A friend of mine at work said he could have sworn he saw a net on the lower Puyallup on Thursday, anybody else see anything? If this is true, how could it be justified? They close the C&R fishery, but alow nets. What the hell is this crap.....hope its not true
tight lines
Chris

Welcome to Washington, its called tribal rights and yes it is a bunch of crap.

------------------

If there was a net they were poaching.The puyallups closed around Jan. 2nd.Maybe you should make sure you see a net before you go posting it.I could have swore, or i think i seen a net that just don, work especially if you want to report it to authorities.

NP,
If you read the post again, I was asking if anybody else had seen one.

X-Floridian....No sence explaining about nets read his moniker-Nativepride

Poaching....Hmmmmmm please define poaching to me concerning tribal members nativepride, Is it like a five min time out or something. Like when you see them floating there gill-nets through a hole or putting them in before they are supposed to, Or putting them on top of the hole and then going right in the middle of the hole where everyone is fishing and reving there motor to chase them into the net...Seems to me if it was I it would cost me and arm and a leg in fines but they seem to be only scolded by the Tribe and right back at it, How about the net that is right under the I5 bridge on the nisqually right now at 2pm on sat, Where we sportsman can't fish, Is it open for netting....Above the Law--B.S.

There is one that they left behind it has been there since last fall

It may be a case of seeing tie up corks in the river and not a net. I have had many clients exclaim,"Hey I thought the nets were out?" when they see these corks. The tie up corks hold the lead line and cork lines on top of the water so that the fisherman can get to them. The way to tell is that the corks will be about a foot apart. Tie up corks are about 6 feet apart. I'm not sure that this is the case here but may be?

Last week, I watched them drift their nets down the Puyallup River just past Fife. I saw them do it two different days. A friend saw them also. I guess the run's not as bad as the state thought it was, or the Indians don't care about the Steelhead. Just makes me mad...

Thanks Ken for confirming the report. I dont know what pisses me off more the one's in the Puyallup or the one sighted in the Nisqually by Yarf'em. Besides being pissed I have a legit question, I know both the rivers mentioned are closed to "sportfishing", but since these fine folks are not sportfishing is it still considered poaching? Or do laws not apply at all to the tribes? Seriously, not trying to be sarcastic, Im still relatively new to the area. Thanks
Chris

X-Floridian,

State fishing regulations do not apply to treaty Indian fishing. Treaty tribes set their own seasons and restrictions. They coordinate them with the state, but tribal regulations are not subject to state approval.

I haven't checked, but I think a commercial treaty fishery in either the Puyallup or Nisqually is highly unlikely at this time of year. Legal fishing in the form of a limited effort test fishery to collect data on run timing and abundance of native steelhead or spring chinook is possible. Another possibility is a limited effort ceremonial fishery. Northwest Indian culture pretty much demands a fresh salmon feed for events such as funerals. Of course, out of season poaching is entirely possible, too. Poaching is an attribute common to most all cultures.

If anyone sees what they believe to be illegal fishing activity, call WDFW in Oly or the nearest regional office. If they don't know, call the tribal fisheries office for the river in question; they're in the phone book, and they can at least tell you what the official schedule is.

Sincerely,

Salmo g.

If they are fishing out of schedual or not following general rules set forth by the tribal fisheries, and the WSDFW does nothing about it , contact NOAA and the poaching hotline out of sandpoint. They are listed under the blue pages and they are a federal agency and they can over ride the WSDFW.
Although it will be hard to have the tribal fisheries agree with you that any of the tribes are breaking laws. Since they will always have a reason to do what they are doing. But Noaa seems to have a little more pull then the local fish and game.

Salmo,

If they were fishing in Fife, might that be part of their on-reservation fishery? Couldn't that make a difference as to the reason (commercial, subsistence, or ceremonial purpose) and efficacy of fishing there?

Thanks,

Todd.

Thanks Salmo, that clears things up a bit. Although I still think a net in any river at any time is a bad thing.
Chris

All,
Netting on the Puyallup gets worse every year. My brother lives right on the river and we have spent hours this year cutting discarded nets out of the middle of the river. The "tribe" should be absolutely ashamed to be associated with netters that knowingly leave bad nets anchored in "convenient" drift spots. I have cut nets this year with dead fish in them on three occasions. We'll probably never change the screwed up laws that allow the raping of 21st century rivers based on 19th century mistakes, but you would think the tribes would at least want to improved their public relations by cleaning up their nets. Absolute disgrace....where is the guy on a horse with a feathered head-dress looking over the 410 bridge at the Puyallup with a tear running down his face...

Todd,

The 1979 U.S. Supreme Court ruling lumped on and off reservation treaty fishing all together, along with commercial, ceremonial, and subsistence as part of the 50% treaty fishing right. So I don't think the fishing location in Fife is relevant. What counts is whether the Tribe officially opened the water to fishing for a specific purpose. If they didn't then it's poaching.

X-Floridian,

A net in river is factually no more a good or bad thing than a hook in a river. It's a matter of values and to whom the values belong. Catching a fish never did a fish any favor. What matters to the health of any fish population is its productivity and having sufficient spawning escapement to achieve that productivity. Fish in the population above that necessary to seed the available habitat are called "surplus production" by fisheries management. It is from that number of fish that harvest can be taken, whether it is treaty, non-treaty, commercial, ceremonial, subsistence, recreational, or incidental catch and release mortality. How surplus production is used or not used is a human value judgement and has next to nothing to do with biology or ecosystem management.

Sincerely,

Salmo g.

[This message has been edited by Salmo g. (edited 03-27-2001).]

Gotta love those tribes. They net and net and net, and when they have so many fish that they don't know what in the world they're ever going to do with them...... They net some more! Tribes: Why don't you just quit screwing around and detonate a couple of nuclear bombs in the rivers? Get all of the fish at once! This crap of doing it slowly is killing me. Could someone please tell me where the "real" logic is in netting a river that has been closed to fishing because there are too few fish to go around? Why do we even bother with fishing regulations if they do not apply to the people who need them the most? Just thought I'd ask.

heavyhawk,
You bring up a good point about public relations. Why are tribes so uncaring about their own public image? I pose a question to anyone out there: is the amount of $ generated by exploiting native steelhead runs even remotely equivalent to the amount of increased revenue that could be generated (in casinos, for example) with a better public image? After all, the economic viability of netting wild steelhead is laughable. Anyone dispute that fact?

I know many sportsman, including myself who refuse to go to Indian Casinos for this very reason. If they were responsible with thier harvest of the resource, I know for a fact they would get more people in their casinos. I don't know if it would be enough to make a difference, but there would be more.

The thing that irks me the most is that the media won't publicize any of the tribes wasteful/destructive behavior. Unfortunately most people who don't fish and hunt never hear about the B.S. that the tribes are pulling. As long as the tribes don't get that kind of negative publicity they won't care about where their discarded nets are winding up and will continue to net fish on rivers with endangered runs.