Come on Jojo, I am absoultly certain there is some common ground.

and plenty of blame to go around.

The state of the resourse is not any one user groups fault. Its every user fault.

The salmon take it from all sides.

And we all forget the one commercial net fact that goes unaccouted for. The Russian, Chinese, Koreans, Japanese that go uncontested into our waters and take salmon every year that are never counted but show up in every fish market in Asia in huge numbers.
Todd will agrue it is not a huge impact, but I go to these fish markets many times every year and is a jaw dropper how many fish EVERY day show up in these markets and are gone in hours to the highest bidder. Not one of these fish makes it to any kind of tally that America sees.
It is open season up there and no one cares about the foreign fleets anymore. Even the Russians are bitching now about the Chinese and Koreans in their waters!
I was just in China and they had a front page article about a 2 mile net they found that they said was from Japan but who really knows? It showed the government guys cutting it up with sissors for the media.
They are all guilty over there.

I went Sail Fishing down in Thailand last week and you should hear the Thailanders bitch about the Chinese commercial fleet that comes in at night right off their coast and takes all their Tuna, Sail fish and Marlin and they cannot stop them. On our way out you could see the huge commercial boats dissapear over the horizon right at day break. It goes on everywhere.
Commercial fishing is the scurge of the ocean in any shape or form, no regardefor the resource one bit.
Anyone that sticks up for or tries to justify commercial netting is doing the resouce and themselves a dis-service.

I'll make the same point I've made in the past...I hope the self-appointed CCA internet ambassadors do not reflect the actual positions of the CCA, or they will be the biggest social club and banquets, while affecting zero change on the state of our fish and fisheries...this thread is yet another example of the aggressive ignorance practiced by the new CCA experts.

And, yes, Jerry, I am specifically talking to you...if you don't like it, take some of your passion and enthusiasm and direct it into learning what the hell you are talking about, rather than wasting it by showing how little you actually know about the state of our fish and our fisheries.

Fish on...

Todd

But Todd-
I can agree with you on just about every point you make, but at some point I would like a person with your background to say just once that there is a huge affect on OUR fish by commercial interests outside of our control for now in the form of foreign fleets.
Sometimes you come across almost sounding like you are saying they have no impact or are proctecting the rights of the commercial fisherman.
It may be perception, but it is the way you force the habitat issue without saying we are in trouble until the commercials are stopped or at least monitored.
Our State has no data or information on what really is going on in the migration lanes of our Salmon other than BC and Alaska and those numbers are probably fabricated or adjusted to shut us up as well.

From Todd's own post:

"This is all I'll have to say on this thread, since it's been hashed out before in the other various Rah Rah CCA threads."



Once again the lawyer just can't shut up.

It must be a professional thing.

JoJo sounds to me like you just might be pro-commercial and anti sportsman. Again sounds like.

Todd hope to see you at the commission meeting on Saturday. No better yet stay home......

Big difference about guides selectively harvesting "hatchery" fish with rod and reel and other "commercial fisherman" and their non-selective practices don't ya think?

Jerry if you believe that the CCA can do a thing about the commercial harvest in AK well then good luck.

I pretty much think that they, need to concentrate on something a little closer to home. There are plenty of things in this state that need fixing.

They are coming across as totally against commercial fishing. Well guess what thats where the money is. Because those fish mean food, and not just food in Washington. Its really a shame that we are fighting for such a small pie. If the habitat was healthier the pie would be much larger.


Also hire a photographer that knows what a Gillnetter looks like (P 36) SSJ.

Jerry,

I am just not one to place blaime on a user group without any proven data. You make statements like ocean overharvest yet have no reliable data to back it up.

I sportfish in Alaska so I am very much pro sportsman. I don't think that there should be gillnets in the columbia but I have a problem with the people that are completely against all commercial fishing yet have no problems with the impacts sportfishing has. This whole thing has nothing to do with conservation it has everything to with who gets allocated the fish.

Good pickup.

I thought that was funny myself.

My pic is of a seiner, not a gillnet. I never stated it was a gillnet.



Jason, go look it up for yourself.

Dogfish,

I don't think they were referring to your picture.

His method of discussion is burdensome. He's tried to make many points, had some refuted, yet he presents not a single fact to support his stance. Time to yank his trolling license. (Pun)

Not a whole lot of reason happening in this thread, but I'll throw in my two cents. First off, not sure why someone would join a group then immediately question why they did it. Sounds like something my wife does with a pair of jeans. When men buy a pair of pants, they make sure they fit. Second, for those of you who have not witnessed the pink and chum salmon fishery in SE Alaska, JoJo is absolutely correct. The picture posted by Dogfish is a purse of humpies being hauled aboard a purse seiner. Having grown up in Sitka and having generations of family who have owned and ran purse seiners and trollers, as well as an uncle who is the undisputed highliner in Sitka, I have seen many bags of humpies hauled in. The humpie and chum seine fisheries in AK are typically done at terminal areas. The seiners are NOT catching many pinks or chum bound for BC or WA. Additionally, the chinook and coho bound for Anthony's are not typically seine caught. One interesting thing to ponder is that the charter fleet in communities like Sitka continue to get an increasingly larger share of the allocation pie than the commercials. Tourism and the money brought in by charters and lodges is the cash cow in Sitka. The charters send a fleet out of Sitka all day every day for 5-6 months straight chasing kings and coho, while the commercials fight for openings to target these same fish. I would guarantee there are people on this thread right now that have caught kings out of SE AK that were bound for our rivers.

Andy- sorry was refering to a picture in a mag.

[/quote]I pretty much think that they, need to concentrate on something a little closer to home. There are plenty of things in this state that need fixing.

They are coming across as totally against commercial fishing. Well guess what thats where the money is. Because those fish mean food, and not just food in Washington. Its really a shame that we are fighting for such a small pie. If the habitat was healthier the pie would be much larger.[/quote]

I can only speak for the CCA chapter that I belong to.

We are not against commercial fishing.....But we are against non selective fishing in waters where there are ESA listed fish.

I have yet to see a organized chapter state that they are against commercial fishing. Where are you and others getting the idea that the CCA is against commercial fishing?

I pretty much think that they, need to concentrate on something a little closer to home. There are plenty of things in this state that need fixing.

They are coming across as totally against commercial fishing. Well guess what thats where the money is. Because those fish mean food, and not just food in Washington. Its really a shame that we are fighting for such a small pie. If the habitat was healthier the pie would be much larger.[/quote]

I can only speak for the CCA chapter that I belong to.

We are not against commercial fishing.....But we are against non selective fishing in waters where there are ESA listed fish.

I have yet to see a organized chapter state that they are against commercial fishing. Where are you and others getting the idea that the CCA is against commercial fishing? [/quote]




When I read "Their days are numbered:A lone gillnetter makes its way toward the Astioria-Megler Bridge in the columbia river" Its a picture of a dragger.

Then pretty much all of the Loomis article in the ripple effect.

It has to do with selective fishing and non-selective fishing. The point is that the rules and allocations are made to protect wild fish not hatchery , yet the commercial fisheries that use nets can not release these native fish unharmed as a sport angler "can". I say "can" because not all practice proper release tech. The over harvest points have been made really clear at many of the CCa meetings that had Gary Loomis speaking . I am not well versed in the topic but did attend many of the early CCA meetings. What a jaw dropper Garys presentation was for me.

I wonder if the attention will ever be taken off the amount of fish harvested and be put towards the method used for the harvesting?

just my .02 flame on



Later...............

I bet if they hurry they will be able to realease all the unwanted and wild fish unharmed. Ya right!

Later........