#1012251 - 07/26/19 12:13 PM
Pound Nets on the Columbia.
|
Fry
Registered: 03/14/18
Posts: 37
|
How is this going the be good for sports fishing ? Your thoughts please. https://vimeo.com/310697782
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#1012259 - 07/26/19 12:52 PM
Re: Pound Nets on the Columbia.
[Re: Chinook 1]
|
bobrr
Unregistered
|
I don't see how all the commercial (and tribal) fishermen that currently fish for Columbia River fish are ALL going to be able to do this. Who gets to put traps where? How do the traps upstream keep from getting "low holed" by traps directly below them? How many traps will it take to effectively catch fish? Are they willing to put the same effort into killing off all other means of commercial fishing as they are in killing opportunities for recreational fishing(which has a MUCH lower mortality rate on released fish)? Is it effective enough to remove all hatchery fish (or at least most of them) without other ways? I think it's a good thing if at all feasible in terms of practical applications. As a reasonable person I tend to believe that it won't impact the efforts to curtail opportunities for recreational fisherfolk by WFC as we are the lowest hanging fruit they can reach . Bob R
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#1012265 - 07/26/19 03:04 PM
Re: Pound Nets on the Columbia.
[Re: Chinook 1]
|
River Nutrients
Registered: 04/25/00
Posts: 5077
Loc: East of Aberdeen, West of Mont...
|
1. Concept sound good …. I've watched how wild fish are taken from a gill net, this is a better way
2. Strict standards must be in place.... set number of "traps", gill netting reduced until its 0 on the NT side.
3. Low holding, can be less painful by a lottery type system....Let's say there are 5 active traps, 100 NT netters, …. that's 20 netters per trap, paint 20 balls 5 different colors, assign each active trap a color......put all the painted balls in a container.....have each NT netter draw from the container, that would be his trap.
The drawings would have to be done quite often.....weekly ???? That way during a run, chances of having the "hot trap", would be shared.
Problem???? Yea, some one could get lucky and draw the "hot trap" more but that's life.
Would be easy to monitor, video cams could be used.
Sure would be a "up to date", current, of the amount and species of fish in the river system.
Sure would be nice to see all steelhead, released and not have to do the "gill net" show.
_________________________
"Worse day sport fishing, still better than the best day working"
"I thought growing older, would take longer"
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#1012267 - 07/26/19 03:31 PM
Re: Pound Nets on the Columbia.
[Re: Chinook 1]
|
Returning Adult
Registered: 04/18/12
Posts: 315
Loc: Elma, WA
|
All good, except the fact that WFC is involved. Can we really trust their endgame? Do they want commercial and recreational harvest of hatchery fish, including increasing hatchery production back to historic numbers; or are they interested in using this as means to an end? To end all hatchery production.
This is a much better solution to gill nets. We all know that. I’m concerned that doing things different at the terminal areas isn’t enough. As long as troll fisheries are raping over mixed stocks, it won’t matter. For some reason, Japan and other major fish buyers find a terminal area caught fish not as desirable as a ocean caught fish.
(I get it, sushi from river fish isn’t as good, nor is it a good idea).
I don’t trust WFC at all. We all know their solution would be to end all harvest and recreational salmon fishing, close all hatcheries and let salmon just spawn and repeat.
I was a hatchery terminal area yesterday. Thousands of fish moving through, everyone catching. Good times to be had. Some people came to look at the fish with their kids, the mom said “this would be so much more beautiful if everyone wasn’t catching all these beautiful natural creatures!” I had to explain to her that the creek flowing into this body of water was chosen specifically because it didn’t have much i natural occurring run. We were catching pinks. In an area that never had a historical occurring run of pink salmon. After an hour...I had to give up...no logic would make sense to the couple. They couldn’t grasp that the hatchery was built purely for harvesting fish. It’s pretty much a 100% kill all hatchery fish facility. No chance of strays (God forbid a hatchery fish spawn outside of a hatchery).
The WFC wants ZERO hatchery fish. Period.
Good idea, but could someone else, who supports hatcheries get behind this? Please?
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#1012268 - 07/26/19 03:33 PM
Re: Pound Nets on the Columbia.
[Re: Chinook 1]
|
River Nutrients
Registered: 10/22/09
Posts: 3020
Loc: University Place and Whidbey I...
|
While they may be effective in selectively removing hatchery fish thereby undermining arguments from the anti-hatchery crowd and conversely allowing continued and possibly increased hatchery output there is a potential dark side for some recreational fishers.
That potential dark side? To the extent that they are used to remove "excess" hatchery fish which recreational fishers are going to be "corked" and face a significantly reduced opportunity in their favorite fishing areas?
_________________________
Remember to immediately record your catch or you may become the catch!
It's the person who has done nothing who is sure nothing can be done. (Ewing)
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#1012277 - 07/26/19 05:27 PM
Re: Pound Nets on the Columbia.
[Re: Chinook 1]
|
Fry
Registered: 03/14/18
Posts: 37
|
These pound are not good for sports fishing at all. If the only fish that are passed above these nets are wild fish. Your going the screw all the sportsmen that fish the tributaries above the pound net.Hell the gill netters only fished 34 hours last fall and took 5% of the run which is about 4000 fish. These pound nets fish 24/7 taking hatchery fall Chinook and Coho that sportsmen won't be able to harvest.These pound are the result of a poorly written Columbia river reform policy.
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#1012279 - 07/26/19 06:12 PM
Re: Pound Nets on the Columbia.
[Re: Chinook 1]
|
River Nutrients
Registered: 10/22/09
Posts: 3020
Loc: University Place and Whidbey I...
|
These pound are not good for sports fishing at all. If the only fish that are passed above these nets are wild fish. Your going the screw all the sportsmen that fish the tributaries above the pound net.Hell the gill netters only fished 34 hours last fall and took 5% of the run which is about 4000 fish. These pound nets fish 24/7 taking hatchery fall Chinook and Coho that sportsmen won't be able to harvest.These pound are the result of a poorly written Columbia river reform policy. Fact: They fish when and only as long as they are allowed to operate. As CM said, the devil will be in the details should this proceed.
_________________________
Remember to immediately record your catch or you may become the catch!
It's the person who has done nothing who is sure nothing can be done. (Ewing)
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#1012294 - 07/27/19 07:38 AM
Re: Pound Nets on the Columbia.
[Re: Chinook 1]
|
River Nutrients
Registered: 11/21/07
Posts: 7428
Loc: Olema,California,Planet Earth
|
Flea is hitting the fear the Tribes have always had with selective fishing by recs. The better one faction (commercial/rec/tributary) is able to cleanly harvest, the less opportunity is available for the folks who are less selective.
Say, just as a for instance, that every Chinook hatchery in WA returned fish to specific streams where there was no concern for the wild fish. A fishery in that stream is, then 100% clean and can can take every surplus fish. The ideal fishery being a trap where broodstock is retained and the other fish available for consumption. Hard, then, to argue for mixed stock fisheries where there is all sorts of incidental mortality unless those stocks can take it. This is, of course, a very extreme example unless you happen to be talking about Baker Sockeye.
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#1012321 - 07/28/19 09:52 AM
Re: Pound Nets on the Columbia.
[Re: Chinook 1]
|
Fry
Registered: 03/14/18
Posts: 37
|
Larry B: It's not the easy to put those net in and out of the water. I've scene them camp down there on the shore fishing 24/7.
Flea: As of now there are no tribal gill nets fishing below Bonneville.
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#1012324 - 07/28/19 01:05 PM
Re: Pound Nets on the Columbia.
[Re: Chinook 1]
|
River Nutrients
Registered: 10/22/09
Posts: 3020
Loc: University Place and Whidbey I...
|
Larry B: It's not the easy to put those net in and out of the water. I've scene them camp down there on the shore fishing 24/7.
Flea: As of now there are no tribal gill nets fishing below Bonneville. Are you purporting that there is no "easy" way to either close off the entrance to the trap or, alternately, open an escape door?
_________________________
Remember to immediately record your catch or you may become the catch!
It's the person who has done nothing who is sure nothing can be done. (Ewing)
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#1012327 - 07/28/19 02:58 PM
Re: Pound Nets on the Columbia.
[Re: Chinook 1]
|
River Nutrients
Registered: 04/25/00
Posts: 5077
Loc: East of Aberdeen, West of Mont...
|
Well here is my take.....If your livelihood is based on how good you get at operating "pound nets", then you'll get good at it. I've been to NOF meetings for the past 10 years....I can tell you the "hard core nt netters" are not into "hanging their nets up", IMO
_________________________
"Worse day sport fishing, still better than the best day working"
"I thought growing older, would take longer"
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#1012337 - 07/29/19 12:07 PM
Re: Pound Nets on the Columbia.
[Re: Chinook 1]
|
Three Time Spawner
Registered: 12/29/99
Posts: 1611
Loc: Vancouver, Washington
|
This is still an experiment.
They have demonstrated they can release wild fish, and that immediate harm is quite low. But they have not been able to show that the wild fish they handle/release will make it to the spawning grounds. The rate of pre-spawn mortality of released fish is still being estimated. But preliminary indications are that the pre-spawning mortality rate is alarmingly high. If so, that would suggest that handling adult fish this low in the river system results in much higher mortality than if they are handled higher upstream.
Presumably, if this gear type is allowed, the commercial folks will not get an increase in their allocation. They will still be able to catch their quota, and nothing more. I would expect the recreational angling allocation to remain the same too. But that's an open question.
The Tribes long-standing argument on wild/hatchery fish is further reinforced. This is, catching large numbers of hatchery fish before they get over Bonneville Dam reduces the Tribes catch since the proportion of wild fish will increase, and therefore the Tribes will exceed their ESA limits quicker (i.e., before they reach their 50% allocation). They have a good point. This will only make it worse. Ditto for the non-Tribal anglers on the Snake River, and on the Columbia upstream of McNary Dam. The number of hatchery fish that will be available for them to catch will go down.
This gear may be great if an NGO subsidizes the operation (in this instance, WFC). So if WFC funds the nets, they set it up, and provide staff to operate it, it’s really easy and economical. The only thing the commercial folks have to do is run their boat up to it, and shovel in the fish. But if the commercial folks have to do the heavy lifting of setting it up, operating it, separating the wild fish from hatchery fish, and dividing the catch between various fishers, it gets complicated and likely uneconomical.
And it’s not possible for each fisher to have their own pound net (as they would with a gill net). It’s likely that only one or two pound nets would be feasible on the Columbia. As such, I expect the commercial folks will strongly support this gear if an NGO is funding it and operating it. But once they have to fund/operate it themselves, their support may evaporate.
I'm not saying this gear can't be successful on the Columbia. I'm saying it's still an experiment that needs more work to see if it has a future.
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#1012338 - 07/29/19 01:09 PM
Re: Pound Nets on the Columbia.
[Re: Chinook 1]
|
Fry
Registered: 03/14/18
Posts: 37
|
Larry B: yes they probably could lift the trap and stop fishing at the end of the day.I'm just try to point out this is not good for sports fishing And it might not be good for the fish in that warm summer water of the Columbia.
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#1012548 - 08/05/19 02:07 PM
Re: Pound Nets on the Columbia.
[Re: Chinook 1]
|
Fry
Registered: 03/14/18
Posts: 37
|
Well groups like CCA and NSIA screaming for alternative gear on the Columbia. Have they got what they wanted at the expense of sportsmen. You bet they have with only wild fish being passed above these pound net. And how many of these pound nets will be installed in the Columbia. Just think if these pound nets were placed below tributaries like the Cowlitz ,Kalama and Lewis.Hell why not the Wynoochee and the Satsop. Sports fishing would be done as we know it. Will these pound nets create a pinch point for sea lions to destroy more of are fisheries. You bet they will sea lions are pretty smart animals.Remember pound nets were outlawed in the late 1930. So remember look at who you support before you spend your're hard earned dollars on out of state special groups.
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#1012552 - 08/05/19 03:35 PM
Re: Pound Nets on the Columbia.
[Re: Chinook 1]
|
River Nutrients
Registered: 10/22/09
Posts: 3020
Loc: University Place and Whidbey I...
|
Larry B: yes they probably could lift the trap and stop fishing at the end of the day.I'm just try to point out this is not good for sports fishing And it might not be good for the fish in that warm summer water of the Columbia. Okay, glad to read that we've established that fish traps do not automatically fish 24/7.
_________________________
Remember to immediately record your catch or you may become the catch!
It's the person who has done nothing who is sure nothing can be done. (Ewing)
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
1 registered (1 invisible),
345
Guests and
3
Spiders online. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
11498 Members
16 Forums
63778 Topics
645367 Posts
Max Online: 3001 @ 01/28/20 02:48 PM
|
|
|