Forum Index > Public Lands Stewardship > salmon
 Reply to topic
Previous :: Next Topic
Author Message
Ski
><((((°>



Joined: 28 May 2005
Posts: 12798 | TRs | Pics
Location: tacoma
Ski
><((((°>
PostTue Jun 11, 2019 11:09 pm 
Gregory- Thank you very much for pointing out brutal facts. Let me add, to address iron's question from the first post: Several years ago I made a call to Olympic National Park's fisheries biologist and asked him if they'd ever given consideration to closing the coastal rivers to all sportfishing. His answer was quite interesting. They had indeed looked at doing exactly that, and they sat down and crunched the numbers. They figured that the cumulative take on all rivers in Olympic National Park by sport fishermen amounted to less than one percent of the total take. The other 99% was "commercial fisheries" - tribal gillnetting. While that's just a small snippet of a very large picture, it underscores the pointlessness and futility of attempting to restore runs of native anadromous salmonids by changing fishing regulations. I am on various email lists, and one of the agencies I receive emails from is the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife. I get two or three or four or five emails every day from WDFW. Many of them are concerning some change in regulations, or the closure of some river or stream or lake due to low return numbers. (You can find a number of them posted in the "farmed fish" thread here in Stewardship.) So while WDFW spins its wheels and pretends to be "doing something" about the ever-declining numbers of wild anadromous stocks, as Gregory has pointed out above (and as I have pointed out innumerable times on this site) there are so many other factors involved that the continual tweaking of fishing regulations is, in reality, a tragic joke. The primary reason the anadromous runs have been decimated is because we went crazy early in the 20th century and built a huge network of hydroelectric dams that stupidly included no provisions to allow fish passage. The second biggest reason is habitat destruction. Third is residential and industrial pollution dumped into waterways. Then there's a whole laundry list of other "reasons", among them: - increasing water temperatures in the North Pacific - over-harvesting of food-fish stocks in the North Pacific by various countries who pull more small food-fish stocks out of the ocean than nature is able to replace. Most of these are used to make "fish pellets" for the farmed fish and farmed shrimp ("Aquaculture") industry. And then way, way, way, way down at the very bottom of the list is the guy standing out in the middle of a river somewhere with a rod in hand hoping to get a bite. Boycott farmed fish and farmed shrimp.

"I shall wear white flannel trousers, and walk upon the beach. I have heard the mermaids singing, each to each."
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Ski
><((((°>



Joined: 28 May 2005
Posts: 12798 | TRs | Pics
Location: tacoma
Ski
><((((°>
PostThu Jun 13, 2019 8:16 pm 
just a note for iron: FIVE emails today from WDFW regarding fish. FIVE are there more fish in the rivers now?

"I shall wear white flannel trousers, and walk upon the beach. I have heard the mermaids singing, each to each."
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Gregory
Member
Member


Joined: 08 Mar 2014
Posts: 386 | TRs | Pics
Gregory
Member
PostFri Jun 14, 2019 6:58 am 
Looks like I need to poke my nose into my inbox. By the fourth grade, I had become obsessed with fishing. With the waters of the Puget sound all around me, it was all I could think about. One day my fourth-grade teacher came back from a lunch break with a couple 18-inch sea-run cutthroat trout on a stringer and told us he caught them fly fishing the mouth of the creek that ran alongside our Elementry school, deep in a canyon. Deep to a fourth grader anyway. A few days later at recess, he told me there were fish down there in the creek. Now I had seen the creek as we sometimes had to climb the fence to fetch balls that accidentally went into the canyon. I politely did not believe him. That summer during summer vacation I got bored and decided to go check this claim of my favorite teacher out. The first trip into the canyon yielded a large cutthroat and I was hooked. Over the years I learned in the fall, first coho then chum salmon also made a showing. It was a paradise for a little kid. Then around my sophomore year, the farmland at the headwaters became a huge trailer park. With all the memories attached to a little kids adventures scraped away even then I was sad. I made a trip down to the culvert hole just to see if there was a cutty and there was and I was happy again. Then the local water municipality punched a well in next to the creek and started pumping. I did not then understand the ramifications of this. Then another huge development was proposed just downstream of the trailer park. This time the people living along the creek already decided to argue the density of the proposed development did not match the surrounding properties and would further harm the creek. I was just out of high school and decided to testify in front of a county hearing examiner. I just wanted the county to know of the trout and salmon that lived there and that I was worried about them. I testified and was immediately rebutted by a stream Biologist paid by the developer. He called me a liar and then told the county that there may of been fish in there long ago and if there were, old man Monroes cattle killed them off long ago. He also stated the new development would be the healthiest thing for the fish after the terrible farmer had done his damage. Now I knew the biologist was a liar and I also knew that the stream was doomed. I also learned that the hearing was a farce and that government only cares about money. The stream is dead now. Luckily, even though it is now designated a salmon stream they have not wasted millions of dollars of taxpayers dollars pretending to bring it back like they are others around here. This story started forty-some years ago and is a prime example of why the killer whales are going to die soon. A sophomore in high school knew that the development of all the little creeks was a very bad thing. I just wish I had moved away and started a life elsewhere, where I di not have to watch it all up close. So preventable.

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Ski
><((((°>



Joined: 28 May 2005
Posts: 12798 | TRs | Pics
Location: tacoma
Ski
><((((°>
PostFri Jun 14, 2019 9:43 am 
Gregory wrote:
"...now designated a salmon stream they have not wasted millions of dollars of taxpayers dollars pretending to bring it back like they are others around here...."
Flett Creek Clover Creek Fauntleroy Creek Swan Creek Chambers Creek etc. etc. ad infinitum Certainly there are "success stories" trumpeted by local Parks Departments and governmental agencies, complete with color photos of small children watching native salmon splashing upstream to their historic spawning beds. But it begs the question "at what cost?" As Gregory points out, the answer is millions and millions of dollars, and the unfortunate reality is that it may well be too little too late, particularly in light of the fact that municipal and county permitting agencies continue to allow massive residential and commercial development in the areas which were the former headwaters of these same creeks (e.g., Chambers Creek, Flett Creek, Clover Creek, Swan Creek.)

"I shall wear white flannel trousers, and walk upon the beach. I have heard the mermaids singing, each to each."
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Schroder
Member
Member


Joined: 26 Oct 2007
Posts: 6696 | TRs | Pics
Location: on the beach
Schroder
Member
PostMon Jun 17, 2019 11:20 am 
Ski wrote:
They figured that the cumulative take on all rivers in Olympic National Park by sport fishermen amounted to less than one percent of the total take. The other 99% was "commercial fisheries" - tribal gillnetting.
You're forgetting the Boldt decision. The allocation is 50% to the tribes and 50% to all non-tribal harvest combined - commercial and sports fishing.

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
tinman
Member
Member


Joined: 08 Oct 2004
Posts: 355 | TRs | Pics
Location: Where it rains, WA
tinman
Member
PostMon Jun 17, 2019 5:25 pm 
There is no commercial non-tribal fishing in the Rivers on the peninsula. I tend to agree with Ski's statement.

Wherever you go, there you are.......
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Ski
><((((°>



Joined: 28 May 2005
Posts: 12798 | TRs | Pics
Location: tacoma
Ski
><((((°>
PostMon Jun 17, 2019 9:02 pm 
Schroder wrote:
You're forgetting the Boldt decision. The allocation is 50% to the tribes and 50% to all non-tribal harvest combined - commercial and sports fishing.
I was passing along a statement made to me over the phone by the Park's fisheries biologist. I am disinclined to question the veracity of his statement.

"I shall wear white flannel trousers, and walk upon the beach. I have heard the mermaids singing, each to each."
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Pyrites
Member
Member


Joined: 16 Sep 2014
Posts: 1879 | TRs | Pics
Location: South Sound
Pyrites
Member
PostTue Jun 18, 2019 7:20 pm 
Ski’s phone conversation, commercial:sports fishing catch. Salmon returning to WA streams are caught in large numbers in Alaska & especially British Columbia. I haven’t paid attention for a couple decades. It varied by specie but take in B.C. used to easily exceed WA take for some Puget Sound runs. Best.

Keep Calm and Carry On? Heck No. Stay Excited and Get Outside!
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
treeswarper
Alleged Sockpuppet!



Joined: 25 Dec 2006
Posts: 11272 | TRs | Pics
Location: Don't move here
treeswarper
Alleged Sockpuppet!
PostTue Jun 18, 2019 7:26 pm 
http://www.tribaltribune.com/news/article_c5d388ec-817a-11e9-b3d3-67430dffa337.html

What's especially fun about sock puppets is that you can make each one unique and individual, so that they each have special characters. And they don't have to be human––animals and aliens are great possibilities
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Schroder
Member
Member


Joined: 26 Oct 2007
Posts: 6696 | TRs | Pics
Location: on the beach
Schroder
Member
PostThu Jun 20, 2019 8:20 am 
tinman wrote:
There is no commercial non-tribal fishing in the Rivers on the peninsula. I tend to agree with Ski's statement.
There is no commercial non-tribal fishing in any river. The allocation is done by regions. Pre-Boldt Decision (1974) there was no fishing in the rivers by the tribes, except the protest fishing on the Nisqually. That's what brought the issue to Federal Court. The year after there were nets in every major river.

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Gregory
Member
Member


Joined: 08 Mar 2014
Posts: 386 | TRs | Pics
Gregory
Member
PostFri Jun 21, 2019 7:02 am 
tinman wrote:
There is no commercial non-tribal fishing in the Rivers on the peninsula. I tend to agree with Ski's statement.
I will respectfully disagree with that statement. There are no NI nets in the coastal river only tribal, yes. But the amount of fishing guides is completely out of control. What the tribes miss with the gill nets gets hooked and handled by a guide getting paid. Yes much of the guides operate on a catch and release policy with steelhead and chinook salmon but even that has its cost on the spawners. Especially a big egg-laden king.

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
tinman
Member
Member


Joined: 08 Oct 2004
Posts: 355 | TRs | Pics
Location: Where it rains, WA
tinman
Member
PostFri Jun 21, 2019 5:07 pm 
Gregory, very good point. i admit, I was thinking of commercial net fisheries. I also agree with your comments on catch and release, it doesn't always work out well.

Wherever you go, there you are.......
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Ski
><((((°>



Joined: 28 May 2005
Posts: 12798 | TRs | Pics
Location: tacoma
Ski
><((((°>
PostThu Jun 27, 2019 5:25 pm 
iron - here's yet another example of "closing the barn door after the horse has run off": ==== Thursday June 27, 2019 17:07 PDT WDFW NEWS RELEASE Anglers are reminded of Columbia River salmon fishery closures OLYMPIA – State fishery managers are reminding anglers that the mainstem Columbia River – both above and below Priest Rapids Dam – is closed to fishing for salmon due to projected low returns of summer Chinook and sockeye salmon. These closures are reflected in the 2019-20 Washington Sport Fishing Rule pamphlet, which is available online at https://wdfw.wa.gov/fishing/regulations. Areas of the Columbia River above Priest Rapids Dam typically open for salmon fishing around July 1, but those areas will remain closed to protect the lower number of summer Chinook and sockeye expected to return this year. The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife issued an emergency rule change (https://fortress.wa.gov/dfw/erules/efishrules/erule.jsp?id=2341) earlier this month to close salmon fisheries below Priest Rapids Dam. The department initially announced these closures in April in a news release: https://wdfw.wa.gov/news/washingtons-salmon-fisheries-set-2019-20. -WDFW-

"I shall wear white flannel trousers, and walk upon the beach. I have heard the mermaids singing, each to each."
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Ski
><((((°>



Joined: 28 May 2005
Posts: 12798 | TRs | Pics
Location: tacoma
Ski
><((((°>
PostTue Jul 02, 2019 6:19 pm 
Tuesday July 2, 2019 17:12 PDT WDFW FISHING RULE CHANGE Chehalis River and tributaries to close to fishing Action: Closes Chehalis River, South Fork Chehalis River, North Fork Newaukum River, South Fork Newaukum River, and Skookumchuck River to fishing. Effective date: Immediately until further notice. Species affected: All species. Location: Chehalis River, South Fork Chehalis River, North Fork Newaukum River, South Fork Newaukum River and Skookumchuck River. Reason for action: Streams and rivers where spring Chinook hold and stage through the summer are experiencing lower than normal stream flows. Spring Chinook hold and stage in the Chehalis River, South Fork Chehalis River, north and south forks of the Newaukum River and the Skookumchuck River. Low stream flows decrease holding and staging refuges and elevate vulnerability and pressure on these Chinook. Any encounters of spring Chinook could subject these fish to stress, injury, or death. Additional information: Please see the 2019-20 Washington Sport Fishing Rules pamphlet or visit the WDFW website at wdfw.wa.gov for additional fishing opportunities and regulations. Information contact: Chad Herring, Willapa Bay/Grays Harbor Fishery Policy Lead Region 6, 360-249-4628, ext. 299. -WDFW-

"I shall wear white flannel trousers, and walk upon the beach. I have heard the mermaids singing, each to each."
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Alpendave
Member
Member


Joined: 01 Aug 2008
Posts: 863 | TRs | Pics
Alpendave
Member
PostSat Jul 06, 2019 7:34 am 
treeswarper wrote:
iron wrote:
(might be wrong forum...) if we are so concerned about the survival of salmon, why don't we just impose a moratorium on salmon harvesting for 3 years or so? seems more effective than all the bandaid solutions currently out there.
I have wondered about that for years. We throw so much money at salmon recovery, yet folks are still fishing for salmon. It makes it hard to believe that salmon are in trouble. Has doing away with hatchery raised fish worked.....nope. Rehabbing streams? Nope. The latest threat here is Northern Pike. These scary looking fish are above Grand Coulee in the Columbia, but may head downstream. The Colville tribe has been netting them to try to get rid of them. Another question from me. We seem to be able to overfish and drive species to extinction, but can't seem to do the same with invasive species like the pike and the other one which I cannot remember. The latter even has a bounty on it and some folks have made quite a bit of supplemental income catching them.
Some years back I was fishing Vermilion Bay near Trout Creek, MT (on a reservoir on the Clark Fork River) and suddenly hooked something YUGE. Had no idea what it was as every time I got it within 15-20’ of shore, it would run off with 30-50 feet of line. Finally got it within 10 feet and as it took off again, created a sizable swell. Finally landed it and it was a 30” or so Pike of some sort (perhapss a Tiger Muskee). Doubtful it would have fetched a bounty (being a sterile hybrid) but easy to see how the fact that it liked hanging out at the mouth of another river, it could devour a large amount of young salmonids as they went from the Vermilion River to the Clark Fork. Maybe I shouldn’t have let it live.

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
   All times are GMT - 8 Hours
 Reply to topic
Forum Index > Public Lands Stewardship > salmon
  Happy Birthday speyguy, Bandanabraids!
Jump to:   
Search this topic:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum