PDA

View Full Version : Unlawful Netting Taking Away Sportfishing Opportunity


Deleted User
06-10-2001, 02:27 PM
In the thread "tribal netting" on P.P. BB it was noted the Muckleshoot Tribe is getting to net steelhead and spring chinook, many are native fish, on the White River while the sportfishermen aren't even allowed a C&R fishery! This scenario seems to be an increasing problem region wide. I will copy my reply over to here for those interested in helping sportfishers get a fair share of fishing opportunity:

I agree with many of the posts here and like some of the solution ideas for the way netting has gotten grossly out of hand and beyond fairness or lawfulness. A couple points I will add to this thread. - Just as with the Columbia River Treaties and Judge Belloni Federal Court review mandates that the harvestable fish be split evenly 50/50, so to has the Washington state Treaties and Federal Court review mandates by Judge Boldt called for the fish deemed harvestable to be split evenly 50/50. As with the Columbia Tribes getting 6 1/2 times the spring chinook harvest that the non-Indians got (commercial and sporties combined), it is obvious that in many rivers the Tribes of NW Washington are also getting much more of the amount of fish which are controversially deemed harvestable by someone and only for the Indians (White River and many others examples). How does this fit in with the signed Treaties and Federal Court review mandates? IT DOESN'T! - The other point I want to emphasize (and this is nothing new from me) is to keep writing your congressmen and state reps about these gross unfairnesses; from big numbers of people. We don't have to cry out any longer about the unfairness of the Boldt and Belloni 50/50 split of fish decisions; we HAVE TO cry out loudly about the Indians unethically and unlawfully getting much more than 50% of the harvest, seemingly region wide now! - I also strongly urge you to become members of NSIA (Northwest Sportfishing Industry Association), and/or WSA (Wild Steelhead Coalition - accessed in P.P. forums), and/or other respected sportfishing advocacy entities such as The Associaltion of NW Steelheaders that are well organized with legal representatives. They have a better chance at getting something positive done in our favor, especially if their memberships and lobbying revenue increase. By writing your reps and joining these organizations at very low yearly membership dues (the best spent money you could ever do for your fishing opportunity and success; many times more effective than buying another overpriced rod), we CAN AND WILL get closer to where we deserve to!

RT

boater
06-10-2001, 03:15 PM
i thought the NSIA was against I-696 ban-all-nets ??

Deleted User
06-10-2001, 11:31 PM
I don't recall that Boater, but I don't know. They are a good organization that does fight for the sportfishers rights; effectively with a couple of paid Wash. DC lobbyists looking out for our interests. Among fishing advocacy organiaztions they were most responsible for fighting off the Col. Tribes and NMFS's attempts to close down last year's fall chinook sport fishery on the Columbia. They helped with getting us at least a small % season on the Columbia springers this year. Ifish member Divid Johnson is also an active member of NSIA and if he sees this he can better answer your question.

RT

David Johnson
06-10-2001, 11:56 PM
I'm not real sure about I-696. If NSIA was against it I'm sure it was for our best interest, like if there was some loop hole or the wording wasn't advantageous for us. I have a feeling it was too broad of a net removal but don't take that as set in stone.

I do know they are for the most sport fishing opportunity possible and if it wasn't for Liz and the others we wouldn't have been fishing on the Columbia at all this spring.

I beleive you can email NSIA at: NSIALIZ@aol.com

sinker
06-11-2001, 09:29 AM
There were alot of organizations against I-696 because it would only effect the white fisherman and not the tribes.
For one thing this idea is ludicrous, it would be like saying "I'm never voting again until there is an initiative that covers EVERYTHING I believe in." Seems kinda childish.
Personally I'd rather vote for something that gets me a little bit of what I want rather than sit around and get nothing.
I worked with a bunch of people that weren't going to vote for I-696 because of this reason. I politely sat them down and tried in a civil manner to explain to them that it was rather stupid thinking and that a state initiative can't effect the tribes. Thats something thats gonna have to come down from the federal level.

Fish Hunter
06-11-2001, 11:47 AM
Right on RT! I did join NSIA after reading one of David Johnson's posts. Since I'm not in the industry, I felt a little odd about joining an "Industry Assn." But I feel it can be an important group to show the non-fishing public there are economic factors involved in sportfishing that are overlooked. Sadly everyone needs their PAC now to look out for their interests an beliefs. I hope that one of these groups can pull off a lawsuit against the state/feds to remedy the inequitys you are bringing up. Seems the government has to sued to do anything now. images/icons/rolleyes.gif