Discussion in 'Steelhead' started by _WW_, Jan 14, 2013.
The natives are in charge of their own thing for sure.
It's silly to get so worked up about hem netting the late part of the run when the damage they do to the early run may be more damaging. All in the name of fishing for $1,000 per fish hatchery fish.
The natives kill far more wild fish than any other entity. This is the case regardless of whether therre is a C&R season. The natives will always use up their impacts, either early in the season, late in the season, fishing for springers or "sockeye" fishing, they will kill their paper fish. I don't see whaere a C?&R fishery changes this. They'll figure out the amount of fish they can kill and kill them. Nets killing nates in March and April should only reduce the number of nets killing nates in May and June and December and January and February.......
The point is that hey'll use their impacts one way or another. Whether there is a C&R fishery won't change this. If there is a season for us it can only be because there are expected to be harvestable fish for the natives as well. They already harvested the fish they could this year. Nates died in their nets while they netted for hatchery fish.
T\I would also contend that the NA take of wild fish in nets that are supposed to be for hatchery fish is not the responsibilty of people who hook and line fish for steelhead prior to Jan. 31 or Feb. 15 .
I see catch and release fishing as the last stop in management of a run of wild fish. I don't think it is a good recovery tool once we have gone too far. So to me that is the most important criteria: Can the fish, numbers of fish, sustain being caught and released with any regularity without threatening their spawning success? If the answer is a qualified yes, with solid scientific evidence to back it up, then why not open the fishery to catch and release? Selective gear rules work. http://olympicpeninsulaflyfishing.blogspot.com
Salmo posted this elswhere and I think it gives a pretty good perpspective in layman's terms on how we arrived at where we are with the 'numbers'.
Thanks again Salmo
Yes, very well stated.
So...I'm doing a little research on catch and release education and somehow find this:
New BC statistics show sport fishing gets the best return on fisheries resources
The first paragraph; (bold type and underline by me)
British Columbia's recreational fishery is worth as much to the provincial economy as commercial fishing, aquaculture and fish processing combined, according to a new report from BC Stats.
I know this is in BC, can Washington be much different?
Isn' their aquaculture businees much larger than ours?
You might find the folowing 2008 report interesting -
As I recall of the 16,000 plus jobs that non-treaty fishing jobs generates roughly 3/4 came from the recreational fisheries. Something to keep in mind is that the commercial economic value/jobs include that generated from not only fin fish but also include shellfish (sub-tidal geoducks is a biggie), off shore trawl fisheres, baitfish fisheries etc. In other words the difference between the recreational and commercial split is even greater for those species that are of recreational interest.