Washington Fly Fishing Forum banner

Lower Quinault in 2014

12K views 88 replies 39 participants last post by  kamishak steve 
#1 ·
From The Evening Hatch's website:

"The Lower Quinault 2014 dates in Feb and March - More info soon on our new swing only program on the Lower Quinault - This exclusive program is very cool as we have teamed up with a Quinault Guide to show you some of the finest swing fishing for winter steelhead on the West coast."

An ironic juxtaposition to the bank-to-bank nets on the lower Queets.
 
#67 ·
$50 a year for a license is really not that much money. $100 hurts a bit, but if that money is the difference between having a resource and having nothing, its the best deal you'll ever find.

Kamishak Steve- Heres something to think about.... while the lower reaches of these rivers are on 1st nation land, the upper reaches ( spawning water, rearing water) are in park property meant to be a haven for wildlife and is managed as a long term sustainable resource. Why the hell would you think that people would be OK with letting the downstream land occupants basically strip out the resource to oblivion before it ends up being evenly dispersed? Do we sit back and say " We owe them"? What do we owe? The right to not be accountable for a resource that is supposed to be CO MANAGED for the LONG TERM preservation of the resource. Not nickel and dimed out complete with the " fuck ******" attitude that is so prevalent on so many of the reservations.

Its just my opinion.... Im sure people could make all kinds of arguments as to " rights to the resource" but really.... what do you think is going to happen when THAT natural resource is gone. They will move to the next one. OR they will get more tax dollar augmentation to offset their losses. Either way, WE ALL PAY if that resource disappears. It will cost us FAR LESS to try and preserve and restore whats left.
 
#68 ·
$50 a year for a license is really not that much money. $100 hurts a bit, but if that money is the difference between having a resource and having nothing, its the best deal you'll ever find.

Kamishak Steve- Heres something to think about.... while the lower reaches of these rivers are on 1st nation land, the upper reaches ( spawning water, rearing water) are in park property meant to be a haven for wildlife and is managed as a long term sustainable resource. Why the hell would you think that people would be OK with letting the downstream land occupants basically strip out the resource to oblivion before it ends up being evenly dispersed? Do we sit back and say " We owe them"? What do we owe? The right to not be accountable for a resource that is supposed to be CO MANAGED for the LONG TERM preservation of the resource. Not nickel and dimed out complete with the " fuck ******" attitude that is so prevalent on so many of the reservations.

Its just my opinion.... Im sure people could make all kinds of arguments as to " rights to the resource" but really.... what do you think is going to happen when THAT natural resource is gone. They will move to the next one. OR they will get more tax dollar augmentation to offset their losses. Either way, WE ALL PAY if that resource disappears. It will cost us FAR LESS to try and preserve and restore whats left.
Money doesn't guarantee good behavior. You're making a correlation that by paying more people are more interested in "protecting" a resource. If that were the case then the Atlantic Salmon wouldn't have been nearly extirpated from a lot of eastern canadian rivers. Just because you pay doesn't mean that you play fairly. And an additional $50 is a big deal to some folks. It may not to you, but $50 is a tank of diesel or a weeks for groceries for working class folks. We pay enough already, adding another premium doesn't fix the issue and ends up creating a feudalistic system that frankly would blow.

Also, law doesn't make sense sometimes. This isn't a resource management issue in the classic sense, but rather honoring what the law stipulates. If you want to be pissed, be pissed at the folks who botched the lawsuit to begin with.
 
#69 ·
Stilly, I understand your frustration, it is a complicated issue. But I gotta tell ya the idea of buying off the Indians has been floated many times and it WILL NOT WORK. I have several friends you are tribal and I can guarantee you they will NEVER sell their treaty rights. Put yourself in their shoes, given the history in this country would you trust the government if you were them? My best friend aunts and uncles were taken from their home and sent to schools where they were beaten if they spoke their native language, and that is just the tip of the iceberg. It's easy to talk about getting over the" generational guilt" but we signed an international treaty with them ( the highest law in the land), they gave up almost all their land for the right to fish and hunt, I think we got the better end of the deal.

To the original post I think it is a great thing that some of the tribal members are seeing the light, and while it may take some time to change the mind set, hey you have to begin somewhere. Pointing fingers hasn't worked so far, maybe we should try something different.
 
#70 ·
Put a dollar amount out there in black and white. Let them look at it. And then let them decide. It ain't about trust, it's about money. We aren't without blame in this whole mess, either. Some steps were put in place this year to limit the whoring that's going on but more needs to be done. It's a complex issue with no simple answers. But, continually doing what has proven not to work isn't the answer.

As for the Quinault, you can have it. I'm not supporting any tribal endeavor, in any way, with any of the money I have control over. I'll chase whatever scraps I deem worth chasing.
 
#71 ·
We here on this board live in a bubble. The general public view on this issues is that the harvest of wild steelhead is and should be ok. Most people in the public that I talk to about my chosen career have no clue that killing wild fish is unethical. I educate 2-3 people every week on this subject. I have turned several prospective clients away, that felt they wanted to kill a wild fish. Just yesterday my neighbor was bragging about the fact that his friend is a Quinault, and that when he fishes with him
"There is no limit and no such thing as release."
This is an educated individual that knows the laws and ethics. How do we change the public view to make the killing of wild fish unpalatable?

Not even the most sacred of our steelhead streams are strictly catch and release. Until we change the public opinion and not just ours, the steelhead will suffer. The catch and keep mentality is what keeps hatchery programs running. The public at large does not differentiate between hatchery and wild. A steelhead is a steelhead. Until the demand for steelhead goes away, there will be tribal netting and hatcheries, period!

I would love to see the Quinault tribe change their thinking and turn over to guiding. The unfortunate reality is that this will never happen. Guiding the lower Queets and the Quinault rivers for C&R will support a few of the tribal members, only a few. It will not support the whole. And that is just a pure numbers fact. If you add in that not every person has the personality to be a guide, that number gets even smaller.
 
#75 ·
I actually read the article in the Drake. Now mind you, the Drake is a highly regarded publication with a strong focus on conservation.

I learned an awful lot about the Quinault Fisheries department and how they go about managing the hatchery and wild stocks. If the Drake's editors thought the Quinault tribe were recklessly raping the river and wild steelhead, they wouldn't have run the article.

I am 3rd generation Polish, my grandmother arrived at Ellis Island. I don't owe the tribes shit. I agree with the vast majority of lamenting taking place on this thread. However, energies need to be focused on watersheds overseen by WDFW. The treaties are in place and the tribes just had a big ass party celebrating the 40th year of the Boldt ruling.

The tribes are going to as they please on their land.

Leave the tribes be and focus your energies on the WDFW, who in my mind are a much bigger enemy. You can make a difference there. Hell, WDFW has public comment periods on a wide range of policy. Show up in Centralia when they have a comment period on wild steelhead gene pools for the Toutle and N. Fork Lewis. Offer education to your friends and suggest they don't buy steelhead at your local Safeway.

I am by no means defending the tribes, I am saying it is a waste of time and energy. Get off the forum and drop an email to the WDFW.
 
#76 ·
I actually read the article in the Drake. Now mind you, the Drake is a highly regarded publication with a strong focus on conservation.

I learned an awful lot about the Quinault Fisheries department and how they go about managing the hatchery and wild stocks. If the Drake's editors thought the Quinault tribe were recklessly raping the river and wild steelhead, they wouldn't have run the article.
I am wondering where you base the idea that the Drake's editors know anything about wild steelhead, Quinault management, or the impacts the Quinaults have on rivers not named "Quinault"?

Highly regarded? Strong focus on wild steelhead conservation?
 
#79 ·
I read it. I think the primary reason they published it was the author was Trey Combs.
Yep, I got the same feeling. His is a name that will sell magazines, plain and simple.

I'm not sure what to think about the fact that the story was written by Combs and published by The Drake. I found it surprising, to say the least, when I pulled that issue out of the mailbox and saw that story. And it certainly made me question some of my assumptions on the matter.
 
#80 ·
I don't know, it seems the situation for steelhead everywhere is mostly a sad state of affairs. It's tough to look at what happens on the OP (with the netting and such) and not want to lay the blame on the tribes, but they really only impact a small number of rivers that at one point had substantial runs. I know that every river is different and on some level the OP rivers feel like the last hope for wild steelhead to have a real chance but that isn't the tribes fault. If the Puget Sound and SW Wa rivers were still flush with fish I'm sure the complaints with the tribal practices would be way less. It's come to the point where everything else is ruined and now we're not in the position to change things and to the tribes I'm sure it would come across as "Do as I say" not "Do as I do" in terms of maintaining sustainable fisheries.
 
#89 ·
between tribal land and the park there is a small amount of usfs land. yes some of this was logged. the usfs of days past logged quite a bit. point is there,is not much there. the park is not logged. the lower Queets was. i marvel at folks marveling at "old growth" here even though it was slicked off long ago. as far as lwd recruitment, i don't see the usfs land having much impact here. Steve, where are the gnarly logging on the quinalt? not saying it didn't happen, believe me logging is gnarly on any stream. however these,are likely not usfs holdings or large,land owner. they are likely small time homestead types with parcels under 80 ac. heres another interesting fun fact. qin members have timber allocated to families for them to manage. yet because they are part of qin they are,treated like large,land owners and subject to different harvest laws complying with the Washington forest and fish laws. so while joe q whiteguy can slide,in under,different rules upstream and rape his fish stream cause he,is,a small land guy, tribal members,cannot. this,has causes much friction with forestry and harvest layout. just some fun facts for,you.
Hey Sop,
I am not really sure what you are asking, but as for the logging, I was talking only about historic logging in the Upper Quinault Valley, not current use. The damage done a long time ago (meaning prior to the 1938 when it the area received park designation and became protected) still has a lingering effect on the valley. If you want to read more, here is a great paper about it:
http://pubs.usgs.gov/misc/FISC_1947-2006/pdf/1st-7thFISCs-CD/8thFISC/Poster_Bountry.pdf
I was not aware of those challenges to the QIN members regarding logging, it's interesting stuff how all of that shakes out. Truthfully, i don't know much at all about how timber is managed on the reserve...
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top