So, do we give each NI commercial fisherperson a couple traps with thier name and license number stamped on the traps ? Or, maybe a reef net or two in trade for their boats, gear, gas, moorage, and fishing permits. Will they own the trap locations, or do they draw traps and locations from a fishbowl for fairness in trade? Maybe site leasing from the state or tribes?

Yup, I think it’s a possibility.

Working on my roof but this. Chinook in GH as a whole are not at risk, make escapement more than not, and anything above the goal is harvested with most being in the marine fisheries. That is salmon management in our state. Again the GHMP intentionally removed targeted NT commercial harvest allowing only minimal impacts when coupled with three net free days a week. The release mortality from a net is rather substantial be it with a box or not and we are talking 12W and 7 marked fish for 2021. To think that 19 fish will have any measurable impact the health of the run is off more than a bit.

So what I am seeing in all the post is philosophical arguments revolving around harvest. One I want to kill a fish, two the NT get to kill them so I should be able to also. That the NT impacts are tiny fraction of what the rec fisher places on the run ( 19 fish guys vs 271 rec fish with C&R ) is inline with the GHMP appears to irrelevant to some folks. Interesting way to look at things and DW GH has zero threatened salmon of any species. Over harvested I think yes but that damage is done in the marine fisheries with Hump Coho being the odd one.

Yep. The NT boats should not even be there, for the few that still fish it is just a form of state welfare.

One piece of the puzzle is that one fish harvested in a terminal area may represent 100 or more to be harvested in a mixed-stock fishery. When the goal is "maximum participation" that in-river fish, from a smaller stock, is more valuable in the outside fisheries. If WA gave up all mixed stock fisheries we could still get the full harvestable on WA stocks but would miss out on the "free" Canada, Oregon, and California fish.

I think the use of traps could be a real problem for recreational fisherman. Done correctly they can be very efficient and have zero or near zero impacts. If impacts are the restricting factor in any run, this would allow them to fish at any time the hatchery components allow, with less impact than a recreational fishery. That said, in very low impact years, there could easily be a big push to let the traps fish and take out as many hatchery fish as possible but not allow the sports fishery in at all.

As in all things fish traps are no different, it is location location! Let me share my experience with you all. LLTK had a contract to capture Chinook brood for the hatchery on the Hump and utilized a tidewater area. Getting fish not that difficult but keeping them alive was something else. After a bit in the hatchery a full wedding band of fungus from gripping the fish showed on many as the stomach with a hand print! Even worse on the Wishkah and it was well documented. Seems we hit the salt fresh thing that tidewater gives you so any effort in tide water got dumped.

On the Chehalis we found that the water temp has to drop or the females do not do well. Satsop not so much but by the time they reach that far they are slimed up and sturdy as h===.

Bottom line is traps can work but not everywhere. Rain driven streams on the coast not so much UNLESS you can release the fish without touching it. Frankly fish wheels would work best and the technology exist now to hit a pedal and clipped one way fin the other.

So traps or other methods can work but it is about release, water temp, and location. It can be done but it ain't cheap and is difficult to site. Then the coastal streams can go up to flood stage in a few hours so construction cost are likely be high as a bunch of net strung up in pilings will not work on the coast.

Yes, traps could, by the efficiency at release, severely impact the recreational fishery. Right now, we see, or should see, the opposite as the recs can be more efficient at release than the netters. In which case, the pre-season negotiations will be even more critical to participate in. That, and getting clear policy from the Commission that allocates fish amongst the user groups.

The GHMP does allocate harvest between users and for rec the different reaches of the river. Other streams or areas someone else will have to address as my knowledge is limited in that aspect.

I am speaking more holistically. Bring in all the harvesters (and those who support the ecosystem needs). To my mind, if there are harvestable fish available, the areas where they are produced (spawning areas) should bet first call.

I can see nothing to object to CM but how that could happen with the management system that exist in the state and federal agencies would make it rather steep climb.

Very steep climb. The Tribes, with a strong conservation ethic, could push for it. The NGOs that support whales, birds, and such could take it to court. In the end, we'll just let it collapse.

I did see that WDFW has formally made a move to traps, beach seines, and purse seines in the Columbia. Identifying them as a new, experimental gear.

Not Chehalis but this on the Columbia CM referenced is a peek at what direction the beast is moving on harvest concepts.

April 29, 2021
Contact: Charlene Hurst, 360-605-5247
Public Affairs contact: Ben Anderson, 360-480-4465
Three alternative commercial fishing gears designated for 'emerging commercial fishery' status on the Columbia River

OLYMPIA – After several years of test operations, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) Director Kelly Susewind yesterday announced that the Department will begin the rulemaking process to designate the beach seine, purse seine, and pound net as an “emerging commercial fishery” on the lower Columbia River, opening these alternative gears for expanded study and use in the river.

The emerging commercial fishery designation would allow Columbia River commercial license holders to apply for a permit to use these gears. The designation is the first step in a process to better evaluate the commercial viability of these gear types and their role in helping meet conservation goals for certain salmon and steelhead runs under the Endangered Species Act.

“The emerging commercial fishery designation is significant, but it’s important to note that this is just the beginning of a much longer process toward potential wider adoption of these alternative gears,” Susewind said. “This designation does not restrict any existing commercial gears, nor does it mean these alternative gears will suddenly dominate the non-treaty commercial fishing landscape on the Columbia River.”

Without the emerging commercial fishery designation, these gears can only be used as scientific collection devices or in a test fishery, which limits managers’ ability to evaluate whether they are commercially viable. The new designation would allow authorized commercial operators to sell the fish they catch using these gear types, while still allowing fishery managers to carefully monitor catch and mortality rates on sensitive fish populations.

All three gear types are currently legal in Oregon, and the catch-and-release mortality rates for the gears have been approved by the U.S v. Oregon Technical Advisory Committee, which consists of state, tribal, and federal staff and evaluates salmon and steelhead runs and forecasts in the Columbia River.

Currently, only gill nets and tangle nets are authorized by Washington statute for commercial use in the Columbia River mainstem. Development of alternative gear and corresponding efforts to optimize economic benefits while supporting conservation objectives for threatened or endangered fish populations are key components of the latest version of the Columbia River Salmon Fishery Management Policy, which was adopted by the Washington Fish and Wildlife Commission in September 2020.

WDFW will continue to work closely with the commercial industry and other interested stakeholders during the continued development, implementation, and study of these alternative gears.
After collecting additional data, fishery managers will prepare a report to the Washington Legislature and, if warranted, request changes to existing statutes that prohibit the use of these gear types in the river.

The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife works to preserve, protect and perpetuate fish, wildlife and ecosystems while providing sustainable fish, wildlife, and recreational and commercial opportunities.

Before really jumping on the bandwagon, I have actively worked (as in hands in the fish) in what was supposed to be selective beach seine and purse seine fisheries. In both we hade real problems in handling the fish to release. Based on that huge sample of two times, one would need to carefully site the areas where these would be used and the abundance of fish worked on.
"Too many" fish will significantly gum up the works and kill fish intended for release.

No doubt CM. We found out seining that you had to keep the bow in the seine parallel to the current our the fish became packed in the bow and not good. Also hand pulling really sucked so it was block and tackle with a tow vehicle but you had to be very careful not to bring it in and jam the bow. Then if that was not enough that was the easy part. Sorting without harming the fish is not easy as you have literally dip net the fish in the water to avoid damage. Then the last thing was it takes about a 4 person crew to operate the seine safely bank based and if using a boat for a tug cost, man power, and risk of injury for the fish and people go way up. It can be a bitch especially if your effort involves mixed species and the number captured is substantial.

Tried traps twice and if the cost and effort did not chase one off all you had to do was wait for a rain. If the current didn't try to wash you away ( which it will ) then the mass of crap from sticks, logs, and everyone's favorite ......... grass. On a rise things coming down stream leaves, algae, just everything nature has laying around the stream turns a trap into a giant garbage catcher. One of the guys said that his wife said it had one benefit, it took care of his desire to man the trap at night.

It will take a lot of planning, for sure. The issue I saw was simple safely sorting. In the beach seine we were keeping male chinook and passing females. Try grabbing 20-30 pound fish without too much stress. In the purse being we hit a slug of fish and there was no way to sort other than to bring them on board (ie kill). I worked some permanent traps that fished the whole creek and floods/freshets/leaf fall could be challenging. Of the three, I think traps would work best, but they do require attention. Fish wheels could probably work well too.

I found this to be interesting. Using 2021 forecast for harvest BC and AK will take as many GH Chinook as cross the bar. So I think a step in right direction but do not think this will work as it is just another truck load of BS to continue on. It will take a judge with a pair ( of something ) to put an end to the massive damage marine fisheries continue to do. To be honest this bit NOAA is proposing is insulting as they continue to dodge the issue of AK and BC.


https://www.king5.com/article/news/natio...08-7533d1b0fd11

NATION WORLD
Feds could restrict West Coast salmon fishing to help orcas
The fishing restrictions would extend from Puget Sound in Washington to Monterey Bay in central California when Chinook salmon forecasts are especially low.

Author: Associated Press
Published: 7:29 AM PDT June 9, 2021
Updated: 7:29 AM PDT June 9, 2021
Facebook Twitter
SEATTLE — Federal officials are proposing to curtail nontribal salmon fishing along the West Coast in especially bad years to help the Northwest’s endangered killer whales.

NOAA Fisheries is taking public comment on the plan, which calls for restricting commercial and recreational salmon fishing when Chinook salmon forecasts are especially low.


The southern resident killer whales — the endangered orcas that spend much of their time in the waters between Washington state and British Columbia — depend heavily on depleted runs of fatty Chinook. Recent research has affirmed how important Chinook are to the whales year round, as they cruise the outer coast, and not just when they forage in Washington's inland waters in the summertime.

The fishing restrictions would extend from Puget Sound in Washington to Monterey Bay in central California, and they would be triggered when fewer than 966,000 Chinook are forecast to return to Northwest rivers. The last time forecast Chinook returns were that low was in 2007.

The restrictions would include reducing fishing quotas north of Cape Falcon in Oregon; delaying the start of the ocean commercial troll fishery between Cape Falcon and Monterey Bay; and closing parts of the Columbia River and Grays Harbor in Washington and the Klamath River and Monterey Bay to fishing much of the year.

If NOAA Fisheries adopts the plan as recommended by the Pacific Fishery Management Council, it would be one of the first times a federal agency has restricted hunting or fishing one species to benefit a predator that relies on it.


Credit: Wirestock - stock.adobe.com
A orca whale jumping out of the sea in Vancouver Island, Canada
There are 75 orcas in the three pods that make up the southern resident orca population. The whales have in recent years been at their lowest numbers since the 1970s, when hundreds were captured — and more than 50 were kept — for aquarium display. Scientists warn the population is on the brink of extinction.

Did you notice that the Fed proposal is Puget Sound south so it really doesn't help GH. Like moving boats away from the whales it sounds nice but accomplish little.

Quality lip service and feel good actions are the hallmarks of WA leaders. Who knew the feds wanted part of that action?

Not to be political what I find simply strange is the last two governors ( and present ) touted that they were strong enviros. Lots great sounding PC phrases then you look to the actions, ah not so hot is being very kind to their actual priorities and actions.

In a state that is unable to provide (mandated) funding for education, maintain our highway infrastructure, maintain a functional ferry system, maintain a functional mental health system, and so on why does anybody think they give a rat's backside about something as non-voting as fish.

They'll say whatever is necessary to keep the serfs quiet.