End commercial gillnetting on the Columbia River. Need your help

[Curly]

This is a rather complicated issue

Not really that complicated.  Gill netting is not good for endangered fish runs. 

There is a reason we have not moved the dial on recovery; it is the way we harvest - and continually over-harvest - our fish. Currently, the commercial fishing gear in use in the Columbia River and elsewhere (gillnets) is non-selective and kills large numbers of ESA-listed and wild salmon and steelhead. Gillnets are designed to "gill" fish snared in the nets, leading to suffocation and death before selection is possible. All marine life that gets caught in a gillnet dies, from salmon and steelhead to seals and seabirds. Ironically, the Pacific Northwest is one of the few areas in the country to still allow gillnets.

We have the ability to restore our runs -- and our fishing economy -- by changing our harvest practices.

Implementing the use of selective gear is an effective, achievable way to create a sustainable fishery for all stakeholders - both recreational and commercial - a solution that is supported by science. And, it opens the door to providing a greater return on the investment that taxpayers are contributing to salmon recovery.

You don't have to be a biologist or scientist to advocate for the conservation of this resource. It's an issue that impacts us all, and we can all be involved in this important effort. Thank you and I hope you take the time to get involved and join CCA!


Bryan Irwin
Executive Director, Pacific Northwest

http://www.ccapnw.org/pageview.aspx?id=31358

[WSU]

http://seattletimes.com/html/othersports/2016748747_outn13.html

State Fish and Wildlife is looking to make its cuts with a reduction of hatchery production.

Hatchery fish represent more than 75 percent of the fish caught in Washington.

Potential cuts include salmon production at the Stevens Creek Hatchery on the Humptulips River near Grays Harbor, eliminating all fall chinook production, and a 75 percent cut in coho (970,000 down to 240,000).

"We're looking at a volunteer cooperative that may be interested to help us with mass marking as well as a host of other different volunteer outreach activities," said Ron Warren, a state Fish and Wildlife fish program manager in Montesano.

"We've also continued talks with the Quinault Nation, and they've engaged us in trying to resolve this," Warren added. "None of us want to make these cuts, so we're doing everything we can to make those options actually happen."

http://wdfw.wa.gov/news/release.php?id=nov0609a

Key provisions of the new policy, available on the commission’s website at http://wdfw.wa.gov/commission, call on the department to:

    Increasingly focus state commercial and recreational fisheries on the harvest of abundant hatchery stocks to support sustainable fisheries and reduce the number of hatchery fish spawning in rivers.
    Develop and promote alternative fishing gear to maximize the catch of hatchery-origin fish with minimal mortality to native salmon and steelhead.

The policy adopted by the commission also directs WDFW to seek necessary funding "from all potential sources" to implement these hatchery-reform measures, expand selective fisheries and ensure state facilities comply with standards for fish passage, water-intake screening and pollution control.

http://wdfw.wa.gov/commission/policies/c3619.html

     Seek funding from all potential sources to implement hatchery reform and selective fisheries.
    Define "full implementation" of state-managed mark selective recreational and commercial fisheries and develop an implementation schedule.
    Work with tribal co-managers to establish network of Wild Salmonid Management Zones (WSMZ)1 across the state where wild stocks are largely protected from the effects of same species hatchery programs. The Department will have a goal of establishing at least one WSMZ for each species in each major population group (bio-geographical region, strata) in each ESU/DPS. Each stock selected for inclusion in the WSMZ must be sufficiently abundant and productive to be self-sustaining in the future. Fisheries can be conducted in WSMZ if wild stock management objectives are met as well as any necessary federal ESA determinations are received.

1 Wild Salmonid Management Zone is equal in meaning and application to the term of ‘Wild Stock Gene Bank’ as used and defined in the Statewide Steelhead Management Plan.

http://www.fws.gov/gorgefish/littlewhite/index.cfm

Reimbursable funds from other agencies accounted for a majority of the operational budget at the Little White Salmon/Willard National Fish Hatchery Complex with most of these funds (46.3% in fiscal year 2009) coming from NOAA - Fisheries Mitchell Act appropriation. These funds reimburse the operating agencies (in this case the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service) for fish production to mitigate for fish losses associated with the operation of hydroelectric dams on the Columbia River.

http://nwifc.org/2012/06/nwifc-magazine-tribes-keep-hatchery-programs-running/

Treaty tribes in western Washington are assuming additional fisheries enhancement responsibilities to preserve hatchery programs in danger of closing because of cuts to the state budget.

there spent 20 minutes looking for information, this isnt all the info I had at one time but much of it is similar.....if you are interested in fish and the rivers and hydro electic and how it relates to hatcheries you will read all the articles in full and check out the many links and maybe even go look for more data to decide for yourself. 

either this is about saving fish or its about opportunity and who isn't getting what they are entitled to, kinda simple as that in my mind.

I'm familiar with most of those issues.  The hatchery cuts on the Hump were not made because sport fisherman volunteered and fin-clipped hundreds of thousands of smolts this year.  Noticeably absent was any help from the commercials, who net the *censored* out of those fish in Grays Harbor.  Again, sportfishers pay the bill and do the work and 20 gillnetters in Aberdeen get to reap the rewards. 

The next bunch of articles discuss hatchery reforms that are in the process of being implemented by WDFW.  An independent group recommended a series of changes to lessen the impact of hatchery programs on wild fish.  This is a very hotly debated topic, as many feel disagree with reducing hatchery plants in an attempt to bolster wild runs.  A lot of this new thinking is based off, at least in part, the hood river study showing that interbreeding between hatchery steelhead and wild steelhead greatly reduced the genetic fitness of wild steelhead and results in far fewer returning fish (in fact, after a couple generations you get less returning fish than you had a spawners, meaning the population cannot replace itself). 

The Mitchell act is a federal law that the feds to fund hatcheries to mitigate for the damage the FCRPS causes to the Columbia's salmon runs.

The last article discusses efforts of the Puyallup tribe to restore spring chinook to the white river.  They do not harvest these fish, but I'm sure would love to (like everyone else) sometime in the future.  The Quileutes are doing something similar on the sol duc with summer chinook.  Again, I'm sure everyone would love to harvest those fish.

I don't really see what any of that has to do with your opposition to removing non-tribal gillnets from the Columbia?

[WSU]

Don't we have biologists to figure all this stuff out?

This is a rather complicated issue, I think I'll leave it up to those who are educated on the subject and those who have or are doing the research.

So what do the biologists say?

As you well know the biologists don't get to set public policy.  Their opinion doesn't hold much sway with how we choose to allocate our fish runs or whether the dams are harmful.  Everyone who has studied the issue knows the dams are harmful and that gillnets cost us money and kill unintended fish.

[bobcat]

OK, we'll I'm all for no nets in the Columbia, and no dams on the Snake.

I would assume most biologists would have the same opinion, but maybe not.

[Huntbear]

I'm for removal of the Snake River dams.  Bonneville and the Dalles..........not so much.

They all have to be removed to be beneficial to the salmon.. again, it seems you guys are not for the fish, but for a larger allotment for sport fishermen...  What is the matter? Do not want 600.00 electric bills?  Come on, it is for the Salmon...

And again, if you are not going after ALL the nets,  the commercial guys will still get my support.  At least they are working for a living, and creating a few jobs along the way.
Not saying, I get this share because I am born a certain race....  and I deserve it because my ancestors fished that river.... .


Gill nets are gill nets... does not matter if they belong to a Native or a Commercial Fisherman... they both kill indiscriminately, so there will be sturgeon and wild fish killed.. does not matter which net they are caught in.

Oh my.  Where to start.  First, as discussed at length above, your analysis of the netting issue is flat wrong.  I can tell you aren't going to get that tribal nets and non-tribal nets present different issues and will stop beating my head against the brick wall.

Second, your analysis of the dams issue is totally wrong.  The 4 lower snake river dams don't produce much power and your power bill won't change much, if at all, if they are breached.  We spend more tax payer dollars per year maintaining those dams than they produce in energy.  Their purpose is almost solely to facilitate barge traffic.  They provide no flood control, almost no irrigation, and very little power.  No scientist has said that all FCRPS (Federal Columbia River Power System) dams need to be removed for Snake River runs to receive a huge benefit, and almost unanimously agree that breaching those 4 dams would provide our greatest bang for our buck for salmon recovery.

Again,,,, netting is netting... does not matter who own the nets...  and breaching those 4 dams does absolutely nothing for the lower river fisheries...   Speaking of breaching dams... that one on the White Salmon really did a lot of good didn't it?  Totally destroyed the mouth of that river for ANY kind of fishing but netting...

and again, if we are not going after ALL the nets, you will never get my support.

[runamuk]

WSU here is the bottom line I no longer really care.....I dont fish the river in fact I avoid it now..... I get tired of being told what I have learned is wrong, get tired of feeling like my opinion is worthless, get tired of we need more business and fixes to the economy but not if it messes with your chosen sport, hobby etc...tired of natives have rights but we do not, tired of how a white mans life long multi generation form of subsistence is not as relevant as a tribal members subsistence basically I am wore out run down and all ready know even if I was right I am wrong and at the end of the day none of it matters one tiny bit its all just a bunch of crap humans argue about........what matters right now today is that I try and get ahead on my homework, and that just maybe I go try and fill my deer tag this evening so I dont feel like the person kind enough to buy me one wasted their money ..... other than that not a whole heck of a lot matters.....tribes will do what they do.....anti's what they do...politicians will keep dividing the public...the public will keep taking sides on issues and the earth will rotate on its axis ....and continue hurtling through space like it has for billions of years or maybe only 2012 years depending on what you believe 

[Button Nubbs]

How does breaching the 4 dams do nothing for the lower river fisheries huntbear? all those fish have to go up river right? Don't they Swim through the lower river.

[Curly]

OK, well I'm all for no nets in the Columbia, and no dams on the Snake.

I would assume most biologists would have the same opinion, but maybe not.

 

I'm pretty sure bio's would share that opinion.  How could they not?

Politics is what gets in the way of doing the right thing.

[JimmyHoffa]

and breaching those 4 dams does absolutely nothing for the lower river fisheries...   

I think they actually did some research on this and found that with the dams in place it created a low flow/slackwater condition through that area.  The young fish leaving Idaho bound for the sea would naturally face upstream and swim in an upstream manner, but the river current is dominant.  The current carried the fish to sea.  So the fish make it to the delta faster, use less energy and have a much higher survival rate.  With the dams in place, the fish have to turn around and swim all on their own downstream through the slackwater portions.  It takes them considerably longer to make the journey and many die.  Years ago a federal judge ordered some of the dams in the region to release large volumes of water to generate enough flow, and the return of that out migration of salmon was much higher than suspected.  They correlate the higher return to the higher/faster flow of the water.

[WDFW Hates ME!!!]

I really do care about the fish. Why do you think i am against non selective fisheries. If the netters could figure a way to net without killing non targeted species i would be all for it.
I understand people need to eat fish, even if they can't catch them for themselves.

But this stand by and do nothing attitude had done no good. There are rivers below bonneville the natives do not net. And there are runs below bonneville that are in trouble.

And the columbia dams will stay untill the american public get on board with nuclear power.

The 4 lower snake dams are not tax based. They are payed for by the Bonneville Power Admin. And i guarantee you the BPA would not be paying for the Operation and maintenance if they provided nothing. One of the issues the lower snake dams solve is shipping from the lewiston/clarkston area. And flood control.

Seems everybody has an opinion on this subject and most are emotion based. Do some fact finding and quit trying to scare others with emotion.

[WSU]

They actually don't provide flood control.  And our tax dollars do pay for the dams.  BPA is an agency of the federal government that we are paying for.  This isn't a dams thread, but there is all kinds of info out there including figures showing the cost of maintenance and benefits from the 4 lower dams.

[WDFW Hates ME!!!]

WSU i work for BPA, we are not an appropriated association. We are not tax funded. We make our own money and we pay for the operation and maintenance at the hydro projects in the northwest not tax based. They are rate payer funded. They do not go to congress and ask for money. like the other administrations.

And i do realize this is not about BPA, but some facts were not correct. I am sorry i was mistaken about flood control. But the snake dams provide power, and commerce to idaho.

[WSU]

I stand corrected.  I looked close at the study I was thinking of, and BPA does appear to fund its portion of maintenance costs (roughly 90% of the roughly $77 million per year for the snake river dams) through sales of electricity.  The rest (roughly 10%) is paid for by tax payers and is largely spent on the navigation system. 

And, the dams do provide power.  They don't provide much in the large scheme of things (the Columbia dams provide far more) and, as you indicate, the main use is barging grain.

[Sitka_Blacktail]

I'm familiar with most of those issues.  The hatchery cuts on the Hump were not made because sport fisherman volunteered and fin-clipped hundreds of thousands of smolts this year.  Noticeably absent was any help from the commercials, who net the *censored* out of those fish in Grays Harbor.  Again, sportfishers pay the bill and do the work and 20 gillnetters in Aberdeen get to reap the rewards. 

Then you must be familiar that the non native gillnetting on Grays Harbor is limited to about 1 to 3 days per year. Those 20 boats from Aberdeen you see fishing all the time are tribal fishermen and you aren't going to stop that. In fact the reason they are there is because sports fishermen and the State tried to stop tribal fishing for steelhead and salmon. I remember the fish wars well. Natives getting billy clubbed and arrested on the Nisqually and Puyallup. You might not like what's going on, but when you start something, you aren't going to always like what you get. The Boldt decision morphed into crabbing rights and hunting rights that everybody on this site complains about. So keep on pushing.

[WSU]

I'm familiar with most of those issues.  The hatchery cuts on the Hump were not made because sport fisherman volunteered and fin-clipped hundreds of thousands of smolts this year.  Noticeably absent was any help from the commercials, who net the *censored* out of those fish in Grays Harbor.  Again, sportfishers pay the bill and do the work and 20 gillnetters in Aberdeen get to reap the rewards. 

Then you must be familiar that the non native gillnetting on Grays Harbor is limited to about 1 to 3 days per year. Those 20 boats from Aberdeen you see fishing all the time are tribal fishermen and you aren't going to stop that. In fact the reason they are there is because sports fishermen and the State tried to stop tribal fishing for steelhead and salmon. I remember the fish wars well. Natives getting billy clubbed and arrested on the Nisqually and Puyallup. You might not like what's going on, but when you start something, you aren't going to always like what you get. The Boldt decision morphed into crabbing rights and hunting rights that everybody on this site complains about. So keep on pushing.

That is just plain false.  The non-native gillnetting in Grays Harbor is a hell of a lot worse than that.  I just looked back at this year's schedule, and the non-tribal gillnetters fished 20 days in Grays Harbor.  They also fished way past the chum quota they were supposed to have (by 421%).  Those are facts.  Try to spin it how you want, but reality doesn't support your position.