#958112 - 05/31/16 08:53 AM
Re: North of Falcon/PMFC update
[Re: Carcassman]
|
Piper
Unregistered
|
As long as we keep fishing the ocean and Straits all is well with the world. At least I believe that is what WDFW believes.
WDFW just fvcked over all of us small boat owners... the only place I feel safe in my boat is puget sound and hood canal... hood canal used to be spectacular, but anymore, once the fish move in the nets are right behind them and its over...
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#958117 - 05/31/16 10:33 AM
Re: North of Falcon/PMFC update
[Re: Sky-Guy]
|
River Nutrients
Registered: 11/25/01
Posts: 2834
Loc: Marysville
|
Evo - The bottom line on the hatchery coho is that the forecasts this year were so poor that it was expected that several hatcheries may not meet escapement/brood stock needs. As a result in the typical mixed stock recreational fisheries there were not "harvestable" hatchery fish. Notice that hatchery coho retention is allowed in several fisheries; Hood Canal where the forecast was better both hatchery and wild fish can be retained and Dungeness river fish hatchery coho are OK; again where there are surplus fish expected.
Curt
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#958118 - 05/31/16 10:55 AM
Re: North of Falcon/PMFC update
[Re: Sky-Guy]
|
Lord of the Chums
Registered: 03/29/14
Posts: 6768
|
i understand that Curt, but they said that last year and it was not true....
so what happens when Voights meets escapement in say October? will they open the Puyallup and Carbon to us for fishing, or will the Indians go full tilt on netting every last available fish just like they did last year?
my theory is still the same, while we have weather issues and such affecting our fish runs, this is entirely the fault of the WFC lawsuit, the tribes lost alot of money from not being able to net due to no fish returning on quite a few rivers because no fish were planted... now, they are going to make up for that by taking it now... and the WDFW just agreed and allowed them....
i dont know if this is true or not, but someone on FB posted it on one of the well known guys in the industries page, he said he fishes with and knows 2 lawyers that are on retainer by the tribes, their plan is to wipe out wild fish, then sue the state for billions of dollars due to "mismanagement"....
to me, that sure looks like whats happening, and is about to happen....
_________________________
BLM IS A TERRORIST ORGANIZATION ANTIFA IS A TERRORIST ORGANIZATION
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#958120 - 05/31/16 11:19 AM
Re: North of Falcon/PMFC update
[Re: Sky-Guy]
|
King of the Beach
Registered: 12/11/02
Posts: 5189
Loc: Carkeek Park
|
Evo, Are you saying the Puyallup tribe lost the opportunity to net steelhead due to the WFC lawsuit? SF
_________________________
Go Dawgs! Founding Member - 2023 Pink Plague Opposition Party #coholivesmatter
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#958121 - 05/31/16 11:24 AM
Re: North of Falcon/PMFC update
[Re: Sky-Guy]
|
Lord of the Chums
Registered: 03/29/14
Posts: 6768
|
no, they havent planted Voights with Steelhead since 2008, the Muckleshoots did tho... i do know they release 40-50k Steelhead on the upper Puyallup at Electron because the asshat that bought the property is running it for profit, not for the need for electricity, so the tribe has been putting fish up there to mitigate the loss of Kings and Steelhead at the facility...
the Muckleshoots seem to be the front runner for all tribes in this state.... you know, the mouth piece.... the are the ones that were behind the crap last year, and now this year....
ill have Voights creek Coho returns from the last 10 years up in a bit, you will see what im talking about..
_________________________
BLM IS A TERRORIST ORGANIZATION ANTIFA IS A TERRORIST ORGANIZATION
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#958122 - 05/31/16 11:39 AM
Re: North of Falcon/PMFC update
[Re: BrianM]
|
Returning Adult
Registered: 08/15/12
Posts: 247
|
"Secretarial Order (June 5, 1997) “American Indian Tribal Rights, Federal-Tribal Trust Responsibilities, and the Endangered Species Act”
The "Questions and Answers" section beginning on page 16 may be the best place to start.
Thanks Brian. I read the document and understand a little more. The "government-to-government collaboration" to work out conservation measures with the tribes sure is smushy. Another part I found really interesting: 10. The Order, in its Purpose,, states that the Departments will ensure that "Indian tribes do not bear a disproportionate burden forthe conservation of listed species . . .I' Does that imply that someone else will share a ~~disproport.ionate burden?"
No I. The Order implies ,that:: no one: should carry a disproportionate burden and that the Act should be implemented fairly and consistently for all Americans, including Native Americans.
Of course, that just appears in the FAQ, not the order itself. I am no lawyer, but there seems like alot in here that could be court-challenged. I am assuming this is one of the reasons the tribes were compelled to work things out with the state. There are things they probably want to avoid testing in court.
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#958123 - 05/31/16 11:39 AM
Re: North of Falcon/PMFC update
[Re: Sky-Guy]
|
Lord of the Chums
Registered: 03/29/14
Posts: 6768
|
heres the returns...
2015 the NO COHO YEAR: 6145
2014: 4392
2013: 6658
2012: 5338
2011: 7218
2010: 1143
2009: 7481
2008: 6263
2007: 10992
2006: 9575
2005: 24209
so 10 years ago, the runs were quite a bit larger, but they werent netting it as hard as they do now either, also, if you read into the agreement posted, they are going to net "winter chum" into January, last year there were NO Chum around on the upper river, same with the year before, and the year before... they are netting the B run Silvers that are going up river, not the Chum, in January....
also, on the numbers, what you dont see because i didnt add it, is that normally, even on the lower years, they spawn around 12-1700 Coho to get their egg take, last year, they spawned 3635 for a 2.7 million eggtake, much larger than the 1.1 to 1.6 million they have taken the last 10 years, why? whos going to pay to raise those fish? whos going to get to fish for them?
as you can also see, even after the nasty ass flood of 2009, the runs pretty much stayed in the same range, so they cant use that as a reason....
_________________________
BLM IS A TERRORIST ORGANIZATION ANTIFA IS A TERRORIST ORGANIZATION
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#958130 - 05/31/16 01:11 PM
Re: North of Falcon/PMFC update
[Re: Sky-Guy]
|
Returning Adult
Registered: 08/05/09
Posts: 416
|
Apologize in advance if I missed this, but does anyone have a "best guess" as to when the Sky will actually open?
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#958131 - 05/31/16 01:15 PM
Re: North of Falcon/PMFC update
[Re: Sky-Guy]
|
River Nutrients
Registered: 11/25/01
Posts: 2834
Loc: Marysville
|
Evo -
I attempted to answer your question of why no hatchery coho retention for the recreational fishery. My answer was a generic one for the whole of the Puget Sound recreational fishery.
Yes in 2015 there were more than enough coho returning to the Puyallup hatchery to meet its egg taking needs. That said on the whole if I remember correctly (been a while since I looked at the numbers) for the PS WDFW hatchery in 2015 the total egg take was short by 25% of what they had taken on the average for the last 5 years. That was driven by both shortfall in total escapements to the hatcheries and the small size (and resulting low fecundity) of those returning coho.
It is true that there hatcheries in the Sound that are expected to have adequate coho brood stock; others will not. To your point about the Puyallup hatchery coho returns. Yes it does look as if there are harvestable hatchery coho returning to the Puyallup. Further it would appear that a hatchery coho only in-river recreational fishery would have been both appropriate and justified. It would appear to me that fishery was one of the victims in the effort to achieve a co-manager agreement. I'm sure that it was difficult discussion for the State to consider whether that lost of that fishery (or part of the MA 11 blackmouth season) was worth the cost of getting an agreement for the other fisheries.
And yes it sucks if one is a Puyallup river fisherman. I guess the long term question is two fold. Will the State be able to take the lessons from the last two years of failure at NOF to be able to better position themselves for success going forward (be able to prepare proactively)? Secondly will more of the fishers (and especially the river guys) engage in the NOF process with the State to insure that they concerns and needs are considered?
Unfortunately the answer to both questions based on past experience is unlikely not!
Curt
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#958132 - 05/31/16 01:42 PM
Re: North of Falcon/PMFC update
[Re: Sky-Guy]
|
River Nutrients
Registered: 11/21/07
Posts: 7601
Loc: Olema,California,Planet Earth
|
Stepping back into the wayback machine again, in the 1980s the Puyallup's had the river open 24/7 for the coho fishery. With that level of fishery the hatchery failed to achieve escapement once. Most years it 2,3,4X the goal. Maybe they have gotten a lot more efficient...
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#958133 - 05/31/16 02:23 PM
Re: North of Falcon/PMFC update
[Re: Smalma]
|
Piper
Unregistered
|
Secondly will more of the fishers (and especially the river guys) engage in the NOF process with the State to insure that they concerns and needs are considered?
Unfortunately the answer to both questions based on past experience is unlikely not!
Curt fvck all you rich assholes that can take whatever day off you want to attend all your meetings to make sure your fishing areas are protected... I get 10 days off a year, and all those days are spent with my kids at a parent teacher conference, doctors appointment, or when they are sick... the little fishermen will never be heard unless he has red skin...
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#958134 - 05/31/16 02:56 PM
Re: North of Falcon/PMFC update
[Re: Sky-Guy]
|
Spawner
Registered: 12/30/08
Posts: 561
Loc: around
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#958135 - 05/31/16 03:07 PM
Re: North of Falcon/PMFC update
[Re: ]
|
Returning Adult
Registered: 04/17/13
Posts: 281
|
Secondly will more of the fishers (and especially the river guys) engage in the NOF process with the State to insure that they concerns and needs are considered?
Unfortunately the answer to both questions based on past experience is unlikely not!
Curt fvck all you rich assholes that can take whatever day off you want to attend all your meetings to make sure your fishing areas are protected... I get 10 days off a year, and all those days are spent with my kids at a parent teacher conference, doctors appointment, or when they are sick... the little fishermen will never be heard unless he has red skin... You know, all that attend these meetings are not all "rich assholes that can take whatever day off you want to", some of us are NOT rich, but take the time off anyway. A lot of folks respond with written statements or e-mails, if you are too busy (or lazy!) to act, don't bitch about what you DON'T get. To call those who attend meetings "rich assholes" tells us all where you are at. Get bent! Bob R
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#958136 - 05/31/16 03:29 PM
Re: North of Falcon/PMFC update
[Re: Sky-Guy]
|
King of the Beach
Registered: 12/11/02
Posts: 5189
Loc: Carkeek Park
|
So what is the likelihood that some systems that are closed might open up during the season? Forecasts are just that. What if more fish show up then expected? Seems in season management always has the ability to declare emergency closures, how about emergency openers provided they are warranted based on return numbers? How much flexibility is there in getting things open if they were agreed upon to be closed via NOF negotiations? SF
_________________________
Go Dawgs! Founding Member - 2023 Pink Plague Opposition Party #coholivesmatter
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#958137 - 05/31/16 03:30 PM
Re: North of Falcon/PMFC update
[Re: Sky-Guy]
|
River Nutrients
Registered: 07/11/04
Posts: 3091
Loc: Bothell, Wa
|
I'm currently reading a book on the Columbia River that my 'ol man gave me. Interesting when talking about Grand Coulee it mentioned that Wa has given a share of Wa fish off of Vancouver Island to Canada due to the millions of fish that no longer make it there via CR. So we are giving a share of endangered PS fish to Canada for both lost fish on the CR AND for the mixed catch in Ak. What a mess! In our race to kill the last salmon I am certainly way back in the pack. Maybe one day I'll be able to afford to retire up north and work my up to the front of the pack as I sure do enjoy fishing for Chinook and really do want to spend as much time doing it as I can while I'm still alive. Not to mention filling the freezer, canner and smoker. Maybe I'll live long enough to see this race end. At that time I hope the Indians, Commercials and Sporties can raise a glass together in memory of a better, happier, more spiritual world due to our common bond, the pacific salmon! Till then get some! And remember it is always someone else fault. Carry on!
_________________________
"Government does not solve problems; it subsidizes them." Ronald Reagan
"The trouble with Socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money." Margaret Thatcher.
"How fortunate for governments that the people they administer don't think." Adolf Hitler
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#958138 - 05/31/16 03:33 PM
Re: North of Falcon/PMFC update
[Re: Sky-Guy]
|
River Nutrients
Registered: 11/25/01
Posts: 2834
Loc: Marysville
|
Piper -
Bobr has it exactly right!
I understand where you are coming from however there are alternatives for even those with limited timed.
In the time it took you for the 3 posts on this thread you could have sent 3 emails to WDFW's NOF site with cc to the wildlife commission earlier this spring. Would it do much; don't know but am certain that it would be more productive than b*tching here. Lacking that one could start a thread pre-NOF to discuss and maybe get out to the larger public (including those that are involved) issues that are important to you. One can cultivate contacts that can pass your concerns along or one can even join one of several groups that share your concerns.
While I'm retired and have time I suspect you have no idea whether I' m rich or not (not by the way) but many would agree with the asshole part. There are those that do advocate for the "little guys" but it is hard to be taken seriously if there isn't at least a little support out there to back up those needs/desires.
There is a lot of truth to the old adage "that if you aren't part of the solution you are part of the problem...". As I said in the earlier post I doubt that many folks will get involved and as a result they will end up with exactly the opportunity they worked for.
Curt
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#958139 - 05/31/16 03:34 PM
Re: North of Falcon/PMFC update
[Re: ]
|
Egg
Registered: 11/02/07
Posts: 4
|
Secondly will more of the fishers (and especially the river guys) engage in the NOF process with the State to insure that they concerns and needs are considered?
Unfortunately the answer to both questions based on past experience is unlikely not!
Curt fvck all you rich assholes that can take whatever day off you want to attend all your meetings to make sure your fishing areas are protected... I get 10 days off a year, and all those days are spent with my kids at a parent teacher conference, doctors appointment, or when they are sick... the little fishermen will never be heard unless he has red skin... I rarely post on any board I belong to, but this is just to much. I have been out of work for 5 years due to 2 neck surgeries. I am not making squat for money, I have a family to feed and try my best to take care of. I have been fishing Washington for about 40 years. It does not take a lot of time these days to write a congressman or woman, a senator, a mayor, or any official and give them your viewpoint, some facts, or just an opinion. If you think only rich people care then you are just plain wrong, if you think only rich people have time to help out then you are just to lazy to care. You and I can both do something but because you have chosen not to, you are saying the rich people should do it all. Take a look in the mirror, flame me all you want, but, what have you done? Any e-mails, petitions, join any groups or organizations? All I am saying is we all care, some can do more than others, but if you do all you can then that is the best you can do.
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#958140 - 05/31/16 03:56 PM
Re: North of Falcon/PMFC update
[Re: fishinmike]
|
Piper
Unregistered
|
. Take a look in the mirror, flame me all you want, but, what have you done? Any e-mails, petitions, join any groups or organizations? All I am saying is we all care, some can do more than others, but if you do all you can then that is the best you can do. to answer your question - yes, yes, yes and yes... but, when the wdfw employee says that the users aren't engaged in the NOF process, I take it that if we are not at the meeting we are not heard... that is what I'm pissed at... I fish for fun and the occasional dinner, not for a living... Piper out
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#958141 - 05/31/16 04:31 PM
Re: North of Falcon/PMFC update
[Re: ]
|
Returning Adult
Registered: 08/15/12
Posts: 247
|
fvck all you rich assholes that can take whatever day off you want to attend all your meetings to make sure your fishing areas are protected... I get 10 days off a year, and all those days are spent with my kids at a parent teacher conference, doctors appointment, or when they are sick...
I am filthy rich. Like, Donald Trump rich. And I can't even buy WDFW officials anymore!
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#958142 - 05/31/16 04:58 PM
Re: North of Falcon/PMFC update
[Re: Sky-Guy]
|
Juvenile at Sea
Registered: 11/26/03
Posts: 210
|
For any of you who think NOF is for the rich or they don't listen at all, You Are Wrong. A lot of us fish for fun but have decided to invest a little time.
Mill Creek meeting for 2016 was a Saturday. I believe 2015 was as well. Other years they have been at night. There were maybe 15-20 people there. 2-1 Salt interests to River interests. River interests have always been low attendance to none. Other Regional areas had there meeting at night I believe. Sometimes you have to plan and give up something to attend. You don't need to take a day off. If my 16 yr old nephew can go, you can.
A few years ago WDFW changed a few river related rules we didn't like so now there is a core group that goes to Mill Creek. WDFW does listen,. Because of ESA, Boldt etc they may not be able to do things you want. 2 things that came out of past Mill Creek meetings. Skagit River Sockeye fishery and 2013 early opening of Snohomish Pinks.
If you don't like whats going on. Try and change it. Looks to me that some of the Rec Groups did that. They hired a Lobbyist. Kept closer tabs on what's going on after the 2015 Area 10 & 11 fiasco.
Attend a Regional meeting in 2017. Comment on Rule Changes. Send an email to our elected officials. Basically get off your a--.
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
1 registered (stonefish),
1221
Guests and
0
Spiders online. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
11499 Members
17 Forums
72917 Topics
824844 Posts
Max Online: 3937 @ 07/19/24 03:28 AM
|
|
|