Walking thru my local Frey Meyers store the other day I passed the fish counter and saw a sign that said "fresh steelhead" 3.99 lb- They had a stack of maybe 30 filets that all looked to be the exact same size. I would say that the fish they came off of would be 6-7 lbs. I asked the lady behind the counter where they came from and she said that she did not know, did I want some or not... I have never seen steelhead for sale so I am assuming that they come from some tribal fishery over in WA. Any ideas where ??? And no, I did not buy any. But my son and I did stand there and mac down about half a sample pizza as a small sign of protest

Last summer I saw the same thing in a Port Angeles Safeway. When I inquired about them, and told them why I was concerned, I was told that they were farmed fish.

No need to protest, the net pen farms are selling steelhead to the major grocery chains as of late. They have adipose fins and beat up (real beat up) dorsal and tail fins. Typical farm raised.

My folks out in New England are also buying farm raised Steelhead and tell me it's in all the markets out that way. My girl friend was in at Pikes Market in down town Seattle this weekend and said that one of the fish markets there had real wild Steelhead for sale and marketed it that way. She asked if it was really wild and the guy behind the counter said yes, netted by indians localy. This practice can be stopped with enough complaints by customers.

I've got one for you on this one, Indians do sell some nates to restaraunts and fish markets, the only way to protest it is to not buy it and be sure to mention your opinion to management.
On one occassion taking my wife to "Anthony's Home Port" a few years ago the special on the menu said, "Anglers Choice: Wild Steelhead" Embarassed my wife a little when I called fore the manager and explained loudly that "Anglers Choice" was not for killing "Wild" steelhead. Maybee "Indians Choice" but definately not anglers. He Apologized and changed the special board to just read "Wild Steelhead" . Good friend and outdoor writer, Dave Vedder, had a simalar experience down at the Seattle Fish Market and actually gathered a crowd arguing with one of the fish tossers. Vedder of coarse won. Let Em' know what you think!! J-

The ones in Freddy's are them triploid rainbows- farmraised clones. "Steelhead" is just a cool marketing name, like "keta" or "silverbrite" used for chum.

Interesting, I wonder how close they are to steelhead. A couple of weekends ago I went 1 nate and no brats in 2 days of fishing, so nothing for the oven. I admit that at 4 bucks a pound I bought some, and I was surprised at how close it was to a river caught steelhead in taste and texture(actually better than the late hatchery brats that start to pale). The only noticeable difference was that it took slightly longer to cook through, but thinking back, it usually takes a little longer to cook early fish, probably because of the higher fat or oil content.

I guess we have to be careful to determine just what we are buying; I had never heard of nates for sale to the public before these posts. However, a good way to get the commercials and Tribes off the water is to dry up demand by consuming farmed products.

The regs read: In order to buy, sell, or possess steelhead, sea run cutts or dollys a person must meet the following requirements: the fish must be accompanied by a written statement showing the takers name, adderss, tribal affiliation and tready ID card #, number of fish, date and location and location where taken. The rule does not applly to treaty indians nor the game fish purchased from a fish buyer licenced by the department of fish and wildlife.
I think no gamefish should be alowed to be commercally sold. Fishing for cultural heritage I can accept, fishing for profit I can not.
We should be asking there places selling steelhead for their buying licences, if they fail to produce turn them in.
Boycott any store selling wild steelhead!
Make It known to them that you as the coustomer(who is allways right)wont be back. Write the opinion page of your local paper.
If that dosnt work theres always arson.

These so-called "steelhead" you see in stores aren't really steelhead at all. They're farm-raised Atlantic Salmon (name changed to make it sound more exotic). If you want to buy the "real thing" go down to the Pike Street Market (in Seattle) and the fish buyers there are able to buy steelhead from the Indian's and sell them for next to nothing. This time of year you can find plenty of nice nates that make your stomach turn. Buying goods from these "fish whores" are only supporting the further kill of our native stocks. Take away the commercial market and maybe the Tribes will see the real value of these fish. Guiding on a river with a strong steelhead run will bring them far more money than wholesale slaughter of nates at a buck a pound. I don't hold a grudge for Indian personal use but I find selling nates to be gross misuse of a special resource.

The frist time I saw they was at top foods in Puyllup I got in a debate with the seafood manager about what in the hell that thing was the body and coler was right but the head was defromed.

Hey maybe what we're all getting at is that farm-raised "steelhead" and Atlantic salmon may lead to a reduction in the commercial aspect of tribal steelhead subsistence fisheries. Maybe a demonstration/boycott is in order to protest the selling of native steelhead by seafood markets. Nothing like a little negative press to get things going at Pike's Place. This can be done in conjunction with the long-term goal of paying off the tribes to quit fishing after ceremonial and home consumption needs have been accomplished. The extra nates left in the river will benefit both recreational anglers and the tribes in the long run. Problem is, where's the money going to come from? Maybe the fish farmers could help us out here. Seems like another "odd-paring" in the making. Nuff said, before I get into trouble.

The money can come from those that would benefit most from decreased tribal take on the rivers. Recreational Steelheaders!! I'd be willing to pay an extra $5-$10 per river per year (individual river license fee) that would go straight to the tribe that fishes that river (provided that tribe eliminate commercial catch and selling of steelhead on that river, limit tribe take to personal use subsistance fishing only, allow netting only one day a week). I know it's a lot of ifs. That would amount to a pretty significant payout to those tribes willing to forgo buck-a-pound syndrome. It would also give the tribes an increased guiding opportunity that would in combination to aformentioned would probably triple the tribes current profit margin. This would put lots more Steelhead in the river for everyone to enjoy. Another option would be to let the tribes commercially net the brats (hatchery fish) and layoff the nates (say from Feburary 1st on) with a similar payout structure. Just an idea.

I am dead set agianst paying anymore money for licenses to get the indians to stop or not fish as much!!!! That is a joke. we allready supply ALL the funds for these fish why do we need to pay more? I think we need to start charging the indians that fish for our fish. we need to put them on the run why would we wanna buckle under their pressure. we need to put a large tax on all fish that is sold by the indians. I know it won't work to charge them but we can charge a tax on all fish the buyers buy that is caught with nets in a river with a low run. Then those funds can be used to fund our sytem to do what ever to get those runs back. Kinda like a sin tax?


dcrzfitter

It's interesting how things transpire. Just maybe, commercial fishing for steelhead may be on its way out. I recall that in 1979 many buyers paid treaty Indians $2.50 per pound for steelhead. In the last few seasons, the same buyer paid about $0.65 or $0.75 per pound, due to the presence of farmed Atlantic salmon and steelhead/rainbow trout availability. I heard but didn't verify that the same buyer offered only $0.10 per pound for Skagit steelhead this season, in part to discourage fishermen from bringing fish to sell. This had nothing to do with ethics about steelhead or native wild fish. It was just business. The treaty steelhead fishery is just too erratic and undependable in supply compared to the farm raised fish for that particular fish monger's trade.

If this market conditions becomes prevalent, an opportunity should become available to purchase certain tribal treaty catches subject to the condition that the fish be left in the river. As a business deal, it shouldn't be too far fetched. The tribes would keep their fishing rights, sell fish, improve their profit margin by decreasing operating expenses by actually fishing less.

So maybe the fish farms aren't so bad after all if they coincidentally contribute to conservation of native stocks.

Tribes on the run? I don't think so. They were here first and there here to stay. Plenty of treaties and court action to back their case. We can learn to work with the tribes to preserve the resource or we can continue our contest to catch the last metalhead. One thing is for sure, if sport fishers can't agree on a Steelhead policy and carry the message in a unified manner to state and tribal fish managers we don't stand much of a chance in improving the resource. It's evident from dcrzfitter's comments that we couldn't be much further apart. It's sad.

Look, I look at it this way. What's done is done. All of the BS that took place centuries ago with the tribes, is one thing. I agree, it wasn't the right thing to do. HOWEVER, times change, this is now. People can't go on dwelling on the past, this is the NOW! We all need to put our "DIFFERENCES" behind us, and just live life equally and normally... I'm SO sick and tired of hearing about how we owe certain people, etc, etc. In todays economy, with all of the job opportunities, etc, etc. There is absolutely no reason why there is any need for any one particular group to be entitled to more than another. It's pure BS.

I'm not denying that sh|t happened to the tribes a long time ago, I'll be the first to admit it, but it all needs to stop... That's all I can say... There has to be an end to it.

Tom

Tom
That is exactly what we are talking about....A way to make the commercial netting stop. I stated in the past we should buy out the Tribes. I am glad to see others feel the same way, since we can't do it in court.
I would be happy to help in any effort to help in this effort. Tribes are not really fishing for heritage.....IT is the MONEY!!! I Don't think fishermen would oppose indians actually practicing heritage fishing....If it was actually for those purposes.

What we need now is and a meeting of minds to get this rolling. Drop me a email if you are willing to help organize.

------------------
Marty
www.steelheader.net
marty@steelheader.net

Marty,

I'll tell you one thing... I dont really see any successful way to end tribal netting, with the exception of letting them wipe the rivers clean, so there aren't any more fish... That's about the only way I can see it happening,sad enough to say!

Just a note. Does that mean you are all against river guides? Thats a comercial use of the resource.