more gillneting columbia - www.ifish.net
The Oregonian's Bill Monroe!

Go Back   www.ifish.net > Ifish Fishing and Hunting > Fish & Game Management

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 05-28-2013, 11:47 PM   #1
scott31
Cutthroat
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: vancouver, wa
Posts: 44
Default more gillneting columbia

crc28may13_action.pdf

scott31 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-29-2013, 12:16 AM   #2
gonefishing
Cutthroat
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Beaverton, Or.
Posts: 33
Default Re: more gillneting columbia

Quote:
Originally Posted by scott31 View Post
Here we go again..... Another day of kill-netting ... Must be to many fish in the river ???? I think I will take-up golf. P.S." BOAT FOR SALE "
gonefishing is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-29-2013, 04:49 AM   #3
Thumper
King Salmon
 
Thumper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Vancouver, WA
Posts: 11,672
Default Re: more gillneting columbia

They have their quota. We have ours.
__________________
Jack

Tillamook Anglers!!! Good people doing great things!
Thumper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-29-2013, 05:25 AM   #4
XXX archer
 
XXX archer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: St.Helens
Posts: 1,528
Default Re: more gillneting columbia

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thumper View Post
They have their quota. We have ours.
EXACTLY!!!!
__________________
Dustin......
XXX archer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-29-2013, 07:47 AM   #5
dilleytech
Chromer
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: WA
Posts: 716
Default Re: more gillneting columbia

Whats the drano qouta? I would be willing to bet those nightly gill nets aren't being recorded...
dilleytech is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-29-2013, 08:02 AM   #6
NF122
Tuna!
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 1,358
Default Re: more gillneting columbia

Netting is here to stay. Thanks cca and m81.
NF122 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-29-2013, 08:12 AM   #7
Got Fish?
Tuna!
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Woodland, WA
Posts: 1,026
Default Re: more gillneting columbia

Mainstem netting will be over Jan 1 2017. Thanks CCA.
Got Fish? is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-29-2013, 08:19 AM   #8
gonfishenagin
 
gonfishenagin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Beavercreek Or.
Posts: 2,863
Default Re: more gillneting columbia

Quote:
Originally Posted by NF122 View Post
Netting is here to stay. Thanks cca and m81.

So if CCA was NOT here. and M81 had never happend, The Gill nets would magically disapear???

Phased out in 4 years, I was at the meetings.
__________________
Official Ifish sponser. www.rbboats.com Making the world better one Custom Boat at a time

member of CCA ,northweststeelheaders & the NRA
gonfishenagin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-29-2013, 08:20 AM   #9
Bill Monroe Jr.
Tuna!
 
Bill Monroe Jr.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: On the Water - OR/WA
Posts: 1,902
Exclamation Re: more gillneting columbia

Quote:
Originally Posted by Got Fish? View Post
Mainstem netting will be over Jan 1 2017. Thanks CCA.
DING DING DING

(Oh and the emphasis twds Sports from 60/40 transitioning to 80/20 - Sport majority - is another thing we ALL need to make sure happens over the next 3/4 yrs!)

No one said this was going to be easy!
__________________
-Team Willie Boats
-Team Arima too!
-Lamiglas Rules


You should always try and Save lives, in order to be able to live life yourself.
Bill Monroe Jr. is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-29-2013, 08:21 AM   #10
Lurp
Tuna!
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: gresham
Posts: 1,640
Default Re: more gillneting columbia

On Jan 1st 2017 the gill netters will still be in the Columbia and still have a lawsuit in court
Lurp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-29-2013, 08:23 AM   #11
beachboi26
Chromer
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 974
Default Re: more gillneting columbia

Quote:
Originally Posted by NF122 View Post
Netting is here to stay. Thanks cca and m81.

and thank you mr.gov
beachboi26 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-29-2013, 08:25 AM   #12
Bait Bucket
King Salmon
 
Bait Bucket's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 9,533
Default Re: more gillneting columbia

Quote:
Originally Posted by gonfishenagin View Post
So if CCA was NOT here. and M81 had never happend, The Gill nets would magically disapear???

Phased out in 4 years, I was at the meetings.
Don't they get a mop up sesson at the end of the run?
Bait Bucket is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-29-2013, 08:32 AM   #13
100% Siwash
Tuna!
 
100% Siwash's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 1,831
Default Re: more gillneting columbia

Remember we are getting to fish this extended season because the Nets are in.

Be friendly to the guys that want more hatchery fish and have the voice and power to do so.



Look how easy it was for them (Gill netters) to suggest a barbless hook rule for sports fishermen. It was almost instantly.
100% Siwash is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-29-2013, 08:49 AM   #14
Criddler
Tuna!
 
Criddler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Portland
Posts: 1,358
Default Re: more gillneting columbia

Quote:
Originally Posted by gonefishing View Post

Here we go again..... Another day of kill-netting ... Must be to many fish in the river ???? I think I will take-up golf. P.S." BOAT FOR SALE "
That's the attitude! Quit when you don't get what you want

There is still plenty of fish in the river. The powers at be aren't budging so just live with it and be happy you don't live in the Midwest where salmon/steelhead don't exist. OR move to the great lakes and catch those nasty colored up nookies and steelhead they have over there.

We live in one of the greatest spots in the world for chrome bright fish. We should all be happy to even have the opportunity to fish for them. Nets will always be around. Get over it and go fishing.
Criddler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-29-2013, 09:14 AM   #15
Deanrt
Sturgeon
 
Deanrt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: McMinnville
Posts: 4,332
Default Re: more gillneting columbia

Quote:
Originally Posted by NF122 View Post
Netting is here to stay. Thanks cca and m81.
If I remember right Measure 81 failed because (most) everyone fell for the governors rhetoric, never imagining a lawsuit would be filed.

As Lurp suggests and I tend to agree, this thing will be in the court system for longer then anyone imagined. I just hope I'm wrong.
__________________
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
Semper Fi, Team ACME, #5724
Deanrt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-29-2013, 03:37 PM   #16
CKthumper
Tuna!
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Cornelius, OR
Posts: 1,806
Default Re: more gillneting columbia

I don't get the vitriol over the Governor's plan. M 81 did NOTHING to restrict WA netters and did NOTHING to increase sport allocations. And do you think 81 would NOT have been challenged in court or reversed by the legislature? IF it had passed?

The people who conceived of, wrote, and pushed 81 onto the ballot thought the Gov's plan was a better deal. That's good enough for me.
__________________
It's a great day in the neighborhood
CKthumper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-29-2013, 04:57 PM   #17
bigfishaddiction
Tuna!
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Milwaukie
Posts: 1,363
Default Re: more gillneting columbia

Quote:
Originally Posted by gonefishing View Post

Here we go again..... Another day of kill-netting ... Must be to many fish in the river ???? I think I will take-up golf. P.S." BOAT FOR SALE "
What's the year, make, model, power and price of the boat? Any extra gear getting thrown in since you are changing up sports? Im serious if you are?
bigfishaddiction is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-29-2013, 05:01 PM   #18
Got Fish?
Tuna!
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Woodland, WA
Posts: 1,026
Default Re: more gillneting columbia

The lawsuit is as weak as it comes... Going through the motions. Yes there MAY be some coho or fall chinook mop up but the way I see it, the sport fisheries will expand tremendously! Time will tell.
Got Fish? is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-29-2013, 05:05 PM   #19
1911
Chromer
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 621
Default Re: more gillneting columbia

Quote:
Originally Posted by gonefishing View Post

Here we go again..... Another day of kill-netting ... Must be to many fish in the river ???? I think I will take-up golf. P.S." BOAT FOR SALE "
Awesome! You should share a link, or put it up in the classifieds here! I have a set of near new, Taylor Made clubs ill do a part trade with I yer interested.
1911 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-29-2013, 05:07 PM   #20
Bait Bucket
King Salmon
 
Bait Bucket's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 9,533
Default Re: more gillneting columbia

I hope I don't run over any nets tomorrow morning. I'm fishing.
Bait Bucket is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-29-2013, 05:08 PM   #21
Deanrt
Sturgeon
 
Deanrt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: McMinnville
Posts: 4,332
Default Re: more gillneting columbia

Quote:
Originally Posted by CKthumper View Post
I don't get the vitriol over the Governor's plan. M 81 did NOTHING to restrict WA netters and did NOTHING to increase sport allocations. And do you think 81 would NOT have been challenged in court or reversed by the legislature? IF it had passed?

The people who conceived of, wrote, and pushed 81 onto the ballot thought the Gov's plan was a better deal. That's good enough for me.

IMO, 81 would have been the better alternative!
__________________
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
Semper Fi, Team ACME, #5724
Deanrt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-29-2013, 05:28 PM   #22
salmonbob
Steelhead
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 387
Default Re: more gillneting columbia

Quote:
Originally Posted by bait bucket View Post
don't they get a mop up sesson at the end of the run?
YES THEY DO... Just to clarify that is part of the (Kitzhaber) approved plan.

Last edited by salmonbob; 05-29-2013 at 05:30 PM.
salmonbob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-29-2013, 05:35 PM   #23
RobbyD
Chromer
 
RobbyD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Tigard Or
Posts: 938
Default Re: more gillneting columbia

Quote:
Originally Posted by 100% Siwash View Post
Remember we are getting to fish this extended season because the Nets are in.

Be friendly to the guys that want more hatchery fish and have the voice and power to do so.



Look how easy it was for them (Gill netters) to suggest a barbless hook rule for sports fishermen. It was almost instantly.

More fish sounds pretty dang good to me .... RobbyD
__________________
Team SHORTBUS Flashers
RobbyD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-29-2013, 05:35 PM   #24
salmonbob
Steelhead
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 387
Default Re: more gillneting columbia

Quote:
Originally Posted by Deanrt View Post
If I remember right Measure 81 failed because (most) everyone fell for the governors rhetoric, never imagining a lawsuit would be filed.

As Lurp suggests and I tend to agree, this thing will be in the court system for longer then anyone imagined. I just hope I'm wrong.
Meanwhile a million smolt are being transferred to the safe areas.
A 20% or 30% shift in allocation dosent mean squat if we are fishing on 20% to 30% reduction of released fish.

Last edited by salmonbob; 05-29-2013 at 05:40 PM.
salmonbob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-29-2013, 05:37 PM   #25
Got Fish?
Tuna!
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Woodland, WA
Posts: 1,026
Default Re: more gillneting columbia

Quote:
Originally Posted by salmonbob View Post
Meanwhile a million smolt are being transferred to the safe areas.
Which have to swim in the mainstem at some point... Hammond should be rockin!
Got Fish? is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-29-2013, 05:48 PM   #26
salmonbob
Steelhead
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 387
Default Re: more gillneting columbia

Quote:
Originally Posted by Got Fish? View Post
Which have to swim in the mainstem at some point... Hammond should be rockin!
Thats where it gets interesting .... What if the safe area fish weren't clipped? I have reason to believe that might be happening.

Last edited by salmonbob; 05-29-2013 at 05:53 PM.
salmonbob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-29-2013, 06:16 PM   #27
Wreckless
King Salmon
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Hillsboro OR
Posts: 7,888
Default Re: more gillneting columbia

Quote:
Originally Posted by salmonbob View Post
Meanwhile a million smolt are being transferred to the safe areas.
A 20% or 30% shift in allocation dosent mean squat if we are fishing on 20% to 30% reduction of released fish.
This and the "mop-up" is what bothers me. Sports fisherman shouldn't be giving up ONE hatchery fish to support a commercial fishery. THEY can run & support a fishery in the "safe" areas IF they want to.
and
Why do the guys (& gals) that like to fish in the Columbia in October have to deal with GILLNETS!!!?? They shouldn't.....EVER!!!!


BAN THEM!!!!!!!
__________________
Owner/Operator: "I Can't Believe It's A Guide Service".

"Today's the day"......Mel Fisher
Wreckless is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-29-2013, 06:54 PM   #28
Gun Rod Bow
 
Gun Rod Bow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Sherwood, OR
Posts: 10,359
Default Re: more gillneting columbia

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bait Bucket View Post
Don't they get a mop up sesson at the end of the run?
No. Period.

"they" will transition to selective commercial gear only in the mainstem.

Commercial/sport allocations transition to way more for sport. From 50/50 to 70/30 on fall chinook and coho.

80/20 on Springers

And from 50/50 on summers to either 80 or 90% sport.

No more gillnets in the mainstem after the transition

As mentioned on this forum CCA has formally entered the lawsuit at great expense and the policy will prevail. All involved know it. All involved expected it.

Actually entering a lawsuit is very expensive compared to filing an abicus. Those concerned could help by donating to help cover the cost. No other group has entered the suit or donated money to M-81 but CCA.
__________________
Now Jeff wants to be like me
Gun Rod Bow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-29-2013, 07:03 PM   #29
Gun Rod Bow
 
Gun Rod Bow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Sherwood, OR
Posts: 10,359
Default Re: more gillneting columbia

Quote:
Originally Posted by salmonbob View Post
Meanwhile a million smolt are being transferred to the safe areas.
A 20% or 30% shift in allocation dosent mean squat if we are fishing on 20% to 30% reduction of released fish.
You aren't. Your numbers are way off.

It's less than 10% of some of the poorest returning (fall release smolts). Some if which the recent NFS injunction took away anyway.
__________________
Now Jeff wants to be like me
Gun Rod Bow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-29-2013, 07:15 PM   #30
Bait Bucket
King Salmon
 
Bait Bucket's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 9,533
Default Re: more gillneting columbia

The ODFW News Release states "1,000,000 spring chinook, 920,000 coho, and 500,000 bright fall chinook smolts...)

Last edited by Bait Bucket; 05-29-2013 at 07:16 PM.
Bait Bucket is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-29-2013, 07:18 PM   #31
Gun Rod Bow
 
Gun Rod Bow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Sherwood, OR
Posts: 10,359
Default Re: more gillneting columbia

Quote:
Originally Posted by 100% Siwash View Post
Look how easy it was for them (Gill netters) to suggest a barbless hook rule for sports fishermen. It was almost instantly.
the gillnetters proposed about 20 things.

The WDFW commission has been pushing Oregon for barbless for years. They used this opportunity to get it.

The gillnetters also asked for a very large exclusion zone from the Megler Bridge, along the red can line down to the sawdust pile.

They did not get that. I don't see the gillnetters as being as all powerful as some of you seem to.
__________________
Now Jeff wants to be like me
Gun Rod Bow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-29-2013, 07:23 PM   #32
Gun Rod Bow
 
Gun Rod Bow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Sherwood, OR
Posts: 10,359
Default Re: more gillneting columbia

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bait Bucket View Post
The ODFW News Release states "1,000,000 spring chinook, 920,000 coho, and 500,000 bright fall chinook smolts...)
The cohos are from WA (90% sure) The SABs. ( select area brights) are new production from Youngs River. That sporties will be catching.

The 1 mil number includes the 500,000 that were taken from sports in 2008 that we got squat for. The new transfers are less than 10% of current production. As I said. Some we just lost due to NFS. Most are fall release.

Still a major gain for sports no matter how you cut it
__________________
Now Jeff wants to be like me
Gun Rod Bow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-29-2013, 07:24 PM   #33
Gun Rod Bow
 
Gun Rod Bow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Sherwood, OR
Posts: 10,359
Default Re: more gillneting columbia

Quote:
Originally Posted by salmonbob View Post
Thats where it gets interesting .... What if the safe area fish weren't clipped? I have reason to believe that might be happening.
Total hogwash. All the safe area fish are clipped
__________________
Now Jeff wants to be like me
Gun Rod Bow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-29-2013, 07:32 PM   #34
Bait Bucket
King Salmon
 
Bait Bucket's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 9,533
Default Re: more gillneting columbia

I don't know about all the SAFE areas but Youngs Bay has unclipped Springers. The netters cannot keep them when (and only when) they are not netting the mainstem. This is also cited in the latest Fact Sheet.
Bait Bucket is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-29-2013, 07:33 PM   #35
Gun Rod Bow
 
Gun Rod Bow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Sherwood, OR
Posts: 10,359
Default Re: more gillneting columbia

Quote:
Originally Posted by Deanrt View Post
IMO, 81 would have been the better alternative!
If your goal was to ban all gillnet use in OR then you are correct. Allocations would have stayed the same. We would have to resolve the issue of WA ( I think it would have been resolved) and keep allocations exactly the same.

WA was moving toward a sein fishery IN ADDITION to a gillnet fishery. They got the legal clearance to do it.

M-81 forced action. And in my opinion would have passed with a full campaign but the governor offered a very good comprimise for both groups which made large donors less excited about funding a fight that had already been won

Should CCA have snubbed the Governor and gone forward on those terms?

The compromise plan was adopted in BOTH states and establishes a selective recreational fishing PRIORITY in both states. And yes the big allocation shifts to boot.

There will still be a selective commercial fishery in the mainstem keeping the public vested in fish for harvest (hatchery fish).

The policy is now adopted in both states.

Gillnetters and processors sued. In borh states Everyone knew they would.

The suit will resolved. The new policy with selective recreational priority will transition in
__________________
Now Jeff wants to be like me

Last edited by Gun Rod Bow; 05-29-2013 at 07:43 PM.
Gun Rod Bow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-29-2013, 07:36 PM   #36
billjr64
Sturgeon
 
billjr64's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: SW WA.
Posts: 4,154
Default Re: more gillneting columbia

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gun Rod Bow View Post
Total hogwash. All the safe area fish are clipped
Was the Kalama and/or NFL shut down this year for sport harvest to supplement safe area smolt transfer? How many smolts are already taken from these hatcheries to acclimate in these areas? Cowlitz?
__________________
2014 OTC----Team Just Keep Fishing!
billjr64 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-29-2013, 07:39 PM   #37
Gun Rod Bow
 
Gun Rod Bow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Sherwood, OR
Posts: 10,359
Default Re: more gillneting columbia

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bait Bucket View Post
I don't know about all the SAFE areas but Youngs Bay has unclipped Springers. The netters cannot keep them when (and only when) they are not netting the mainstem. This is also cited in the latest Fact Sheet.
There are wild strays in the terminal areas. A few years ago they were shut down to prevent blowing out their impacts. The terminal areas use some wild fish impacts every year to operate.

In high water they shut down to prevent using more than allotted. If they were to use up all their wild impacts, they have to shut down and wouldn't be able to access the hatchery fish.

Unless of course they went to selective gear in the terminal fisheries
__________________
Now Jeff wants to be like me
Gun Rod Bow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-29-2013, 07:45 PM   #38
boondogger6
Steelhead
 
boondogger6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: the corner
Posts: 166
Default Re: more gillneting columbia

Quote:
Originally Posted by salmonbob View Post
Thats where it gets interesting .... What if the safe area fish weren't clipped? I have reason to believe that might be happening.
And what reason might that be?

The coho are clipped and the SAB's or "Rogues" are left ventral or pelvic fin clipped unless they have a tag and they will also be ad clipped. Only good that does sports is gives them a hatchery card option, pretty sure anyway. Anything else is a stray, an incidental preclip release, or from natural production and Youngs bay tribs are capable and do produce "natives".

B6
boondogger6 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2013, 08:27 AM   #39
salmonbob
Steelhead
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 387
Default Re: more gillneting columbia

Dont be surprised to see a rule stating all chinook retained by sports anglers must have a removed ADIPOSE fin with a healed scar. The safe area fish will be marked some place else.
Do you honestly think the commercial industry is going to let the sport fleet hammer out fish in the safe areas after we just kicked them out of the mainstem? If you only knew what is going on behind the SEINES.

Last edited by salmonbob; 05-30-2013 at 10:03 AM.
salmonbob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2013, 12:18 PM   #40
Gun Rod Bow
 
Gun Rod Bow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Sherwood, OR
Posts: 10,359
Default Re: more gillneting columbia

Nice fear mongering Bob. Your claims have been proven false
__________________
Now Jeff wants to be like me
Gun Rod Bow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2013, 12:35 PM   #41
HeadofSteel
 
HeadofSteel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Oregon City, OR
Posts: 396
Default Re: more gillneting columbia

Quote:
Originally Posted by 100% Siwash View Post
Look how easy it was for them (Gill netters) to suggest a barbless hook rule for sports fishermen. It was almost instantly.
Barbless hooks came from the state of Washington, not the gillnetters. Period. You want someone to blame for barbless hooks, it's WDFW, and it was not instant They've been pushing ODFW to go that route for more than five years. That being said, gillnetters tried to impose rubber nets, fishing bubbles, Jesus boxes on guide boats, and even tried to make it so steelhead are no longer a game fish, all of which were soundly rejected.

Last edited by HeadofSteel; 05-30-2013 at 12:49 PM.
HeadofSteel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2013, 02:22 PM   #42
joe_camo
Tuna!
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,563
Default Re: more gillneting columbia

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gun Rod Bow View Post
No. Period.

"they" will transition to selective commercial gear only in the mainstem.
.

.
Great Bruce! So you at last recognize that the small mesh giillnets know as tangle nets are selective commercial gear according to CCA. Thanks to CCA small mesh gillnets will be on the mainstem Columbia River long after 2017.
__________________
if your worst day hunting or fishing is better than your best day at work, you need to find different work.
joe_camo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2013, 04:14 AM   #43
Seiner
Steelhead
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Puget Island
Posts: 211
Default Re: more gillneting columbia

Quote:
Originally Posted by salmonbob View Post
Dont be surprised to see a rule stating all chinook retained by sports anglers must have a removed ADIPOSE fin with a healed scar. The safe area fish will be marked some place else.
Do you honestly think the commercial industry is going to let the sport fleet hammer out fish in the safe areas after we just kicked them out of the mainstem? If you only knew what is going on behind the SEINES.

What is going on behind the seines? I'm curious.
Seiner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2013, 05:38 AM   #44
Ginny Ross
Ifish Nate
 
Ginny Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: SW PDX Burbs
Posts: 2,378
Default Re: more gillneting columbia

Quote:
Originally Posted by joe_camo View Post
Great Bruce! So you at last recognize that the small mesh giillnets know as tangle nets are selective commercial gear according to CCA. Thanks to CCA small mesh gillnets will be on the mainstem Columbia River long after 2017.
A tangle net is a gillnet, and woefully non-selective, especially in the spring fisheries. I have never seen anything close to a statement that tangle nets are selective coming from CCA, and CCA has consistently advocated against their classification as selective over the years. I do not know where you get your outlandish and demonstrably false conclusions but as long as you are allowed to put them here, they will need to be shot down like so much propaganda.
__________________

Views expressed in my posts are mine alone and should not be attributed to any organization. My posts have not ever, and do not contain any confidential information related to any organization or committee. To obtain official replies on issues discussed from any particular entity, contact that entity directly. Use your own name and address for best results.
Ginny Ross is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2013, 02:13 PM   #45
Bait Bucket
King Salmon
 
Bait Bucket's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 9,533
Default Re: more gillneting columbia

Has anyone seen the numbers for the last two sessons?
Bait Bucket is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2013, 03:36 PM   #46
salmonbob
Steelhead
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 387
Default Re: more gillneting columbia

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bait Bucket View Post
Has anyone seen the numbers for the last two sessons?
They have met quota.....Adaptive strategy alowed the use of 8" mesh. Didnt see that one coming did ya Bruce. Lol

Last edited by salmonbob; 05-31-2013 at 03:40 PM.
salmonbob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2013, 04:34 PM   #47
billjr64
Sturgeon
 
billjr64's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: SW WA.
Posts: 4,154
Default Re: more gillneting columbia

Quote:
Originally Posted by salmonbob View Post
They have met quota.....Adaptive strategy alowed the use of 8" mesh. Didnt see that one coming did ya Bruce. Lol
That`s because 8" mesh is more selective than 2" mesh, which would be more selective than 1" mesh, etc.
__________________
2014 OTC----Team Just Keep Fishing!
billjr64 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2013, 07:15 PM   #48
boondogger6
Steelhead
 
boondogger6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: the corner
Posts: 166
Default Re: more gillneting columbia

Quote:
Originally Posted by salmonbob View Post
Dont be surprised to see a rule stating all chinook retained by sports anglers must have a removed ADIPOSE fin with a healed scar. The safe area fish will be marked some place else.
Do you honestly think the commercial industry is going to let the sport fleet hammer out fish in the safe areas after we just kicked them out of the mainstem? If you only knew what is going on behind the SEINES.
First of all Commercial fishers havn't been "kicked off" the mainstem and probably never will be. It is gillnets that are getting phased out not commercial fishing.

Secondly the SAFE areas don't really get fished by sports I am guessing out of respect, I think Youngs Bay will be closed to sports this fall but the proposed bubble did not pass giving sports ample opportunity to catch some SAB's out front, I will be there and it should be hot!

Enlighten us, what's goin on behind the seines?

B6
boondogger6 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2013, 08:34 PM   #49
NF122
Tuna!
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 1,358
Default Re: more gillneting columbia

Funny how the nets are in this week and also next week???? Thought they were out of quota???? Must be fishing one their sturgeon quota?? Oh wait that is incidental. Are these springers or summers????
NF122 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2013, 08:34 PM   #50
Gun Rod Bow
 
Gun Rod Bow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Sherwood, OR
Posts: 10,359
Default Re: more gillneting columbia

Quote:
Originally Posted by salmonbob View Post
They have met quota.....Adaptive strategy alowed the use of 8" mesh. Didnt see that one coming did ya Bruce. Lol
Check your calendar Bob. Pay attention to the last numbers. It's the year.
__________________
Now Jeff wants to be like me

Last edited by Gun Rod Bow; 05-31-2013 at 08:41 PM.
Gun Rod Bow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-01-2013, 07:29 AM   #51
Willy
Coho
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Gladstone
Posts: 92
Default Re: more gillneting columbia

Quote:
Originally Posted by HeadofSteel View Post
Barbless hooks came from the state of Washington, not the gillnetters. Period. You want someone to blame for barbless hooks, it's WDFW, and it was not instant They've been pushing ODFW to go that route for more than five years. That being said, gillnetters tried to impose rubber nets, fishing bubbles, Jesus boxes on guide boats, and even tried to make it so steelhead are no longer a game fish, all of which were soundly rejected.
Are you saying the state of Washington insisted on barbless hooks to Willamatte falls on the Willamatte and the 99 bridge on the Clack?
Willy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-01-2013, 07:44 AM   #52
The Drift
Steelhead
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 153
Default Re: more gillneting columbia

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ginny Ross View Post
A tangle net is a gillnet, and woefully non-selective, especially in the spring fisheries. I have never seen anything close to a statement that tangle nets are selective coming from CCA, and CCA has consistently advocated against their classification as selective over the years. I do not know where you get your outlandish and demonstrably false conclusions but as long as you are allowed to put them here, they will need to be shot down like so much propaganda.
Gillnets are assigned 40 percent mortality rate
Tanglenet are assigned 14 percent mortality rate
Sports are assigned 10-16 percent mortality rate
Seines have been REPORTED to have a 1 percent mortality rate.
What is the magic number then when a gear type can be called selective?
__________________
Greed is a funny thing, no matter what you have you always want more.
The Drift is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-01-2013, 09:01 PM   #53
joe_camo
Tuna!
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,563
Default Re: more gillneting columbia

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ginny Ross View Post
A tangle net is a gillnet, and woefully non-selective, especially in the spring fisheries. I have never seen anything close to a statement that tangle nets are selective coming from CCA, and CCA has consistently advocated against their classification as selective over the years. I do not know where you get your outlandish and demonstrably false conclusions but as long as you are allowed to put them here, they will need to be shot down like so much propaganda.
Ginny? What exactly are you trying to say?

CCA abandoned the very measure they spent thousands of dollars and volunteer hours to get on the ballot to fully support the govenors plan which classifies tangle nets as selctive commercial harvest gear.

Are you now saying that CCA did not support the govenors plan that clearly classified tangle nets as selective commercial harvest gear?

You cant have it both ways Ginny, either CCA abandoned measure 81 to support the govenors plan or CCA did not support the governors plan which classifies tangle nets as selective commercial harvest gear. So, ginny what is it? Did CCA support the Kitz plan or did CCA not support it?
__________________
if your worst day hunting or fishing is better than your best day at work, you need to find different work.
joe_camo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2013, 08:05 PM   #54
joe_camo
Tuna!
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,563
Default Re: more gillneting columbia

Quote:
Originally Posted by joe_camo View Post
Ginny? What exactly are you trying to say?

CCA abandoned the very measure they spent thousands of dollars and volunteer hours to get on the ballot to fully support the govenors plan which classifies tangle nets as selctive commercial harvest gear.

Are you now saying that CCA did not support the govenors plan that clearly classified tangle nets as selective commercial harvest gear?

You cant have it both ways Ginny, either CCA abandoned measure 81 to support the govenors plan or CCA did not support the governors plan which classifies tangle nets as selective commercial harvest gear. So, ginny what is it? Did CCA support the Kitz plan or did CCA not support it?
I shut this thread down with logic.
__________________
if your worst day hunting or fishing is better than your best day at work, you need to find different work.
joe_camo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2013, 09:08 PM   #55
The Drift
Steelhead
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 153
Default Re: more gillneting columbia

Quote:
Originally Posted by joe_camo View Post
I shut this thread down with logic.
It usually doesn't take much logic after most of her replies.
__________________
Greed is a funny thing, no matter what you have you always want more.
The Drift is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2013, 09:10 PM   #56
Gun Rod Bow
 
Gun Rod Bow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Sherwood, OR
Posts: 10,359
Default Re: more gillneting columbia

Quoting yourself now Joe? Kina telling isn't it?

CCA didn't abandon anything. CCA was abandoned.

CCA changed the dynamic by the hard work of hundreds/thousands of volunteers and supporters who worked hard to make that happen and it worked.

The new policy adopted in both states prioritized selective recreational fishing and requires selective commercial fishing by non tribal commercial fishing with and other gear.

In every state that gillnets have been banned. Commercial gillnetters continue to try to sneak back in with some variation of gillnet. These efforts will be resisted.

I haven't heard anyone from my side say "mission accomplished". Just "step in the right direction".

M-81 wasn't the end game. Neither is the new rules in place in both states.

Conservation minded sport anglers need to be diligent and engaged. And CCA will be here to help them be effective. CCA is all of us

Sorry if I neglected your latest scud. I was enjoying fishing this weekend.
__________________
Now Jeff wants to be like me

Last edited by Gun Rod Bow; 06-02-2013 at 09:16 PM.
Gun Rod Bow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2013, 10:28 PM   #57
The Drift
Steelhead
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 153
Default Re: more gillneting columbia

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gun Rod Bow View Post
Quoting yourself now Joe? Kina telling isn't it?

CCA didn't abandon anything. CCA was abandoned.

CCA changed the dynamic by the hard work of hundreds/thousands of volunteers and supporters who worked hard to make that happen and it worked.

The new policy adopted in both states prioritized selective recreational fishing and requires selective commercial fishing by non tribal commercial fishing with and other gear.

In every state that gillnets have been banned. Commercial gillnetters continue to try to sneak back in with some variation of gillnet. These efforts will be resisted.

I haven't heard anyone from my side say "mission accomplished". Just "step in the right direction".

M-81 wasn't the end game. Neither is the new rules in place in both states.

Conservation minded sport anglers need to be diligent and engaged. And CCA will be here to help them be effective. CCA is all of us

Sorry if I neglected your latest scud. I was enjoying fishing this weekend.
"Step in the right direction" ?, all CCA has done is receive a pile of hard earned money then bring the sport/commercial conflict to a boil and both user groups are going to be adversely effected in the way fish are harvested. Meanwhile the impact on wild salmon stays exactly the same as it has for decades. Hard to believe CCA is for ALL OF US CONSERVATION MINDED.
__________________
Greed is a funny thing, no matter what you have you always want more.
The Drift is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-03-2013, 05:18 AM   #58
Gun Rod Bow
 
Gun Rod Bow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Sherwood, OR
Posts: 10,359
Default Re: more gillneting columbia

The Drift.

I've been around these issues long before CCA was in the NW.

I recall Jim Wells shaking a Kwikfish at the commission and yelling "these things are killing our fish".

I recall Jon Englund and company snubbing sport fishers and shifting allocation. As well as trashing worked out agreements between commercial and sport and hearing gillnetters say "you guys are just playing with food".

The angst between the 2 groups is old. There have been many attempts to find common ground. Sort anglers have been forced to change and not revieve any adjustments in impact. More than once.

You and the other gillnetters think everything was fine before CCA because you were getting whatever you wanted and laughing at sports

Those of us who care about our fish for more than their price on the dock are the same folks. Just got together and got engaged

As Gary K says. Welcome to the days you've made.
__________________
Now Jeff wants to be like me
Gun Rod Bow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-03-2013, 07:48 AM   #59
Farfish
Tuna!
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Portland
Posts: 1,289
Default Re: more gillneting columbia

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Drift View Post
Gillnets are assigned 40 percent mortality rate
Tanglenet are assigned 14 percent mortality rate
Sports are assigned 10-16 percent mortality rate
Seines have been REPORTED to have a 1 percent mortality rate.
What is the magic number then when a gear type can be called selective?
Good Question, but Buoy 10 coho is 19% release mortality rate.
Farfish is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-03-2013, 10:29 AM   #60
Woodpecker
Chromer
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 810
Default Re: more gillneting columbia

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gun Rod Bow View Post
The Drift.

I've been around these issues long before CCA was in the NW.

I recall Jim Wells shaking a Kwikfish at the commission and yelling "these things are killing our fish".

I recall Jon Englund and company snubbing sport fishers and shifting allocation. As well as trashing worked out agreements between commercial and sport and hearing gillnetters say "you guys are just playing with food".

The angst between the 2 groups is old. There have been many attempts to find common ground. Sort anglers have been forced to change and not revieve any adjustments in impact. More than once.

You and the other gillnetters think everything was fine before CCA because you were getting whatever you wanted and laughing at sports

Those of us who care about our fish for more than their price on the dock are the same folks. Just got together and got engaged

As Gary K says. Welcome to the days you've made.

In 09 they laughed at the sports. The so called "sports", led by the CCA, insisted on fishing the lower river, and the Willy even though there was a small run forcast for the Willamette. The laughter was at the hypocrisy of your use of the word "conservation". You use it a lot when it is convenient.

The netters moved up above 205 and fished with tangle nets, in an effort to protect the Willamette fish.

2013 is the babies from that run.

How did it work out for you GRB.

Ask how it worked out for the occasional sportsman who gets to fish 1-2 times a week, and doesn't have the $50,000 boat and the time to run up and down the river chasing fish.

Should have used a little "conservation" in 09.

CCA is the problem.
Woodpecker is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Cast to



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 03:56 PM.

Terms of Service
Page generated in 0.89135 seconds with 81 queries