Tribal netting

Discussion in 'Fly Fishing Forum' started by MasterAnglerTaylor, Jan 23, 2009.

  1. Inland,

    Fish are more on the radar screen of legislators because of ESA listings than is fishing. Fishing is recreation, like parks (State Parks), and the State Committee on Outdoor Recreation. These aren't unimportant, they're just relatively unimportant to legislators who have bigger issues on their plates. Consequently recreational fishing gets very limited legislative attention. It can be made important to the legislature only through aggressive lobbying.

    As for WDFW doing its job, an excellent case can be made that it's performing its legislative mandate to the letter. It allocates harvest among user groups, none of which are happy, suggesting that WDFW might be threading the needle of complex management pretty well. Since the Legislature has seen fit to severely limit WDFW's ability to protect fish habitat by law, then it's safe to say that habitat protection to maintain a robustly healthy fishery resource is truly not a high state priority, all the lip service to the contrary notwithstanding. So WDFW manages a steadily diminishing natural resource according to the allocation mandates they are given, and tries to prop it up with the nation's largest fish hatchery system.

    High seas drift net fisheries are the least of our worries. At their peak in the early to mid 1990s, the maximum estimated take of WA steelhead, and this was thought to be a conservative OVER estimate, was 3%. Since international enforcement has greatly reduced that activity, like I said, it's the least of our worries.

  2. If we all were to write our legislators we'd be making constructive steps in the right direction. If you don't like CCA's approach then write your own message. Don't blow all the steam on this forum where you're almost certainly preaching to the converted. Keep some in the tank for the legislators in Olympia and D.C.

  3. yes, johnnyrockfish, contacting those you help elect is an important part of what needs to be done. engaging in the political process is critical to change. i for one continue with this strategy.

    WDFW doing it's job???? that is a real hoot. kind of like the forest circus promoting excessive harvest as their source of revenue was tied to these timber sales. WDFW should be leading not shuffling along with their collective heads up'ther'asses. a totally worthless group of well trained 'experts' who can't find the mens toilet when they need!

    and james, i have posted numerous suggestions. i have yet to read one from you.

    now folks, carry on, 'cause your shuffling along in single sheep file is doing a big ZERO for the fishes. i have, fortunately, had the opportunity to fish when the runs were stong, and a dozen wild steelhead a day was easy. but here we are, and apparently too few of you care enough to propose solutions or get involved in the political process instead making excuses for the dimwits who should be leading the charge.
  4. I didn't realize that the tribes (and BEFORE you scream racist, I'm 1/2 Cherokee, 200% sportsman/environmentalist) had jet boats, Loran, ghost nets, etc., 9,000 or even 100 years ago. Beat your head some more . . . we ALL need to sacrifice for the common good, when necessary . . . to date, only SOME do. In the meantime, I'll keep waiting for those who profess to be "one with Mother Earth" to clean-up the mess they seem to leave behind on the Yak & the Columbia every year.
  5. Once again, we aren't saying that you aren't doing proposals, but rather not offering anything new or novel. Unless you come up with something that will do some good, you're pretty much dooming yourself to following the doomed path of others. Just cause your making a lot of noise doesn't mean you're making any real progress...
  6. suggestions or thoughts are good, but seems to me like this situation is only going to be addressed if meta-solutions are implemented. I don't even know if that's a real word by the way...but what I'm trying to say is:
    this thing is so big, such an octopus because of the numbers of players, stakeholders and unknowns that we really need to be looking at
    1)reforming the process used to make management decisions
    2)forcing some accountability towards the lawmakers and the Commission. no fish=poor results=loss of job
    3) properly integrating fisheries management into a total strategy. Salmon in particular are the hingepin that the whole ecosystem swings on, and not feeding the streams and forests is one of the biggest crimes the current policy leads to....but since the effects aren't immediately apparent, are ignored.
    Big mistake, that, but one among many.

    bottom line, we need to think bigger but have some common sense solutions to implement today...I've been racking my brain ever since this thread started.

    perhaps we should all have a brain trust meeting at Meydenbauer this weekend? Over a cold beverage?
  7. Yeah, you can call it a brain trust meeting if you like, but you won't be fooling many. (jk)
  8. any excuse for a cold one, baby:beer2:

  9. Thought this might be of interest... interesting studies on selective fisheries by the Upper Columbia Tribes (Colvilles) who have a large stake in seeing the in-river fisheries on the Lower Columbia take less of a toll on the ESA listed wild chinook stocks that they're working with.


    A ray of light for other stocks in other rivers?
  10. Thanks for the link. That is one of the few encouraging posts I have read.It just shows us that cooperation is possible and also selective harvest will make a difference.

    while this isn't exclusively related to tribal netting, I'll offer this link. It's a (yawn) exciting read. But there's some zingers in there.
    I listened to the audio transcripts of the conference call that occurred on 28 January. This is all about WDFW trying to achieve an interstate allocation agreement on Columbia River Chinook. Sounds tense.
    There are severe constraints on the fishery because both WA and OR are accountable to NOAA for protecting ESA listed Chinook. No fishing seasons can be set till the allocation is agreed upon.
    When you look at this policy, note how strongly conservationist it is in language.
    Their mandate is responsible conservation. They're trying to take a step toward following it.

    The results of this decision will be felt for many years to come, and will affect everyone who fishes the Columbia and its many tributaries. This is a significant portion of the PNW.
    I urge every fisherman to contact their representative and let them know if they are satisfied with the status of our anadromous fisheries, or not.
    Me?...i'm not satisfied.
  12. I have to wonder if the decision by some committee members to vote against his corrupt power and lopsided favortisum to netters has anything to do with Jacobson trying to get his committee back under his control by getting rid of the people that don't go along with him? It was a big step in the right direction when the commision voted 65/35 in favor of sports fisherpersons. Sportsman have to unite even more now because the politicians can feel the heat and we can't loose ground now. It's time to push harder, get more involved and support the groups that are actually making progress.We have to increase sportsman numbers in organized groups rapidly now and make ours voices really heard. We don't have to accept what is being dished out right now. Write your elected politicians now on both committee down sizing and switching F&W enforcement to WSHP.
  13. plus they elected that lady you like to the Chair position, which might help put a muzzle on Mr Net'nkill.
    The Commission is real worried about how the public would perceive them if they cave in to OR and disregard the Fish Working Group's recommendations. On 28 Jan they specifically discussed the public input they were getting from sportsmen at the last meetings on this issue and how they would look if they caved in to OR.
    This means that it makes a difference when you go and tell them what's on your mind. It has an effect on how they make policy decisions.
  14. All this dialogue is good and educating many of us on this forum. We must keep hounding all those in positions that affect these issues and get involved with groups that can do more than the individual. Yet somehow we must get the general public more interested and involved. If it's just fishermen chasing after their own special interest of having fish to catch, we wont get far. CONSERVATION is the issue that must come to the forefront for us and the public. We need more articles in newspapers, more stories on local TV news, more stories on national levels also. This thing has to get BIG to make BIG things happen quick enough to save these fish. I wish I knew how to do that.
  15. Allocation of the fisheries under the North of Falcon process, as far back as I know, never involved the sports fisherman or the public for that matter. Historically, it has always been between the co-managers of the resource, WDFW and the tribes only. This year, YOU have the opportunity for input. So if you really want to voice your opinion then go to the meetings. It is a bit late in the process this year, but you still have a chance.

Share This Page