#567656 - 12/29/09 08:02 PM
Re: Gill-net salmon fishing ban on ballot?
[Re: SBD]
|
River Nutrients
Registered: 01/17/04
Posts: 3742
Loc: Sheltona Beach
|
So thats the reasoning for switching over to seining instead of just getting rid of them? To keep the tribes out, CCA is playing with fire. This discussion reminds me of a time at a Commission meeting close to five years ago. I was told the DFW was to provide a viable commercial fishery and recreational opportunity. Lower CR steelhead have tanked. Sturgeon are going downhill fast. How viable are the gillnets now?
_________________________
When we are forgotten, we cease to exist . Share your outdoor skills.
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#567657 - 12/29/09 08:17 PM
Re: Gill-net salmon fishing ban on ballot?
[Re: ]
|
Three Time Spawner
Registered: 07/01/09
Posts: 1597
Loc: common sense ave.
|
The public will not stand by and let tribes and us be the only ones to harvest.
what do the tribes do with all the fish they catch ?, if they dont sell it to the public who do they sell it to ?
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#567659 - 12/29/09 08:30 PM
Re: Gill-net salmon fishing ban on ballot?
[Re: boater]
|
clown flocker
Registered: 10/19/09
Posts: 3731
Loc: Water
|
There selling more and more all the time, crab, whiting, blackcod, salmon...Big money behind them now..
_________________________
There's a sucker born every minute
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#567668 - 12/29/09 09:12 PM
Re: Gill-net salmon fishing ban on ballot?
[Re: ]
|
Three Time Spawner
Registered: 07/01/09
Posts: 1597
Loc: common sense ave.
|
The public will not stand by and let tribes and us be the only ones to harvest.
what do the tribes do with all the fish they catch ?, if they dont sell it to the public who do they sell it to ? There is no shortage of buyers in the market. so why do you think The public will not stand by and let tribes and us be the only ones to harvest ?, what am i missing ?, the tribes will still sell fish to the public
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#567684 - 12/29/09 10:14 PM
Re: Gill-net salmon fishing ban on ballot?
[Re: ]
|
Juvenile at Sea
Registered: 12/25/09
Posts: 141
Loc: SW WA.
|
Wondering when this was going to hit the news on this site. I`ll state my opinion now. A ban on gillnets in the LCR is a good thing, unfortunately CCA has an alternative for the commercials. Fishing methods that were outlawed in the past because they were too effective, seines, wheels, etc. While these methods will greatly reduce their impacts on wild fish it will not be a good deal for us {sport fishermen}, as it will give them a MUCH longer season and more hatchery fish {our keepers} bonked before we get a chance at them. As for the tribal fishermen I believe many of you don`t understand the intent of the treaty tribes on the Columbia river. They`re interested in FISH, not some government regs saying how many, what kind, etc. Any of you fish the Wind River while the tribes were in control of the hatchery know what I`m talking about. They milked every springer that came into the hatchery, when the rearing ponds got too full they dipped smolts out and threw them in the creek. WDFW can only do so much with the way they`re regulated/governed, but they could do a lot better, these guys do know how to raise fish but they`re not allowed to. I believe that if the tribes were in control of some of our LCR hatcheries we would see an immediate benefit in the amount of hatchery fish available. I don`t know what this would do to the wild runs but since we started down this road with hatcheries I see no turning back now. That is unless about 3/4 of us decide to quite fishing, and the others go to C&R of the few remaining wild stocks left. Bill
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#567691 - 12/29/09 10:37 PM
Re: Gill-net salmon fishing ban on ballot?
[Re: billjr64]
|
River Nutrients
Registered: 01/13/07
Posts: 3359
Loc: Pasco Bulldog country
|
I don't think it'll happen, cause these fish belong to the n-juns and we're not entitled to squat...but are given left over scraps, so that we keep buying fishing licensing, and paying taxes....and the vicious cycle continues.
Mf
_________________________
Born again with IRON MAIDEN!
"Go hard, today Can't worry the past, coz that yesterday". GO COUGS!!!
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#567697 - 12/29/09 10:53 PM
Re: Gill-net salmon fishing ban on ballot?
[Re: billjr64]
|
River Nutrients
Registered: 12/30/07
Posts: 3116
|
Bill,
Its not a burden you should lift, by yourself. Its much easier to make adjustments to compensate for the projected consequences, than it is to spend a lifetime, repopulating thousands of creeks and rivers, with fish that are inferior, or came from somewhere else.
I think, we will face other sacrifices, that will be much larger and more expensive, in order to save what nature gave us.
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#567702 - 12/29/09 11:24 PM
Re: Gill-net salmon fishing ban on ballot?
[Re: billjr64]
|
clown flocker
Registered: 10/19/09
Posts: 3731
Loc: Water
|
Good post bill, I just don't see this as the answer either...Need to get people out period, not take away there 22's and give them 300mags
_________________________
There's a sucker born every minute
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#567731 - 12/30/09 12:19 AM
Re: Gill-net salmon fishing ban on ballot?
[Re: SBD]
|
Carcass
Registered: 11/30/09
Posts: 2267
|
I'm for change because I don't like where we are going from where we have been.
Edited by Lucky Louie (12/30/09 12:29 AM)
_________________________
The world will not be destroyed by those that are evil, but by those who watch them without doing anything.- Albert Einstein
No you can’t have my rights---I’m still using them
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#567734 - 12/30/09 12:23 AM
Re: Gill-net salmon fishing ban on ballot?
[Re: Magicfly]
|
Juvenile at Sea
Registered: 12/25/09
Posts: 141
Loc: SW WA.
|
Any of you fish the Wind River while the tribes were in control of the hatchery know what I`m talking about. I`ll take left overs like that any day. 4 fish limit. No fin clip required. And you had a decent chance at that four fish limit. BIll
Edited by billjr64 (12/30/09 12:50 AM)
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#567736 - 12/30/09 12:28 AM
Re: Gill-net salmon fishing ban on ballot?
[Re: SBD]
|
Juvenile at Sea
Registered: 12/25/09
Posts: 141
Loc: SW WA.
|
So 3/4 of us need to quite fishing? Who should that be? Do you want to pick or should we just price out all the undesirables? Bill
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#567739 - 12/30/09 12:36 AM
Re: Gill-net salmon fishing ban on ballot?
[Re: Lucky Louie]
|
Juvenile at Sea
Registered: 12/25/09
Posts: 141
Loc: SW WA.
|
Well, back in the day I began springer fishing the Columbia was closed PERIOD to spring chinook. Don`t get me wrong I`m all for banning gillnets on the LCR. But I don`t think this is "the change we can believe in". Bill
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#567745 - 12/30/09 12:48 AM
Re: Gill-net salmon fishing ban on ballot?
[Re: Fast and Furious]
|
Juvenile at Sea
Registered: 12/25/09
Posts: 141
Loc: SW WA.
|
Umm, don`t know how to respond to the wild fish guys except to say that you have ALOT of valid points and I agree with most of them. I wish we could rely on wild fish propagation to provide all of our needs. Unfortunately there are too many of us and too few of them{wild fish}. Habitat restoration may help in the long run but I doubt it will be enough and at what cost. Bill
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#567761 - 12/30/09 01:45 AM
Re: Gill-net salmon fishing ban on ballot?
[Re: ]
|
Three Time Spawner
Registered: 07/01/09
Posts: 1597
Loc: common sense ave.
|
What you're missing is the ability to think outside and beyond your bias against ANY group that doesn't hug gillnets.
you know for a fact that i hate gillnets, you also know that i want gillnets eliminated but not replaced by a method that the commercials can catch and keep more of the same fish that we the sportsman do, thats what, about 200 times ive said that ?, we need to get more fish for sports, not the commercials.
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#567763 - 12/30/09 02:07 AM
Re: Gill-net salmon fishing ban on ballot?
[Re: billjr64]
|
Parr
Registered: 12/10/09
Posts: 54
Loc: Mason
|
Umm, don`t know how to respond to the wild fish guys except to say that you have ALOT of valid points and I agree with most of them. I wish we could rely on wild fish propagation to provide all of our needs. Unfortunately there are too many of us and too few of them{wild fish}. Habitat restoration may help in the long run but I doubt it will be enough and at what cost. Bill Couldn't agree with you more. Here's a little more to fuel for the fire. World population has increased from 4 B in 1975 to about 6.8 B in 2008. This has put increased pressure on fish stocks worldwide to feed an ever increasing population. Of course, this has increased the amount of Pacific salmon caught by tribal and commmercial fisheries. Seems simple, they should be making lots of money. Right? Wrong! In fact, the price per ton they have been receiving has dropped from $6000/tn to about $3000/tn over the last 15-20 years. And do you know why that is? Simple, the amount of commercially raised farm salmon has flooded the market. The only way the way the commercials can make more profit is to catch more fish. Plain and simple. Now here comes my question. Who is responsible for making sure that the catch numbers both the tribal and non-tribal fisheries are honest numbers? It seems that if you are getting less per pound the only way to make more money is catch more fish. Here's the other point that sticks out for me. Where are those fish being sold and what benefit our we as citizens receiving from them? From my point of view most of those fish are either being shipped out east or overseas. Either way I don't see how we (as a state) make much off of commercial fishing. One last straw on the fire. In doing some research into this subject I came across an interesting study about the value of US recreational and commercial fisheries. If you want I'll provide the link but one statistic stood out for me. This was value of marine recreational fisheries in Washington and Oregon are some of the lowest of all the marine states. Apparently our state governments do not place a high value on recreational fisheries. The state of Washington generates @ $6.8 M in tax revenues from marine recreational fisheries. The state of North Carolina generates @ $141 M in tax revenues. This state is missing out on a tremendous opportunity to increase it's tax revenues by promoting recreational fisheries. Just think what it would be like to have a healthy recreational fishery at Westport, Ilwaco and Neah Bay. Most people have given up on those because of the severe harvest restrictions that have been in place over the years that favor a commercial fishery. Let's get rid of old and start thinking looking forward instead of just accepting the status quo.
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#567783 - 12/30/09 10:50 AM
Re: Gill-net salmon fishing ban on ballot?
[Re: RtndSpawner]
|
Carcass
Registered: 11/30/09
Posts: 2267
|
Umm, don`t know how to respond to the wild fish guys except to say that you have ALOT of valid points and I agree with most of them. I wish we could rely on wild fish propagation to provide all of our needs. Unfortunately there are too many of us and too few of them{wild fish}. Habitat restoration may help in the long run but I doubt it will be enough and at what cost. Bill Couldn't agree with you more. Here's a little more to fuel for the fire. World population has increased from 4 B in 1975 to about 6.8 B in 2008. This has put increased pressure on fish stocks worldwide to feed an ever increasing population. Of course, this has increased the amount of Pacific salmon caught by tribal and commmercial fisheries. Seems simple, they should be making lots of money. Right? Wrong! In fact, the price per ton they have been receiving has dropped from $6000/tn to about $3000/tn over the last 15-20 years. And do you know why that is? Simple, the amount of commercially raised farm salmon has flooded the market. The only way the way the commercials can make more profit is to catch more fish. Plain and simple. Now here comes my question. Who is responsible for making sure that the catch numbers both the tribal and non-tribal fisheries are honest numbers? It seems that if you are getting less per pound the only way to make more money is catch more fish. Here's the other point that sticks out for me. Where are those fish being sold and what benefit our we as citizens receiving from them? From my point of view most of those fish are either being shipped out east or overseas. Either way I don't see how we (as a state) make much off of commercial fishing. One last straw on the fire. In doing some research into this subject I came across an interesting study about the value of US recreational and commercial fisheries. If you want I'll provide the link but one statistic stood out for me. This was value of marine recreational fisheries in Washington and Oregon are some of the lowest of all the marine states. Apparently our state governments do not place a high value on recreational fisheries. The state of Washington generates @ $6.8 M in tax revenues from marine recreational fisheries. The state of North Carolina generates @ $141 M in tax revenues. This state is missing out on a tremendous opportunity to increase it's tax revenues by promoting recreational fisheries. Just think what it would be like to have a healthy recreational fishery at Westport, Ilwaco and Neah Bay. Most people have given up on those because of the severe harvest restrictions that have been in place over the years that favor a commercial fishery. Let's get rid of old and start thinking looking forward instead of just accepting the status quo. Washington has done a study of benefits of Rec sport fishing VS Commercial . The rec sport fishing is considerable more value to the state that commercial.
Edited by Lucky Louie (12/30/09 10:54 AM)
_________________________
The world will not be destroyed by those that are evil, but by those who watch them without doing anything.- Albert Einstein
No you can’t have my rights---I’m still using them
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#567788 - 12/30/09 11:13 AM
Re: Gill-net salmon fishing ban on ballot?
[Re: billjr64]
|
River Nutrients
Registered: 12/30/07
Posts: 3116
|
Umm, don`t know how to respond to the wild fish guys except to say that you have ALOT of valid points and I agree with most of them. I wish we could rely on wild fish propagation to provide all of our needs. Unfortunately there are too many of us and too few of them{wild fish}. Habitat restoration may help in the long run but I doubt it will be enough and at what cost. Bill There are lots of wildfish guys, but most of us, will not turn down a hatchery chinook on the end of the line. Expressing a vision for a fishery (aka Wet dream) is a target for criticism on these sites. We have a lot of unproductive hatchery runs. We also have streams like the cowlitz, that at this point, are more suitable, for a heavy hatchery fishery, than trying to save, whatever wild fish, that linger in the system. In short, designate hatchery and wild fish streams and dont keep trying to have the best of both worlds in one river. From my view point, the tribal rights in certain areas, makes that goal really tough, if the tribes want to have a fishery. Wild fish cant keep up with that level of demand. Set asides or exemptions for ESA must be granted for the cowlitz to become a great hatchery river. We cant continue to fight with TU and others over bastard fish from other rivers. We must have more power and control, than the friggin power company does. period. Lots of things help. You have to work with others, or come up with your own ideas, that will enhance the reproduction or stability of the life cycle of the fish. I dont care if you want to rid the Columbia of Walleye, or squaw fish, its an improvement. Obviously, some projects like culverts or small dam removal will have a major impact on the production capacity of a particular creek. However, this fking issue of selective harvest cannot go unfinished. I relate the wild fish we have left, to the money you have for retirement. If you keep drawing down the account, the amount of compound interest (aka compound spawning) is never going to grow the account. Given the choice of an inheritance of cash from which you create a retirement account or college fund, would you rather start out with 100 dollars or 1000 dollars. Yes, 100,000 is needed to get people excited, but IM REALLY talking about wild fish and there arent 100,000 wild fish left in any river, that I know of. Fish reproduction is slow and not steady. But the old penny saved theory does work. Take a penny and double the amount everyday. In thirty days, the penny will become one miillion dollars. (I did the math). Salmon reproduction may be more like collecting aluminum cans, but people do it. Selective harvest is ONLY the beginning. In order to make the money grow, you have to find good opportunities for growth and you have to monitor the fundamentals of the company stock (aka river) to make sure, you dont have bad managers.
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#567791 - 12/30/09 11:18 AM
Re: Gill-net salmon fishing ban on ballot?
[Re: RtndSpawner]
|
clown flocker
Registered: 10/19/09
Posts: 3731
Loc: Water
|
I have friends in alot of various industrys/agencys and the problem there facing right now is not the commercial guys but sport fisherman selling on the side. One estimate I heard from a Dept of Agriculture employee is 20% of the salmon in the mom and pop restuarants is coming through the back door. I've heard the same thing from a NMFS enforcement agent, and even a Portland ares chef at a big name restuarant that said it was so common he didn't even know It was illegal, and don't worry about the extra fins.
_________________________
There's a sucker born every minute
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#567793 - 12/30/09 11:33 AM
Re: Gill-net salmon fishing ban on ballot?
[Re: SBD]
|
Carcass
Registered: 11/30/09
Posts: 2267
|
I have friends in alot of various industrys/agencys and the problem there facing right now is not the commercial guys but sport fisherman selling on the side. One estimate I heard from a Dept of Agriculture employee is 20% of the salmon in the mom and pop restuarants is coming through the back door. I've heard the same thing from a NMFS enforcement agent, and even a Portland ares chef at a big name restuarant that said it was so common he didn't even know It was illegal, and don't worry about the extra fins.
_________________________
The world will not be destroyed by those that are evil, but by those who watch them without doing anything.- Albert Einstein
No you can’t have my rights---I’m still using them
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#567795 - 12/30/09 11:38 AM
Re: Gill-net salmon fishing ban on ballot?
[Re: SBD]
|
River Nutrients
Registered: 12/30/07
Posts: 3116
|
We could benefit from more details. It takes a lot of work, to contact the restaurants individually or thru their associations and educate them about wild and hatchery fish. Washington passed a law, last session, that deals with the retail sales of fish by commercial fisherman off the back of their boat, or SUV. That is a particular issue, that allows them to catch wild fish and sell them thru the back door to an uneducated public.
Grocery stores are the same way, but its more difficult if hatchery fish, come from a state or province that doesnt fin clip their fish.
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
1 registered (DrifterWA),
950
Guests and
3
Spiders online. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
11499 Members
17 Forums
72933 Topics
825111 Posts
Max Online: 3937 @ 07/19/24 03:28 AM
|
|
|