Gillnetting Poll

[Fish catching kid]

I am doing a project for my sociology class and was wondering how you guys feel about gillnetting with respect to tribal rights and commercial envolvement. Any additional input will be helpful.

[ 03-09-2004, 10:38 PM: Message edited by: Fish catching kid ]

[garyk]

Umm, I understand the options of 'yes' and 'no' but what is 'strongly' - isn't that one of those things the teachers used to call 'adjectives'?

[Fish catching kid]

Just think of it as "strongly yes"

Kid

[Ty]

Interesting that more people want to eleminate "tribal" gillneting then "white man" gillneting even though more people know white gillnetters? [img]graemlins/1zhelp.gif[/img]

Sad part is Native American's have that "right" like it or not!

[KalamaSpark]

how do you figure they have the right?????

[Ty]

It is not how I "figure" it is their right by law... Also there is some Irony that The lower river fishery is by those that have no "lawful obligation" as the Native Americans do.

Point being... If u want to ban gillnets...start with the one that didn't loose there land and fish and don't have right by law "catch" these fish.

[Born to be Wild]

It is not how I "figure" it is their right by law... Also there is some Irony that The lower river fishery is by those that have no "lawful obligation" as the Native Americans do.

Point being... If u want to ban gillnets...start with the one that didn't loose there land and fish and don't have right by law "catch" these fish.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">I have to disagree with you Ty.
I don't feel we owe the Native Americans anything.
Maybe a couple hundred years ago?
But if it hadn't been for us they would have been exterminated by the Germans or Japanese or some other Country that would have eraditacated them if it weren't for us.
They were way behind there times and technology.

As far as I am concerned they owe us!

If anybody wants to live in this blessed Country than they should be treated the same regardless of race.


This is wrong and when you need to manage fisheries only to let a user group screw things up for themselves and everybody else involved just doesn't make any sense!

My .02
cents and I threw an extra penney in.

Dano

[ 03-10-2004, 03:57 AM: Message edited by: Born to be Wild ]

[Mr. Carp]

Dang them native americans for being on our land before we got here. How dare they.

I am not saying I completely disagree with questioning what right they have, but I would much rather see the native americans get them, instead of the commercial guys. If a native american wants to net a few salmon or go harpoon Willie, I have no problem with that.

Dan, I am not sure if you were kidding or not, but I believe you might be a little harsh. Nothing wrong with your opinion though and they are yours to speak. That's what makes democratic debate wonderful. :grin:

[Mr. BrownTrout]

I personally believe that the native american fisherman should have to fish they way they use back before there were gillnets, take away their gillnets and make them all use dipnets.
And the deal about them saying, the white man took our land, yes many many years ago, but hey they still do it today, if you so happen to own some land along a road or an area where they want to build a road, they give you a one time check of chump change and tell you your in the way of progress and your going to give it up anyway. So that old addage that the white man stole their land is broke, along many other things that are broke and need to be changed.
Just my humble opinion only.

[Cowlitz Kidd]

A gillnet knows no diffrents it kills all the fish that swims into to it.It rapes the river of fish.Its time to stop this

[Bonneville Dan]

I agree it seems REALLY stupid to stretch an indiscriminate wall of death in any river during the peak of wild fish migration. Offsetting the "need" of Native Americans' netting fish is the large gifts of surplus fish from hatcheries (Carson NFH for example) they get. Shore to shore nets in narrow stretches of river should always be outlawed! Regarding tribal or non-tribal gillnetting, most I knew growing up can't pay their expenses by only fishing for a living anymore. For the few old guys who still do, I say let them finish up their working years with brief netting seasons if run strengths justify it, but don't issue new permits to new participants. If runs are unusually weak, keep all the nets out. Cheap farmed fish are putting them all out of business anyway.

Just another opinion from somebody who doesn't guide or sell sporting goods for a living.

Dan

[DJFISHS2XS]

Sad thing is the tribes dont have and right to gill net. There are less damaging fishing nets that they could use. The treatys can be rewriten they we conqured. they need to join the human race and try to restore the land and its bounty just like the rest of us. I was very proactive towards indians until I moved to the north west. there are other tribes in the US that actully do good stuff for habitat restoration. Dont let the great conqured tribes of the north west B.S. you into thinking that they have the right to slaughter and kill every thing that moves. They can never move forward as a race if you dont point out that what they do is wrong. At one time tribes moved from place to place so the lands bounty could regain its grip on life. now we all have to share the same land there not enough room to move around so you have to take care of what you have,,,,have you actully driven by any trible areas...do you remember the commercial with the indian crying on the side of the road due to trash....what a joke... walk the tracks west from the junction of the south and north fork of the nooksac...there is about 500 junked cars out there and about 20 junked house trailors....now the lazy tribel member that lives near there is dumping trash in and between the cars....and its all with in 200 yards of the river...stewards of nature my butt......DJ

[Bill Monroe]

You guys...

[Mr. BrownTrout]

Ok lets not mention that the native american's are allowed to set net in the Columbia river, so do you think they set out there and watch those nets??? NO
They check them probably no more then 2 times a day. So those fish whether hatchery or native get caught up in the nets, die and am sure some come out of the net before they can get back to check the net.
Trust me the problem is not only with gillnetters, white or native american. You have mother nature to contend with, sea lions, commericial boats in the ocean, sports fishermen, dams. I have been right there on the front lines and seen it first hand.

[RichH]

Dano,

For once there is a topic in which you and I totally agree.

[Lured In]

For what its worth...

I don't think most people take a real strong issue with giving the Tribes a fair shot at the runs.

Most of the issues I have heard and/or personally share revolve around two things.

1. The relative inequity in the distribution of ESA impacts among user groups. Tribal fisheries are not required to do much of anything when it comes to netting. They impact limits are so high it enables them to net virtually indiscrimately. If my memory serves me correctly their ESA impact guideline is along the lines of 12-15%. That puts it at roughly 6-7 times the amount of commercial and sport impacts combined. (This is a huge number when considering how many fish are harvested between commercial and sporties with a combined 2% guideline.)

2. On the practical side the Tribal Fisheries have no motivation to change netting practices. Yes there are a few Tribal Hatcheries in the NW. While I don't have a statistical contribution to the run, I am sure it is much less than there harvest/impact. The result is the DFW's, commercial and the sport fisherman investing time and money to protect native fish and maximize our 2%, only to have those efforts diminished by the Tribal nets.

Personally I take no issue with giving Tribes a high impact rate, but make them change their practices like the rest of us. It is in everyone's (Tribes, Commercial and Sport) best interest to be as selective as possible.

IMHO the treaties have been used as an excuse to **** a resource senselessly. I have a hard time believing this matches up with any of the principles I have learned about Native Americans appreciation and respect for natural resources.

I am not an expert by any stretch of the imagination, just another concerned party like everyone else here.

[Fish catching kid]

What about the gillnetting that happens in the Hood Canal, have any of you been out at Hoodsport when they net out there? do any of you know when Native American gillnetting was made legal, and how it happened?

[ 03-11-2004, 11:48 AM: Message edited by: Fish catching kid ]

[steelheadslayer]

Dano, I gotta agree with Ty on this one, fight the fight we have a chance of winning now. You know my thoughts and feelings on gillnets. Those were driven home pretty harshly today as I drove home from fishing and spotted numerous gillnet boats working that section of the Columbia I love to fish.

In regards to tribal gillnetting, we don't stand a chance of ridding the rivers of them due to Judge Boldt and his generosity. The tribes have some of the best hatchery programs around, just look into it little and you'll see. I do wish we could get them to go back and net the way they did 100 years ago but that is not possible due to 'progress' by the way of dams for electricity that we all use.

I wish that our govt would just look into other methods of harvesting fish for the general public to buy, farmed fish is one way but the recent toxin reports are a bad influence on that choice. It just sickens me to hear of so many native or 'protected' runs getting mortally impacted when they are targeted as bycatch. Granted, sportfisherman mortality on released fish happens, just not to the degree that's been mentioned by the commercial nets.

Take it for what it's worth, my .02. &lt))&gt;&lt;

[Hoosier Daddy]

.....they would have been exterminated by the Germans or Japanese or some other Country that would have eraditacated them if it weren't for us.....
As far as I am concerned they owe us!
[/QB]

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">Yeah, would have been a shame if someone ELSE had exterminated them instead.....They owe us a lot.


as far as the treaties allowing tribes to "misuse" a resource...those treaties are the biggest hammer that has been used to push BPA on Columbia River fisheries. Like it or not, without those treaties, we probably wouldn't even have fish to fight over.....

Flame away....but its true.

[Fish catching kid]

GutZ;
I would like to cast this poll to a more generalized group. Since I cant afford to sirculate a survey in print, does anybody know of a website that is free, or at a low cost for, a poll? a website that is like this fine one.

Kid

[Born to be Wild]

Hoosier Daddy,

Sorry but I have differen't ways of looking at things than some folks.

My point was that the native Americans and Afro Americans went through much injustice through our goverment but without the help of our government later they would have been history (native Americans).
And Afro Americans wouldn't being paid millions a year to play basketball. :grin:

Other countries would have come over here and taken over and from a historic standpoint, they were not very people friendly.

So now they are using our technology and the kids are watching television and playing video games and the adults are driving nice 4x4's and not sleeping in TP's and where does it end?

Do you think it is right for them to monopolize Casino's?
When were Casino's natural to naive Americans?
Do you think it would be cool for them to hunt grey whales?

To me it is a kind of welfare system and if they deserve some "special rights" then let them provide there own military and so forth.

Some of you say it is unchangeable, but maybe it isn't either by their own will or other.

My Grandma and Grandpa on my mothers side were native American, wonder if I could get some kind of casino welfare check or a privelidge to cast some death nets?
Maybe I could even go out and spotlight some deer and elk?
Of course I would use my bow and hand carved arrows. :grin:

Dano

[Ty]

I think I was mis-understood again..... I am not a fan of gillnets being used anywhere. I was suggesting u guys try and fight the battles u can win.. and not challenge tribal fishing rights... They could dipnett at Celilo Falls if it where still there....

Look the real issue....why let hatchery fish be caught ans sold commercially....dumb economics there... makes no sence....the sport value of the same fish is so much higher....

Better yet work with the real issues to improve wild sotcks on the CR to impove there returns....

I am very well educated with fisheries in the NW and Alaska....... deal with gillnetting issue weather they are commercial or subsistence everyday with my job...... Reality is the gillnet fisheries are too unregulated and usually end up with too much "by-catch" and waste from net fall out...

Like it or not I am on the sport fishermans team..... However, raciest remarks are not required and how the Native American choose to fish is there right... just like we shoose to fish with a Kwickfish or a corkie...

Where I work in AK Native's often are offended by sprtfishing, just as u guys are offended by gill nets... I tell them that where I grew up I have to "subsistence" fish w/ a rod and reel cause gill nets are not available and the resources have been thourally depleted by the use of such gear as fish wheels and gillnets...

Maybe. we should look to future goals and try to learn from one another instead of waging personal attacks and determining "right from wrong."

[ 03-11-2004, 12:13 PM: Message edited by: Ty ]

[GutZ]

Fish Cathing Kid;
This is probably not a good place to get your "sample" from as most of us are very heavily biased against gilnetting in any form. (As you can see from your result) It would be interesting top ask the same questions of the general public and compare the two groups.