As an avid scuba diver who has logged many a dive at Seacrest, I was really disappointed to hear that 4 six-gill sharks were harvested off of the pier. The sharks were a great attraction at Seacrest, and I will really miss them. Seeing how there were really only 4-5 sharks there, it now seems some thoughtless person has effectively wiped our the shark population at Seacrest. As a fisherman, I'm also sad to see that there are just down-right stupid people out there that obviously have no clue.

Thanks a bunch, guys. While you are at it, why not just fish out all the wild steelhead and salmon too. Obviously you don't give a crap about anything or anyone else besides you. Hope you choke to death on some shark meat!

PS. The WDFW heard our complains (our being the local diving community). Harvesting six-gills is now ILLEGAL. Divers as well as local WDWF Enforcement agents are now watching the pier and the fisherman now.

Here's the official WDWF notice on the closure:
http://www.wa.gov/wdfw/do/newreal/aug1500a.htm

If it's Native, Let it Go. If there are only 4 of them and they take a long time to grow and mature, Don't Fish For Them!

Parker

I've gotta comment here. As a fisheries biologist, its good to here that the take of sixgill sharks has been officially made illegal. Targetted shark fisheries anywhere have to be HIGHLY regulated and monitored because of their very low reproductive rates. And I guarantee WDFW has virtually no population data on sharks in Puget Sound (maybe some on dogfish). Most sharks literally have "litters" of 5 to 10 young per year. The sixgill is an exception producing as many as 100 young (which still isn't much).

But I have to admit (not being a diver or Seacrest regular) that I was clueless that sixgill sharks inhabit areas near the pier. I think it a bit harsh to call the anglers of the pier 'thoughtless', 'clueless', and 'stupid', just because they took a shark home. They probably had no idea that the fish are uncommon in Puget Sound. Are we any better when we bonk steelhead and salmon? Particularly the salmon issue, when such a small percentage of fish are marked and you're not sure whether its a native or not. You fish because the season is open. To me it smacks of the hypocrisy that the extremists advocate. People that eat meat, or hunt, or fish (or bonk sharks), are uncivilized evil barbarians.

You did a good job Parker, but why denigrate others like this?

My 02.



[This message has been edited by obsessed (edited 08-16-2000).]

Parker, you have no right to call those guys stupid for fishing when it was legal. Now I'm sorry they killed your pets but if you were a non-scuba pier night regular you wouldn't know. I think you, other divers, and wdfw should have done something a long time ago. I mean years and years past by and nobody said ****. Now everybodys *****ing. I know the guys that were fishing for them had no idea there are only 4-5 of them, which I disagree. I dont fish the pier at night but I think you overly attacked the fishermen. They were catching sharks on a regular basis and it WAS legal. Sorry but we hate divers on the pier anyways and thats the truth. I dont mean to piss you off but I think your angry at the wrong people(fishermen), get angry with wdfw or your clan of divers for not bringing up the issue earlier.

Just another California transplant changing life here in the great northwest,
and not for the better probably..*L*
I read the article, he moved up here in Jan.

Does anyone know if any sixgills have been snared by the nets?

Rainycity: Hate to rain on your parade, but your comment about Californians is asinine: "Just another California transplant changing life here in the great northwest,
and not for the better probably." All because the guy was legally fishing for sharks? Come on.

I try and stay out of arguments on this board, but I'm gonna have to take exception with this one. Making blanket statements about Californians is just flat-out silly. I myself am a 3rd-generation Californian presently living and working in Seattle. Why did I finally leave California? Because too many outsiders, including millions--yes, millions--of Northwesterners, have flooded into California over the past 50 years, overcrowding the state and creating all sorts of problems. The truth of the matter is this: people flock to nice places; everyone craves a high quality of life, be it in California or Washington or Timbuktu. A Californian in Washington is no worse than a Wa****onian in California. Heck, unless you're a Native American, it's a pretty safe bet that your family isn't native to the Northwest, just as mine isn't...

HSL,
I was just making light of the situation but since you want to take exception, well go ahead, I was more or less picking on my sister with that one, if it offended you, I`m sorry, but there must have been some truth it
if it bothered you that much...heh-heh

Obsessed - Ok, maybe my wording was little off.
Thoughtless - you're correct. Bad word to use. They thought long and hard to kill those sharks. Although you claim to be "clueless" about the sharks at Seacrest, those two fisherman certainly were not. They *knew* the sharks were there.
Clueless - again, you're correct. These guys were on the ball. Pulling out 4 sharks over 7' in length is certainly not "clueless". That's down right damn good fishin', if you ask me.
Stupid - again, you are correct. These fisherman obviously knew what they were doing and where to do it. If anything, I applaud these guys. They knew how to catch sharks. Truly not stupid in that sense.

BK - I only call them as I see it. Fortunately for the sharks, a good majority of citizens pointed out the "stupidity" to the WDFW and fixed the problem. You are dead wrong BK - I have every right as a tax paying citizen in our WA State to point out and squash "stupidity"

From your comments, it appears that maybe "us divers" better slap some more laws at the pier. How about "NO FISHING." period? Doesn't bother me as I don't fish on the pier. We already know our voice is stronger than yours. I'm also a fisherman, and believe you have the right to fish as well. I can live with fisherman on the pier - you might want to try to live with divers at Seacrest.

Raincity - It doesn't matter where anyone is from. That's no excuse. Those guys new exactly what they were doing and where to do it.

Finally, I don't have a problem with C&R shark fishing. It was the "harvesting" part that I had a problem with.

That's enough out of me. Next topic!

Parker

Let me tell you something about the pier and divers. Divers have a mile or two in which to dive, the fishermen have ONE pier they are stuck to fish off. There is a 150yd or ft. buffer from the pier that just went into effect. If your within casting range watch out for websters and darts coming at your drysuits. Divers need to stay the hell away from the pier. Many of the fishermen go down there every single day to hook a couple fish a season! No fishing period, who do you think you are, Jesus christ himself. How bout closing down the diving, doesn't bother me I don't dive it. And remember they were slayin' sharks legally!!!!!

Wow. I've been called a lot of things before, but never Jesus Christ. Kind of disturbing, if you ask me.

BK - As your new savior, you have my permission to fish for divers that come within casting range of the pier. Anything to make you happy.

Any diver stupid enough to get that close to the pier, probably deserves a Dart in their wet/dry suit. Especially from the line of BK.

Just remember, like the six-gills, it's legal to catch the divers, you just can't harvest them.

Parker

jesus's names doesnt deserve to be posted unless it glorify's him, thank ***schitzo***

Parker, you're off base. Your language and tone will basically get you nowhere with most fishermen. Your black and white view of this issue makes it seem to me you don't care about the facts. There are not just 4 or 5 sixgills in Puget Sound. I am a fisherman, and a diver, and a conservationist. I brought my shark fishing skills with me from the Gulf of Mexico a few years back (I'm not one of the pier fishermen). Northwesterners just basically don't know what a Californian or a Texan, or a Floridan knows about shark fishing. In Puget Sound, we don't launch window sash weights from a black powder cannon, tied to a cable hook with with a whole bonita the size of a salmon, to get it over the breakers to the tigers. I hit on big sharks in puget sound from the first time I tried for them, with gear I have never heard of being used in Puget Sound (not the cannon). There is some unknown number of sixgills in Puget Sound numbering many, many more than 4 or 5. I have landed sixgills in the size class same as caught at the pier in the last few weeks, not near that location. The state record is around 220 pounds, and I thought, just for grins, I would maybe submit one to make "the book" (most are substantially bigger). I guess I won't now. My worst fear is what just happened--somebody besides me very pubically figured out how to catch these fish, and now we have a zero limit. Like you, I believe it's the only option to avoid a targeted fishery that would indeed pose a severe conservation risk for this long-lived species. They are illegal to take in BC, so that offers a refuge, even before this legislation. The real tragedy is: Here's a fish that, up until this week, you could catch and keep 15 (can you imagine 3000 pounds of meat?)--a species that could never in a biologist's wildest imagination withstand a tenth of that harvest pressure under any kind of targeted fishery. Now, all of a sudden there's an emergency to save this species and fishermen are SOL. It's rockfish all over. What happened to science? A little population work with limits that are conservative in favor of the resource to begin with (every biologist knows about the vulnerability of sharks)--in place of wild swings in policy and crises management necessary because somebody in authority was asleep at the wheel. I have only ever killed one sixgill. I wanted to eat it and it was good. This is the third largest carniverous shark in the world, it's not even sexually mature until about 12 feet, and it undoubetedly needs protection. What it doesn't need, Parker, is some wingnut to drive a wedge between fishermen and divers, who both basically both want fish in a deteriorating universe.

Amen brother!

Don't even get me started on Lingcod!

Being upset is fine, but do you really think the average joe wants a piece of these big boys? I didn't even know they existed, how the hell would one hide something that size? They don't have a chance in hell of fitting in the trunk.The fear of someone catching these things is silly to me. With that said I think at 12 feet or bigger they would stick up for themselves. It would be pretty hard to pass them off as sturgeon.

As a diver and fisherman, I figure I should throw my two cents in. I don't believe shark fishing should be shut down. There should be slot and catch limits. There are many six gills out there. We just don't know a thing about them. I have seen some landed near Tacoma that were huge. I may have even hook one once near Dash Point. Never did see that sucker! Most of the piers around the state are set up for both fishing and diving. I don't think I would keep a six gill I land, but who knows? But I think that anyone one who wants to keep a shark should spear it while diving. The thrill of the catch will be not being eaten. As anyone who dives and spears know, we got shafted on lings this year. So maybe it was the state's turn to pick on sport fishers? Figures, I get it at both ends.

------------------
Just because I look big, dumb, and ugly, doesn't mean I am. It means I can stomp you for calling me it!

Spear and release? how does that work?

Ummnnn, I don't recall a spear and release part in my ramblings. But maybe I need to say if I caught one on hook and line, I would be unsure if I would keep it. Although if we tipped our spears with rubber blunts, that might work. Kinda like paintballing elephants in Africa. Which I have seen done. That has to be nuts.

------------------
Just because I look big, dumb, and ugly, doesn't mean I am. It means I can stomp you for calling me it!

Spurgod/BigJim

Facts???? Since when have their been honest-to-Glub Facts on this BB?

The only fact is that the WDFW closed the harvesting down so that further studies can be done on the sharks. Until (if?) we see the results of those studies, all of us don't have any real facts about this issue. Myself include.

Feelings and opinions yes, actual facts, no.

My feeling and opinion is that I disagree with the general attitude of fishing out a fishery then doing the research. How about we do the research now then determine if there can be a fishery or not?

Parker

Sorry to jump into this so late. Been logging in some time on my namesake river. Anyway, I fish Seacrest pier for kings nearly every day during the summer and these are some of the facts as I know them. The sharks have always been out there in the bay. I believe the reason they are "schooled" in front of the pier is because one of the regulars ("pier rats") hung herring in plastic bottles over the side of the pier. His explanation was that it was done to compensate for the lack of live-bait pens, which attracted many resident and migrating salmon to the pier in the past. The last time I was at the pier, the bottles were still hanging (three weeks old, whew!). This practice could be considered chumming, which is illegal. Days after they were hung a ten foot shark attacked a crab net baited with chicken right under the pier. The recent flurry of shark catches coincides which these baited bottles. I'll go done to the pier tommorow and remove these bottles if they are still there.

Parker, calling these shark fishers "pier rats" and insinuating that they are regulars is totally off base. These dudes (2) are from Cali and fish the pier at night. I've been fishing Seacrest regularly for over ten years now and I've never seen them before this summer. Also, these dudes are pretty fuzzy. I've talked to them and have seen their riggings. Their gear comes nowhere near the complexity of the tackle used in the shark surf fisheries from the Gulf Coast that Spurdog has eluded to. We're talking stock Wally Whale wire halibut leaders w/the sliding hook and store bought Atlantic salmon for bait.

Parker you are a respected member of this BB, but you are entering a sensitive area and possibly dissing members of your own diving community by condoning the snagging of divers that "get close to the pier." Already a diver has been snagged by an angler this year. I like to think that I have helped bring about the new buffer zone around the fishing pier through a concerted letter writing campaign over the last six years. I did this not because I'm a pier rat and want to hoard this facility, but rather I was concerned for the safety of other divers and still am.

Peace Out...

[This message has been edited by Hohwaiian (edited 08-18-2000).]

Honestly, I had nothing do with the closure of the piers for salmon fishing!!!

My abuse was just pointed towards the shark fisherman - not the every day regulars.

Low blow by the WDWF. I feel for you guys. That sucked.

Parker

Parker, you have said more than enough for me, and it seems for more than a few other people who regularly frequent the seacrest pier, I agree with the guy that said, keep the pier(and puget sound) open for the harvesting of six gills sharks, but with the aformentioned slot limit/bag limit.
you also mention that there needs to be more studies done on them....just like the WDFW studied the Sammamish river native steelhead into exctinction?? come on, YOU are the one who needs to get a clue here.
and what is the attraction of diving a public pier anyway?? gotta check on that roll of carpet the divers put there to see how many new lures are there?? you fish?? now thats a laugh!...bet you fly fish....nuff said.

What's up fuzzy!!!!!

I always thought that there was a large population of six-gill sharks in Puget Sound but that they usually hang out in water so deep that they hardly ever get hooked. Also seem to remember that ther was some sort of commercial fishery years ago that used 50 gal drums for floats, huge hooks w/chain leaders. Think they were harvested commercially for their oil?

Back in '84 I hooked somethin huge and fought it for over an hour and a half before I broke it off, always figured it was one o them 6-gills.

One time as I wuz walkin out to fish on the hood canal bridge I saw somethin swimmin along in relatively shallow water that was bigger than a chev suburban. Am still puzzled as to what it might have been-the only thing I can think of that it might have been is one super-huge skate. Anyone care to take a guess @what that might have been?

Really sympathize w/you pier fishermen. My first salmon came off of the beach @ PT D. It was hilarious. Used to have great success fishin there; some of my fondest fishin memories are of fishing PT D @first light in October but sadly that spot became just too damn crowded. Moved to fishin under the Narrows Bridge on the Tacoma side but then that became way too crowded also!

Always have felt that the shore-bound angler gets the short end of the stick. I've written letters to elected/appointed state officials urging them to liberalize reg.s for shorebound anglers w/out success. avail.

Sorry bout the long ramblin post,

Roger

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

Well, there are some harsh words here. But I just found out the state was kinda told to close fishing for sharks. Here is the link, www.nmfs.noaa.gov Click on the shark topic. I didn't read all of it, but saw an article in Sport Fishing about how the feds closed fishing for 19 types of sharks. Kinda interesting that we are getting NMFS pressure on sharks now. I think NMFS should stand for Now, More Fisherman Screwed.

------------------
Just because I look big, dumb, and ugly, doesn't mean I am. It means I can stomp you for calling me it!