#943045 - 11/11/15 02:00 PM
Re: FISHINGTHECHEHALIS.NET
![*](/forum/images/general/default_dark/star.gif) ![*](/forum/images/general/default_dark/star.gif)
[Re: Carcassman]
|
Carcass
Registered: 11/30/09
Posts: 2267
|
LL, your point is? WDFW really seems to have no interest in in-season management. For whatever reason, and WDFW won't answer the question, is that they and the co-managers have adopted an auto-pilot management paradigm. There may be good reasons but they actually need to put them in front of the license-buying public. If, in fact, they care a whit about what the license-buying public thinks. The short answer would be to help protect the reliability of ocean fisheries. If ocean harvesters get their fisheries then an up roar by others that don’t get a fair harvest might upset the whole apple cart. State and federal management can put up with complaining sport anglers, but co managers working with sport anglers to go after the ocean commercials would be too much to bear. The ocean fisheries are cancer to conservation. They not only take first whack at the smaller class of fish in the earlier months, feeding, and then heading to their terminal areas, but also fish over mixed stock from the CR, coast, Strait, PS, and beyond those areas. ESA listed stocks could be better managed in terminal areas. If there has to be ongoing ocean fisheries to feed the masses, then the least that should be done is use the data that is available to all State and Federal agencies.Which would be counterproductive in looking out for number 1, and No.1 would be the ocean fisheries...
Edited by Lucky Louie (11/11/15 04:56 PM)
_________________________
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
|
|
|
|
#943070 - 11/11/15 07:20 PM
Re: FISHINGTHECHEHALIS.NET
[Re: Lucky Louie]
|
River Nutrients
Registered: 10/28/09
Posts: 3313
|
LL, your point is? WDFW really seems to have no interest in in-season management. For whatever reason, and WDFW won't answer the question, is that they and the co-managers have adopted an auto-pilot management paradigm. There may be good reasons but they actually need to put them in front of the license-buying public. If, in fact, they care a whit about what the license-buying public thinks. The short answer would be to help protect the reliability of ocean fisheries. If ocean harvesters get their fisheries then an up roar by others that don’t get a fair harvest might upset the whole apple cart. State and federal management can put up with complaining sport anglers, but co managers working with sport anglers to go after the ocean commercials would be too much to bear. The ocean fisheries are cancer to conservation. They not only take first whack at the smaller class of fish in the earlier months, feeding, and then heading to their terminal areas, but also fish over mixed stock from the CR, coast, Strait, PS, and beyond those areas. ESA listed stocks could be better managed in terminal areas. If there has to be ongoing ocean fisheries to feed the masses, then the least that should be done is use the data that is available to all State and Federal agencies.Which would be counterproductive in looking out for number 1, and No.1 would be the ocean fisheries... Amen, Brother. I've made some harsh claims about our local co-managers, and while I still think they should do the fish better in general, conservation must begin in the ocean, and that's not on them. Any amount of conservation in the open ocean benefits wild salmon throughout their range. Talk about a cheap investment in the future (and a slick P.R. move).
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#943072 - 11/11/15 08:45 PM
Re: FISHINGTHECHEHALIS.NET
[Re: eyeFISH]
|
River Nutrients
Registered: 11/21/07
Posts: 7519
Loc: Olema,California,Planet Earth
|
You do remember where the last Director got his working start? Westport Charters. Also, ask where (when they do go salmon fishing) where WDFW FP staff go to fish.
Finally, I am pretty sure the Co-managers support and encourage the ocean fishery. Hoh v Baldridge said the Tribes could not be closed for conservation unless the non-Indians were closed. By fishing outside the tribes are allowed to "balance" the catch. When this decision came down, the WDF staff said "we'll close the ocean". Tribes and Feds said not to do that, just balance catches so here we are.
If the ocean were closed, inside fishing would be better for the fish but would (in a management paradigm that abhors waste (one fish above MSY) probably require a lot more net fishing.
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#943073 - 11/11/15 08:51 PM
Re: FISHINGTHECHEHALIS.NET
[Re: eyeFISH]
|
Repeat Spawner
Registered: 03/05/00
Posts: 1083
|
I doubt all the charter boats and fishing lodges in S.E. Ak,the west coast of Vancouver Island and Washington State would consider conservation in the open ocean a cheap investment in the future (and a slick P.R. move).
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#943077 - 11/12/15 07:23 AM
Re: FISHINGTHECHEHALIS.NET
[Re: Keta]
|
River Nutrients
Registered: 10/28/09
Posts: 3313
|
I doubt all the charter boats and fishing lodges in S.E. Ak,the west coast of Vancouver Island and Washington State would consider conservation in the open ocean a cheap investment in the future (and a slick P.R. move). I was mostly referring to commercial fisheries, but you're right to include lodges and charters in the discussion, since they do catch a lot of fish. You know of any fishing lodges in Washington State? Me niether. By the time the fisheries up north are done, there's rarely enough left to support the kind of fishing experience the elite demand near the mainland. It's like the entire salmon industry is a giant welfare program. I, for one, am tired of paying into that system and getting screwed by it. The fish-buying public has proven they are willing to pay more for fresh salmon when supply is less, so the fishing industry can just jack up the price to absorb any losses incurred from lower quotas. That's how things should work when managing scarce or limited resources. As for the lodges, as long as their fisheries are still the most productive of their kind, the patrons will keep pouring in. I think it's safe to say that people willing to spend thousands of dollars for a few days' fishing and lodging aren't penciling out the value of a limit of every species to determine whether or not the trip is cost effective. Maybe I overestimate how much people care about saving salmon, but I still think a major seafood processor making a public announcement that the future of salmon matters to them, so they're voluntarily reducing their impact would be a great PR move... not that I think anyone will make that move.
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#943078 - 11/12/15 07:31 AM
Re: FISHINGTHECHEHALIS.NET
[Re: eyeFISH]
|
River Nutrients
Registered: 11/21/07
Posts: 7519
Loc: Olema,California,Planet Earth
|
Wild salmon have no future unless we deal with human population. Since we won't deal with it, the only option left is to get it while you can.
There may not be lodges in WA, OR, and CA but what about 75-100 years ago? Boathouses and such. The problem just moves north. Until there is no north.
Edited by Carcassman (11/12/15 08:32 AM)
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#943079 - 11/12/15 08:46 AM
Re: FISHINGTHECHEHALIS.NET
[Re: eyeFISH]
|
Carcass
Registered: 11/30/09
Posts: 2267
|
Washington State at one time was called the salmon capital of the world where people from all over the world came to spend time and money trying to catch 50+pound Chinook in the Skagit R, certain parts of Puget Sound, and even bigger possibilities in the Elwha. There were the famous north coast streams and Westport. I just read last week from a NOAA study that of the 23 coastal states in the US, WA is ranked No.22 in futility in bringing in non-resident re creational fishing dollars. Oregon was the bottom dweller at No. 23.
That Hoh v Baldridge court case proves what devastating capabilities that the WA ocean fisheries can have by being able to catch salmon to escapement numbers in those areas of the three tribes described 35 years ago. Just think of the technological/electronic capabilities now.
It is no wonder that as the ocean fisheries expanded the 35+ canneries at the Columbia River and 45+ canneries of Puget Sound dwindled into oblivion.
It will be interesting to see what NOAA does to protect the PS ESA listed Chinook stocks knowing the pillage that occurs in the mixed ocean fisheries.
_________________________
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
|
|
|
|
#943081 - 11/12/15 09:11 AM
Re: FISHINGTHECHEHALIS.NET
[Re: eyeFISH]
|
Carcass
Registered: 11/30/09
Posts: 2267
|
I was reading public comments submitted to NOAA sometime back and there was a complaint about the Puget Sound ESA listed Chinook limiting their ocean fishing harvest. ![rolleyes rolleyes](/forum/images/graemlins/default_dark/rolleyes2.gif)
_________________________
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
|
|
|
|
#943083 - 11/12/15 09:49 AM
Re: FISHINGTHECHEHALIS.NET
[Re: Carcassman]
|
River Nutrients
Registered: 10/28/09
Posts: 3313
|
Wild salmon have no future unless we deal with human population. Since we won't deal with it, the only option left is to get it while you can.
There may not be lodges in WA, OR, and CA but what about 75-100 years ago? Boathouses and such. The problem just moves north. Until there is no north. At some point, absent drastic changes in population growth, this will almost certainly be true, but I don't see any reason to believe we're at that point now. I get that there are hard limits to how many salmon our troubled rivers can produce (and that those limits decrease as more habitat is compromised by human development), but those limits are obviously significantly higher than the escapements currently being allowed. If that weren't the case, where would the majority of all salmon stocks being caught in open ocean fisheries be coming from? Hatcheries would be a convenient answer, but not an honest one. I understand there are papers out there that strongly suggest our assigned carrying capacities are consistent with what each system is honestly capable of sustaining, but I believe all the data used to support that argument are significantly skewed by the huge percentage of all stocks that are caught in open ocean fisheries. I don't see any reasonable argument that indiscriminately killing half the adult fish, year after year, before we get any chance to see what is actually returning to each river, provides a strong basis for any assumptions about the true potential of the remaining habitat. I'm not saying I think changes to the status quo are at all likely. What I am saying is that limiting open ocean, non-selective harvest (to ANY degree) is the fastest, most effective means of increasing returns to virtually every system within the range of Pacific salmon. Even faster than killing babies and our elderly to control our population! Whether those additional returns translate to sustained increases in future run sizes is another matter, but shouldn't we at least take an honest assessment of that? If there is any hope for salmon, it will depend on us killing fewer of them than what we currently do. That's the reality nobody in salmon management talks about.
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#943084 - 11/12/15 11:23 AM
Re: FISHINGTHECHEHALIS.NET
[Re: Rivrguy]
|
Dick Nipples
Registered: 03/08/99
Posts: 27838
Loc: Seattle, Washington USA
|
NEXT UP IN THE DANCE:
For Immediate Release Quinault Nation Closes Fisheries to Protect Wild Coho TAHOLAH, WA (10/29/15)-- The Quinault Indian Nation has announced that it is closing all its fisheries in Grays Harbor and Queets River due to concerns about low returns of wild coho salmon and declaring a disaster due to economic hardship to its fishermen and their families, according to Quinault President Fawn Sharp. “Closing the fisheries was a tough decision. The closure will have serious consequences and substantial financial losses for our community, but it's the right thing to do as stewards for future generations,” said President Sharp. “We will be seeking economic relief for our fishermen and their families, as well as providing what support we can through the Tribe,” she said. “As we do every year, we participated fully in all pre-season planning with our state and federal co-managers, through the North of Falcon and Pacific Salmon Fisheries Commission processes,” said Quinault Fisheries Policy Spokesperson Ed Johnstone. “After analyzing all available data, we concluded that the actual run sizes of wild coho returning to the Queets River and Grays Harbor are so far below expectations that closure was warranted. The closure will hurt our fishermen and reduce opportunity to harvest hatchery coho and other species but the situation was so dire that Quinault Nation felt that even incidental impacts to wild coho need to be avoided at this point in the season."
The Quinault Nation is working with the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife to determine how to approach management of fisheries directed at other salmon and steelhead. WDFW has indicated that it has closed non-treaty fisheries in Grays Harbor and the Chehalis River and its tributaries. WDFW and the National Park Service have not announced decisions regarding sport fishing on the Queets River and its tributaries.
As for a cause for a diminished return of the wild coho, Johnstone pointed to the "Godzilla" El Nino and blob of warm water off the coast. These conditions are expected to linger for the next few months. With forecasts of drought and continuation of adverse ocean conditions expected to severely impact food chains, we are extremely concerned about the ability of the fish that are in the ocean now and those produced from this year's escapement to survive. The fish returning this year are not only low in numbers, but in poor physical shape. There's a lot at stake. We want to minimize the potential to dig ourselves in a hole that will be hard to get out of. The condition of wild coho stocks from the Queets and Grays Harbor will affect future Quinault and ocean fisheries for years to come."
“People need to understand that these fish need a healthy ocean and we are facing severe challenges in the Pacific, ranging from acidification and sea level rise to storm events. We worry about the uncertainty of climate change impacts and developments like dams and oil terminals that could have disastrous consequences for the environment. We care about the Earth and the fish, wildlife, bugs, water, air and soil. These are not resources that can be wantonly exploited, but rather our relations that must be treated with honor and respect. Their future as well as ours have been entrusted to our care. It's not an easy job, but it’s one we must undertake, not only for Quinaults but everyone,” said President Sharp. For now, we have to take responsible action here in our waters. It’s time to shut down,” she said.
I have heard from two people today telling me that there are nets in the Chehalis today...poaching, fishing, test fishing? Anyone know? Fish on... Todd P.S. Haven't seen pics or seen them with my own eyes...just received two messages about it.
_________________________
![](http://i436.photobucket.com/albums/qq90/ToddRipley/newav1.jpg) Team Flying Super Ditch Pickle
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#943085 - 11/12/15 11:42 AM
Re: FISHINGTHECHEHALIS.NET
[Re: FleaFlickr02]
|
Repeat Spawner
Registered: 03/05/00
Posts: 1083
|
I doubt all the charter boats and fishing lodges in S.E. Ak,the west coast of Vancouver Island and Washington State would consider conservation in the open ocean a cheap investment in the future (and a slick P.R. move). I was mostly referring to commercial fisheries, but you're right to include lodges and charters in the discussion, since they do catch a lot of fish. You know of any fishing lodges in Washington State? Me niether. By the time the fisheries up north are done, there's rarely enough left to support the kind of fishing experience the elite demand near the mainland. It's like the entire salmon industry is a giant welfare program. I, for one, am tired of paying into that system and getting screwed by it. The fish-buying public has proven they are willing to pay more for fresh salmon when supply is less, so the fishing industry can just jack up the price to absorb any losses incurred from lower quotas. That's how things should work when managing scarce or limited resources. As for the lodges, as long as their fisheries are still the most productive of their kind, the patrons will keep pouring in. I think it's safe to say that people willing to spend thousands of dollars for a few days' fishing and lodging aren't penciling out the value of a limit of every species to determine whether or not the trip is cost effective. Maybe I overestimate how much people care about saving salmon, but I still think a major seafood processor making a public announcement that the future of salmon matters to them, so they're voluntarily reducing their impact would be a great PR move... not that I think anyone will make that move. I don't know of any fishing lodges in Wa either but know of quite a few in S.E Ak & B.C. so I included them in the mix. Before I posted this I did a some research on ocean catch numbers. I was looking for recreational, commercial and bycatch broken down by AK,BC and WA. IMO these numbers should be readily available for all to see so we have a clear picture of where the damage is being done regardless of which group it is. I think there is a lot of the pot calling the kettle black in the world of salmon user groups that creates confusion and prevents progress in conservation. Regardless, and as an ex salmon troller, I have seen the ocean fisheries,recreational and commercial,first hand and have been a long time advocate of ending mixed stock fisheries and narrowing down the harvest to terminal fisheries. As for letting the free market, as in "major seafood processor making a public announcement that the future of salmon matters to them, so they're voluntarily reducing their impact" , you are right, wouldn't happen. The big seafood possessors will go as far as fighting regulations that have no real effect on their operations just because they don't want a precedent set that may effect their operations in other fisheries the future. All this said and it's only one complex part, as we are dealing with multiple governing entities, of a very complex societal problem, saving salmon from human greed.
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#943087 - 11/12/15 11:57 AM
Re: FISHINGTHECHEHALIS.NET
[Re: FleaFlickr02]
|
River Nutrients
Registered: 03/03/09
Posts: 4434
Loc: Somewhere on the planet,I hope
|
I have heard from two people today telling me that there are nets in the Chehalis today...poaching, fishing, test fishing?
Headed to town so I will take a look.
Edited by Rivrguy (11/12/15 11:59 AM)
_________________________
Dazed and confused.............the fog is closing in
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#943090 - 11/12/15 12:52 PM
Re: FISHINGTHECHEHALIS.NET
[Re: eyeFISH]
|
Three Time Spawner
Registered: 02/24/00
Posts: 1505
|
I didn't see any nets in Chehalis when I went over bridge... but they were in the hump last few days...
_________________________
Where Destroying Fishing in Washington..
mainly region 6
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#943091 - 11/12/15 01:01 PM
Re: FISHINGTHECHEHALIS.NET
[Re: steely slammer]
|
River Nutrients
Registered: 03/03/09
Posts: 4434
Loc: Somewhere on the planet,I hope
|
Nothing from the Muk to the Port. No idea about the Hump.
_________________________
Dazed and confused.............the fog is closing in
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#943092 - 11/12/15 01:17 PM
Re: FISHINGTHECHEHALIS.NET
[Re: eyeFISH]
|
Spawner
Registered: 01/01/05
Posts: 501
Loc: Des Moines NOT Seattle
|
There are nets in the Chehalis river around the Independence area. Nets are scheduled to go BACK IN the Hump on Sunday...Conservation at it's finest.
_________________________
Just Fish!
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#943093 - 11/12/15 01:41 PM
Re: FISHINGTHECHEHALIS.NET
[Re: Mystical Legends]
|
River Nutrients
Registered: 03/03/09
Posts: 4434
Loc: Somewhere on the planet,I hope
|
The nets upriver are Chehalis Tribal but are not Treaty Tribe ( QIN ) they come from the non treaty side ( us ) and by court decision have the right to fish at a % of harvestable at the Oakville Reservation. Once the REC & NT Nets went in they do not have a conservation lock out as they are part of the Non Treaty side of things. It is the way things work.
_________________________
Dazed and confused.............the fog is closing in
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#943096 - 11/12/15 02:33 PM
Re: FISHINGTHECHEHALIS.NET
[Re: eyeFISH]
|
Spawner
Registered: 01/01/05
Posts: 501
Loc: Des Moines NOT Seattle
|
http://wdfw.wa.gov/fishing/tribal/ Try this, not sure if they are really netting or not. I can't believe any netting is actually taking place at this time on the Chehalis or Humptulips.
_________________________
Just Fish!
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#943378 - 11/16/15 09:32 AM
Re: FISHINGTHECHEHALIS.NET
[Re: eyeFISH]
|
River Nutrients
Registered: 03/03/09
Posts: 4434
Loc: Somewhere on the planet,I hope
|
This is a link to the NW River Forecast http://www.nwrfc.noaa.gov/rfc/ Living on the river one learns how to time out the crest and other factors as it affects just what goes on in my yard, literally. Now this forecast is puzzling. If you look at the rain we have had, the ground is soaked, and we made minimum flood stage which is the valley fields & ect. So just how do we get this drop back below average flows? Temperature range at higher elevations which would give us snow without run off is not that much below normal. http://www.nwrfc.noaa.gov/weather/10_day.cgi Any ideas?
Edited by Rivrguy (11/16/15 09:35 AM)
_________________________
Dazed and confused.............the fog is closing in
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
1 registered (1 invisible),
343
Guests and
3
Spiders online. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
11498 Members
16 Forums
63807 Topics
645760 Posts
Max Online: 3937 @ 07/19/24 03:28 AM
|
|
|