Nets

fiishawk · 08-06-2001, 01:24 PM

Has anyone heard of any gill nets in the Columbia ?

Killertraylor · 08-06-2001, 07:27 PM

Yeah - they get to fish about 10 days a year on the Columbia. Two to three days for spring chinook and two to three days for sturgeon. Yesterday was one of them - actually not the entire day, just 7pm Sunday night until 7 a.m. this morning. I'm unlike 90% of the people on this board as I'm a sportfisherman who doesn't have a problem with gillnetting. I went out with a friend of mine last night as a "spectator" and the fishing wasn't too hot. We got about 45 sturgeon and only 2 chinooks. Last year we got about 80 sturgeon and 40 chinooks on August 6. This is a good sign that the Chinooks aren't in the lower Columbia yet in good numbers. If they let the gillnetters go in in about a week they'd catch several hundred chinooks on each boat. I'll probably post flack for posting this - but the reason I posted it was to let sportfishermen know that it's a bit early to count on catching a chinook at buoy 10. Hopefully in about a week they'll start to show.

08-06-2001, 09:06 PM

You don't have a problem with gillnetting and then call yourself a sportsfisherman? That's kind of like saying "I'm a pacifist but I don't have a problem with war" It doesn't make sense just like gillnetting.
Stew

DF · 08-06-2001, 09:33 PM

its just not fair
I wish i could catch 45 sturgeon! [img]images/icons/rolleyes.gif[/img]

Killertraylor · 08-07-2001, 10:40 AM

I didn't call myself a sportfisherman, BS, I am one. If you don't have the courtesy to respect another's beliefs and opinions on this board, please refrain from simply hurling insults if those beliefs and opinions just don't happen to be your own. I thought you were a bigger man than that.

I'm not here to debate gillnetting - you have your opinion and I have mine. My opinion just happens to be very well supported as I've watched this fishery first hand for the last 5 years. I would wager that most people who are hot under the collar about gillnetting have never witnessed it on the Columbia. Our "bycatch" on sunday consisted of 2 starry flounder (released unharmed - not cought in the gills) 12 sturgeon shorter than 48" - also released unharmed and 2 keeper crabs. Those are just first hand facts for those of you who believe these nets kill everything in their path. With 9" mesh, you don't catch any silvers or steelhead and rarely catch a sturgeon shorter than 44". I still respect those of you who are opposed to gillnetting - I fully understand your reasoning. You should be kind enough to respect mine.

Dustin - I cought more than 45 legal sturgeon on my boat this year in one month. How many days do you get to fish for sturgeon? Gillnetters get 2 half days each year. Coho charters, just one of many sturgeon charters, pulls 40-60 keepers out of the Columbia every day from May through August (except this year with the Aug. 1 closure)The gillnet quota is about 5% of the sportcatch quota - seems to me that the regs are pretty "fair" to sportfishermen. I guess those of you opposed to commercial gillnetting don't think people other than sportfishermen should get to eat these fish?

[ 08-08-2001: Message edited by: Killertraylor ]

Killertraylor · 08-07-2001, 12:10 PM

Finclipped - you've got every right to string a net - just buy a permit - they're pretty cheap considering that gillnetting is becoming a thing of the past. Sportfishing wasn't shut down to support a commercial take. Sportfishing was shut down because the sportfishermen cought their 40,000 plus fish - their portion of the quota. Gillnetters only get to fish until they get their 10,000 fish, but they usualy only get 8,000 as they don't let them go back in for another day if they think they'll exceed the quota. This usually means they get to fish 3 days a year and then they go back in in October when there aren't any fish around to try and get to the 10,000 fish quota. The way I see it, the measure of a healthy fish run is when they open it for gillnetting. If the fish population couldn't sustain it, they are the first people who lose their right to fish. They've already lost far more rights than sportsfishermen. I guess this is turning into a debate - finclipped, you'll never change my mind, and I'll never change yours - let's just leave it at that! I made my initial post simply to let other sportfishermen know that there aren't many chinooks in the river right now. I'm also a lawyer, a republican, a gun owner, I drive a Ford, and I'm opposed to abortion - go ahead hammer me for that stuff too while you're at it...

[ 08-07-2001: Message edited by: Killertraylor ]

[ 08-07-2001: Message edited by: Killertraylor ]

fishbait · 08-07-2001, 12:50 PM

KR,

Like I said before, ya got big stones. I disagree with you but......Horray for you for standing up for your rights/opinions and doing it in such an eliquent fashion. Enjoy your time on those gill net boats, they are an extince species, then just don't know it yet. Oh, and by the way, Bigstew is a big guy, I've seen him. As for hammering you for the other items, no thanks , gill nets are reason enough...........FB

Killertraylor · 08-07-2001, 12:55 PM

Yeah - but Bigstew doesn't have a boat, so unless he can swim really fast....

Killertraylor · 08-07-2001, 01:03 PM

FYI - I just heard that they are letting the nets back in on Wednesday night - but only for 8 hours. They can't keep sturgeon, just salmon, and they have to fish 9" mesh, so they probably won't catch any silvers or steelhead. All the guys will be fishing floaters in the deeper water so they won't catch many sturgeon. The season will be open from 10 p.m. Wed. night until 6 a.m. Thursday morning. I'll talk to a gillnetter on Thursday and find out how they did. This is usually a pretty good indicator of whether you have a decent chance at catching a chinook in the area of the Astoria Megler bridge.

DanS · 08-07-2001, 01:16 PM

So KT,

You state that you'll probably catch flak for posting your first post, and then when you DO catch flak you're suprised? Get real.

Take your anti-abortion views to the NARAL webpage and you'll catch flak, take your Republican views to the DNC's page and you'll catch flak........take you pro-net views to a SPORT FISHING page and you'll catch flak. Don't act surprised by what you KNEW would happen.

I'm not even going to argue the net thing with you......you should know better already.

Thumper · 08-07-2001, 01:22 PM

KT --- Though I am no fan of gillnetting I appreciate the information that you posted. It is nice to hear both sides of the issue.

Joe Schwab · 08-07-2001, 02:02 PM

Killer, 5 out of 6 ain't bad. I'm with you on the last 5, everybody needs a good lawyer now and then. The thing that bugs me about gillnetting, and I have been on more gillnet boats than the average bear, is somehow gillnetters think the state owes them a cetain amount of fish. Lets open commercial fishing for salmon to everyone. The constitution gives everyone equal access to fishery resources. But get rid of gillnets. I am being a little facetious but what gives a select group of people the right to harvest a public resource and sell it, paying as little as 5 cents a pound to the state? How did we ever get to this point? Yes I know when fish were plentiful some genius biologist decided we had to harvest them up to the point of what is commonly referred to as "maximum sustainable harvest". This obsolete theory is still being taught at OSU. It is truly a slippery slope. I've sat in commercial fish compact hearing and listened to gilnetters whine about overescapement above the dams and how these "food fish" were going to waste, while sport anglers were just playing with "our food". Fish farms are far more efficient at raising salmon for the table. One gillnetter had the kahonies to ask me how I could justify becoming a guide and taking food off his childrens plate. I almost choked on a fishbone! A few years back ODFW in it's wisdom required barbless hooks at Buoy 10 and then opened it to gillnetting at night. As a game officer at the time I found it extremely offensive enforce that law and needless to say I didn't. Found better things to do. I know there are a lot of good guys that gillnet, however I see no good reason to continue the buffalo hunt. [img]images/icons/wink.gif[/img]

Killertraylor · 08-07-2001, 02:33 PM

Those are excellent points, Capt. Hook and I can easily see why you are opposed. The problem I see is that sportfishermen also think the state owes them a certain amount of fish - and they want ALL of them - no gillnetting. Let's get real - if they didn't allow gillnetting, commercial harvest of sturgeon and salmon would be virtually non-existent in the Columbia estuary, which, I suppose, is what most sportfishermen want.

DanS - I never said I was suprised - and thanks for not arguing - you know better already.

Stz ll · 08-07-2001, 04:01 PM

I would be curious to find out how many gillnet caught salmon end up in Oregon restaurants and fish markets vs. those in California or on the East Coast where they can get twice as much per pound for the fish. I realize that the gillnetters don't directly sell the fish to the public only to fish buyers. I guess my question is why do the sportsmen in Oregon have to pay for the fish enjoyed by others outside of the Northwest. I have never seen any salmon other than farm raised in any Oregon fish market. [img]images/icons/confused.gif[/img] [img]images/icons/confused.gif[/img] [img]images/icons/confused.gif[/img]

finclipped · 08-07-2001, 04:18 PM

Gillnets have no place in the estuary, if it can't support a 12 month sport catch. Thats my opinion.

I am still trying to see your justification for commercial take of fish when there aren't enough to support a full sport season.

You want the gillnets in there... fine, but why should we collectively allow a small portion of the population an "extended" access pass to a limited resource. Anyone can be a sportsangler and participate. It doesn't matter if your a gillnetter, black, white, Asian, communist, republican or whatever. Why should we limit this group in favor of a few commercial fisherman who will make a couple of bucks selling them? This doesn't make any sense to me.

Maybe you can just give me your thought process on why? I know Its difficult to "read" someone on the internet, but I'm not looking to change your mind, but I can't see the reasoning behind your opinion.

Its a question of fairness. The reality is that our resources can't support a commercial take without restricting sports anglers. By offering a sports angling season, we are allowing everyone, (who wants to) to participate.

So,,,, I say let the pecking order begin. First priority is to offer a sports season. If there are true surpluses of fish, the commercials can have next crack at them. This isn't only fair, it makes sense.

Then.... commercial fishing would be the mark of a decent fish run.

Ohh,...I'm a Banker, don't own a gun, Democrat, (no comment on abortion), but I do drive a Ford. [img]images/icons/cool.gif[/img]

hustlerrjim · 08-07-2001, 04:46 PM

nothing wrong with a bit of netting ,done some of it myself a few years back before margery christianson--- the woman judge, showed up in tillamook.

Stz ll · 08-07-2001, 04:50 PM

You see! the problem is you both drive Fords.
[img]images/icons/tongue.gif[/img] [img]images/icons/tongue.gif[/img]

Just trying to add a little humor to a post which is getting carried away. [img]images/icons/smile.gif[/img]

Phunybonz · 08-07-2001, 05:10 PM

Ok, I've been layin in the weeds on this, but one or two things disturb me. If the commercial guys are not getting a fair price, why do it at all. Just because? I don't think so. I'm sure the goverment has some kind of retraining program. If they don't, well ....that's typical. Thier needs to be a way for the commercial guy to make a living other than impact an already depleated resource.
On to the second disturbing point, SURPLUS FISH? These extra surviviors should be treated as an investment in the future of fishing in general.
And in closing, there is another group of fishers who can't and won't be dealt with....

DanS · 08-07-2001, 05:11 PM

The state of Oregon's studies place the average direct expenditure per trip at $71, and an average catch rate of .79 salmon per angler trip. If you gave the entire quota to sport anglers, it would generate $295 million. Divided by the number of fish harvested, that comes out to about 90 bucks a fish. (Figures from the mid nineties).

By contrast, the gross value of the commercial harvest, if the entire quota was allocated to them, would be around $44 million. (about $13 per fish).

So tell me, as a tax-conscious republican, how you or anyone else can justify selling a taxpayer's resource for $44 million when it could be sold for $295 million?

The state of Oregon approximates (not exact science) its cost to produce an adult salmon at $40. Commercially caught, it generates $13.40 in revenue. Sport caught, it generates $90. Now, I wasn't a math major, but I'm almost sure 90 bucks is better than 13 bucks.

Would you be happy if the BLM was selling land for 2 bucks an acre, when they could get 20? From a taxpayer's perspective, I have little sympathy for the netters, and less for the miners who buy land at 2 bucks an acre. Both parties should look at the writing on the wall, and get some new job skills soon.

Man, I KNEW better than to get into this again..........

Jennie@ifish · 08-07-2001, 05:20 PM

Nets, nets bo bets, banana fana mo mets, fee fi, fo fets...
Let's try Sportsfishermen!
Sportsfishermen, Sportsfishermen, bo bortsfishermen, banana fana fo fortsfishermen....
Argh, here we go again, but... at least you are being mostly reasonable on both sides
so far.... keep it up!
As long as this thread doesn't include four letter words and name calling, etc, it will stay...
The minute it deteriorates and becomes pointless..... LOCK!
Jen jen bo ben....

boater · 08-07-2001, 06:20 PM

[ 08-09-2001: Message edited by: boater ]

whitewaterbill · 08-07-2001, 06:29 PM

It kind of reminds me of the Lawyer and the farmer....when the lawyer shot the duck that landed on the farmers side of the fence...

Can we settle this with the "three kick rule"?

Just a suggestion!!!!

Bill

08-07-2001, 06:50 PM

No insults intended KT but you did open yourself up to this and now are real thinned skinned about it. There is absolutely no reason for gillnets! Commercial netters do not make anything close to a living from their nets and only have permits because they either leased them from permit owners or were grandfatherd their permits. Sorry pal no sympathy here! This is a board for sports anglers and you advocating the virtues of gillnets just doesn't wash. And the comment someone made about theres nothing wrong with a "little netting" amazes me! No four letter words here Jen but I can think of plenty when it comes to gillnets. And YES we sports anglers feel the state owes us our share of fish! We sustain the fish runs through the license and tag fees. What has the gillnetter or any commercial fishery ever done for the anadromous runs? They only take and feel justified doing it!
Stew

Ban all gillnets

whitewaterbill · 08-07-2001, 07:18 PM

BIGSTEW.... You can play the part of the farmer on this one......

I am with you on everything you said...right or wrong....I am with you!!!!

No nets on the Columbia!

Bill

Killertraylor · 08-07-2001, 07:27 PM

I didn't see anything in the BB policy saying this board was limited to pro-sportangler opinions only, BigStew. I thought this was a fishing website. Like it or not, gillnetting is fishing. I'm not sure why you think I'm thin skinned just because I don't have a problem with a legal fishing practice. Just as I predicted - nobody changed anybody's mind on this topic and that's fine. Maybe I shouldn't post how many chinooks they get tomorrow night? Just trying to help you guys out with a little fishing report.

Salmonator · 08-07-2001, 07:36 PM

Kt, I think most would rather do without the report if it came from a net boat. Kinda hypocritical if you know what I mean.

On the topic of netted fish. The local Fred Meyer fish department was advertising wild fresh coho salmon available. They emphasized wild with capital letters. Is wild fish awareness so bad that the stores think they will sell more fish by pushing the fact that their fish for sale are wild? The funny thing is, the fish that was in front of the pile was clipped! [img]images/icons/confused.gif[/img]

Bait O' Eggs · 08-07-2001, 07:57 PM

Hustlerjim - Marjorie had a problem with the bottle in the car, but she did know how to flog, skin, beat, trample on, lock up and throw the key away when it came to game violators. She was a famous lady for a long time.

I'm glad I never met her, in her robe. [img]images/icons/shocked.gif[/img] [img]images/icons/shocked.gif[/img]

Baldpate Basher · 08-07-2001, 08:19 PM

[img]images/icons/shocked.gif[/img] Yeah, this is getting a little hot, but I think it's the only real important discussion I've seen so far. This is a Sportfisher's page and all of us have sn opinion to give.
[img]images/icons/smile.gif[/img] Good on all of ya! [img]images/icons/smile.gif[/img]
The most important issues I see being brought out here are as follows;
1. There is a limited resource being partitioned.
2. Those being billed for those resources are not the ones who benifit.
3. There are external forces limiting those resources i.e. Polution, Natural attrition and Commercial intrest.
As one of the ones being billed for this dwindling resource, I think that those who are not contributing should put-up or shut-up. I'm not saying they should not express thier opinion but that they should pay the same dues that the rest of us already have.
I grew-up in Maryland and had to sit by and watch as the Chesapeake Bay was slowly killed by algae. It died because farmers would not stop using nitrate fertilizers close to run-offs. The state did nothing, because these were influential poeple, and fishing for every one died. Hundreds of years of Watermen tradition just disappeared. A Great Natural resource was lost to all of us.
Out here in the Pacific Northwest we still have a chance to keep our resources in-tact.
And here's the rub. The only way we'll be able to do so is to hold, those who don't want to put-up thier fair share, to the BILL!
All commercial intrests are nothing more than commercial intrest. "WE THE PEOPLE" are the ones who have rights, not buisnesses. People have the right to start and maintain buisnesses but no more than you or I have to fish or do whatever we want to do. Plus, We have the right not to listen when they excersize thier right to free speach.
So in conclusion, I'd like to say, Protect the fish and turn a deaf ear to the complaints of the gilnetters. They don't want to kickin as much as we do so forget them.
But, They do have the right to complain.

[ 08-07-2001: Message edited by: RRTITUS ]

dogfishboy · 08-07-2001, 08:38 PM

KT,

I do appreciate knowing when the nets are going in because that has a direct effect on our ability to catch fish for several days to follow. That information though is available at several other locations. I don't care about the numbers because if you've been out there long enough you know when the fish will show up. If the nets are going in this week that pretty much ( Jen, sometimes it's really hard to 'keep it clean' but I�m tryin' ) insures that this weekend will SUCK - OOPS! 4 ltr word [img]images/icons/rolleyes.gif[/img] Not that it was going to be any great shakes to start with, but it just makes a guy or gal feel like they have even less of a chance. [img]images/icons/frown.gif[/img] [img]images/icons/mad.gif[/img]

Human sacrifice once had a place...now it doesn't.
Witch burning once had a place...now it doesn�t
Disco once had a place...now it doesn't.
Gillnets and deep sea drift nets once had a place...now they don't.
I think you know that. [img]images/icons/wink.gif[/img]

dfb

Killertraylor · 08-07-2001, 08:39 PM

You're probably right, Salmonator. I'll keep the info. to myself. As a sportfisherman, I like to find out that information as it lets me know whether it's worth my time and effort to try for a Nookie. Anyone is free to email me at killertraylor@home.com if they want the info. I disagree with you dogfishboy - I limited out the boat 3 times on sturgeon on the morning the gillnets came out and I cought nookies last year on the day after the nets came out. I found it had no effect on sportfishing whatsoever and actually it helped me to know where the fish were. Last year Butch Smith of Coho charters was back at the dock at 8:30 a.m. with a boat limit of 14 sturgeon just 1 1/2 hours after the gillnets came out.

[ 08-07-2001: Message edited by: Killertraylor ]

[ 08-07-2001: Message edited by: Killertraylor ]

08-07-2001, 08:52 PM

KT says"Like it or not, gillnetting is fishing" Wow KT! You're right! After all it is ifish.NET [img]images/icons/grin.gif[/img]. If you want to do us all a bigger favor than giving reports based on what is caught in gillnets then loan your gillnetting friend some money so he doesn't have to gillnet!
Stew

boater · 08-07-2001, 08:59 PM

[ 08-09-2001: Message edited by: boater ]

Killertraylor · 08-07-2001, 09:01 PM

This is really going to get under your skin, Bigstew. He's got millions - so does his dad. They made it all crabbing and gillnetting. They continue to do it because they enjoy it and they believe in it. I respect them for that - you'd probably like to kill them for that....

Boater - you're always missing something.

[ 08-07-2001: Message edited by: Killertraylor ]

urb · 08-07-2001, 09:18 PM

If you catch a salmon on the oregon side of the lower river it was probably raised in a gillnetter financed net pen.

dogfishboy · 08-07-2001, 09:37 PM

KT, I must disagree with you. I've seen over the years that when the nets go in it all but shuts down a fishery for a period of time. Two examples don't make an absolute...but years of fishing on the Columbia makes me feel good about my opinion. Thanks for yours.

btw, touting your friends wealth speaks volumes about yourself and your intentions. Thanks once again.

dfb

[ 08-07-2001: Message edited by: If I can pillage one resource why not try another. [img]images/icons/rolleyes.gif[/img] .]

[ 08-07-2001: Message edited by: dogfishboy ]

Salmonator · 08-07-2001, 09:54 PM

A guy with millions netting fish not because he needs to but because he believes in it is no better than any poacher I can think of. [img]images/icons/mad.gif[/img] [img]images/icons/mad.gif[/img] [img]images/icons/mad.gif[/img] [img]images/icons/mad.gif[/img]

08-07-2001, 09:54 PM

Geez! Jennie time to close this stupidity KT needs time to remove his foot from his mouth or is that his head out of....well you know what I mean. Yeah those gillnetters are a great bunch of conservationists! Urb you're kidding right? [img]images/icons/rolleyes.gif[/img]
Stew

[ 08-07-2001: Message edited by: BIGSTEW ]

urb · 08-07-2001, 10:02 PM

Haven't you ever noticed the net pens at tongue point, youngs bay, blind slough

Trick · 08-07-2001, 10:14 PM

Urb is right to some degree that some lower river salmon are net pen fish financed by the Salmon for All group. Most fish caught on the Oregon side of the Columbia are probally Willamete fish and a mix of upriver fish. How do I know that you ask? The first net pens went into Youngs Bay in the late 80's I believe. The Tongue point/Blind slough pens went in during the 90's. I grew up in Knappa and spent alot of time fishing the lower sloughs for salmon in the fall. Had seasons where I filled a 40-fish tag, back when it was still 40 fish. We caught plenty of salmon before the pens went in and we used to catch some upriver brights in this general area also. Besides, most fish raised in those pens, if not all, are Willamete springers and are long dead before the fall run comes in. No place for them to survive till fall in the tiny streams in that area. Besides, the snaggers took care of them during the May opener.

KT, Gillnetting may be fishing. I've heard a few people tell me that snagging/flossing is also fishing and is legal in a few states(not Oregon). So in my book just because gillnetting is legal and a form of fishing it doesn't make it seem anymore "right" to me. I had several freinds that were gillnetters growing up and I used to make some extra money mending nets in the summer (I was young and naive at the time). I couldn't believe some of the outragous actions that I seen and heard about, like fishing in closed boundaries, using a substance to flush fish out of streams into the nets at the mouth, etc... I know there are alot of "sportfisherman" who snag, keep over their limit, kill wild fish, etc... Don't let a few bad apples ruin the barrel, as they say. But gillnetters are far from a perfect group.

Onto the point of great fishing after the nets come out. KT, I want to fish with you to see how your doing it. I've had excellent days salmon fishing only to come back the next day after the nets have been in for 12 hours and haven't gotten a strike. I can't recall very many days in years past where I've performed well after the nets came out. One day last year I caught one jack at about 16" bewtween 6 guys after the nets came out one morning. The day before I limited out in short order. I think the only reason I caught that coho jack was because it fit through the mesh. Before we started fishing we watched them pull the nets in and were amazed at how many silvers were in the nets.

How much do the indians generate per fish compared to gillnetters? Probally even less then $13. Love those treaties.

urb · 08-07-2001, 10:27 PM

You sound like you know all the detail but I have to ask,if most fish raised in the pens are springers why are there 50 plus gillnetters in young bay every september.

urb · 08-07-2001, 10:53 PM

If the net pen fish are all springers why are there 50 plus gillnetters in youngs bay in september

finclipped · 08-07-2001, 11:13 PM

So they net 10 days and take 25% of the quota. We fish 10 months and take 75%? These ARE the established quoata's for sturgeon. They have every right to catch sturgeon I have, but I don't have the right to string nets. And do your know why.....Because there aren't enough fish.

Fish prices are between $2 and $3 a pound at the grocery store. I doubt there is a shortage of fish with those prices. How much more money do sportsanglers contribute compared to the commercially caught fish?

Gillnetters are ordinary people, they don't deserve special rights to net.

5 Years? How do you figure 5 years of watching gillnetters is well justified? How about a 120 years of overfishing.

KT, I don't understand your justification, its not that I don't respect your opinion. The way I see it, its like feeding one person at the table 1/4 of the available food (which they sell) and letting the other 99 divide the rest.

I can understand commercial fishing in areas that can support it. But when you need to shut down a sports season to support a commercial take, that just isn't right.

KilgoreTrout · 08-07-2001, 11:14 PM

My 2 cents. I have only lived and fished here for ~ 1 year but have fished most of my life in other places.

Gillnetters are not fishermen, they are a kind of farmer. But unlike farmers they don't raise or feed the fish. They pay a disproportionately small fee to harvest them.

To me Salmon are a Sportfish and deserve to be caught by Rod & Reel. They have a fighting chance and it also requires skill by the angler. If people want to buy Salmon in a store they can get those pen raised ones for all I care.

I am not posting this reply to convince KT he is wrong. It would take more than my or this boards preaching to get the scales to fall from his eyes.

I don't have much experience with nets, however, I did fish the Mult. Channel this year in the largest spinger run in memory. We fished a couple of days after the nets came out. I saw 60 boats fish for 4 hours and not 1 fish was landed. Only an idiot would think you can pull a ton of fish out of the river and not impact the sports fisherman.

I guess the millionaire gillnetter is all the proof we need to get rid of the practice entirely. He's not doing it for the money, and with the limited fishing days per year it could never be anyones day job. All over the world fisheries are destroyed by overfishing( Grand Banks) and everytime the only excuse they have is that they have to make a living. You have too many people chasing too few fish. And in the case of gillnetters they are killing high percentages of the Wild fish we are trying so hard to preserve.

Dave

superfly · 08-07-2001, 11:44 PM

Anybody who gets on here and talks about the nets in a positive manner either has a death .
The gross waste and disregard for the resource is why I quit commercial fishing way back in the mid eighties, I did it for two seasons and was sickend by what I saw and how the fisherman plainly did not give a **** . Just made me sick. So now K.T. I hope you go and sell your license and become a true sports fisherman, you will sleep better at night.
Peace Superfly [img]images/icons/mad.gif[/img] [img]images/icons/mad.gif[/img]

[ 08-08-2001: Message edited by: Jennie@ifish ]

urb · 08-08-2001, 06:25 AM

I'll try this again for some reason I couldn't reply last night. You say that the fish raised in the net pens are spring salmon and long dead by the fall, but why are there 50 plus gilnetters in youngs bay in sept./oct

Hoosier Daddy · 08-08-2001, 07:33 AM

Here's a thought. We all know where most everyone stands on this. Can't we all just get along?!?
[img]images/icons/grin.gif[/img] [img]images/icons/grin.gif[/img]

My head hurts.......

[ 08-08-2001: Message edited by: chnookie ]

Killertraylor · 08-08-2001, 07:58 AM

Superfly - I don't have a gillnet permit, nor do I want one. Bigstew - great idea - let's just ask Jenny to close this thread because you don't agree with me...that worked for Hitler for awhile. I'm not trying to pursuade any of you that gillnetting is right, wrong, moral, immoral, etc. The fact is that it's a legal fishing method and there are many people who depend on it for their livelyhood. I think it's great that many of you feel so strongly about it. I'm just trying to point out that there is another side to this issue that is just as passionate as sportfishermen are. It's not a life and death issue with me - if they ended all gillnetting tomorrow I could care less. Gillnetting just doesn't bother me. Many sportfishermen have this belief that they deserve all the fish- Bigstew even admitted it in his post above. It bothers me that you feel ENTITLED to ALL of a natural resource. Reminds me of union workers who feel entitled to high wages, benefits, and a job(another can of worms opened) I'm just trying to point out that some people, including me,(and the state of Oregon) think that's being selfish - that's why they set a large quota for sportsfishermen and a small quota for commercial fishermen. There are two sides to this issue and for those of you who haven't been on a gillnet boat with 9" mesh - you don't know what you're talking about.

For those of you who didn't catch springers on the day after the nets came out, you should have been fishing the lower river. Lots of fish cought in my hogline. Gillnetters got less than 6000 of the 600,000 springers that came over the Columbia river bar this spring(1%) - but I'll bet you never considered that it might have just been a slow day.

Fish Hunter · 08-08-2001, 08:25 AM

HONOR LABOR.

Lets NOT go there.

DanS · 08-08-2001, 08:39 AM

Selfish? For thinking something should be sold for $295 million, rather than $44 million? Sure, KT. [img]images/icons/rolleyes.gif[/img]

It's called welfare for the gillnetters. Being a repub, I'm sure you're a HUGE fan of welfare programs, huh? A small group getting a (nearly) free ride at the expense of the taxpaying public.......nice.

Yeah, gillnetting is legal, but so is burning the American flag. How do you feel about flag burning, KT?

OneLastCast · 08-08-2001, 12:03 PM

KillerTraylor:

Although I may not necessarily agree with your take on the "nets" I appreciate your postings and the look from the other side.
Thanks for the posts. Keep it up. It is difficult to debate a subject where the only postings relate to one side of the arguement. It is things like this that keep the board interesting.

OneLastCast

fishbait · 08-08-2001, 12:07 PM

Well, from my point of view, KT is ahead. He has sucessfully handled all the abuse/arguements and has done so with more eliquance (sp) than the rest of us have (probably his JP training), and unfortunately he is right. I don't like gill nets but it's the law.(and a bad on at that) No one will win this one, which is OK. I for one would like to hear his reports and will thank him here for taking the time to post the information and for having big kanonas. He knew he was stepping in it when he made his post. OH, and the net pens in youngs bay, they are financed by the Youngs Bay Gillnetters Association. Without them we would not be catching these fish. Don't get me wrong, I do not like gillnetters but the facts are the facts.

[ 08-08-2001: Message edited by: fishbait ]

parker · 08-08-2001, 12:10 PM

I think most of you are barking up the wrong tree. Instead of venting on KT, take up your issues with the ODFW. They make and set the rules that you all get to play by.

The commercial boys are just playing by the rules set by YOUR governing leaders.

Thanks for the chinook info KT, although I won't get to test out your lack of chinook theorie as I won't be making the trip to Astoria this weekend. Maybe next weekend, though!

Parker

Killertraylor · 08-08-2001, 12:40 PM

For those of you who voiced interest in the Chinook catch tonight, I'll e-mail you the numbers. Thank you everyone who posted well reasoned arguments in opposition to gillnetting instead of making personal attacks. When I said you wouldn't change my mind and I wouldn't change yours - that doesn't mean that all of us are closed minded - it just means that most likely we've already considered both sides of the controversy, combined that with our own personal experience (at least in my case) and then made up our mind as to whether we're opposed or not. I did learn quite a bit from this post about commercial fishing, and about some of the people on this board. Thank You.

[ 08-08-2001: Message edited by: Killertraylor ]

Bait O' Eggs · 08-08-2001, 01:04 PM

Fishbaits last post sums up my feelings (I cannot believe I just said that) KT stood out on the plank all alone and debated (not that everybody jumped on the bash KT wagon) and in my honest opinion gets the judgement in his favor for class and points.

KT, put your post about netting results here on ifish, no sense in keeping some people in the dark just because they dont like nets. It is easy for people to sit in the dark and curse the netters, and what they "MAY" be catching. I for one would rather hear how many fish they are getting, where, and what the by catch is. The alternate is to "THINK" they are getting tons and tons of fish, killing everything in the water, when we are not really informed on numbers and species.

We all have an opinion, I like to base mine on information, not hearsay.

Thumper · 08-08-2001, 01:30 PM

KT - Thanks for the input, and do keep posting your data here. A very informative exchange.

FEAR NO FISH! · 08-08-2001, 01:39 PM

KT,
You must be a very successful lawyer. So I was wondering if you could represent me when I sue all the netters, since I am not getting my fair share of fish! [img]images/icons/grin.gif[/img] [img]images/icons/tongue.gif[/img]

DanS · 08-08-2001, 02:16 PM

Yeah, I'm sure Johnnie Cochran is jealous of your skills, KT. Since you posted in such an eloquent manner, the sport anglers are ready to get behind you and your gillnetting friends.

When I took debate class, the information provided and how convincing your argument was were how debates were judged. Apparently here at iFish, you win the debate by having big cajones and taking an unpopular opinion, as long as you don't take personal shots at anyone.

BTW, KT, I'm still waiting for your response regarding gillnetter welfare, and the state's responsibility to the taxpayer when allocating resources. Anybody wanna sell me 90 bucks for 13 bucks? Anyone??

08-08-2001, 04:25 PM

Geez I think I'm going to hurl! Yeah KT what a great guy you and your gillnetting pals are! What guts it took for your to post this crap about the virtues of gillnetting. Give me a break [img]images/icons/rolleyes.gif[/img]

Killertraylor · 08-08-2001, 05:00 PM

Mission accomplished - this whole thread was just an elaborate attempt to make Bigstew hurl...

Thanks for the kind words guys - but I don't sue people (even gillnetters), I just defend civil lawsuits. I'm not sure if my gillnetting friend is going out tonight. He is really good friends with Robbie Greenfield, the crabber who rolled his boat yesterday morning near Peacock spit. He also knew the deckhands who are presumed dead. I'm thinking he'll still go out, and I'll go ahead and post the numbers for those who have expressed interest.

DanS · 08-08-2001, 05:45 PM

I'm sorry to hear that, KT. Any time any mariner goes down, it's tragic news to me. [img]images/icons/frown.gif[/img]