"Gillnets are selective".....

[David Loy]

Gillnets are selective relative to fish like windshields are selective relative to bugs . . .

Well, not to defend the method, but they are required to use an appropriate mesh size that targets the specific open fishery. In theory this lets smaller fish pass through and larger fish can’t get far enough into the opening to catch their gills. Fishermen are to change their web to suit the target, by law. Of course it’s not perfect, there will be by-catch, and I can’t say how often their nets are inspected. As I recall though the penalty was significant, along with scorn among peers.
One thing I believe is true, and lost on some, is that commercial fishing is a livelihood. These guys don’t want extinction either. Generally at least, they want responsible management as well.
That was my experience anyway.

 

[Cougar Zeke]

Well, not to defend the method, but they are required to use an appropriate mesh size that targets the specific open fishery. In theory this lets smaller fish pass through and larger fish can’t get far enough into the opening to catch their gills. Fishermen are to change their web to suit the target, by law. Of course it’s not perfect, there will be by-catch, and I can’t say how often their nets are inspected. As I recall though the penalty was significant, along with scorn among peers.
One thing I believe is true, and lost on some, is that commercial fishing is a livelihood. These guys don’t want extinction either. Generally at least, they want responsible management as well.
That was my experience anyway.

IMHO responsible management applies to everyone but the guy putting a drift net out. I think if you talked to some of the guys chasing SRC in Hood Canal they'd argue about the selective BS and it not applying to SRC.

Justin Waters: https://www.washingtonflyfishing.com/forum/index.php?threads/135025/page-5

 

[stilly stalker]

Classy. I'm sure your parents are proud.

Very - I’m a successful patented chemist. I contribute to society at a high level. I donate charitably and I volunteer my time.

 

[Cougar Zeke]

Very - I’m a successful patented chemist. I contribute to society at a high level. I donate charitably and I volunteer my time.

Good for you, pumpkin.

I've got to brush up on my urban dictionary, if 'chemist' is what they're calling it these days.

 

[stilly stalker]

Good for you

What do you do thst makes you feel like you can judge others you don’t know?

 

[Nick Clayton]

Sipping scotch and IPAs while swinging flies and smoking cigars is classy.

Smoking weed is for classless trash. Duh

 

[stilly stalker]

Sipping scotch and IPAs while swinging flies and smoking cigars is classy.

Smoking weed is for classless trash. Duh

Have fun with your throat cancer and man titties

I have gout- can’t drink beer. Too many years of being fat and drinking beer

I especially can’t drink unfiltered IPAs.

 

[Nick Clayton]

Have fun with your throat cancer and man titties

I have gout- can’t drink beer. Too many years of being fat and drinking beer

I especially can’t drink unfiltered IPAs.

Lol Guess my sarcasm didn't come off very well. I'm in total agreeance with ya.

But please don't judge my man tits

 

[stilly stalker]

Lol Guess my sarcasm didn't come off very well. I'm in total agreeance with ya.

But please don't judge my man tits

Hahaha- I got it, just wanted to mess with ya a bit

 

[Salmo_g]

Gillnets are selective. The Director is correct in repeating the gillnetters' propaganda about selectivity with respect to "time, area, and place." (Let me not that "area" and "place" are functionally equivalent) Gillnets by design select for fish whose size allows them to swim into the meshes of the gillnet and become caught. Sometimes fish become entangled in gillnets and become caught even though they are either smaller or larger than the intended quarry. What the Director and gillnet propagandists are leaving out is that gillnets don't and cannot select between ESA-listed or depressed runs of say, Chinook that overlap in time and place (or area if you prefer) with a more abundant hatchery run of Chinook that traverse the same area at the same time.

Bycatch is quite common when two or more species overlap in time and place also. The two species average size might be different (let's say 10# ave, chum and 8# ave. coho) but there is significant overlap in size, such that the "selective" 6 1/2" stretched mesh gillnet can be pretty efficient at harvesting all salmon in the range of 6 or 7 pounds up to about 16 pounds. So yes, the gillnet is absolutely selective in that it won't catch hardly any fish at all that are smaller than 6 pounds or larger than 16 pounds. But when over 80% of the fish of both species in the same area at the same time are in that size range, the gillnet is basically selective for the vast majority of the salmon in that area at that time.

Where WDFW falls off the credibility cliff is in allowing gillnet fishing where bycatch is common and knowingly predictable and includes fish populations that are not abundant enough to sustain the fishing pressure.

 

[bhudda]

This train derailed rather quickly . . . but via no fault of yours, Pat.

Or mine.... phew

 

[GAT]

Sipping scotch and IPAs while swinging flies and smoking cigars is classy.

Smoking weed is for classless trash. Duh

Not if the weed is hand-rolled similar to cigars.....

I guess gillnets are indeed selective.... if you don't use any, they have little to no effect on any specific fish.. If you do use them they do have an effect.

 

[john gates]

Wait till you see how my outdoor turned out this year. Purple AF

It got cold. Burrr.

 

[Stonefish]

Gillnets are selective. The Director is correct in repeating the gillnetters' propaganda about selectivity with respect to "time, area, and place." (Let me not that "area" and "place" are functionally equivalent) Gillnets by design select for fish whose size allows them to swim into the meshes of the gillnet and become caught. Sometimes fish become entangled in gillnets and become caught even though they are either smaller or larger than the intended quarry. What the Director and gillnet propagandists are leaving out is that gillnets don't and cannot select between ESA-listed or depressed runs of say, Chinook that overlap in time and place (or area if you prefer) with a more abundant hatchery run of Chinook that traverse the same area at the same time.

Bycatch is quite common when two or more species overlap in time and place also. The two species average size might be different (let's say 10# ave, chum and 8# ave. coho) but there is significant overlap in size, such that the "selective" 6 1/2" stretched mesh gillnet can be pretty efficient at harvesting all salmon in the range of 6 or 7 pounds up to about 16 pounds. So yes, the gillnet is absolutely selective in that it won't catch hardly any fish at all that are smaller than 6 pounds or larger than 16 pounds. But when over 80% of the fish of both species in the same area at the same time are in that size range, the gillnet is basically selective for the vast majority of the salmon in that area at that time.

Where WDFW falls off the credibility cliff is in allowing gillnet fishing where bycatch is common and knowingly predictable and includes fish populations that are not abundant enough to sustain the fishing pressure.

Well put Sg
You can guarantee the gill nets strung up on the canal intended for chum are doing a number on the late wild coho.
SF

 

[KerryS]

...