The Quinault tribe will be net fishing the Chehalis and the Humptulips Rivers, until April 15, 5 days a week.

Heard a rumor, so called the Montesano office of WDF, just got off the phone....the rumor was confirmed.

Guess you have to pray for lot's of super high water so the native stock has a chance to get up river.

Can't believe that WDF would allow a 5 day net fishery until April 15th...

"worse day sport fishing, still better than the best day working"

That's BS.
Good luck,
STRIKE ZONE

Looks like your prayers are going to be answered. At least for the time being.

With the poor returns to the Hump in recent years, what justification can be made for such a liberal netting schedule??

Anyone?

Where are these fish being sold? If we can not stop the tribes from netting maybe a little pressure on those that are could help the problem.

Since when does WDFW ALLOW the tribes to net? They are just doing what we have allowed them to do which is interpret the treaties way way beyond intent....

How much federal and state money was spent to create all of those fish so the tribes could net them and sell them and not pay any taxes or licenses?

dont they allready get to net the quinalt fishery as well, its natives who give natives a black eye, there is no need to be netting rivers liek the hump, it cant sustain a large wild steelie harvest, if any at all..so sportsmen get restrictions on how many wild fish they can keep ( i dont keep wild fish, i believe there should be a state wide wild steelhead ban) but this gives more to the tribes? no wonder there is so much bitterness towards the tribes..

The Quinalts have been rapeing the Hum and Chehalis for years without regard to poor runs, they also tried to start netting the Cowlitz a few years back and they did nett the Hoh up untill 10 or 12 years ago. They feel they have a right to every rivers fish runs it seems. Did I mention the Queets.


This is why I would never support any of their fisheries by paying to fish it. They rape rape and rape more then brag about how good a job they do with the Quinault when all it is is a hatchery factory. Thats nothing to brag about if you ask me. Nor am I impressed with growing large hatchery fish when the native stocks are struggling.

I think the fish will havbe a free pass for the next week or so. but it's a damn shame. Is this there idea of co -managing?

And what ever happend to trying to take their share from the early hatchery brats.

I think we need to try to work on a serious boycott of steelhead in markets and resturants.

I got in a screaming match at the pike Place Market years ago when I saw wild steelhead on ice with a big sign that said "Steelhead The Sportsman's Choice" I convinced the fish monger that out choice would be for the fish to remain in the river. But he never stopped selling them.

Just goes to show AGIAN how poorly Washington DFG manages things. What is the basis for netting rivers that arent producing 100%?????

I'll be glad when the last steelhead is netted... that way we can focus on the the real sport fishing,

Put and take trout! mmmm april is just around the corner...


hearing this really pisses me off. If there is not enough fish for a catch and keep fishery there is no way they should be allowed to net. Period end of story.

As much as I wished a boycot would work, I dont think there is anyway you will convince mr. and mrs. richy rich that it is bad to buy wild steelhead. I'm all for trying though.

One obvious problem is that not enough of those fish are sold around here to make a difference even if they were boycotted.

The market at Pike's seems to sell them regularly, but their about the only ones I know of locally that do. Perhaps others could give better input on markets/stores in their areas?

Most of the netted steelhead are sold back east or overseas.

Its the same with Columbia springers. At the meeting earlier this month one of the commercials was claiming that netters were the only way to "bring the fish to the public." More bs. I closely examine the fish in the case each time I'm in a store and I rarely if ever see fresh Columbia springer around here either.
Its nearly all shipped ot to higher $ markets.

You will see "steelhead" regulaly in stores, but its all farmed.

The crime only escalates when you see the pittance they get per pound.

Hey that's great!

AND one of the WDFW managers and his tribal fish manager buddy are going to come over this weekend and stick hot needles in my eye! Right before the Super Bowl kickoff!

I can't wait until next season, when they're going to come back and roast my balls with a blowtorch.

Sometimes I think I'd be better off not even knowing these things.........because right now my aggravation meter is pegged.

Were working on bainbridge Island and every day I drive by the suquamish tribal fish market and on the sign it reads fresh wild steelhead, truecod, lingcod and snapper, smelt and crab, oysters , clams, think I even seen shrimp on there. I'd never in my life go in the dirty place to see where there getting the seafood but I'm sure they got connections. I can't believe indians can get away with the stuff they do. Its an outrage.

The welfare nation!

Pike Place market would be a nice place to have a protest to killing and selling wild steelhead... I would love to see the looks on the tourist face's.
how about a couple of photos of the left over discarded gill nets as well, to remind people that gill nets kill more than just fish...

From an earlier thread on "Right or Wrong" I posted:

Remember, that broodstock programs can potentially be pandora's box for when it come to the wild fish. With the introduction of broodstock programs, i.e Satsop/Wynooche, etc. word on the street is the tribes will pressure to put the nets in get their 50% of the harvestable run later in the season at the expense of wild fish returning. A good number of anglers seem to believe that wild broodstocks programs are just great. What I want to know is the major goals of these programs, to create more hatchery fish or to aid in the recovery of a wild run? If it's the latter how come we think we can do it better than the fish? If it's just to create hatchery fish don't we have enough hatchery programs as it is? It's funny how there are never any stated goals or objectives when it comes to these programs, why is that?

But Rich ... does the Hump have a broodstock program???

Yes, it can have negative effects. But would it take a 5 day a week netting schedule to harvest 50% of the broodstocked fish?

Someone at the state needs to get some 'nads and fight some of the decisions by our "conservation-minded co-managers".

Keep supporting those Quinault fisheries, sport or commerical! They'll take every last one they can!

I do not understand.

Te same people that take part in the Quinault hatchery factory fishery, (yes these are the same people that go to bat for the Quinaults when they get bashed for their practices because they like to catch their fish), are the same ones that get upset with them for their rape of the Hump and other rivers. But yet these people still pay to fish the Quinault. I have news for ya the QUinault is nothing more than a Cowlitz that is run by Indians. The only difference is that the Quinault hasnt yet evolved into what the Cowlitz is but its on its way.

The Quinault has the most degraded native fish stocks on the coast. Some say their hatchery practices are the best id say they are a disaster.

I just got back from checking out the river and found that the high water has not slowed down the netting. The water is high and dirty but there is very little debri to hang up in the nets and the tribe boats are out there.

C'mon Bob.... Theyr'e indians, do they ever need a justification? Really?
Bleeding hearts + Boldt = Carte Blanche
Radicalism is not popular nowadays, but the Boston Tea party did change things.... Hmmmm..

MC

I actually posted a thread awhile back saying the same thing Rich, that I could not understand all these board members that pump money into the guided Quinalt thing... To me it is the principle of it.... You can make all the justifications you want, i.e., "I would rather have them guiding than netting", etc., but it comes down to the same thing.... Supporting them in any way will not change a thing... Perhaps if there was a boycott on the Quinalt the "Indian" guides would then exert more pressure from the inside to change things??
Funny, if they are not using "Traditional" methods (outboards, mono nets, fiberglass/aluminum boats) to "exercise their traditions", why can't the fish just be taken only from hatcheries and given to the tribes? I know it has been mentioned before, but gets slammed down pretty fast. The tribes against this idea maybe because they would not get as many fish (since they would be accurately counted)?? Now that I think about it, do any of you know that TONS of fish ARE given to the tribes directly at the hatcheries??? I have a good friend that manages a large hatchery in Oregon and he told me they show up every fall with pickups and large container trucks and load up tons of fish...... Lots of people do not know this....

MC

DH,
My partner and I are reading this. I guess you had some valid points. Whats it going to do to that "other" tributary's nates? I guess we'll skip the over nighter. The little tributary wild stocks are really going to suffer. I think I'll pour another whisk and think about coyote hunting.

As long has hatchery supplimentation occures in washington state comercial fishing will favor over wild runs and sport fishers. That is why we had hatcheries in the first place to suppliment comercial fisheries as wild stocks couldnt keep up.

Now the tribes harvest in terminal areas to harvest their share of the hatchery fish without regard to the wild ones in nearly all cases.

Do you really think hatchery salmon and stelhead are planted for sport opportunities?

Only in rivers that dont have hatchery supplimentation do you see any type of balance in tribal comercial harvest and wild fish escapement. This is because wild fish have to succeed in order for them to maintain comercial harvest. If wild stocks collapse so does their fishery.

In rivers that have hatchery supplimentation it dosent matter if they catch every last wild fish.

Now as far as the Quinault's go they just dont clip their fish. They really dont want to be able to tell the difference.

"Radicalism is not popular nowadays, but the Boston Tea party did change things.... Hmmmm.."


thats the kinda thinkin i like..i dont wanna say some of the things ive thought up, i would get kicked off the board..altho i jus wish some navy personel would program some tomahawks missiles with the coordinates of these tribal casino's............extreme? nah...im not here to native bash, or maybe i am, my father's father's father didnt mistreat chief joseph and nor did i, so why is my tax dollars paying for mono nets, boats, everything else they get for free and they're beer and not there counseling?

For instance,

The early element steelhead run in the Quileute System was at one time a much larger part of the run then it is now. Comercail harvest effort on hatchery fish has no doubt been the biggest reason for the decline of the early returning fish.


Since we know this why does the tribe continue to nett 5 days a week when the early part of the run is hanging on by a thread? The early elemt of the run is just as important as the spring element but it seems it is expendable.

Heres something to think about. Picture that tribal harvest didnt exist yet sport fishers impact trying to harvest all the hatchery fish causes the early element of the wild run to deplete to where it is now. What happens?

I will tell you what already has happened. It is now CnR for wild fish untill December 1 for sport fishers and catch and release the whole season up above. Dont be fooled into thinking it is for the good of the fish. It is CnR for sport fishers so the tribal Comercial fisheries could continue at the rate they were going. Infact since this has happened tribal harvest has increased. THe Quileutes now fish on a scedual instead of a quota. Tribal powers are actually opposed to wild steelhead release though you figure out why.


Dont get me wron I strongly support total CnR.


Also dont be fooled into thinking WDFW has made any fishery in this state CnR to be proactive. It is a reactive response to the way our rivers have responded to co-management.

Bob, To my knowlege the Hump does not have a broodstock program. But the Chehalis system does and I have heard concerns before that the tribes may push for harvest on the late returning hatchery fish. I think what is even more apalling is the Hump has been closing early(End of Feb) for a number of years because it is not making escapement goals. If you want to add more salt to the wound, I have seen the harvest data of tribal vs sport harvest on the Quinualt, Queets, by the Quinalts as well as the Hoh and it is very disportionate.

My question regarding wild broodstock programs is there never seems to be any established goals, objectives or timelines that I have seen. If someone knows where I can find them I am interested to know where to obtain them. I am just questioning, to play devils advocate, (because I don't know what the answer is) are they always a great idea for the fish. Would it be more helpful for sportsman's groups to help the department float the rivers to count redds in the Spring?

For example, the Sol Duc broodstock program, seems like it is successful and it has been stated that it's purpose is to jump start or help the depleted early wild run on the Sol Duc. But is there a target set in the program where it is finally determined it has met it's goal to augment the run to stand on it's own? And if the early component of the run is so depressed to have to augment it with a broodstock program why are we still allowing wild steelhead kill on the early portion of the run? Seems like a paradox, dam if you do and dam if you don't.

TKS- Buddy, I agree, make mine a double.

Yeah, great. There's a broodstock program on the Satsop, so we'll net the lower Chehalis and get them...............and the fish heading to the Wynoochee, Cloquallum creek, the Skookumchuck, the Newaukum, and the whole upper Chehalis.

Simply outrageous.

This doesn't surprise me. I don't like it but it doesn't surprise me. Nooch has had 2 week sport extensions into mid-April the last 2 years because of above average returns. WDFW also claims(as of last year anyway) the Chehalis system, as a whole, has been above escapement in recent years. I was wondering when the tribes would catch on.

As to the Hump, with it's depressed wild stocks and early sport closures, I'm completely baffled how this is justified.

Guess that explains the increased netting I've been seeing in Aberdeen on Fridays now.

Why do I keep hearing words like "justified".....The tribes don't have to justify anything....When is everyone going to get that through their thick heads?

I have a question for you folks that might be familair with the federal court process. Is the Bolt decision the type to where it is such a sacred cow that it can never be challenged? If it can be...wouldn't the fact that the tribes probably get much more subsistence monies from casinos and other government programs be justification to overturn it? I think a well financed campaign that was based on bilogocal facts and the endangered specoes act, and basic sportfishing economics, would be the way to approach it. I would be willing to contribute to such an effort. Forgive me if I am stating the obvious too much...I am pretty new to the issue

No there is not a broad stock program on the Hump.

I have to put the blame on the state. They allow it all to happen.

Quote by Double Haul,
I have seen the harvest data of tribal vs sport harvest on the Quinault, Queets, by the Quinault as well as the Hoh and it is very disportionate.

I could tell it was disportionate without the data. I would say they took maybe 90% of what was caught on the hatch steehead. Their nets went in 24-7 on Dec. 2. The river was blown and came back in on the 1st. We were catching some nice fresh hatchery and native silvers. The 3rd nothing no bites for anyone. the nets choked them off. Native silvers gone. They stayed in till noon on the 23rd then went back in on the 26th. They keep the native silvers and steelhead.

They are entitled to 50%. So that should mean we should get to keep the other 50% of the native fish. There are some that think that so they take an ocassional wild one. "My native friend nets all he can, I'm taking this one." The hatchery steelhead are done on the hump so any fish they take now are all natives. I put it on the state for allowing it.

I've talked to alot of longtimers and they say fishing was great till the "Bolt Decission" then it took 4 years for it to get wipped out. One guy told me the 1st year he went down to the bottom and counted 55 nets. They had a real tough time getting the boat thru the gountlet of nets.

Don't get me started on the state biologist that keep the plant at 140,000 hatchery steelhead.

What the hell can we do? It’s the state that doesn’t give a turd. Can we sport fisherman unite to get something done? Can we unite to put presure on the state? Boycott buying fishing licenses. What?

Maguana,

Id say we are pretty much fizucked. Most of the WDFW these days got there start for one of the tribes so you could say there would be some type of loyalty. Meaning making sure the tribes interests are looked out for before sport fishers or the tribe might tell on you for all the bad stuff you were involved with. Im not jokeing.....

Not to mention all the pay offs that go on from the tribes.

Having seen the inner-workings of the tribal fishery for years opened my eyes to many things. The Boldt decision could have been appealed all the way to the supreme court (federal) but to my knowledge it never was. Now after all these years for it to be repealed would take nearly an act of God. As far as the fishery services of either Oregon or Washington doing ANYTHING about tribal fishing, I know many in that field and some at the upper management level...... Here is the problem. They are allocated a limited budget and believe me they do not want to waste it on litigation. Anytime in the past they have tried to impose any restrictions on the tribal fishery it would result in an immediate lawsuit by the tribes which the state fishery agency must then pay legal fee's (and often the tribes legal fee's) and almost always lose. The general attitude has become "why waste the money fighting litigation we will most likely lose?"....... The tribes have become increasingly wise to this fact and know that no matter how out of line with regulations or popular opinion they become, they will always prevail by waving the treaty and Boldt decision in the court room. I have had 2 game wardens tell me in the past that even when they see infractions committed by tribal members, they will rarely issue any type of ticket because it will always be thrown out of court under the auspice of "exercising treaty rights" and they also do not want to waste resources or "my time"
How do we solve this? No easy answer, but I do believe that support of the WDFW in pursuit of litigation is a good move. Although it does deplete the monetary resources in an already limited budget, I believe that the long term benefit to the fishery in general and sportsman interests are well worth the money. Keep in mind though, that the tribes legal fee's are completely funded with federal $$ and if they had to pay their own legal fee's out of their own pockets they might not rush into court so quickly and would then possibly begin to be more compliant and cooperative with the F&G agencies...........

MC

Quote from Double Haul: "if the early component of the (Sol Duc) run is so depressed to augment it with a broodstock program why are we still allowing wild steelhead kill on the early portion of the run?"

Rich - You probably already know that about 60% of the Sol Duc sport harvest of hatchery steelhead occured during the Nov-Jan time frame in the 2001-2002 season. Only around 21% of the sport harvest of wild steelhead occured during those three months. Incidentally that is an increase of more than 20% above the 18.5% of the wild steelhead total harvest for the same three months of the 1998-1999 season. Are you suggesting that all fishing be shut down during that period to prevent the take of the early component that is unavoidable with any recreational fishing?

--- --- ---

We can whine about the over harvest by the Quinault tribal netters but the numbers tell the real story. For the 2001-2002 season the total tribal take of winter steelhead on the Humptulips was 242 fish, and all of them were harvested in Dec(161) & Jan(81). Considering the time frame it is likely the few of these were wild fish.

By contrast, the sport harvest for 2001-2002 was 778 fish, 752 hatchery and 26 wild. Only 8 of the sport kill of wild fish were during Dec & Jan during which time 648 hatchery fish were harvested.

The tribal and sport kills of winter steelhead on the Humptulips during the 2001-2002 season were about 242 (24% of the total) and 778 (76% of the total) respectively. It seems that the sport take was three times as great as the tribal take.

On the Chehalis the tribal harvest was 1,480 and the sport harvest was 8,018.

On the Quinault the tribal harvest was 10,124 and the sport harvest was 525. I wonder why?

On the Queets the tribal harvest was 4,019 and the sport harvest was 1,855 (1,500 of them on the Salmon). I wonder why?

On the Quillayute the tribal harvest was 9,598 and the sport harvest was only 7,260 due to restrictions on wild harvest.

Just some numbers for the record. It goes both ways.

45 years ago i caught my first steelhead on the chehalis, which was the number 2 river system in the state, in december . the main run of wild steelhead then started around thanksgiving and lasted till around the middle of February. now you rarely caught a steelhead tell January because the early run has been netted out so that now they net later.

If you think tribal stats are honest your very mistaken.

MC//that was a great summation of what we are up against. An arrogance on the part of the tribes is breeding an in your face attitude that we will be sorry for in the long run.

The threat of lawsuits is what we fear. Go along to get along is our motto now. This country's appeasement mentality has gotten us into incredible danger and we just don't want to stop I guess.

Plunker -
there you go again trying to insert information and data into the discussion. Some might consider that to be poor form! (t.i.c.).

Rockfish -
Much the same could be same about the accuracy of the steelhead sport catch information.

Rich G -
I found your comments regarding loyality of former tribal employees surprising and inappropriate. Frankly comments such as that seriously undermine your credibility; at least in my eyes.

Tight lines
S malma

Thats fine Smalma.

I have had enough, I have seen what is really going on and we are all being lied to about everything.

Try this for a link for fish sales....looks to me like a good portion goes to California....

T Wolf

http://www.salmonnation.com/fishmeal/wild_salmon.html#RestSEA

Green Sauks:

Thanks for the complete copy of the "Bolt Decision".....I've always wanted to read it.

How well I remember the meetings held in the Aberdeen/Hoquiam area, mid 70's. The meetings had many of the user groups. The "non-indian" gill netters and of course the sport fishing public were always well represented. Wow, the name calling that went on.......nothing ever got changed. Thousands and thousands of hours spent in 100's of meetings, to try and get that "Bolt Decision" changed....and believe me....every angle was looked at and fully discussed. Still it stands

"Worse day sport fishing, still better than the best day working"

Thats a darn good Idea.

Sport fisherman should be involved in the process for negotiations with every tribe on ervery river or beach. We should have a say who fishes when and how much.


I think this should be looked at just like the rule change process.

Plunker, My intent and post was not to argue about a harvest rate and whether we should shut down fishing entirely during the early component of the run. You know where I stand on that statement, and we just have to simply agree to disagree.

My point was to ask some questions and stimulate some thought regarding if wild broodstock programs were really a useful tool in wild steelhead recovery. Maybe this was was the wrong thread to start that discussion.

Rich-

Only a good idea if they are being used to help the run recover and not for harvest. It dosent make much sense for the program to to be used for both at the same time.

As far as the Sol Duc goes I think it would be far more helpful and productive to stop or drastically cut harvest and just alow the fish to make a recovery.

As far as the Bogie and Clawah go I dont know if even enough fish could be caught to start a early program. I dont know if there are enough left. The early runs in these two could be past the point of no return already.

Now are you anti hatchery guys starting to see whats going to happen to steelhead and salmon once the hatcheries are gone? Its this reason we needed hatcheries in the first place!

RE: Sport vs. Tribal Harvest Statistics

While I agree that there may be some misreporting on both sides, take a look at how the data is collected and published.

The data Plunker quoted I believe comes from the published catch records by the WDFW.

As stated in the document, a multiplying factor is used to adjust the sport numbers. Apparently the magic formula comes from estimates of non-reporting and non-recording of returned record cards, creel census data, etc. Those numbers are NOT simply what is reported! Enforcement encourages immediate recording; I know I don't need a $100 fine for one unpunched fish.

The Tribal data is taken from voluntarily released data from the Tribes (key term there is VOLUNTARILY), and from fish tickets turned in by buyers (I used to buy fish, and let's just say the average kindergartener could find ways around the process). Add to this the no-enforcement factor...

...how hard does the pull have to be before you know your chain is bein' yanked?

According to published figures, the total Tribal elk harvest on the Westside of the OP is something like 20 animals...

I love the generalizations that are spewed forth on this board, especially about the Quinault guides. Makes for a funny ready.



Hey, speaking of which, I might have an open seat on March 12 with Robbin. If it opens up, anyone want to pay for the seat and fish with Robbin and Parker?

You can email me if you are interested. Stlhdr1 is suppose to fish with me, but he may or may not be a ble to make it.

Hey Micro,

You are friggin clueless you must have no idea why hatcheries started in the first place.

Hatcheries were started so we could continue to over harvest.

The problem is harvest still occures at the rate as if the wild fish present while hatchery fish are around are not even there. Tribal Harvest