Seiners

Jim Wallace

Smells like low tide.
#16
Larry, I have pondered this for a long time, and the only answer that I can come up with is "revenge." Native American netters are exacting their revenge on the decendants of their former conquerors, now that they have the legal ball in their court. The being once imagined as the "noble savage" never existed in reality. That mythical creature was an invention of early American fantasy authors.
Now, I'll bet the Native netters wake up every morning laughing their asses off, still not believing the unfair advantage that the Boldt decision handed them.
Actually, I think its a "goat's head soup" of greed, short-term thinking, revenge, and plain stupidity.
But then when I drive into the heart of the Puget Sound area, everywhere I look, I see evidence of the same kind of thinking and ignorance. Too many people, too much concrete, endless sprawl, too many cars. Everywhere I look, I see us humans engaged in a race to oblivion.


Can anyone explain this to me? What's the business about tribes get 50% of the harvest. No, I didn't read the Boldt decision lately. I probably just don't know what I'm bitching about, other than, the salmon are getting RAPED!!!!!! I am sick when I think about this. I meant to call the tribe today and got too busy and forgot. I wanted to know the minimum mesh size for the beach seines. Last year I measured one at 2-1/2" square knot to knot.
 

dryflylarry

"Chasing Riseforms"
#17
I just got off the phone with a Skok Tribe officer and asked questions about beach seine sizes. He told me that it is supposed to be minimum opening of 3-1/2" although the center, as it is pulled toward the beach to engulf the fish may be smaller. He also described a "set-net" which is still hooked to the beach, but is anchored out and left, then pulled in. The minimum size is 5" (I forgot already, since I'm old, he may have said 5-1/2"...). He did mention that is the S'Klallam Tribe that does most of the netting north of Ayock Rock in area 12 on the Hood Canal. He mentioned that the tribes and WDFW get together with their biologists to determine seasons, etc. Basically, the season for the tribes easily runs full time from the end of August into December gathering coho and chum. Go figure!!! ............
 

Mike T

Active Member
#18
It is very sick i was in ollala fishing one eve on mon and i had a kid with me that has never fished let alone been in a drift boat and there was some puyallup nation boys and on the beach there was a fellow fly guy an lady minding there buissness and the punks set there net next to him and wrapped it around and totaly screewed his peace time and there were a few words exchange thats bullshit and if he was to call the warden for harassment the warden would have to call tribal police and there would be nothing done so my question would be is there a law that says if a sport fisherman fishing waist high in salt is it legal for the salmon raipest to net you with there set?
That was me and my wife. The Puyallup's were targeting Coho. I initially told them that the state law prohibited sportsfishermen from messing with commercial nets, and vise versa they replied, "whose law" "the white man's" "not our law". I realized nothing was to be done other than to make matters worse. They got a little agitated after the guys on the bridge yelled at them so I got my wife out of there.

It left us feeling sick as well.

I suggest that this next February 12, the anniversary of the Boldt decision we all meet at the grave site of Judge Boldt to take a collective piss on his grave.
 
#19
How does commercial harvest of washington salmon make any financial or biological sense?
This is the question going through my mind. If it wasn't for the native American part, I'd ask the question if we stopped commercial fishing in the puget sound, would net revenues from sports fisherman increase far beyond what commercial fishermen input into our economy. I think we have passed the point of sustainably supporting both interests. I got to believe commercial interests harvest way more natural resources and hatchery fish than sport fishermen and pay little in $/fish.

With the Boldt decision, it won't matter. We can say commercial fishing doesnt make sense any more. We could price commercial and sports fishing equitably and kill commercial fishing. The native Americans will F#$k the whole thing up anyway.

Joe
 
#20
This is the question going through my mind. If it wasn't for the native American part, I'd ask the question if we stopped commercial fishing in the puget sound, would net revenues from sports fisherman increase far beyond what commercial fishermen input into our economy. I think we have passed the point of sustainably supporting both interests. I got to believe commercial interests harvest way more natural resources and hatchery fish than sport fishermen and pay little in $/fish.

With the Boldt decision, it won't matter. We can say commercial fishing doesnt make sense any more. We could price commercial and sports fishing equitably and kill commercial fishing. The native Americans will F#$k the whole thing up anyway.

Joe
The native rights do complicate things. I could be wrong, but I don't think there is much of any net revenue from non-native commercial salmon fishing in the US.

Cost to fishermen: Boats, fuel, equipment, time

Cost to the rest of us:
Hatchery programs - Financial and biological.

Bycatch - is not good.

Subsidies - Public funding for private parties to overexploit a public resource ..A very strange policy. I don't know what the current status of subsidies are for operations in WA state, but I know they have gotten some (not even counting hatchery fish).

Reduced fish populations - This is the big one, but hard to quantify b/c there are always other factors to blame for the loss of fish (dams, habitat, fish farms, marine survial).. The fact is that the commercial fleet (and native netting) ensure that even if the fish are doing well and returning in numbers, only the bare minimum will be allowed to spawn, and die, and fertilize the rivers for the next generation. This is at the expense of every other living thing in the region, including anglers. I think reduced numbers (especially of wild adults to the spawning beds) is the biggest risk factor for salmon/steelhead populations. It leaves no room for error, and no possibility for real recovery.


Payoff to the fishing industry: I don't know, maybe 50 cents/pound? I imagine much less for the chum we are talking about here.

Payoff to the rest of us: ? We have the option of eating wild Washington salmon. Some people get some satisfaction out of knowing a traditional industry still exists..

It is hard to imagine it is worth it. Other regions seem to have figured out that sportfishing is a more sustainable and profitable use for wild fish. Commercial fishing was shut down for striped bass on the east coast (intermitently as it turns out), and for redfish in the SE (along with a general net ban), and those fisheries have rebounded in a huge way. Large organized groups of sportfishermen like the CCA are a big reason that interests other than commercial fishing are being considered in fisheries decisions. In the PNW it seems like sportfishermen are having a hard time organizing in a meaningful way, and there is the Boldt decision..

Still, I think that pulling the US commercial fleet would be a great start - it would take away the 'who can get more?' dynamic and may lead to some internal reevaluation of the tribes' policies. They would be in a position where they have to justify their actions without anyone else to point to.
 

Colin

new member name
#21
I think before bashing fishing rights one might want to look into how many fish the Tribal hatcheries are producing and releasing. Do a little research.
 
#23
Who is paying for those hatchery fish to be relaesed? The tax payers in most cases. Just becasue the tribes are rearing fish does not mean they are footing the bill although in some cases they are helping. Not to mention most of the hatchery fish that they are raising do not get fin clipped which means no chance for us to harvest a fish where only fin clipped fish may be retained ( which is almost everywhere now ). Also if a hatchery fish is not fin clipped how do you tell the difference between a wild and hatchery fish to minimize cross breeding or get a true number on the amount of wild fish returning to a stream? You can't. Its win win for the tribes, raise fish, don't clip them so we have to release them, they return to the rivers and get caught in their gill nets. Not to mention wild fish numbers appear to be higher than they actually are which allows netting to continue.
 

skyrise

Active Member
#25
no fish in your area?? get used to it. this wont stop until every fish is gone forever.

"He mentioned that the tribes and WDFW get together with their biologists to determine seasons, etc. Basically, the season for the tribes easily runs full time from the end of August into December gathering coho and chum. Go figure!!! ............ "

what a joke how do you determine a season when you have no idea what has spawned in a river or stream. let alone what few fish might actually make it back.

does the WDFW A. know what has spawned in any stream in the whole state = NO.
B. do they know the numbers of fish that are returning = NO.
C. do they care if any thing makes it back = NO.
D. are the commercials running this whole game = YES
E. do we have a chance to change any thing = NO.
if i am wrong go fish any puget sound or hood canal stream .
is the OP next to go = YES
its just a matter of time.
 

Smalma

Active Member
#26
I suppose that If I were not such a cynic I would be astounded about the amount of mis-information being sprewed on this thread.

If some of the posters on here are truly interested in seeing changes in fish management issues of interest I suggest that they spend less time "venting" on threads such as this and more time on gathering information to understand these issues. Being in a position arguing from knowledge is almost always more productive than using erroneous information for the foundation of your argument.

Tight lines
Curt
 
#27
About a month ago I stopped by the Cowling Creek Hatchery that is operated by the Suquamish Tribe to watch them spawn the Kings. Maybe it was a statistical anomaly both both times I was there fully 50% of the fish were not clipped. When I asked one of the workers about clipping the kings he told me that they clip 90% of them. After seeing the spawning I'm having a tough time believing that figure. I keep thinking of the 25lb unclipped king I had to release this past summer off of Kingston was probably laying on that sorting table.
 

ak_powder_monkey

Proud to Be Alaskan
#28
seems to me if there are sport fisheries with harvest you shouldn't complain about commercial fisheries with harvest.


Releasing fish while seining is easy, when you brail the net you release the ones you don't want, much easier on the fish than sport fishing for sure
 
#29
I suppose that If I were not such a cynic I would be astounded about the amount of mis-information being sprewed on this thread.

If some of the posters on here are truly interested in seeing changes in fish management issues of interest I suggest that they spend less time "venting" on threads such as this and more time on gathering information to understand these issues. Being in a position arguing from knowledge is almost always more productive than using erroneous information for the foundation of your argument.

Tight lines
Curt
Which information is false? What is the correct information? This is a very important issue to a lot of people - people who might be willing to do something about it. So just saying that a lot of the info is wrong is not very helpful. I, for one, would appreciate a brief explanation of how/why commercial salmon harvest in WA is biologically and economically sound. Or if it is not - what can be done about it?

I am tired of hearing that it is not as bad as it seems, or that it is a hopeless situation. And I am tired of hearing that the managers have it under control. Something needs to change and I'm willing to help. I have my ideas based on my (admittedly incomplete) understanding of fish, fisheries, and what has happened to other severely depressed wild fish stocks. If you know what needs to change and how to change it, fill us in.


seems to me if there are sport fisheries with harvest you shouldn't complain about commercial fisheries with harvest.
Maybe not. ..if you don't have a problem with dwindling wild salmon populations being harvested en masse for commercial gain. Assuming an equal harvest, sportfishing provides more value and a higher quality of life for many more individuals than commercial fishing does. Sport fisheries can function, and even grow, without increasing harvest. My opinion is that wild fish, particularly wild fish so close to so many people, are far too valuable to be netted at wholesale prices. If I am wrong about that I wish someone would explain how, so I can stop being upset by what is going on out there.
 

Latest posts