The Hood Canal Armada

Discussion in 'Saltwater' started by Blktailhunter, Oct 25, 2012.

  1. Well the chums must be in. I crossed the Hood Canal Bridge about an hour ago and saw 20 purse seiners working just south of the bridge and 7 anchored up at Salsbury Point. Don't know how any chum can make it through that gauntlet. Those that are lucky enough to escape will have another surprise in-store for them. The tribal gills nets. It's sad what is allowed to happen to our fisheries. I'm surprised any are left. :(
  2. Same thing in area 11 this past week.
  3. Man that sucks! I assume they're targetting chum primarily? I haven't seen them in my neck of the woods yet but I've heard they work this area.
  4. Why does the federal government still allow this to happen? It seems like an issue that both parties should be able to agree on. If native tribes want to net from human powered boats that is fine, but it is ridiculous that this practice still continues. My very angry 2 cents.
  5. 80 cents per pound for chum
    Area 10 can't keep silvers
    Area 12 can
    Lots of gig harbor boats in the canal
  6. My wife lead a project the last three years rearing chum fry on the creek at the head of Eagle Harbor on Bainbridge . 10,000 fish/year and tons of volunteer hours to try to re-establish a spawning run after the old impassible culverts were taken out. This is the first year they were expecting fish to return. Guess who have been netting extensively just north of the harbor mouth for the last week.
  7. Your wife obviously is a saint. Big thanks from all of us. :thumbsup:
  8. I agree that the commercial fishing seems out of control in these waters where the salmon runs are so depressed to begin with. However, if I'm not mistaken it's not just tribal netters. I think there is also a lot of non-tribal commercial netting that goes on (most of the boats you see out in the canal). Someone can correct me if I'm wrong, but this isn't just a tribal practice.

    I'm pretty sure I've read this sometime in the past, but what exactly is the commercial market for chum salmon? Are they just after roe for Asian countries? Cat food? All I know is I've never seen chum salmon on ice at a supermarket.
  9. You have. It's labeled Keta salmon (though I'm not sure if these are the locally caught fish or from ocean trawlers)
  10. Huh, can't say I've ever seen salmon labeled that way, but I don't look too closely either. So is human consumption the main market for chum or are there other things it's used for? I know you see sockeye and pinks canned, but I haven't seen canned chum in stores.

    If chum is $0.80/lb what do they get for coho or chinook?
  11. Most of grocery store Keta is smoked.
  12. Instead of venting to the quire here, lets lend a hand to folks like CCA who are trying to resolve these issues on a grassroots level:
    doublespey and daveypetey like this.
  13. Folks should remember that much of the Hood Canal chum fishery is driven by hatchery supplementation. Based on pre-season forecasts (WDG+FW's web site) of the 426,000 chums expected to be returning to Hood Canal. Of those 426K 72% (307K) were expected to be of hatchery origin. That Hood Canal hatchery chum production accounts for 78% of the hatchery chum production in Puget Sound. n The citizens of this state have invested a significant sum of money to support that fishery.

    The current non-treaty commercial fishing in Washington is supported by state law and policies. To modify the commercial fishing paradigm is going to require a lot of work to change the enabling legislation policies requiring a lot of ground work and self education on the details and processes of the current paradigm. Joining rants on a fishing board is largely wasted effort and non-productive

    Ben -
    What is the position of CCA on that Hood Canal commercial fishery and how would they change the situation? All I can find is that CCA is generally anti gill net (a good thing) but not necessarily anti commercial fisheries. Those chums are caught by both gill nets and purse seines. Eliminating the gill nets would not necessarily change the commercial fishing situation - just who is catching the fish.

    Bob Triggs and mtskibum16 like this.
  14. Curt, I can understand commercial harvest on a largely hatchery produced fishery. But what's the idea, pay for a hatchery and regain money from taxes on commercial harvest? Why not reduce hatchery production (and tax payer burden), reduce commercial harvest, and concentrate on restoration of wild runs? If all they are doing is creating a hatchery hord so there are fish to catch for the commercial boats, why not just cut it all out? As far as I know, they still net the known wild fisheries as well.
  15. JOINED!
  16. Chum meat might only be $.80 per lb, but the roe is well over $10.00 per lb. THATS the incentive for the netting. The meat is barely worth their time.
  17. Awwww... forget it. My comments here won't solve anything. My 2 cents ain't worth a plug nickle.

    edited for clarity
  18. I agree. I'm not trying to solve problems, change how things are done, or have any illusions that an internet forum discussion changes anything. I am just curious because I don't know the history around all these issues that might seem obvious to those that have been here for years.

    By the way, what's a plug nickle? :)
  19. The plug nickle term is just Jim showing his age....;)

Share This Page