Gillnetter Action Notice

freespool · 05-23-2005, 07:13 PM

URGENT ACTION ALERT REGARDING SUMMER CHINOOK FISHERY

The Compact has announced a meeting on June 16th to discuss opening a non treaty commercial gillnet fishery on the summer chinook. We have sent a letter to Governor Gregoire, and copied it to the Commission. Please send a letter to the Governor and tell her how important the summer chinook fishery is for your sportfishing/tourism business and your community! Remember to stay polite and professional but let her know that after the protection of the resource, sportfishing brings important dollars to the state of Washington and need to be a high priority. A copy of the letter NSIA sent is attached.

Also, for those who were expecting a selective summer chinook fishery west of Bonneville opening on June 16th, we are hearing that it may be delayed! This is just about as ridiculous as it was when WDF&W staff decided that fishing for shad with a Dick Nite spoon or a shad dart is equal to fishing shad with a 5" gillnet and the two fisheries were delayed to be opened at the same time.

The sportfishery for summer chinook needs to open on June 16th. It needs to be selective--1/2 of the fish are marked. Explain in your own words how important this family vacation salmon fishery is. With very low sportfishing impacts on summer chinook it will not place risk on the summer chinook for a selective fishery to begin on June 16. It makes sense to delay or forego the gillnet fishery below Bonneville because it is such volatile and effective fishery.

Do not copy our letter, please write your own. Since we know our letter has been read, your words are more important, even if it's short! E-mail the letter to Governor Gregoire c/o Elliott Marks Elliot.Marks@OFM.WA.GOV.

Be sure to copy your letter to the WDF&W Commission commission@dfw.wa.gov and your state senator (not federal) and your two representatives. You can find their e-mail at: Click here: Washington State Legislature - District Information. We would love it if you would send a blind copy to NSIALIZ@aol.com

If you have any questions, or need help give me a call. Please forward this to others who have a stake in a healthy summer chinook sportfishery. There is no time to lose.

Yours in service,

Liz Hamilton, Executive Director
Northwest Sportfishing Industry Association
PO Box 4
Oregon City, OR 97045
NSIALIZ@AOL.COM
503 631 8859
866 315 NSIA toll free
503 631 3887 fax

We need to take action on this!!!!!

Salmon hugger

blacktail519 · 05-23-2005, 10:08 PM

Well, Im sure the reason for delay, is to determine whether these summer run fish were equally impacted by whatever caused the low Spring returns this year. I can definately understand theyre concern. sorry, But i would have to disagree with you here. I am all for waiting and seeing what happens number wise.

SandySteel · 05-24-2005, 12:19 AM

Blacktail
While I share your concern for the low numbers of spring fish and the possible connection to a low return of summer chinook it makes no sense to shut down the low impact and selective sport fishery while allowing the gill netters to impact the summer fish.

The gill net fishery is not selective, it is high impact on protected runs, and it brings less into the local economy compared with the sport fishery.

Sport fishing on the other hand is selective and has low impact on protected runs.

I wonder when the policy makers will figure out the cost benefit ratio on sport fishing and begin to manage our fisheries in a way that makes the most economic sense.

PISCES · 05-24-2005, 06:49 AM

I have to agree with Blacktail as well. We might have to wait for a while till some decent numbers go over the dam. However, having a meeting to discuss a possible gillnet fishery makes no sense at all! But WDFW has been known to do this before.

jetjockey · 05-24-2005, 08:39 AM

Everybody needs to wait an see before we start fishing for the summer kings!! As a matter of fact, I wish they wouldn't have opened springer fishing this year with the low returns of fish we had (I know, hind site is 20/20 and they had no idea what would happen, but looking back I think we needed all the fish we could get to return to spawn). Everyone needs to write the governors though. Gillnet fishing has to stop. Florida banned all nets (i'm pretty sure) and they only have about 6 billion dollars a year that comes in from sport fisherman. Why can't people in the WA government see the huge economic benefits from having a great recreational fishery vs. the relativly small economic benefit from commercial fishery's.

OdieWon · 05-24-2005, 10:56 AM

There seems to be a common theme here. "let's wait for the numbers". Wait....to see after the fact that the run was indeed good? Too late...the run is about over by the time the F&W folks make their determination. You all seem to agree that the gillnetters should be prohibited. I agree also. But, let the sport fishery open as planned. People plan and schedule vacations, etc. around this. If the numbers start to come in too low, it's very easy to shut off the sport fishery. Once the gillnetters put their instruments of non-selective death in the water, by the time the numbers begin to tell the tale, they've already boated thousands of fish. They can seriously impact a reasonable run...and low numbers can be a result of their high success. But they don't care if we get to fish. They've got their fish in the boat and on the way to market.
Write those letters! Don't wait!!! All waiting will accomplish is letting us look back after the run is over and wish we had taken some action before it started. There are no second chances. Lead, follow, or get the hell out of the way!

CATCH AND EAT · 05-24-2005, 01:17 PM

Sent a letter to Liz just a moment ago. I cannot even believe they are thinking of letting nets in after the dismal showing of smelt, springers, steelhead and now shad too.

ssteelheadsteve · 05-25-2005, 12:55 AM

The percent of Spring Chinook harvested by the Gillnet fishery will be ? 8 % 10 % ?. I will start you thinking now as in the Fall I will be quite busy. If ever there was a year to think about not buying a license untill the gill netters are locked out of 2006 this is it. A new formula must be implemented to punish the gillnet fishery untill parity is reached in regards to sport harvest. It's time to get with the program. You will be hearing more about this in the future. GARONTEED !

fergy61 · 05-25-2005, 07:52 PM

Sorry but that's never gonna happen...unfortunately.
The head of the odfw fisheries is Mr. Englund, as in- Englunds Marine supply who sells them the nets, corks,& leadlines. He is also on the board of Salmon For All. Does this sound like a conflict of interest? It seems to be the trend for the fisheries depts to have gillnetters run the fisheries. We just sit back & #@$% about it but they are VERY organized.

freespool · 05-25-2005, 07:55 PM

Quote:

If ever there was a year to think about not buying a license untill the gill netters are locked out of 2006 this is it. A new formula must be implemented to punish the gillnet fishery untill parity is reached in regards to sport harvest. It's time to get with the program. You will be hearing more about this in the future. GARONTEED !

Steve, I don't think we need to take such a drastic action as not buying a fishing license. Why not support HB2011?

salmon hugger

PISCES · 05-26-2005, 07:57 AM

Quote:

The head of the odfw fisheries is Mr. Englund, as in- Englunds Marine supply who sells them the nets, corks,& leadlines.

It seems that each commisioner (he/she) is biased when it comes to particular things. Is it fair to the state of Oregon to have all the commisioners thinking the same way. A friend of mine told me their used to be a board member from Medford and he had changed most of the creeks and rivers in his area to artificial fly only and the use of certain size hooks during different times of the year, because he was a flyfisherman.

freespool · 05-26-2005, 02:31 PM

Quote:

The head of the odfw fisheries is Mr. Englund, as in- Englunds Marine supply who sells them the nets, corks,& leadlines

The head of ODF&W fisheries is Lindsey Ball, Mr. Englund is one of the fish commissioners.

salmon hugger

eyeFISH · 06-05-2005, 11:16 AM

I believe our rabidly harvest-oriented WDFW is leading the charge for the summer king commercial net fishery. No surprises there.

:depressed:

fergy61 · 06-06-2005, 09:56 AM

You're spliting hairs there bud.
Lindsey Ball is the head of odfw & heads the whole dept.
Jon Englund is THE fisheries commisioner for dist 1.
The fact remains that he is biased in his views & actions in regards to sport & commercial fishing. The only reason we are able to fish in the CR right now is so the commercials can have their crack at the summer run salmon.

At a round table meeting in St Helens,(which I attended) the fisheries people were adamant that the commercials would NEVER be banned from the CR

freespool · 06-06-2005, 11:11 AM

Quote:

At a round table meeting in St Helens,(which I attended) the fisheries people were adamant that the commercials would NEVER be banned from the CR

Thirty years ago ODF&W said we needed to remove the large woody debis from the rivers. Forty years ago they said hatcheries would solve all our fish problems. Just because they say it doesn't make it so. I think there is a lot of support in the legislature for sustainably managing our fish runs.

salmon hugger

fergy61 · 06-06-2005, 11:35 AM

I hate to be a doubting Thomas but I am very pessimistic when it comes to commercias ever being banned from the cr,especially when it's mostly headed by pro commercial commissioners. The commercials have big money, & lobbyist, & are much more organized than we sportsmen are. We gripe about it but generally we do nothing about it. Look at the revenue generated by the sport fishermen versus the gillnetters. The sport fishermen put WAY more money into the economy than the gillnetters do but still the gillnetters seem to get way more than their fair share.

I hope that I'm wrong about the nets always being able to fish the cr. Time will tell I guess.

freespool · 06-06-2005, 11:46 AM

Quote:

We gripe about it but generally we do nothing about it. Look at the revenue generated by the sport fishermen versus the gillnetters. The sport fishermen put WAY more money into the economy than the gillnetters do but still the gillnetters seem to get way more than their fair share.

Well how about joining NSIA there Thomas? They are the tip of the spear when it comes to fighting for our rights to fish. They are also very well organized. Another thing you might consider is attending the critical salmon meetings, the gillnetters show up in mass and they testify.

salmon hugger

fergy61 · 06-06-2005, 11:49 AM

Would you let me know how to do this? I would definitely be interested. (NSIA)

freespool · 06-06-2005, 12:19 PM

I sure can, Northwest Sportfishing Industry Assn. PO Box 4 Oregon City 97045 503-631-8859

As for the salmon meetings, they are posted here on ifish. Historically we have not had a very good showing at the meetings, most are during the week. And sadly ifishers will take a day off to go fishing, but are quite self righteous when it comes to meetings. Yet these same people whine like the dickens when decisions don't go our way. They can't seem to see the correlation between showing up in numbers and things going our way. Having a dozen ifishers at a meeting is a good turn out. And that's out of over 8k members.

salmon hugger

fergy61 · 06-06-2005, 12:19 PM

Nevermind, I see at the end of your original post how to do this. :grin:

fergy61 · 06-06-2005, 12:21 PM

Thx freespool,
I'll check it out.

timinthegorge · 06-06-2005, 01:38 PM

I'm confused. What part of this don't people understand? The gillnetters show up for meetings because they MAKE money by plying their trade. We go to meetings (when we do), because we SPEND money on sportfishing, and Lots Of It!

When the decision-makers see a room full of commercials, and a handful of us sportfishers, what's their conclusion? Duh....

We do need to write letters. We do need to put our money where our mouths are, and we do need to show up for meetings. I will be sending a membership check to NSIA in the morning.

It's the economic argument that'll be the most persuasive, and frankly, I haven't seen any good numbers on what we spend, how many tourists we draw through sportsfishing, or how much of a ripple effect that has in the economies of WA, OR, and Idaho. Those numbers may be available, but I certainly haven't seen them, and those are the numbers that tell the story about how this fishery should be managed.

I think ALL nets should be removed from the Columbia mainstem. The resource is too unstable to think we can allow this completely non-selective form of "fishing" to continue. Just my opinion.

What would happen if all 8,000 ifishers joined NSIA? And all wrote letters? And all collectively organized who would take time off from work to represent us at meetings? I don't know..... but I expect we'd be alot more effective in getting our arguments heard, and reflected, in the decisions of the policy makers.

Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong...

Tim Hopkinson

fergy61 · 06-06-2005, 01:54 PM

I don't think you're wrong in the least bit. It's just getting everyone to do it. I know there are a number of ifishers & sport fishermen who do their part but as a whole, the sport fishing community does not.
I for one will also be joining NSIA & hope that MANY others will do the same.
As far as the Columbia River Compact goes,how do you participate in those meetings that are held via telephone? Many of them are. I receive the compact action notices from odfw & they are in the middle of they day (weekdays) when most are working, or by phone.
I guess I'll find out from NSIA

freespool · 06-07-2005, 12:51 PM

ttt

AnchorManagement · 06-07-2005, 01:05 PM

I agree with you timinthegorge, the Columbia IS too unstable for that kind of harvesting, I just wish we could stop it, I don't have a problem with them out in the ocean, but they can wipe out way too many fish too quickly in our river system.

RiverRogue · 06-07-2005, 02:14 PM

Feeespool, I am with you as well! However, I believe it is time to vote the commercials right off the CR. And...I am prepared to put time, money , and effort into an intitiatve petition to get a vote on the ballot. I know this was tried before, but it has got to be done. I for one am tired of the sport fisher taking the fall for unfair fishing and management practices. Lets gett'r done!!

timinthegorge · 06-07-2005, 05:03 PM

My NSIA membership (with a $50 check) was mailed this morning. We sportfishers have so much potential to see that changes are made to the way this fishery is managed, and we do so little. That's not a broad brush. I know that there's many of us ifishers who spend their time, and their energy, and their money, to make it better for All of us, we owe them thanks. Cudo's to them!! The rest of us need to step up!

I just think this a turning point, and if we don't step up and make our voices (and wallets) heard, and make the policy-makers understand, not only us, but our children's fishing opportunities will be diminished by our lack of effort. It's not enough to buy ice, and bait, and tackle, and boats..... We need to figure out how to work together.

So, on that note! I'm goin' fishin' tomorrow!! YeeHaaa....

Ethical hunter · 06-08-2005, 01:47 PM

It seems to me that most sport fisherman are angry with having to compete with anyone or anything for the resources they care about. Gillnetters, sealions, fishers down river, natives, terns, seals, trollers - Just an observation.

No one wildlife commissioner has the power to set policy/seasons on their own.

HB

cosmo · 06-09-2005, 12:45 PM

HB,
To feel that way is to overlook the conservation and economic arguments associated with the summer chinook fishery.

Commissioners are representatives of my government and they need to be held accountable for their actions.

Thanks for the observation, but what's your point

? Other than trying to casually dissuade people from taking an active role in their sporting futures.

Ethical hunter · 06-09-2005, 01:22 PM

All user groups need, deserve and have the right to representation. Having various commissioners represent the different user groups is ideal. Our natural resources do not entirely belong to the one user group that spends the most money per fish caught - sportfisherman.

Yes, sportfisherman do spend a tremendous amount of money. But, that is simply one aspect of how to most effectively use and distribute our resources. Listening to opposing points of view on an issue can be very enlightening but, more often it seems that shouting our own ideals is deafening us to different ideas or solutions.

Think about this. What user group uses the least amount of resources per fish caught? That group would truely be the conservationist.

HB

cosmo · 06-09-2005, 02:22 PM

Wow, there's more spin than a 9-ball tournament on that one! Good on ya!

Ethical hunter · 06-10-2005, 09:41 AM

If spinning an issue is believing all user groups have a right to representation, apparently I have spun

HB

cosmo · 06-10-2005, 10:38 AM

Okay- food for your thought.

The 5-year average of Oregon commercial salmon landings (98-02 the most recent complete data set) is 372,816. The 5-year on sport is 236,363. With the commercial fisheries delivering lower economic values, and in fact hindering available catch due to higher mortalities on wild fish, I'd say they're very well represented with 136,453 more salmon each year in the plus column. The more years you go backward, the more favorable the split is toward commercial fisheries.

The commercial numbers are also non-tribal, which if you look closely at what's been happening on the Columbia specifically, the tribes are replacing the non-tribal commercials in the market. With non-tribal commercials beginning at 100% of catch (comm) and tribal at 0% decades ago, there has been a swap of positions with tribal over the 50% mark. Not saying I agree with what's happening, just that it is happening, and sport anglers cannot continue to bear the brunt of this paradigm. Throw tribal commercial catch on top of non-tribal, and though it seems commercials paint themselves as the little guys, it just ain't so.

HB. Get the status report from ODFW "Columbia River Fish and Fisheries" 1938-2000. From there you can piece in additional numbers from more recent years. It offers a really eye-opening look at how and where fish are harvested.

Ethical hunter · 06-10-2005, 12:12 PM

Quote:

Think about this. What user group uses the least amount of resources per fish caught? That group would truely be the conservationist.

HB

Its difficult to quantify but, I was origionally thinking bankies.

boater · 06-10-2005, 04:19 PM

Quote:

Feeespool, I am with you as well! However, I believe it is time to vote the commercials right off the CR.

i agree, and until the NSIA agree`s with that i will not join them.

freespool · 06-10-2005, 05:20 PM

Quote:

i agree, and until the NSIA agree`s with that i will not join them.

Were you aware that NSIA sponsered a bill that would greatly inhibit gillnetting? HB2011 was introduced by Rep Scott on the request of NSIA. I can't think of a single sportfishing organization with as many pro salmon projects as NSIA. Your all or nothing attitude seems short sighted to me. If NSIA did what you want,they would be labled as too radical, and would simply be dismissed. Rome was not built in a day.

salmon hugger

dakota2961 · 06-17-2005, 06:16 AM

My guess is that the gillnetters lobby has a lot more money to 'grease' the palms that make the decisions. I am a firm believer that you can only get from the government what you can afford to pay for.

Ethical hunter · 06-17-2005, 08:48 AM

Quote:

My guess is that the gillnetters lobby has a lot more money to 'grease' the palms that make the decisions. I am a firm believer that you can only get from the government what you can afford to pay for.

I'm glad to see ifish has at least a few conspiracy theorists. Bigfoot and the loch ness monster must have something to do with the commercials getting a summer season also.

HB

nobrownline · 06-18-2005, 09:56 PM

hey there was a chance to vote the nets out of the river a couple years back in WA.But nobody showed up to vote and it was defeated by King county again. That was our chance.If it would have passed Oregon would have fpllowed shortly

Tight Lines · 06-20-2005, 07:04 AM

What if Washington and Oregon added $$ to the License fee with the sole purpose to buy out the permits of the Gill netters. Develop a plan to purchase all permits in five - ten years and thenuse the surcharge for Columbia River run development and projects.

I would be more then willing to pay more with the thought of having one of the sports fishing mecca that would follow for our kids to benifit from.

Yes the sport fishing would be drastically improved but business in small community's would feel a year round impact. Money for facilities, enhancement programs would all grow. Motels, restuarants, bait shops, guides/charters, mini marts, box stores, gas stations, travel agaents, car rentals, fish smoke houses, fish processors, camp grounds, airlines etc. would all expand there seasons and incomes. The Columbia would bring visitors from all over the US and world for fishing opportunity's close to year round.

This is not impossible, it just takes a commitment and the willingness to find people with courage. This should be a buy out program just as many of the other commercial programs.

There would be money available from the feds, three states, conservation groups, license surcharges, power companies etc.

For the elected officals in all three states, local, state office and federal offices to get moving and have serious conversations they have to see an active electorite engaged in this type of movement.

We should not wait until it is to late. We should not leave it to our kids to fix. Oregon, Idaho and Washington Sportsmen can conserve and develop a huge fishing capitol that impacts all of the Columbia River basin and the people who live and visit on its shores.

iwanttofish · 06-22-2005, 05:45 AM

Here is a response that I recieved about the gill nets.

Thanks for the email. It was forwarded to me for response. I appreciate your comments.

Commercial fisheries on the Columbia River are adopted by the Oregon Fish and Wildlife Commission through the Columbia River Compact with the state of Washington. Oregon's food fish managagement statute (ORS 506.109) describes that "food fish shall be managed to provide the optimum economic, commercial, recreational, and aesthetic benefits for present and future generations...". It is this statute that requires the Oregon Fish and Wildlife Commission to adopt both recreational and commercial fishing seasons for food fish.

The Commission does not have the latitude to eliminate commercial fishing (based on ORS 506.109). Only the legislature can change the statute. The Commission adopts administrative rules to meet statutory requirements.

Sincerely,

Curt Melcher
Ocean Salmon and Columbia River
Fishery Program Manager