Enough already!

[Pilar]

Ok, so most of you could use a few less tuna and would do lower limits. Some of you are saying no way in hell lets leave it alone. Even to the point of posting info about fish stocks and health of the fishery. Thanks Uglygreen and ***. But the good news is that we can talk about it here without actually changing anything or waking the sleeping dog.

Maybe we better not talk about limits, it's just too close to the nerve endings, like an absessed tooth.

What do you think about the rules we are going to have to follow? The PFMC is adopting Oregon angling regulations, lock, stock and barrel for the draft plan for HMS. Again some are in denial, >3 miles, no jurisdiction, lack of enforcement ... yada yada yada.

Following the same rules as the bank maggots on the zipperlip river when I am 30 miles offshore makes no sense to me. If you could make rules specific for HMS fishing offshore what would you change?

I'll go first.

1) Allow hand lines and standup rods, more than one per fisher. Maybe 2 or 3, dunno. I think a cloud of jigs is better than one or two. Anyone that has brought jumpers to the boat knows what I mean.

2) Clean fish at sea? Makes sense on the big boats. We little trailor sailors are not impacted by this. It would have to be a pretty smooth Ocean to do this but ... less ice and something to do on the way in. Less ice makes for a lighter boat.

3) Boat limits. Fish your own limit is widely ignored by the charter industry. Should we just go ahead and make the combined tag limit for all on board the boat a boat limit? Does it make sense to have the last untagged fisher go it alone? I say fish every stick on the boat until you tag out.

4) Active participation by the sport fleet in the management of the HMS fishes. Yes! Logbooks, catch statistics and whatever is needed to take account of what happens to tuna off our shore. As pointed out elsewhere we may have a hard time claiming our share of this fishery when they do regulate it if we hide under a rock in the meantime.

5) Thanks Janice .... We should all learn alot more about this fishery and the managers of it before we wade in. This part of the let it lie philosophy makes sense. We just don't enough to make any noise yet. We need people who are willing to sit on panels and attend meetings to get into the fray.

6) DOh! how could I forget chumming and live bait. We should do that and they are both key techniques.

My point here is that we (hard core bluewater big game fishers) need to be in on the eventual regulation of our fishery. We have alot of knowledge and time invested in what we do. This could be useful in steering the fishery to what it should be. I believe that we should be the first dog in the fight not in the reaction mode we always find ourselves in.

Your turn ...............

[ 10-24-2002, 06:53 PM: Message edited by: Pilar ]

[Flying Roast Beef]

I haven't read up on the regulations for our local saltwater fishery but you bring up a very good point with number 4. If some kind of allocation system were to be set up, you guys would never stop complaining about the CA boys. They outnumber you by far and would be sure to claim that these migratory fish are native to their waters etc. thus winning a huge atvantage over you in deciding who gets to catch what.

[Threemuch]

I agree with all but number 2. I think cleaning fish at sea puts most of the nutrients back into the ecosystem. Crabs, sea lice, shrimp etc. feed on this stuff and are low of the food chain. Beats supporting the fertilizer industry or commercial crabbers.

Plus, I can tuna fish with 100 pounds of ice instead of 200 or 300 if I can shuck them as I go, and the boat is ready to trailer home when I hit the dock.

KB

[Pilar]

Kurt, read it again I cleaned it up. I'm liking the idea of carc at sea. When could you do it though? Do you want to bounce around with a sharp knife?

[Deepslayer]

Now that you have six items, I can agree with all of your proposals for tuna. Were you thinking of having these "new" rules pertain to salmon, bottom fishing and halibut too? How about increasing the number of hooks allowed for bottomfishing too?

[ 10-24-2002, 07:58 PM: Message edited by: Deepslayer ]

[corrirod]

I think we definately need to get away from the limit issue and deal with the more important issue of gear restrictions, chumming, etc..

I would agree with all 6 of the issues you have John and those are the ones ODFW will be addressing in the near future. The one rule that I see as the stickler of the bunch is the carking at sea. If you thought waiting for the checker to count your whole tuna was bad just wait till they have to examine all the loins. Perhaps if we can convince them to let us keep logs we could then cark at sea though.

We need to help them set up the regulations!

The fact the regs are coming is inevitable. The choice we have is whether we let them impose the regs on us or whether we enlighten them as to the reasoning behind our techniques so we can legally use them.

Perhaps at the next TA/AA meeting we could discuss this in person to establish a better game plan?

The main thing is we all stay open minded on this and not start bickering. I have no doubt that as a group we can figure this out.

[wak'm&stak'm]

Sounds like a plan Jon...Thanks...

[Point-of-Sale Clerk]

I am not by any means very authoritative regarding tuna fishing. My expertise is more in the area of proficiency in opening the can and how much mayonnaise I will need to add.

It is important that when we try to sculpt regulations necessary to protect the sustainability of our sport harvest and the population we depend on that we remember that it is a “sport” and not a reason to fill our boats with more fish per trip than the average American family eats in a year. We must set a sensible limit, or a sporting limit. Maybe we should base it on the number of tuna an average fisherman can reel in, in one afternoon, before his arm falls off?

I believe teaser poles could be allowed but multiple poles and chumming is something that the Commission does not agree with in their current view of sporting.

As to cleaning fish at sea, I believe a compromise could be made with requiring that to a greater extent the fish be brought to shore still as recognizable as single fishes. (head gone but tails attached?) What ever makes the most sense for reducing the amount of ice needed.

The current situation that occurs in the charter industry regarding boat limits is closer to a gentlemen’s agreement and one that should be maintained for this fishery as well. Not perfect but it reflects the goals of a sport fishery of everyone participating equally.

Log books may work well for commercial harvesters but may not bode well for this sport fishery. How about a simplified “TUNA TAG” $10 for the entire year and if when you purchase the next years tag you get $5 back for turning in your previous years tag? That would make it $5 that would go to manage this fishery. No high priced studies or dubious augmentation just simple management and enforcement.

[corrirod]

***,

My intent isn't to throw more money into the fund but I can't speak for the others.

My intent is to make sure people who tuna fish are not considered bandits because they catch fish by using techniques not currently favored by the ODFW.

These techniques of chumming and multiple poles are simply the method in which you catch Tuna, they are not "un"-sporting. This is a prime example of why we must help create the regulations using "knowledgable" input. If you have never tuna fished then you do not have the ability to make an informed decision regarding the fishery. I've never done open-heart surgery so I'm sure not going to make rules for the doctors who do, right?

Tuna fishing is not salmon fishing, or sturgeon fishing, or halibut fishing. It's a completely different type of sport. In this sport you know in advance you're going to use a minumum of 50 gallons of gas as well as go thru dozens of bait (either purchased or caught). In this sport you have to drive 35-40 miles out to sea, most of the time blindly wandering around, trying to entice fish that are 2-3 hundred feet deep to come to the surface, and once they are there you try to get them to bite.

In regards to the carking, if the fishermen can't remove the loins then there is no point. Gutting tuna is not necessary. Loins are taken off with the fish still in tact. I do think there are several solutions to this problem and the easiest seems to be some sort of log. Currently there is little to no sport counts being done by ODFW on tuna, other than charters, so anything is better than what is currently done. Because most tuna fishermen arrive at the docks late there are usually no fish checkers around anyway.

Before I get too long winded(too late), my point was not to pay for more enforcement, just like I wouldn't pay a police officer to frisk me daily. My intent was just that we should amend the current regulations so there are exceptions made for this new(and growing based on the poll) sport of Oregon offshore tuna fishing. If the intent of this group is to add more costs then I'm out, and I will take my agenda elsewhere.

[Pilar]

Cool! just the sort of thoughtful posts I have come to expect of this bunch.

I hate the idea of paying more than I do for this pastime now. A typical day trip can run $200. It just makes sense to me to give that money to the coastal communities I depend on when I pursue the fish. There is no need to add another layer to the F & G apparatus just to deal with a few tuna crazed individuals. I would really like to check out a meeting of the people who deal with HMS at the federal or local level. It would be a learning experience just as it was when we waded into the nearshore groundfish process.

The issue is the difference between what happens in Wa., Or. and Ca. in regards to the rules. They are very different now. Someone(s) in an official capacity is bound to notice and try and change that with or without our help.

Logbooks are pretty easy. We just as much as keep one now with all the crowing and bragging that goes on here in our little sandbox.

We have a good group here. All of you are concerned with making the fishery sustain over your own personal interests. This gives me hope for the future.

Thanks for playing.

[OceanBlue]

Amen!

[img]graemlins/applause.gif[/img] [img]graemlins/applause.gif[/img] [img]graemlins/applause.gif[/img] [img]graemlins/applause.gif[/img]

[puffins crew]

It works, if you work it!!

Keep comming back, the Tuna will!! :grin:

[sturgn]

So when is the next TA meeting anyway??

[Pilar]

Next Friday? Jen, hello ... Jen?

I could always go to Grupo 24 horas if the rash gets really bad. That's a 24 hr AA hall on Powell near the homestead. AA is like TA, right?

[OceanBlue]

Friday, Nov 1!

Jennie will be in town, too! She asked for a Rain Dance Roll Call - so Mel and I were talking about combining the two. :grin:

How about Cornelius Pass Road House. Non-smoking and they can pen us up in a separate room so as not to disturb the unafflicted guests. [img]graemlins/idea.gif[/img]

[sturgn]

WoooHoooo I'm there! Have to work till 6pm and then theirs a 1.5 hour drive but what the hay! I am in for sure!

[Jennie@ifish]

You guys are awesome!
Jen

[WP]

WP looks over at Sturgn and winks...work? Well, I guess you have to represent us mid valley tunaholics!
WP