Commercial Gill Nets Target BASS in Lake WA

[MeepDog]

GWP said it. It's all about waste, because if they're netting all these warm water fish (and some bycatch I'm sure), they aren't doing anything wrong in my book until the resource gets wasted. Heck we need more commercial fisheries targeting non natives. The best thing we could do is develope an appetite for carp and shad, but that's not happening anytime soon.

[10Key]

Those of you that believe use of indiscriminate gill nets is somehow "good", need to open your eyes. Even if culling non natives increases salmon/steelhead #s, you will not see a single increase in opportunity, those fish aren't for you or I. I will add that folks like myself that enjoy targeting these awful non natives, are fishermen too.

[mcrawfordaf]

Removing one resource under the guise of protecting another resource until we end up with NO resources.  government.

I'm sure the amount of waste is incredible.

[10Key]

Removing one resource under the guise of protecting another resource until we end up with NO resources.  government.

I'm sure the amount of waste is incredible.

Nailed. It.

[metlhead]

I have come to appreciate the non native fishes for the recreational value they provide. I do find it unique that those in power get to pick and choose which predators get to remain in this state.

[Stein]

I have come to appreciate the non native fishes for the recreational value they provide. I do find it unique that those in power get to pick and choose which predators get to remain in this state.

Easy, it's the cute ones with lobbyists.

[AKBowman]

The bio I spoke with at the launch said the Shad were being sent off for toxins testing. I didn’t ask about the bi-catch i.e. bass. However the bio definitely did NOT seem to think bass were a bi-catch. They are certainly targeting the bass with strategically placing those bets along spring spawn migration areas and routes.

They can’t irradiate the bass by netting them alone but they sure as heck knock the numbers WAY down.

A lot more people would be OK with targeting non-native species if it resulted in more opportunities for native species. However as many have already mentioned it won’t. So many of the urbanites think nature should only be observed and not interacted with. It’s completely backwards really and that ship has sailed. Too many humans occupy too much space to let mother nature just run its course.

Nature needs management, the majority of nature contains the most valuable RENEWABLE resources on earth. This idea of “non-consumptive” management actually devalues the very species we are all trying to protect. If there is no interaction there is not value and if there is no value then people STOP CARING.

[WAcoueshunter]

The salmon fishery right outside the locks is a solid 10x (100x?) the size of the bass fishery inside the locks.  If killing off some of those Lake WA bass help us from having a Stilliguamish style bottleneck on our MA10 salmon fishery, then I'm all for it!  You guys talk in generalities about one opportunity versus another...this is a very specific situation where reducing one small fishery will help allow us to continue one giant fishery. 

[10Key]

The salmon fishery right outside the locks is a solid 10x (100x?) the size of the bass fishery inside the locks.  If killing off some of those Lake WA bass help us from having a Stilliguamish style bottleneck on our MA10 salmon fishery, then I'm all for it!  You guys talk in generalities about one opportunity versus another...this is a very specific situation where reducing one small fishery will help allow us to continue one giant fishery.

That is one way to think about it. Another would be that the potential of increased #s (on paper I might add), would just increase the # of salmonids allowed to be strangled in gillnets out in front of the locks, not an increase to sportsmen allocation.

[Stein]

Seems like a potential outcome is no salmon and no warmwater fish. 

[10Key]

Seems like a potential outcome is no salmon and no warmwater fish.

nah, that would never happen...

[WAcoueshunter]

Seems like a potential outcome is no salmon and no warmwater fish.

From the other thread:

I agree with Skillet, the problem runs will never recover between habitat and an overabundance of birds and furbags alone.  Throw in warm ocean and it's a dead end road.

Honestly, the best thing for everyone would be for a few of those runs to go to zero and focus on the ones we can maintain.

Exactly...which is why we should be killing bass in Lake WA, before it becomes the Stilly. 

[Angry Perch]

Seems like a potential outcome is no salmon and no warmwater fish.

From the other thread:

I agree with Skillet, the problem runs will never recover between habitat and an overabundance of birds and furbags alone.  Throw in warm ocean and it's a dead end road.

Honestly, the best thing for everyone would be for a few of those runs to go to zero and focus on the ones we can maintain.

Exactly...which is why we should be killing bass in Lake WA, before it becomes the Stilly. 

Is the Lake Wa sockeye run native?

[WAcoueshunter]

I don't think the sockeye are native.  But the kings and coho are.

[Bronson]

Sometimes I think people don't want any fishing opportunity left in WA.....

With the bass having been in there for decades if not more, I dont see any reason to eradicate them.  Its not like they just started eating salmon smolts recently and tanked the runs.  They are hardly an issue.  There are so many other food sources for them to eat, I dont think its going to make a dent.  Even if it did, we will never see that additional opportunity so why take out another quality fishery just for the sake of it.  And if youre going to take out the bass, make sure you kill all the cutthroat while youre at it because they are a problem for salmon smolts too.  Oh and the perch...

ah hell, lets just sterilize lake WA and Sammamish, its for the salmon right?!