's realy funny to see how the fact couple fish killed can explain why couple MSW decreased on a river ... Just hope we will find something else on river like Cascapedia where C & R is now applied on more than 85% of the catches, or Cap Chat which is not showing impressive numbers, where C & R is mandatory since many years, or Nouvelle where kill has never been allowed but not see major improvements, or Malbaie-Gaspé, which is C &R but see the stock radicaly down to a level not seen since many years, or....there are just too many example to list all...
About the Dartmouth, just figure that the lowest level of water seen during the last 5 years has been under 0.5 cubic meter per second, and we probable have a good explanation of the origin of the problem. A river produce like a river, a brook like a brook. And I think that imagine to have a river with no water producing like a river with a regular flow is a dream. A fish without water is usualy a dead fish.
The St John? If the studies realized during the last 20 years are good, just not be surprised to see number going down for the next couple year, but maybe just not for the reason you are looking for...;)
01-28-2009, 09:24 AM
The St-Jean (all sectors) was open in August - September (permitting to keep large salmon - at a max of 50 in all).
19 large salmon were kept in all.
New since 2008
- The gate pool (Moose Bogan) Secor 7 = Catch and Release only
- Dartmouth 2 (Falls) now a 4 rod Sector (instead of 6 rods)
- Total number of large salmon (not released (killed) for 2008 season) = 22
01-28-2009, 09:32 AM
Another factor in the St. Jean and Dartmouth counts is the fact that both barriers were lost during a high water period mid-summer. I suspect many migrated to inaccessible areas upstream and were missed in the count.
01-28-2009, 10:58 AM
My question wasn't meant to provoke - I was simply asking a question. CR certainly did help the St. Jean population recover while it was closed to kill, so i was wondering if re-opening of the kill (albeit in a limited fashion), might have influenced the count.
There are certainly other factors. On the Dartmouth, it seems that the headwater logging practices might be a factor in the river not maintaining flows like it used to.
I didn't know about the retention gates being knocked down.
01-28-2009, 11:23 AM
My answer was not based as if I saw your question as provocation, but more related to the fact the "kill factor" is always the 1st pointed out even if in most case it is the last that should be...It has in to many situation become an easy way to not manage what should be managed first...Applied under conservation consideration, it has great impact, but applied like a religion, the worst can happen too, and we have too many examples to just not objectively consider it.
St Jean has allowed a limited quota since 2 years, so before having an impact (if there is some), it will take at least another 4 years...
Now, more globaly, there is sure some improvement to apply in some rivers where the "kill factor" is currently a big concern.
01-28-2009, 02:43 PM
Very encouraging numbers, although the MSW returns on the Dartmouth are still a concern. I agree that poor logging practices are largely to blame. It has become a spate river...rising and falling rapidly with rain events. I certainly hope that the same fate doesn't befall the York and the St. Jean. There are some nasty clear-cut scars that have appeared on the upper reaches.
I also wonder about poaching. There doesn't seem to be the ZEC guardian presence as in years past. A friend on the Cap Chat attributes the declining numbers on that river to poaching on the remote upper pools.
I don't mean to sound pessimistic. I am not. In fact, I'm more excited than ever to fish the Gaspesie this coming summer, given the impressive grilse returns of 2008. Nonetheless, we must all be more vigilant in protecting these exquisite rivers and maintaining the fragile balance of the overall ecosystem. It was just a few years ago that many of us worried that we were witnessing the demise of Atlantic salmon fishing.
01-29-2009, 02:12 PM
Ann, do you have the stats for the Madeleine River?
01-29-2009, 02:19 PM
All Gaspe rivers are there.
463 (336 in 2007)
623 (592 in 2007)
01-29-2009, 02:30 PM
Hello Mr Fletcher,
336 grilses (36.2.%)
463 grilses (42.6%)
01-29-2009, 02:35 PM
Sorry...did not realize someone had replied before me!
01-29-2009, 06:43 PM
Ann and Pierre, thanks for the information. I have fished the Madeleine twice. It is a most beautiful and remote river. I saw lots of salmon, but didn't do all that well. My only excuse is the water was very low on both occasions. I didn't get skunked, but almost. I'm getting the urge to try it again. It amazes me how the smolts and black salmon can survive going over the falls on their way back to the ocean.
02-03-2009, 03:14 PM
According to the stats the #'s on the Cap Chat are NOT declining and the run for '08 was slightly higher than the mean for 03 through 07 and significantly higher than 83 to 02 . I cannot imagine any poaching going on in the upper CCas the fish can't run higher than the falls .Although between there and Cameron the river IS accessable .The ZEC crew are a VERY hard working bunch and very dedicated and any potential poacher is well known and would be "flagged " going through the access gate . Even when the run was very poor ans 1/2 the '08 run the fishing was incredible .
The Madeleine's run #'s are noted with a grain of salt as this is taken from fish that have been counted at the gate/basket at the top of the falls and definately requires a seperate dive-in-the-water count . I have no idea how many fish go up through the counter and then drop down back over the falls ?? .The "ribbon" test of a while back indicated a dismally high ratio of dropped back fish .
At any time one can ask how many fish went up the past 24hrs and the # is never higher than 5 or 6 . 6 fish over a 3 month run = 6 X90 days = + or - acouple of fish = tops , 700 fish. Now Salmon being what they are, don't run EVERY day ;-) . That being said ,Earle ,Maddie fish are very strong and very much takers .If you're back on the river with low water conditions , ttry a #12 and smaller fly such as a Cosseboom or #16 yellow bodied Trout fly.
02-05-2009, 11:09 AM
Regarding the Cap Chat "declines," you are right and I stand corrected...and hopeful that the numbers continue to increase. I fished a day on the river this past September and I guess I was comparing it to the "glory years" when the river was first reopened following the restoration closure. I spent a lot of time on the river back then - beginning in Aug/Sept 1990 until the numbers started falling toward the end of the decade. "Incredible" would be an understatement.
You mentioned that the fish cannot go beyond the falls. There was talk back then of deepening (by blasting) the falls pool so that the salmon could get a "running start" and leap the falls. I assume that never happened or it didn't work?