Possible closure of chinook fishery..........state wide

[fishnazzi]

OK.......no opinion straight from NOAA (I believe it is OK to post a link to a government site?????)


http://www.nwr.noaa.gov/Marine-Mammals/ ... W-Chnk.cfm

[fishnazzi]

This does go with last years fight for the closure at Eagle point. They made it clear at the public meeting that the numbers of chinook available to the whale pods..........was going to be the next fight. IMO the talk about closing hatcheries to save money.........may come true. If it does be sure that the chinook fishery will close. If it the hatcheries do not close.............and this comes to pass...........your license money will be used to "feed the whales and the tribal nets" I suggest everyone contact the listed folks and let them know .............. what you think.

[bionic_one]

If it the hatcheries do not close.............and this comes to pass...........your license money will be used to "feed the whales and the tribal nets"

Does NOAA have the authority under the ESA to stop tribal netting?

[fishnazzi]

No they do not. This will effect everyone who non- tribal. They will be able to continue fishing.

[natetreat]

No one has the autority to stop tribal netting under the current system. As a sovereign nation under the bolt decision they are entitled to %50 of the fish, and all of the regulations are self imposed if I understand it. The ESA is a US law and doesn't apply to them unless they want it to. At least the way I understand it. I know Puget Sound Orcas eat primarily salmon and don't eat anything else, but I thought that other ocean orcas ate other things. I guess I don't get the justification of a statewide closure and don't see it ever happening. But whales are way more important to conservationists than salmon, so whatever happens.

[crankbait42]

Ramp up hatchery productions, we gotta feed seals, whales, commercials, sportsman, and birds. Killer whales need to eat more seals.

[crankbait42]

This is saltwater only, right? it would make little sense to close rivers with healthy runs of kings. But then a lot of the things the state does don't makes sense...

[wolverine]

If the 800 lb gorilla (feds) decide to close WA saltwater for king fishing it'll be closed for a long time. WA state has tried very hard to keep the feds out by squeezing the targeted fisheries, but it's obviously not enough to satisfy those who have the authority to tell the state and all user (except treaty) to cease and desist all saltwater fisheries. This not only affects saltwater fishermen but manufacturers, distributors, resorts, and retailers. I'd assume that once the kings hit the rivers then they'd be fair game (within reason). Once the feds get their nose under the door they won't leave. The feds will probably attempt to pressure the Canadians to reduce their fisheries on the west side of Vancouver Island also. If this proposal comes to pass there will be limited options for the guys who fish saltwater for kings. Sell their boats, fish BC, buy a river sled and play bumper boats, or bring their own rock to stand on and river fish from shore.

[natetreat]

So let me get this straight, I'm not up on the bureaucracy and jurisdictions. Who is the NOAA and what authority do they have? From the way you describe it it sounds like they have the ability to close down the salt, which will impact charter boys and commercials more than us bankies that fish the river. I tried to figure it out, but their website is garbage. I don't even know how seriously I should take this cuz I don't know where it's coming from. I don't want the feds in our business anymore than they already are, they've screwed up our puget sound runs bad enough already.

[scott080379]

They do not have the power to close it but they do have the strong influence to get it closed. As most of you know orca whales take priority over everything up here. If studies show enough data that the sporties fishg (who take 10% of the catch) will save 1 whale than they will do what ever it takes to close. I see lsts of time being spent in Olympia coming soon.

[natetreat]

This sounds like a manipulation of the truth to me. I just took a course about ecosystems and environmental science and so far as I know it's only the puget sound system's orca's the survive only on salmon. It's true that if the resident salmon of puget sound die out, the year round supply of food is gone and the Orcas would die off or migrate away. It's really interesting to hear about Orcas in the big ocean have more of a salmon fixation. But from the information and the studies that I had to read showed that those orcas are capable of eating other stuff, where the puget sound ones don't. The data over the years showed that they ate other things. I suspect that the interpretation of the data could be more suspect, in that maybe the salmon and the orcas migration paths could be getting closer and they are eating more salmon than they used to. Now if there are any biologists out there that know more than I do, I'll change my mind, but right now it sounds like political maneuvering to me. The last thing the state would do at a time like this is mess with the superior revenue generation of the commercial fishermen, so it's really about future recommendations.

[Matt]

No one has the autority to stop tribal netting under the current system. As a sovereign nation under the bolt decision they are entitled to %50 of the fish, and all of the regulations are self imposed if I understand it. The ESA is a US law and doesn't apply to them unless they want it to. At least the way I understand it. I know Puget Sound Orcas eat primarily salmon and don't eat anything else, but I thought that other ocean orcas ate other things. I guess I don't get the justification of a statewide closure and don't see it ever happening. But whales are way more important to conservationists than salmon, so whatever happens.

Where do people get these notions? First, the tribes are allotted 50% of the total harvest number, not just 50% of whatever they want, they have quotas just like everyone else, the only difference is the other 50% has to be divided between us (recreational anglers) and commercials. Next, the federal supreme court adopted the BD, they can amend it, its not some magical law that lets Indians do whatever they want in complete anarchy, there is order and specifications that must be followed. Also, tribes are not exempt from ESA listings, in fact many tribes are on the forefront of scientific salmonid research in an attempt to manage maintain and restore the salmon which are an irreplaceable staple of their culture and economy. Unfortunately, gill netting does not allow for catch and release of bycatch such as ESA listed species, and therefore they are being inadvertently destroyed during tribal harvest practices. Out in the ocean ESA listed stocks don't swim around with a big red stamp on their head saying "hey, let me go, I am 1 out of 10 South Fork Nooksack endangered Chinook!", so commercials in the salt (predominantly white folks) are as much if not more to blame for the harvest of ESA listed stocks inadvertently or not it is just not as obvious and easy to point fingers.

Here is a copy of what I had to say on this subject on another board:

The concept of fishing in "Usual and accustomed areas" outlined in the Boldt decision needs to be revised so that harvest is mandated for tribal ritual and communal food acquisition only, removing the economic aspect of tribal commercial harvest. It is in my opinion that the harvest of fish from "usual and accustomed" areas in the past was important for ceremonial purposes and to feed the tribe, not to provide economic stimulus in Indian country. Commercial fishing in the estuary and river environment for economic gain is abuse of the privileges granted to the tribes under the Boldt decision, unfortunately it will take serious legal foundation to construct a successful supreme court motion to change this. If tribal members want to fish commercially for an income, they should be doing it side by side with non tribal members out in the ocean and follow the same guidelines and stipulations that they all do.

Asside from who gets what when and where, commercial harvest MUST shift to selective fishing for salmonids on a universal scale, tribal and non. Gill nets need to be gone for good for white folks and natives alike. And with that, all tribes and agencies running hatcheries HAVE TO clip their fish, no more of this "some of us clip our fish some of the time" nonsense. Universal fin clipping at the hatchery and commercial selective harvest are the solution to our woes although tribal gill netting is a quick and easy scapegoat for all of our aggression.

[natetreat]

No one has the autority to stop tribal netting under the current system. As a sovereign nation under the bolt decision they are entitled to %50 of the fish, and all of the regulations are self imposed if I understand it. The ESA is a US law and doesn't apply to them unless they want it to. At least the way I understand it. I know Puget Sound Orcas eat primarily salmon and don't eat anything else, but I thought that other ocean orcas ate other things. I guess I don't get the justification of a statewide closure and don't see it ever happening. But whales are way more important to conservationists than salmon, so whatever happens.

Where do people get these notions? First, the tribes are allotted 50% of the total harvest number, not just 50% of whatever they want, they have quotas just like everyone else, the only difference is the other 50% has to be divided between us (recreational anglers) and commercials. Next, the federal supreme court adopted the BD, they can amend it, its not some magical law that lets Indians do whatever they want in complete anarchy, there is order and specifications that must be followed. Also, tribes are not exempt from ESA listings, in fact many tribes are on the forefront of scientific salmonid research in an attempt to manage maintain and restore the salmon which are an irreplaceable staple of their culture and economy. Unfortunately, gill netting does not allow for catch and release of bycatch such as ESA listed species, and therefore they are being inadvertently destroyed during tribal harvest practices. Out in the ocean ESA listed stocks don't swim around with a big red stamp on their head saying "hey, let me go, I am 1 out of 10 South Fork Nooksack endangered Chinook!", so commercials in the salt (predominantly white folks) are as much if not more to blame for the harvest of ESA listed stocks inadvertently or not it is just not as obvious and easy to point fingers.

Here is a copy of what I had to say on this subject on another board:

The concept of fishing in "Usual and accustomed areas" outlined in the Boldt decision needs to be revised so that harvest is mandated for tribal ritual and communal food acquisition only, removing the economic aspect of tribal commercial harvest. It is in my opinion that the harvest of fish from "usual and accustomed" areas in the past was important for ceremonial purposes and to feed the tribe, not to provide economic stimulus in Indian country. Commercial fishing in the estuary and river environment for economic gain is abuse of the privileges granted to the tribes under the Boldt decision, unfortunately it will take serious legal foundation to construct a successful supreme court motion to change this. If tribal members want to fish commercially for an income, they should be doing it side by side with non tribal members out in the ocean and follow the same guidelines and stipulations that they all do.

Asside from who gets what when and where, commercial harvest MUST shift to selective fishing for salmonids on a universal scale, tribal and non. Gill nets need to be gone for good for white folks and natives alike. And with that, all tribes and agencies running hatcheries HAVE TO clip their fish, no more of this "some of us clip our fish some of the time" nonsense. Universal fin clipping at the hatchery and commercial selective harvest are the solution to our woes although tribal gill netting is a quick and easy scapegoat for all of our aggression.

Well said Matt. I believe you, you obviously know more than I do. I guess my frustration is because I'm a working man too busy to go through supreme court decisions to figure out what is going on. If I was still in undergrad studying political science I'd do it, but now I'm busy making money. And fishing. And from the way things work now all I read is environmental crazies talking about ending fisheries altogether and the scientists they hire to run our fisheries. We don't have a lobby as sport fishermen and the way it works in actuality Al Gore has more weight it whether we get to have hatcheries than us that pay for the license that pays by our hatcheries.

I guess it was an assumption that made me look like an idiot. Thank you for setting it straight, I hate looking like an idiot.

[dicinu]

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/l ... d=obinsite

came upon this while Browsing Seattle times today.

[fishnazzi]

[/quote] We don't have a lobby as sport fishermen and the way it works in actuality Al Gore has more weight it whether we get to have hatcheries than us that pay for the license that pays by our hatcheries.

I guess it was an assumption that made me look like an idiot. Thank you for setting it straight, I hate looking like an idiot.

[/quote]



Well here is a little more................. We do have a lobby actually there are two. One is really for fishermen that is PSA. The other is a conservation group masquerading as a fishing group. Both have full time lobbyist, PSA is very clear about their goals and what they are or are not working on. The conservation group............IMO sometimes causing some of the trouble.



AS for the salmon thing............Last year when they tried to close eagle point I went to ALL the meetings and spoke at length with the state biologist. He was on the record against the the closure. He also was very clear about to things............#1 That NOAA would come back with a "salmon shortage tact". That is proving itself true.

#2 And this is the scary one...............J pod is the pod that eats only salmon. He spends about 200 days a year on the water following them. He has never once gotten a poop sample that had anything but salmon from them. In his opinion the J pod was different from other Orca's. They don't mate outside their pod. They don't eat anything but salmon..........He believes NOAA will have them tested genetically............he also believes they will be determined to be their own species.

If that happens the King salmon thing will end. They will close the rivers to..............see the goal would then be simple. We have a one of a kind species that only fed on KING salmon. The king salmon are already on the endangered list................


Don't think they never will do this......................Take a look down south in CA and the gulf states...............MLPA's have made fishing limited to areas with little resource.


If you wanna have a voice ............ Join PSA(Puget Sound anglers) and get involved.