Commission curtails smelt fishing to protect species in Puget Sound

[pianoman9701]

I don't understand this. The second to last paragraph says that harvest has been high the last few years, not declining. So why are they limiting?  It doesn't seem to make sense. There was another thread about a commercial fisherman who was having problems related to private landowners along the shore. Does anyone think this might be related?

WDFW NEWS RELEASE
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
600 Capitol Way North, Olympia, WA 98501-1091
http://wdfw.wa.gov/

June 16, 2014

Contact: Commission Office, (360) 902-2267

Commission curtails smelt fishing
to protect species in Puget Sound

OLYMPIA – The Washington Fish and Wildlife Commission has approved new regulations for recreational and commercial smelt fishing in Puget Sound in order to increase protection for the valuable species.

The commission, a citizen panel that sets policy for the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW), voted to approve the new rules at a meeting Friday in Olympia.

Miranda Wecker, commission chair, said the new regulations demonstrate the agency’s conservation objective to maintain a healthy population of forage fish, which are an important food source to a variety of species in Puget Sound.

“The new regulations preserve sport and commercial fishing opportunities while providing needed protection for smelt,” Wecker said.

The new policy:

    Adds a new 60,000-pound annual quota for the Puget Sound commercial smelt fishery.
    Reduces the commercial fishery by one day each week, allowing commercial fishing from 6 a.m. to 10 p.m. Monday through Thursday during seasonal openings in each area.
    Closes inactive commercial smelt fisheries, including dip bag and purse seine, which have not been in use for at least 10 years.
    Closes nighttime recreational dip net fishing. Recreational dip net fishing will be allowed from 6 a.m. to 10 p.m. Friday through Tuesday. Jig gear can continue to be used seven days per week, 24 hours per day.

Population abundance estimates are not available for smelt. However, Puget Sound-wide commercial catch and catch rates indicate relatively high harvest over the last several years. The commission also requested an annual review of the commercial and recreational smelt fisheries in Puget Sound.

In other business, the commission approved several land transactions and was briefed on a planned acquisition of 2,900 acres in Yakima County. The property connects summer and winter habitat for the Yakima elk herd.

[bbarnes]

It seemed to be a private property issue the sportsman the CCA and commercial fisherman and tribes were p ed off.

[WSU]

I think that the commission may be recognizing that we can just continue to harvest our fish at the rate we have been, especially when the benefit is so small and the potential risk so high.

[snowpack]

I think that the commission may be recognizing that we can just continue to harvest our fish at the rate we have been, especially when the benefit is so small and the potential risk so high.

I haven't seen where the smelt in question were at any real risk with the status quo on their harvest.  The herring populations in some of the areas near there have had noticeable declines.  Maybe they are hoping that surplus smelt will help fill in the forage fish voids left by those herring declines. 

[pianoman9701]

According to the report, harvest has been record the last few years. To me, that would indicate that the population is thriving. Since they have no other way to measure it, this seems like an odd step to take with a thriving population.

From the earlier article that was posted about the guy making a living off PS smelt, it sounds like pressure from private landowners along the shoreline may have had a play in their decision. We would hope that wildlife management decisions are based on scientific principles, but if that's true there shouldn't be a change made until the population seems to be waning. This is not the case according to their own report. And no, I'm not saying we should fish the crap out of a population until they decline. I'm saying that the present allowed levels of harvest seem to be appropriate.

[jay.sharkbait]

According to the report, harvest has been record the last few years. To me, that would indicate that the population is thriving. Since they have no other way to measure it, this seems like an odd step to take with a thriving population.

From the earlier article that was posted about the guy making a living off PS smelt, it sounds like pressure from private landowners along the shoreline may have had a play in their decision. We would hope that wildlife management decisions are based on scientific principles, but if that's true there shouldn't be a change made until the population seems to be waning. This is not the case according to their own report. And no, I'm not saying we should fish the crap out of a population until they decline. I'm saying that the present allowed levels of harvest seem to be appropriate.

There has been a pissing match between landowners and commercial smelt fisherman that goes back decades.

[pianoman9701]

You'd think for two weeks or so per year they could get along. It's ridiculous.

[jay.sharkbait]

You'd think for two weeks or so per year they could get along. It's ridiculous.

Most of it has to do with trespass. Some tidelands are privately owned and some aren't.

[lokidog]

According to the report, harvest has been record the last few years. To me, that would indicate that the population is thriving. Since they have no other way to measure it, this seems like an odd step to take with a thriving population.

From the earlier article that was posted about the guy making a living off PS smelt, it sounds like pressure from private landowners along the shoreline may have had a play in their decision. We would hope that wildlife management decisions are based on scientific principles, but if that's true there shouldn't be a change made until the population seems to be waning. This is not the case according to their own report. And no, I'm not saying we should fish the crap out of a population until they decline. I'm saying that the present allowed levels of harvest seem to be appropriate.

What state do you think you're in??   

[pianoman9701]

Silly me, right?

[Landowner]

I don't know squat about smelt over that way.

But let's face it, the Commission is as much a rubber stamping body as any----staff recommends, and Commission approves. 

[ICEMAN]

I watched the testimony on this.

Private land owners argued that in the past, (years ago)...the commercial guys would fish an area and score fish, then move on. Fish were abundant, even swarming all the beaches with spawners.

Now, private land owners argued that for the commercial guys to get their limits, they would have to move down the beaches even taking the spawners out of shallow water all the way up the beach. Their arguement that although commercials were getting their numbers, they were having to deplete the beaches to do it, leaving little behind. All landowners explained the masses of fish in the past that were super abundant on the shores, now days - hardly any. Aparently no good fish number data from the past to compare against. Their point was that on the surface, it appears that things are going swimmingly, but in reality the resource is far far below traditional biomass for the fishery, it is way below historic levels. Some of the commercial guys I saw testify did admit it took longer to harvest than in years past. I tended to agree with the private land owners.

Where are the majority of puget sound smelt sold? 

For the most part, I do not usually agree or side with the general population on issues like this, PLUS I do not want to throw commercial businesses under the buss, but I tend to agree with the commission on reducing or halting this fishery until a rebound is documented. Just like with my love of smelt fishing on the columbia tributaries, I want the numbers back. The few days to dip for smelt this year were fantastic, just like I remember from years past.

Personally, I feel that all commercial interests should come last. Sport fisheries first, then, later, if there is an over abundance of fish.....then and only then would I recommend commercial guys profit off of our state resources.

[singleshot12]

  + 1  This is one of WDFW's smartest moves