Increase sought in net catch of steelhead

Discussion in 'Steelhead' started by alpinetrout, Dec 3, 2004.

  1. ray helaers

    ray helaers Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 1969
    Messages:
    1,088
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    .
    On Feb 5 the Washington Fish and Wildlife Commission will hold a public meeting and this proposal will be on the agenda for public testimony. Here is a link for the agenda:

    http://wdfw.wa.gov/com/feb0505.htm

    Show up! Let the Commission know how you feel about this cockamamie idea. The department claims that recent increases in Lower Columbia steelhead abundance justifies an increase in allowable impacts. First, their evidence is flimsy that the increase is real, and even flimsier that the increase , if it exists, justifies higher allowable impacts. But even if they are right, should such an increase be invested in more opportunity for commercial fishers (who aren't supposed to be kiling steelhead in any event), or would it be better invested in the recovery of the steelhead populations themselves? This particular stock is THREATENED WITH EXTINCTION, and this is no way to manage for recovery. It shows that six years and counting since the stock was listed, and the department still thinks job one is getting people fishing and placing every burden of proof on the resource itself. They refuse to get it. Let's send them a wake up call that WE at least do get it. If we can't get the Commission to Kibosh this thing, it will happen. YOU still have a chance to stop it; show up next saturday. Believe me, you have nothing more important to do.
     
  2. Bob Triggs

    Bob Triggs Stop Killing Wild Steelhead!

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2003
    Messages:
    4,349
    Likes Received:
    1,158
    Location:
    Olympic Peninsula
    Home Page:
    Thank you brother Ray! :thumb:
     
  3. Billbob

    Billbob must escape the warren

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2004
    Messages:
    47
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    King County, Washington
    Can anyone tell me why WDFW wants to triple the amount of bycatch? I know that it makes life easier for the commercial fishermen. But so what? Why does WDFW care? What sort of carrot do the commercial guys hold in front of the department? Or what sort of stick do they threaten with?

    Why would WDFW ever consider this rule change? What is in it for them?

    TIA.

    Jeff
     
  4. Bob Triggs

    Bob Triggs Stop Killing Wild Steelhead!

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2003
    Messages:
    4,349
    Likes Received:
    1,158
    Location:
    Olympic Peninsula
    Home Page:
    You can have a chance to ask those questions, and to coment to WDFW Comissioners and Managers,directly on this issue, at the Public Meeting in Olympia, this coming friday and saturday. See our calendar for the details.

    Also see:

    www.washingtontrout.org

    www.wildsteelheadcoalition.com
     
  5. Billbob

    Billbob must escape the warren

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2004
    Messages:
    47
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    King County, Washington
    Thanks Bob, but I was hoping to have their rationale in hand before the comment period so that I could spend some time thinking on it.

    I'll contact WDFW, too. Maybe someone over there will give me a bit of information...

    Thanks again, see you there.

    Jeff
     
  6. Billbob

    Billbob must escape the warren

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2004
    Messages:
    47
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    King County, Washington
    What are the chances that this whole net fishery will be shut down now, given that the unexpected harvest of 20,000 fish contains ESA listed chinook? The tangle nets on the Columbia are allowed to kill 15% of the listed spring chinook. State biologists, according to the PI, have gone on record as follows regarding the Makah catch:

    "State biologists say the catch likely includes wild chinook stocks protected under the Endangered Species Act, and could limit seasons this summer by non-Indians in the ocean off Washington and inland marine waters."

    And:

    Much of the chinook catch in the western part of the strait is typically of foraging Columbia and Snake River chinook. Anderson said that the catch very likely could exceed the allowable impact and thus limit options for summer fishing seasons.

    If the impact was greater than 15%, can we expect the Columbia fishery to be shut down? Then the 3 fold increase in allowable steelhead bycatch becomes a nonissue, since the fishery won't be prosecuted.


    Jeff