Are Gill Nets The Biggest Problem?

[Gun Rod Bow]

Think about this gang. I hear a bunch of noise about who to blame for the closures. None of us want to see endangered stocks not get the protection they need to recover.

All these closures are based on the "potential impact" on "endangered stocks".

Only a very, very small percentage of the upriver fish are actually "endangered stocks". A vast majority of the fish we are gently releasing, are of hatchery origin. Most of the hatcheries ran by our Native Brothers do not clip and they don't want to. Some others still don't, or are just coming around.

If we want to squawk...Let's sqwawk at the Feds and insist on 100% fin marking, and verify it.

Then, when a gill net kills an unmarked fish, the feds won't have to guess what that impact on endangered stocks will be.

Gill nets are killers, and a poor method for selective fishing, but until we clip ALL hatchery fish, we will never know if we are releasing unmarked hatchery fish or true natives that we all want to protect.

GRB

[ 04-03-2003, 04:10 PM: Message edited by: Gun Rod Bow ]

[cosmo]

What you are asking for was finally addressed last month. The purchase of nine fin-clipping machines brought with it language that ALL federally produced fish be marked. It really is a huge step in the right direction.

[boater]

well, gillnetting doesnt realy have a good track record, i have yet to see a run of fish rebuilt while being gillnetted at the same time.

[No Wishin Just Fishin]

Right on GRB you don't build a dairy herd killing the cows

[timinthegorge]

YES.....

And feel free to number the rest of the reasons as you see fit. But nets are bad, and they'd be my first choice to remove if you want to see wild fish return numbers increase!

It's certainly not the only reason, but it's the first on my list!

Tim

[Ty]

Right on Gun Rod..... It is about time someone said it.

I would add though, that the majority of the wild endangered unpriver stocks are gone, and have been for quite some time. The fish that are causing so many gripes with you guys are actually lower snake river stocks, that where heavily impacted with the lower four damns on the snake. These damns are mainly serve as very expensive elevators for barges and are very very fish unfriendly. :shrug:

[Ty]

One last thing gun rod... Most of the hatcheries on the Columbia are Federal, even the one run by states and tribes are federally funded. BPA and other utilities are bound by law to mitigate for fish losses due to hydro-electic projects. graemlins/stupid.gif

[AuntyM]

OK... I am going to take a stand here. Some folks are not going to like what I have to say, but this is reality. I researched this for quite some time. I read everything I could find and once I was finished, I wrote a report. Here is what I concluded.

It's the nets (stupid). :tongue: Gill nets, tangle tooth nets, both are non selective wild fish killers. It isn't the commercials or tribes, it's the gear itself that is the problem. Regardless if it's springers, or silvers or even sturgeon, these nets are a bad idea.

Selective fishing methods need to be implemented. It's time to prod ODFW and WDFW to seriously test fish traps. The trial WDFW did a few years back states that it is ineffective method, which makes very little sense. I can't honestly say they were trying real hard to make it work at the time, since they had already put their faith in tangle tooth nets.

A fish trap is two nets (used as barriers) set in a "V" shape, funneling fish into decreasing sized box traps. Once the fish get to the last trap, they can be sorted and released. They suffer no harm. Live capture and release. No reason it shouldn't work. And it apparently DOES work in BC. :rolleyes:

For tribes, I would prefer the good old fashioned fish wheel. (again, live capture, no harm) However, convincing them to release wild fish is another matter. What is odd though, is that in BC, the Aboriginals embraced the idea of selective methods. They seemed much more concerned about the survival of wild fish and seemed far less inclined to want more hatchery fish.

Clipping should no longer be an issue, except for perhaps a few tribal hatcheries that get no federal dollars.

I don't care how much you huff and puff. The fish don't belong to a sport fisherman until you buy your license, catch the hatchery fish, bonk it, and write it on your CR card. Up until then, John Q. Public has as much right to that fish via commercials and tribes, as you do.

Please don't direct me towards fish farming. I think it's OK for folks in Japan to eat them, but we live in the Great Pacific North West. We should be able to buy these salmon that grew up here and returned here to spawn as much as be able to catch them. The public also pays for these hatchery fish. Why is it OK for a sport fisherman to get a whole bunch of springers to eat and not John Q Public?

So there. That is my informed opinion. graemlins/berry.gif graemlins/berry.gif graemlins/berry.gif graemlins/berry.gif

[Flatfish]

I have a question. How many of the fish are not clipped? If they all were, would we still have a fishery? Or would it shut down because what was counted as wild is actually hatchery.

Mark and the dog.

[boater]

Originally posted by AuntyM:
Why is it OK for a sport fisherman to get a whole bunch of springers to eat and not John Q Public?

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">auntym, john Q public will not have a shortage of fish if the "NON-tribal" netters get taken off the columbia.

[Stew]

More than anything it's mismanagement of the resource :mad: Yeah the nets are lethal to wild fish but it's like Aunty M said there are other methods available for the commercials to get their share. Of course just like anything else change moves at a snails pace :rolleyes:

[ 04-04-2003, 11:32 AM: Message edited by: Stew ]

[Sore Back]

How about those Lions?

[AuntyM]

Boater, Boater, Boater.... How ya been?

It has nothing to do with a shortage of fish at grocery stores. John Q. Public has as much right to those fish as we do. When the "ban net" attempt failed, no one really bothered to do an exit poll. I have asked quite a few non fishing friends why they wouldn't support such a ban. Plain and simple.... they WANT these fish available for purchase.

Seals? Gill netters? Tribes? Time for us all to wake up and smell the coffee. Narrow minded views only make matters worse. Not better.

[Ty]

Aunty M..... I understnad your frustration with the gillnets. I don't even know where to begin to send you to see the "big picture" to research all of the problems that are contributing to the loss of fisheries on the CR. graemlins/1zhelp.gif

The fish traps are a great idea, they are really effective and you can sort through the fish. As for the tribes and fish wheels great idea, except wheels only work well in turbid water, and they are restricted to fish above Bonniville because white man has first chance at fish. A better idea would just let them fish in the fish ladders at the damns and sort through the hatchery fish there. :shrug:

The thing that fails to make sence is the commercial value of a hatchery fish..... The number don't add up and never will. IT would eb far cheaper to buy the commercial permits out and eleminate the commercial fishing since the cost of raising a hatchery fish is far greater than the value of the fish paid to the commerical fisherman and the amazing amount of revenue that sportfishing generates.

A idea is to somehow tax sportfisherman to gain exclusive rights to the fishing resourse. Sportman have the money to spare..... Who would care about $20 a year for that... That doesn't even fill my truck with one tank of gas, and mutliply that by all the CR fisherman and you would have a good start for fisheries recovery money that fisherman would have exclusive right to say where it goes. Bottom lien it buy the gillnetters out!

[Lured In]

GRB...I think you bring up an important point. "The problem" is not just the nets. Personally I think even us sport fisher's could do more to help the resource while on the water.

I was talking to a friend the other day about this. Most of the ESA impact is based on how the average "unclipped" fish is handled/stressed while being caught. If we were to support new regs that required the use of single point, barbless hooks we may be able to lower our current ESA impact percentage. (Currently 10% long term mortality).

Ensuring the majority of hatchery fish are clipped would go a long way to cutting down on the "crystal ball and ouiji board" math that has been going on.

I personally would like to see the commercials continue thier business but as trollers rather than netters. Reduces, by catch and puts thier ESA impact down around where ours is(down from 25-50%) . They probably wouldn't catch as many fish in a trip, but could fish longer and even at the same time as sport fishers, perhaps. (Actually, I wouldn't mind working on one).

Probably not the best answer long term, but would certainly seem to me to be a step in the right direction. :wink:

[ 04-04-2003, 08:35 AM: Message edited by: Lured In ]

[Pilar]

A couple of questions here.

Thanks Aunty 'M', how do we get the regulating agencies to seriously consider alternative methods of commercial fishing? Any ban on nets is going to have to be closely tied to an alternative method for the commercial fishers.

BTW, your presentation at the meeting was impressive. It is obvious that you have given this problem a great deal of thought.

2nd question, Who bought the auto clipping machines? Great idea! When do they go to work?

It will be interesting to see how many returning fish still have adipose fins when the hatchery contribution is 100% clipped. Many fishers here on IFISH believe that the wild stocks are at very low levels. Maybe the Salmon establishment is afraid to find out how low the levels really are.

Think of it. If there are no wild fish left what is all the fuss about releasing unclipped fish about?

The tribes oppose clipping, citing 'spiritual' reasons. They also oppose having to selectively net clipped fish ... saying things like ... the fish gave it's spirit to us .. we should use it.

That's all good but a bunch of baloney. How many fish would get upriver if they were all clipped? You all know when you catch an unclipped hatchery fish. They are smaller, they don't fight as hard and they just look different. The fish are not clipped to maximize the numbers available for tribal net fisheries.

The nets are not the only problem, for sure. But they represent a part of the problem that is possible to change. The dams aren't going anywhere (politics) the changes in the habitat aren't going away (property rights, politics) and the numbers of fishers wanting some salmon aren't going to go down.

Let's change what we can and then start on the harder stuff.

[AuntyM]

Ty,

Fish wheels can be powered, they don't need turbidity to work. It's just another alternative anyway. The point is, in this day and age, we are capable of using a non lethal method to sort the fish.

I agree about the commercial value etc. In many ways, it doesn't make sense for gill netters to keep trying. The ESA and fish farms WILL get rid of commercial gill nets at some point. Too bad, because they COULD make much more money on live caught, fresh Columbia Springer, if they were marketing it properly.

OK... now here is where I eat some crow. I agree somewhat with UglyGreen. :blush: Once the commercials (and their lobbying efforts) are removed from the picture, we will lose. You will be seeing far fewer hatchery fish. It isn't rocket science....

So I guess this is my train of thought;

1) We sit here and fight about/with gill netters.
2) We get mad and rant at tribes taking 50% (or more)
3) We post thread after thread about seals and sea lions "stealing" fish.
4) We gripe constantly about WDFW and ODFW and the decisions they make.
5) We ignore the very real threat from groups like Washington Trout, who make no secret that they want to rid us of these horrible hatcheries.

Well, if you were an employee of one of those agencies tasked with trying to make us happy, or you were a legislator... what would YOU think about us? They are damned if they do, and damned if they don't. Eventually, they will give in to those extremist groups and close hatcheries.

So I think if we don't mature as a group and stop acting like rotten kids fighting over the last candy bar, we will lose most of our fishing opportunity.

The sky is falling! :depressed:

[AuntyM]

Pilar,

You asked what we can do to try and get the regulating agencies to consider alternatives. In my opinion, I think fish farms, the NMFS and the ESA will take care of that for us in just a few more years. What is best for us sport fishermen/women? Do we want to fight FOR the commercial interests, AGAINST or just stick our heads in the sand?

[ 04-04-2003, 10:26 AM: Message edited by: AuntyM ]

[Ty]

Great thoughts Aunty M.... Good to hear your understanding of the complexities involved in management. :dance:

Tunbidity has to do with water clearity. More turbid =l less clearity and is commonly measured with a secci disk. Fish wheels are far more effective in more turbid waters and are not very evective in clear water.

[OceanBlue]

AuntyM, IMHO, I would like to see us work WITH the commercial interests to come up with a viable alternative. I again commend you on your awesome reasearch into alternate fishing methods.

If we join with the commercials to find a better method, everyone wins. The feds already subsidize the effort, why not get them to subsidize new gear?

[AuntyM]

Ty,

Gotcha! But if you use the same principal with a fish wheel as you do a fish trap and use a barrier net, it changes things some.

They ARE expensive though. So are boats. The price of fuel could become another limiting factor. Fish wheels can be semi permanent and used along shorelines, making them far less of a navigation hazard or littering the river with ghost nets, which is another motivator for me.

It IS complicated isn't it? :shocked:

[OceanBlue]

AuntyM: little that's worth doing is easy.

[BrionLutz]

Aunty M,

It gets back to UglyGreen's original suggestion that the sport fishing folks need to work with the commerical fishermen.

If sport fishermen help them get their fish, the commerical folks will help us increase the number of fish.

Combine the lobbying power of the commericals with the sport fishermen, tribes and (don't freak out now) environmental groups and you have a very powerful lobbying force for salmon that covers a lot of bases (public access to the resource for non-fishermen, commercial industry, sport industry, tribal concerns, environmental concerns).

Personally, adding a couple bucks to the sport licensing fee and using that money to grab hatchery fish for the commerical license holders at the fish ladders is how I'd go.

Be interesting to ask the commercial fishing association on how sport fishermen could work with them so everybody's rice bowl is protected and how we could then all work toward restoring the salmon run which is what we (commerical, tribe, sport and environmental) all want to do.

Brion

[Stew]

I think it's time for a reality check about seals and sea lions. They are a problem but apparently no one with NMFS or ESA thinks they are. Hey I have it graemlins/idea.gif How about an Orca hatchery :grin:
The gill netters are not about to voluntarily give up their nets! I don't think a buy out would even do it unless it's some astronomical amount of money.
So with that in mind it's going to take something drastic to force them to change their way of harvesting their alloted quota of fish and these wild fish by catches may be the thing that does it! People might not like the notion of an uneasy alliance with groups like Washington Trout or Native Fish Society but in the matter of getting gill nets off of the Columbia river we may need their help!
AuntyM is right, they are definately against hatcheries and we will still have to battle them on those issues but since they are not a sports angling advocasy group they may be able to help in forcing a change in the methods of commercial harvest that is not harmful to wild fish.

[ 04-04-2003, 04:21 PM: Message edited by: Stew ]

[OceanBlue]

Omigosh! I agree with some of what Brion says. :shocked:

I'll ask the gillnetting association what they think when I chat with them next week. :grin:

[fishchaser]

Well here's my 2 cents worth:

First off I feel that all nets should be banned. Let them try something else.

Second of all I pay almost $40 dollars a year to fish for Sturgeon, Salmon and Steelhead.I don't fish for halibut because I can't cross the bar without wishing I was dead.

Now ODFW has closed down sturgeon fishing. :depressed: I can live with that, we still have Salmon. :dance:
They will be closing the CR on Sunday for Salmon fishing. graemlins/berry.gif It's OK I have the Willamette :dance:
Now they want to close the Willamette on April 24th, for Salmon fishing. :mad:

WHY AM I SPENDING $40 DOLLARS A YEAR TO FISH?
WHAT CAN I FISH FOR, EVERYTHING IS CLOSED OR CLOSING. :mad:

AND THEY WANT TO RAISE MY LICENCE FEE AND ADD A SHELLFISH LICENCE, TOBOOT?

THEY CAN FORGET IT!!!!!!!! :mad:
I HAVE A GOOD FELLING TO TAKE MY LICENCE AND TAGS DOWN TO THE CLACKAMAS OFFICE AND THROW THEM IN THIER FACES!

[AuntyM]

Fishchaser,

That is an emotional response to disappointment. I am also disappointed. I had a trip planned for Sun-Tue that my husband took off work for. He can't change it now, so those days will be spent doing something else.

But I have to wonder, why are you mad at ODFW and not your fellow Ifishers? Surely you realize if these folks here would just stop fishing AND catching AND sharing so much, you would have all the opportunities you desire.

In fact, how do WE know you aren't taking opportunity from the rest of us?

:shrug: :hoboy: :wink:

[jdbrightfish]

Ok here I go I am going to cut of my nose just because its on my face,this is what need to do is just stop buying fishing lics for a year and let them think about how much "MONEY" they will be losing ,if it wasn't for us the fishermen spending the money for the lics ,they really wouldn't have the money to put back into the "so called fishiers" ha ha . Sorry thats how I feel.
I am like you fishchaser why should i spend moeny on tags i'll never use.To be honest I really think they don't want us to fish. It a money game and they want the money and we keep giving, we seem to be the suckers here . Heres one why don't ODOT start asking for the bike riders (pedal ones) that use the hiways to start lics their bikes?

[Gun Rod Bow]

Well Gang,

I did one of those: Make a post...Log off...do other stuff and check back a day later to see what dust got kicked up.

My original point was: We are being shut down to due to "estimated impact" on protected stocks.

We sportspeople do not want to damage protected stocks, quite the contrary is historical fact.

We cannot accurately understand spotfishing's impact on protected fish unless we can accurately identify them.

I suspect (total opinion) that if ALL hatchery origin fish were clipped, we'd be releasing less fish.

That means we may be reaching quotas faster, or fishing less days, etc. I don't mind catch and release fishing. But why guess at it?

Isn't it silly to use the by the by-guess and by-golly method that we are using now?

It absolutely is in the best interest of the those afore mentioned bretheren above the dam to not clip the fish so we let them go.

Let's clip 100% of the hatchery stock. Then when a dead salmon with an adipose fin is stuck in a net, we will know the truth.

GRB

BTW Auntie M, did you call me stupid?? graemlins/dork.gif :shrug: :wink:

[BrionLutz]

Stew,

People might not like the notion of an uneasy alliance with groups like Washington Trout or Native Fish Society but in the matter of getting gill nets off of the Columbia river we may need their help! <font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">You're a dead man &lt;grin&gt;.

Politics is shifting alliances. You work with folks on some issues, oppose them on others. Those who can build the biggest, most powerful political alliances win. I'd like to see all those who are for salmon restoration win.

Specific to Washington Trout and Native Fish lawsuit, keep in mind they actually sued to get WDFW to reform the hatchery practices which is the best of all worlds. We get hatchery fish and we help maintain/restore the native fish.

The commercial guys fight hard for salmon restoration in a lot of areas. They provide the political punch to fund a lot of they hatcheries.

So we work with them on the many areas of agreement.

A real world example. The commercial fishing associations often fund EarthJustice lawsuits regarding pro-salmon restoration. Earthjustice is the lead on suing the commericals to stop/reform the gilletting and on ocean fihing issues.

Sometimes they work together, sometimes they oppose each other.

Sport fishermen have to get this sophisticated in our political lobbying and alliances.

Brion

[Cohoangler]

Stew - I couldn't help but notice the line from JFK's speech at American University in 1961. The entire quote is:

"For, in the final analysis, our most basic common link is that we all inhabit this same small planet. We all breathe the same air. We all cherish our children's futures. And we are all mortal."

John F. Kennedy

[AuntyM]

GRB,

No, I didn't. It was a reference to something posted by someone on another thread. Sorry you took it that way. :cheers:

[jcarufo]

I can't believe part of this discussion is about the sports fisherman supporting the needs of the gill netter, so they will lobby the needs of the sport fisherman. They would no sooner lobby our needs than the preverbial 'H**L freezing over'. They would take our quota in a minute if possible and typically do take at least a part yearly by under reporting catch data until the last day of their season when they mysteriously have great days and end up over quota. If I remember correctly, didn't it conveniently even happen this year, prematurely closing the Columbia and negatively impacting the sport fisherman's available season?
They disrespect the resource or at least don't police their own, witnessed by: their advocacy of a non-selective catch method that continually over harvests; takes/harms non-targeted species; numerous substantiated stories/reports of abuses during their tangle/gill net fishery i.e. mis or non-use of revival boxes and excessive soak times on nets.
The resource can't afford gill nets anymore. If the consumer market needs product and the resource has excess, increase the troll take in the ocean. It's a far superior commercial product and brings a much higher price. And the Tribes; let them take their monitored, treatied quota selectively from the ladders.
I can't believe that in a State that is suffering multi-hundred million dollar deficits and a extremely depressed economy, that publicly shown the light, the Legislature wouldn't support and advocate for a sportfishing industry that pumps multi-millions of dollars yearly into the Legislative and States economic coffers. That is unless certain influential members are in someones back pocket.
I'm sorry, but the sport and commercial fisherman are on the opposite ends of the spectrum. The sportsfisherman is constantly willing to sacrifice financially by requesting increased fees, and advocating reduced bag limits and seasons if need be. Show me a like attitude and actions by our commercial gill netting bretheran.
Jean

[boater]

jean, it the law, they have to give the netters some fish, until an inititive is passed to ban them nothing will change.

[crabbait]

Attacking the allocation of fish (commercial non-tribal, commercial tribal, sportfisher) will only make it appear that the sportfisher wants all the fish. This has been tried before and fails everytime because it is motivated by greed.

Instead, we need to concentrate on selective fishing methods that protect wild strains and are manageable, unlike the gillnetting season that we just witnessed.

A solution that we be supported will maintain the allocation of fish, ensuring that everyone gets their share, will protect wild fish and will be cost effective.

The "sticking point" that I see with the fish traps and wheels is that now, commercials compete with each other for the allocation. The best or "luckiest" fisherman gets the biggest cut. How would the catch from traps/wheels or the trap/wheel locations be allocated? Designate and draw? Draw days/times at the trap?

We can work this out.

[Bill Monroe]

This is the most intelligent debate on this issue I've seen yet on ifish...thanks for reassuring me there is hope...

On a somewhat revolutionary note, I plan to ask around about why it is again that anglers can't also have commercial fishing licenses and make sales themselves of hatchery fish...
I'm virtually certain there will be a host of reasons, but it seems like at least one alternative...