Salmon fishing/Not likley

[Fl0und3rz]

I'll wait to see what the outcome is, but I'm not holding my breath for a positive one.  Everyone collectively agrees the WDFW is worthy of plenty of criticism and takes it fair share of jabs.  I agree they should and they have more than made their own beds.  It is stuff like this that also feeds into the narrative against the tribes.  I'm tired of the vale of secrecy and sovereignty they hide behind.  If they are going to accept partnerships with WDFW on NOA application and co-management of shared resources they need to show some transparency and good faith to the general public.  The explanation of the treaty's and Boldt decision is tiresome also.  Things adapt, change and require adjustment.  All most of us are asking of the tribes is to be a little more forthcoming and transparent if they also want us to not assume the worst and be frustrated.  If they don't care about the frustrations and public image it shows, by all means carry on.  But to continue to decry any of us who are frustrated with the secret meetings and lack of transparency on harvest numbers, is hypocritical and insulting.  If you want a conversation, HAVE ONE IN PUBLIC!!!!

Excellent and respectful comment.  Thank you.

[boneaddict]

 

[pianoman9701]

I'll wait to see what the outcome is, but I'm not holding my breath for a positive one.  Everyone collectively agrees the WDFW is worthy of plenty of criticism and takes it fair share of jabs.  I agree they should and they have more than made their own beds.  It is stuff like this that also feeds into the narrative against the tribes.  I'm tired of the vale of secrecy and sovereignty they hide behind.  If they are going to accept partnerships with WDFW on NOA application and co-management of shared resources they need to show some transparency and good faith to the general public.  The explanation of the treaty's and Boldt decision is tiresome also.  Things adapt, change and require adjustment.  All most of us are asking of the tribes is to be a little more forthcoming and transparent if they also want us to not assume the worst and be frustrated.  If they don't care about the frustrations and public image it shows, by all means carry on.  But to continue to decry any of us who are frustrated with the secret meetings and lack of transparency on harvest numbers, is hypocritical and insulting.  If you want a conversation, HAVE ONE IN PUBLIC!!!!

I can't disagree with this. Well and respectfully put.

[Stein]

Unfortunately this looks like we continue down the path of the double whammy - no or short seasons without making any changes that will recover the fish.  I think you either do what you need to recover the fish as quickly as possible or let what will happen happen.  If I was king of the world, I would say we are going to have some wild salmon but not in every river.  Here are the rivers we can and will protect and the rest will be hatchery based.  Instead, what we get is everyone suffering and the fish still teetering on the brink of the void.  Simply moving the percentage of sport kill a few percent isn't going to lead to recovery.

[Wetwoodshunter]

Unfortunately this looks like we continue down the path of the double whammy - no or short seasons without making any changes that will recover the fish.  I think you either do what you need to recover the fish as quickly as possible or let what will happen happen.  If I was king of the world, I would say we are going to have some wild salmon but not in every river.  Here are the rivers we can and will protect and the rest will be hatchery based.  Instead, what we get is everyone suffering and the fish still teetering on the brink of the void.  Simply moving the percentage of sport kill a few percent isn't going to lead to recovery.

I vote Stein for King! I agree with this, we have major issues that need to be addressed like the marine mammal protection act. Similar to the issue with wolves and deer/elk populations if you introduce/protect apex predators you will see a decline in fish stocks. Marine mammal population is currently higher than it has ever been, especially seals in Puget Sound, and this has more impact than treaty/non-treaty combined. There once was a day in the peak of habitat destruction when there was also a bounty on sealions and the salmon populations were booming. Wild stocks protection and sport/commercial fisheries no-longer go hand in hand. There are to many users of the resource, you me and my neighbor all have boats, to rely on wild stocks if we want opportunity we need to produce as many hatchery fish as possible and remove predators.

[hunthard]

Maybe someone can clear this up for me, if I fish M.A. 11 and catch a wild king I have to let it go, but if this same king goes up the Puyallup river into a gill net it's ok, Seems to me there is only one user group here following the rules.

[fishngamereaper]

I think theirs a broad assumption that truly wild fish still exist in some of these rivers. Most are just un clipped hatchery fish.

[hunthard]

Do you think the ESA feels the same way? Not intended to be sarcastic.

[fishngamereaper]

Do you think the ESA feels the same way? Not intended to be sarcastic.

Nope. Because they use the ideal for season setting, or in many cases no- season setting reasoning.

[MADMAX]

Need 5 years of no commercial native or nonnative inside the straits all the way inside to Oly
Some predator control on Seals and sea lions.

There are still rivers that are gorgeous free flowing that never see a fish run.
Nature would heal itself

[hunthard]

Sorry but as river that has no fish run can't heal itself.

[MADMAX]

gotcha thanks
try and get the point
quit netting them

[JimmyHoffa]

Sure they can.  A certain percentage of fish stray and go into rivers and start new runs.  Salmon/steelhead/rainbows were originally from Mexico and kept working their way up as new rivers came available when the ice receded.  If they didn't stray and mix genetically, then there would be tens of thousands of different kinds of salmon that all looked different and were of different sizes.  As it is now, they are all basically the same--a king from California is virtually identical to a king in Alaska and all the kings in between.  If there's no biomass in the river when they get to it, it is really unlikely that a run will ever start.

[WSU]

Lots of misunderstanding of fish, seasons, and biology going on here.  Too much to parse, but suffice to say, the number one thing we could do to curtail harvest is cut harvest in Alaska and Canada.  Far more harvest occurs north of our border than once the fish finally return.

As much as it goes against the mantra folks have been speaking for decades, netting fish in the river is the most effective way to control harvest.  When we catch 80% of the harvested fish in the open ocean, we have no idea if they are from a healthy run or one listed under the ESA.  They fish are all mixed and there is no way to control.  If you wait until they return, not only can you control which runs you harvest, but the fish are also as large as they are going to get because we aren't harvesting them as juveniles.

[hunthard]

Very good point WSU, there are way to many hands in the cookie jar.