new sturgeon rules

[Biteme]

Here is an article from the stateman journal that spells out the proposed rules changes for sturgeon fishing.
statesman article

which option do you think it will be?

[zipper]

Funny the article doesn't mention anything about reducing the commercial harvest numbers? What's up with that? zip

[Biteme]

The way I understand it is that the commercial harvest is being lowered by the same percentage that the sport harvest is.

[Miss B Haven]

Sport/Commercial quota is a fixed percentage of the allowable catch. (60-40? if I remember).
The commercial "incidental" keep will be lowered just like the sport. The problem is that the commercial "catch and release is from Gill nets. How many of those fish make it compared to the release by sport? :whazzup:

[Bill Monroe]

The allocation is 80-20...commercials will cut to 8,000 (on behalf of the buying public, Miss B...) and sport to 32,000...commission told King to think about options 2 or 3...his, that is...I didn't read the Statesman story, just did my column on it last week...Jan. 30 is decision day...sounds like five fish a year, maybe seasonal closures when salmon are running...

[Robert]

I hope that means salmon season is open. Not that the salmon are just coming up the later. Does that mean the sturgeon season will close when its open to salmon or not? I hope I am just being paranoid.

[WaterDog]

A couple of the options talk about C&R on Sunday and Monday and/or Tuesday. I still don’t think having C&R on Sundays and Mondays is going to do anything other than add pressure on the other days. I would rather see block closures if the intent is really to help the fish population. I guess on the flip side of that is I’d probably fish more on Sundays just to avoid the crowds. :grin: I have no problem with a 5 fish yearly limit.

[Biteme]

I cant believe that all of you dont have more opinions on this you have plenty on everything else. I think the options are interesting and reflect the interests of the partys that proposed them. A couple of those options are designed to make sure that 80 percent of the keepers are allocated to the astoria area. anyone interested now?

[Point-of-Sale Clerk]

Biteme

We all have opinions but sometimes we are shy…

I have sat and listened at the commission meetings when this subject arose. There is always talk about Astoria / estuary harvest rates and how block closures are targeted to occur when salmonid fisheries are at their best. I believe that the sturgeon fishery is one of the “better managed” fisheries that we have. [img]graemlins/eek13.gif[/img] That may only be because we are not competing with Alaskan and Canadian commercial fishermen or do large augmentation with hatcheries but that is another subject. I do believe that this fishery would do better with no targeted commercial harvest but we sports fishermen will never get our act all that together so it may never happen. What do you think would happen if we declared sturgeon a sport fish like we did steelhead? :smile:

STGRule, you should make your opinions available on this thread… :tongue:

*** Clerk

[Sturgeon Tom]

I think we should have area closures. Last year the Astoria / estuary area just slaughtered the sturgeon. They end up closing the who river insted of the just very lower river early. That way people who can't get to Astoia would get to fish more. I talked to a lot of people that felt that way. They close areas for salmon why not sturgeon?

[STGRule]

***: My opinions are irrelevant on this subject. This is a battle of pleasing the most people with the least damage and isn’t up to me. As long as the stock isn’t over-fished, my personal opinion is just that. Having said that, my personal opinion is: quotas for sections of the lower river with block closures.

[Point-of-Sale Clerk]

Thank you STG, I was not interested in the Departments official line on this issue, I was interested in your personal opinion. That is why I asked for it.

How would you address the lower river business owners concerns that quotas would take away too much of their clientele traffic? It is easy to set quotas for and keep track of commercial harvesters but how much would it cost to keep better track of sport? Would it be, as they say, “easily enforceable”?

[ssteelheadsteve]

SPORTS USED TO HARVEST 68,000 STURG

The late Gary Krum and myself tried for several years IN THE EARLY- LATE 80'S to get the commission to lower the catch.
Mismanagement of our resources and a greedy public have brought us to this. Catch quots have been too high for at least a decade. When you kill wildfish you kill your fishing. 32,000 is not a recovery level . WATCH

[STGRule]

***: I don't really think it would hurt the lower river folks. It may even help in the long run. Since the seasons would be spread out more the employment base would be more stable. Instead of hiring a whole bunch of people to work for a short time (usually a transient workforce), workers would be able to settle in the communities for longer periods of time and add to the community. Stable workers spend their money more evenly over a greater period of time and help keep the other non-fishing entities in business too.

Hooboy, sport fishing. I don't know how much it would cost. It would require major man-power to cover all the ramps. It can be done, but who will pay for it? Although it would add another layer of stable employment to the community.
EDIT for clarification: I mean quotas with large block closures, not a couple days a week. When retention closures are in effect, other species could be harvested. If we would just quit this "get mine while I can" thing we would be better off. It can't be done with salmonids as they have a limited time in the river but, if the charters and guides have a variety of species to fish for over a protracted period of time, it would even all things out and maybe keep people in business and give sporties a chance to fish all year for something. You could fish for sturgeon for awhile, switch to chinook, maybe some bottom fish, do some crab, back to sturgeon for awhile, then on to more salmonids, back to bottomfish and crabs, then on to sturgeon again. Take a little over a long period of time is better than taking everything at once.

[ 12-21-2002, 12:21 AM: Message edited by: STGRule ]

[ssteelheadsteve]

FRANKLY *** I DON'T GIVE A DAM ABOUT THE
Coast retailers and towns. They screw the tourists and the guides at every turn.Without mercy. And generally leave both not wanting to come back. Forming the regs so that one region gets priority is not right. As usual you can expect the upriver angler to get the screwing. But then we need more people using more resources to catch the same fish that will be upriver in 8 weeks. Make sense ?

[ 12-20-2002, 11:46 PM: Message edited by: ssteelheadsteve ]

The regulations should be written for sustained yield (protect the resource) not to help the economy.

[STGRule]

Actually it doesn't. Can you explain (without yelling) what your talking about?
And I'm not sure you are correct about declining stocks. Actually the lower river population is fairly stable and has been for awhile now. The difference between now and then is the number of people fishing for sturgeon. This is the reason for closures. The shear number of people fishing and removing stock.

[Tacklebuster]

My opinions will probably not be the ones that most people will share but here goes......

I don't have a problem in the least with a 5 fish a year limit. My wife, as well as my daughter are avid fisherwomen and take part in the harvest almost as much as myself. I put a lot of sturgeon in the freezer a year but none of it goes to waste.

Anyone that has ever spent some time in the estuary every year is well aware of the slaughter that takes place. People will camp for a week or so and take limits every single day. Spend an hour or so at Sturgeon Pauls in the middle of July. I bet you loose count of all the fish you see. Togive a prime example I will use a two day trip I took last year. The first day we were anchored near Whalerman and my boat put 16 keepers to the stern. My buddy beside me put 12 on his boat. I had 4 people that were limited and he had three. The next day WaterDog and his Pops were next to me. We put 6 keepers to the boat, Rich put 2 on his, and Pops put 1 on his. That was 37 keepers that were caught in about 10 total hours of fishing :shocked: Had there had been 12 other boats with an average of three tag holders per boat next to use using the right stuff think of the numbers that would have added.

I will do whatever needs to be done to protect this great fishery of ours. I do keep my fair share of fish but I release far more a year than I will tag. I don't think that the fishery is really an issue as far as declining fish in the keeper size. I have been consistantly catching keepers for 5 years now and I haven't really noticed a decline. I do not do studies and everything else involved so my opinion is uneducated. I do however want this fishery to sustain so I will support whatever is needed to do so.

I almost like block closures cause I usually have the river to myself for a little catch and release. It's selfish I know but a good time for me is being out on the river with my family and friends in a low pressure fast action fishery like the one we have. I could care a less about punching a tag and bringing some meat home for the most part. As long as I have a little time to put my legal amount in the freezer, the rest is gravy.

Have you ever been down in the estuary when it is closed for the retention of sturgeon? Man it's a gas. No crowds at the ramp, no high strung boaters trying to crowd you off your anchor, like I said, a gas. I really like the Portland area because you will have all your favorite spots without having to launch in the middle of the night to get there first.

My opinion is do whatever you must to sustain the fishery. I don't like a two day closure a week cause it just adds for more pressure the rest of the five. I don't have a problem one with the 5 fish limit. It might even make up for the fish that were taken that didn't have to be tagged this year when the computers were down.

See ya on the river.....
Chris

[roadsend]

Sturgeon Tom,
Your post addresses the relatively high number of sturgeon harvested in the Astoria area. I think it would be interesting to analyze who is doing the harvesting. The number of guides fishing this area has skyrocketed over the past several years and their client base is certainly not local folks. One of the few local guides told me recently that there are now approximately 180 guides doing sturgeon on the estuary. If you figure 4-6 clients/day/guide, do the math. My point is: It is not primarily the local Astoria vicinity folks putting the pressure on the sturgeon in the estuary. The overwhelming majority of both guides and clients are from out of the area. The reason why folks hire professional guides and come down here is the quality of the fishery. If an equal quality fishery existed closer to home these folks would fish closer to home. Since these fish move up and down the river the whole idea of quotas for different parts of the river is bogus and is a political rather than a biological decision. If you really want to equalize the fishing pressure, for whatever reason, you would allocate limited entry guide licences by river zone and require sportfisherman to buy tags for one zone only. I do not necessarily think this is a good idea.

[Biteme]

Could someone please explain the difference between the upriver keeper sturgeon and the estuary sturgeon, It is my belief that these fish follow the food source and the fish that are in the Raineer to Bonneville stretch in Feb- Apr are the same fish that are in Astoria in the summer. They follow the smelt up river and during feb-apr we do have a great fishery upriver. If they close the entire river in March april that isnt going to affect the estuary fishery much because all of those fish are upriver anyway, it will however ensure that a lot less are caught by upriver anglers leaving more for the estuary. I very well could be way off base on this but I often here the terms upriver and lower river fish used I think they are the same.

[Sturgeon Tom]

Roadsend; There are so maney guides down there becouse the chetch rate is so high.
Look at Tacklebuster's story as an example. It's not that way up river. When is the last time you herd of a slaughter at Rooster Rock?
The idea of closing a zone down is to perserve a fishery for later and to give other people a chance at the fish.
Whats wrong with leaving some fish for the up river people?
Whats wrong with quotas for an aera?
Again they do it for salmon why not sturgeon?
Your not going to stop people from making a living so you have to do the right thing and a quota system for an area to me is the right thing.
It does't matter who catches them there gone and thats what counts. The numbers.

[King13fisher]

Just an opinion:

1. Reduce the catch rate to 5 per year. Should also include 1 per week, or maybe even per month.
2. Split the lower Columbia, same as is done for Salmon.
3. Have block closures, not daily, daily only puts more pressure on all of us fishing those days.

By organizing the closures and limits, there would be ne need of having moe fish counters to check for "quotas" our law inforcement people would only have to continue to check harvest cards to catches to ensure that people are not over harvesting.

Weekly limits are unfair to those of us that have to travel long distances to fish.

[SturgeonKing50]

I note that they are not going to close the gill net season for sturgeon. Whats wrong with this picture? Maybe we should should just quit fishing. Why are the sports fisherman the ones to get cut all the time. I work 5 days a week minimum and the weekends are the only time I have to fish unless I take vacation. I am all for catch and release to protect our resources. I have been fishing for sturgeon for over 35 years and most of the problems are caused by the amount of people fishing for them. They never fished astoria and the lower estuary like they do now until the salmon runs crashed.AS far as I concerned those guys are alot of the problem.

[boater]

how bout this, only sell enough tags for 32.000 fish, why sell tags that could add up to a million of them and have to depend on the state to do one of there famous estamates of how many have been caught, have it a mail in system and we would mail in our request for a 5 fish tag, some of the extras could be used for out of town fisherman and make those tags with one punch for about 10 bucks apeice, the remaining ones could be used for residents of oregon and washington who want to buy another tag with 5 punches on it, when the total adds up to 32.000 symply quit selling them for the year, this way we could fish for them whenever we wanted to and keep our keepers whenever we wanted to, have it a requirement that if you dont send your sturgeon tag in at the end of the year you will not be able to buy one for the following year, at the end of the year when the total is counted have the amount short of 32.000 added to the next year. think of it this way, if the state had a forrest where 250 christmas trees could be cut down would they sell 5000 permits and do in season estamates and close the cutting down at 250 or would they only sell 250 permits and not screw the other 4750 people out of what they paid for, they do the smart thing, they manage there forrest and only sell what can be harvested, our fisheries are not managed they are guessed. ya i know, "shut up boater", have a nice day....

[roadsend]

Sturgeon Tom,

You are right. The guides are here because the catch rate is high and they can give their clients a quality fishing experience.

I have no problem with zones and quotas except that they unnecessarily complicate things and are divisive. But if thats the way we go, we (guides and fisherman) should have to select the zone we want to fish, just like we do for deer (eastern or western Oregon). Otherwise nearly everyone will concentrate on the estuary until the quota is quickly exhausted and then move upstream.

"The idea of closing a zone down is to perserve a fishery for later and to give other people a chance at the fish. Whats wrong with leaving some fish for the up river people?" -

The guides and clients in the estuary are already primarily upriver folks, as are a great many of the other sportsmen. Upriver folks in large numbers fished here by choice well before stringent harvest limitations were necessary because it is the best place to fish sturgeon in the summer.

[Biteme]

come on you biologist types is there any difference between upriver or lower river keeper sturgeon or are they indeed the same fish?

[No Wishin Just Fishin]

We could always limit the guides to 10 trips a year for sturgeon and also eliminate catch and release after your limit is done daily or yearly. Also if you buy a sturgeon tag for Oregon You cannot buy one for Washington and vice versa just a thought :grin:

[Point-of-Sale Clerk]

Limiting people to buying either WA or OR tags is a good idea. I also like the idea of reducing the yearly limit from 10 to 5(reduction in yearly harvest that was not even considered or put forth as an option last year at the commission meeting.)

But as far as sport fishing harvest rates go we currently have so many loopholes that reducing the yearly harvest rates may have little affect. Right now if you fill your “combined” tag with any particular species and still wish to continue to harvest all that is required is that you wash your tag with your laundry, then purchase a replacement at your nearest *** agent. If you are not comfortable with that option (or not clever enough to think of it) then purchasing one-day licenses on top of your yearly license is a way to allow increased yearly harvest.

[STGRule]

BiteMe:
The fish in the upper river may or may not be the same as the fish in the lower river. There is always some component of the population that stays where it is and another that is highly migratory and most that are in between. There is also likely to be more fish in the estuary as some fish just poke their noses into the river and don't go very far or stay very long.

They are indeed following migrations of anadromous species for the most part. It probably depends on available food species and how close they are to spawning. Active gonadal maturation will require more calories. Larger fish probably cover more territory as they need more food.

[WaterDog]

***, you and I have had that conversation before regarding "hatchery" tags. It sucks that I have to drive to Salem or Sherwood because you wont sell me "hatchery" tags. I understand your reasoning but the bottom line is I play by the rules. It is simply not right to say,"oops, I washed my tag. :depressed: ", when I fill my tag with salmon or sturgeon (not that it happens on a regular basis ). It's also not right that an agent such as yourself promotes it. :depressed: Doesn't that fancy million dollar box track how many tags are sold and to whom? If not, why not? Seems a simple way to plug at least that hole. :smile:

[SHLEPROCK]

Biteme, The only difference that I have seen in them is the clear colored meat of what I think are the fresh ocean fish and the cloudy colored meat of fish that have been in the river for some time. But I have caught clear colored fish in the upper river in the winter months and some cloud colored fish in the estuary also. I do'nt know if that helps or not. A couple years ago I caught fish in the Mult.Channel that was so tainted that I had to throw it away [img]graemlins/berry.gif[/img]

[invader]

well let me say this...... i have sundays mondays and tuesdays OFF!!!!!!!!!!!!.. if these stupid states ( washington and oregon_) tell me i cant keep my fish-------- i will sell my boat!

[Point-of-Sale Clerk]

Waterdog

What my little ODFW supplied box can and does keep track of is a secret. [img]graemlins/program.gif[/img]

The problem with keeping track of what you ask is a combination of two things. One, ODFW by statute is a law enforcement agency. That means they have the statutory authority to investigate game violations as well as cite for game violations. Two, under Oregon law no law enforcement agency may keep track of the everyday lawful actions of our citizens. You cannot keep track of who goes to a particular bar, you can not keep track of who attends a political rally, and if you are an enforcement agency you may not keep track of how many duplicates everyone in the state purchases in an effort to catch someone who may violate a law. The rules say you have to believe a specific violation is happening by a specific person before you can collect that kind of data. Sort of like stopping everyone on the street and inspecting their money in the possibility that one bill may be counterfeit. You have to have a reason to suspect that a specific person may be counterfeiting.

For the record, I do not like the loopholes that currently exist. And as always I am trying to get those closed. I worked very hard to get everyone’s SS# made more secure. And if I can find the right approach I will work to fix this as well.

And just so you will not think I am anti-Hatchery Tag, all *** outlets began selling them Dec 1st, 2002. You come in and I will sell you a hatchery tag (for next year)

[dawhunt]

I don't have a proplem with being cut back to 5 fish,if thats what we have to do to still be able to catch some thats fine.I don't think its right that the estuary gets a bigger % then we do.Between the guides and the charter boats up there plus us !! there is more fish caught there then here.Why should we have to take a bigger cut if they want to split the %
up it should be 50/50 when they get there 50% there done period.I'm tired of every year we keep getting cut back more and more on the amount we can keep and how much we can fish.I also don't belive the GILLNETTER should even be allowed to fish for them how many times can you GILLNET
a fish and turn it loose before you kill it ????
I'm sure the mortatly rate is alot higher from them then it will EVER be from us in C/R,remember the key word here is GILLNET !!!
I know a few of you think I'm just a crybaby
but its time for them to get out of river.
Bob

[ 12-21-2002, 12:29 PM: Message edited by: dawhunt ]

[SHLEPROCK]

My concerns are that when we start limiting certain zones it may add to the preasure of those zones. The block closure for sportfishing may just add to the success of commercial fishing. I think that lowering the limit to five fish is a good enough solution for now and see how the numbers look at end of the year, or when the quota is met.

[Biteme]

sts,
thanks for replying, and I do agree that some of the keepers stay in a localized area but you can definitly tell by the looks of the fish which ones are resident and which ones just came up from the salt.

as far as limiting the guides tags there is always guided fishing for *********.... think about it there may be a new untapped market for the guides. .... just kidding...

[Smj]

AD 11, I assume by your handle that you are a guide. If this is the case, THANK YOU VERY MUCH for having the veiwpoint that guides need to change their ways also, not JUST the common joe fisherman. If you're not a guide, nevermind.

Boater, Sounds good to me. Don't ever shut up. Most of your posts interest me, but that may not mean much.

Smj

[No Wishin Just Fishin]

smj Yes I think some of the guides should rethink and maybe help with keeping the fish around. I have lots of clients that like to just go and catch and release whether it be Sturgeon, Salmon or steelhead.

Most guides do not have another job and they cry poor mouth if things are not going right or if they do not make enough. Well I think if we are going to limit or do away with Gill netting we should do the same with guides as it is also Commericial fishing of sorts, so why not limit them (us) also

[Born to Fish]

My "outsider" perspective.....

I have been traveling from Boise to the Astoria area for an annual 2-day sturgeon fishing trip over the past 5 years, and will continue to do so - regulations permiting.

During this time I have fished with two different guides, both had other sources of income as well as their guiding.

I didn't know that much about the fishery when I first started, but have continued to go to Astoria because: I like the area; and I felt that being that close to the ocean you might have access to a larger population based on residents as well as those moving in and out with the tides. Don't know if that's true, but I suppose that view point would be greeted with joy from the upriver fishers cause I'm not pulling off the interstate earlier than I am and competing with them.

Another reason I make my yearly trip is that after my first trip I discovered what fine eating sturgeon is - part of the reason I make this long trip is that I know I'll have a nice supply of fillets in the freezer for the remainder of the year.

From my limited perspective, I have no problem with the annual limit being reduced by 50% to 5 annual in possession. I would hope that in the spirit of the effort to sustain this fishery, the commercial industry would also take a 50% cut.

I also agree with others that it makes no sense to have 1 or 2 day closures during the week regardless of what the days are. It only concentrates the fishing pressure during a shorter period of time - probably not much of a reduction of the catch, and it certainly will have a negative impact on the quality of the experience [something I believe the F&G are responsible for maintaining, besides numbers].

[Biteme]

I would give up astoria. if you want to slow the reduction in sturgeon population maybe we ought to look at where most of the fish are killed by both sports, guides and commercials.

[roadsend]

Bite me,
What do you mean giving up Astoria?

[WaterDog]

Something I observed this year really puzzeled me. I was out fishing prior to the reopening on Nov. 23rd. I was very suprized by the lack of boats on the river. I think I counted maybe 10. I was out on the opener and of course there was lots of boats. Are most fisher's so greedy that if they cant bring a fish home they wont go? I guess the answer is yes :depressed: and that is why I think the block closures would work. I just like to be on the river and bringing something home is not why I go.

It's good to see there are a few forward thinking guides here. I hope someone uses some common sense when the final decision is made.

***,

Understood. I may see you this week sometime and we can discuss this further. And I will need a hatchery s/s tag. :smile:

[SHLEPROCK]

I would like to wish the sturgeon a merry christmas for the tons of bait we feed them. :grin:

[ 12-23-2002, 08:03 AM: Message edited by: SHLEPROCK ]

[dahsboard_fisherman]

amen to thatshleprock!!! :smile:

[boater]

[ 12-23-2002, 03:54 PM: Message edited by: boater ]