One of my zipperlip bottom fishing spots in the San Juans is caked with a derelict net. I've managed to add about $30 worth of Pt. Wilson darts to the net in the last few days. I even managed to break a small chunck (probably 4' x 5') of the net off and haul it up but I know there is a LOT more down there.

Does anyone have any experience with reporting this stuff? What is the time frame for removal and how would I know if a group is actually removing it? Has anyone ever attempted to remove them on their own? I've got the spot marked on the GPS and I'm confident that a rope with a big hook could probably rip it right up (or shred it up a lot).

For now, I'm losing way too much gear there and most of the fish are missing.

Thanks,
Kaiser D.

or contact this guy who is a hired consultant who runs the derelict net removal program for wdfw:

Jeffrey A. June
Natural Resources Consultants, Inc.
4039 21st Ave West, Suite 404
Seattle, WA 98199-1252
Phone: 206-285-3480
Fax: 206-283-8263
Email: jjune@nrccorp.com
WWW: http://www.nrccorp.com

The timeframe for removal is a crapshoot. This program is so severly underfunded that in my case, I reported a net last August and they didnt go to try and remove it until just last month. The net had been moved by current or tide, & It was there anymore

Amazing that Commercial fisherman can lose those nets and not be accountable to the state. Fuel tanks have to be removed. Contaiminated dirrt has to be removed and processed. I think I read that CCA is going to fund some net removal. Probably so we have physical evidence to drag into the legislature. Is there room for 6000 angry fisherman in Olympia?

That is certainly one of the key targets in the official position statement recently issued by CCA-WA.

The Northwest Straights Foundation, a tax-exempt non-profit, has been very active during the past few years surveying for derelict gear, removing some, and projecting how many thousands more remain in Puget Sound and adjacent waters. As far as I know, no surveys have been conducted in the Columbia River.

Here is a quote from one of their many informative web site pages: “ Derelict fishing gear priority ranking project. The Foundation recently completed a project to identify and rank priority areas for derelict gear removal throughout Puget Sound and to estimate the cost of removing most of that gear from high priority areas. High priority areas were identified in North Puget Sound and the San Juan archipelago. In those high priority areas, an estimated 2,855 derelict fishing nets remain to be removed. Of the known fishing grounds in these areas, 11% have been surveyed in the San Juan Islands and 18% have been surveyed in north Puget Sound. Further surveys would serve to refine the estimate of remaining derelict nets. There are an estimated 1,038 derelict nets remaining in the lower priority areas of central and south Puget Sound and Hood Canal. Removal of the higher priority derelict nets would require an estimated 816 operation days (163 days per year over five years) and cost approximately $3.3 million. Removal of the lower priority derelict nets would require an estimated 297 additional operation days and cost approximately $1.2 million. Support for this project was provided by the Russell Family Foundation, the Puget Sound Action Team, and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Coastal Program.”

When you have time, plow around through their web site; it’s full of interesting information.

And, THANKS, DOC, for the CCA plug. You are right on!

How sickening that there are 3000 nets just in the "high priority" areas and that we are talking about 7+ years of work. And that is just what is known. Talk about tragedy of the commons!

I'm not sure if I'm willing to wait one to 5 years to get this spot back and I'm guessing I could get a significant amount of it out with a slack tide, rope, and some sort of giant meat hooks.

Does anyone know how the CCA fits into the other existing net removal programs that have been established? Are they working off the same list? Do they have their own boats and removal equipment?

Thanks for the info so far,
Kaiser D.

dr t-Hokee, Dale is his first name, was very involved in ghost nets a couple of yrs ago.
Maybe had a state contract for removal?

I think CCA's idea is to make the state accountable for removal as we pay for that with part of our license fee's...... Fishy

Not about nets, but maybe how to save some of those Darts.

A skipper I know in Ilwaco removes the hook from the split ring AND ties the hook onto the split ring with mono that will break and leave the hook but not the lure when hung up.

I'd guess you would base the mono size on what would hold what you're catching?

Nice idea, Sebates. I'll certainly look into it!

Why should the buck stop with the taxpayer? Why should the non-fish-consuming taxpayer be so unjustly burdened?

If the state is going to head up this project it ought to be funded directly by the user group that put the stinkin' nets there in the first place!

Every other major resource-extracting industry is held accountable for its environmental footprint. Why isn't the commercial fishing industry that profits from a publicly held resource held to the same standard?

There ought to be a big fat-a$$ annual tax or surcharge levied on every gillnet permit to generously fund a reserve account ear-marked specifically for the retrieval of derelict gear. Charge the active permits twice or three times as much as the the non-active ones, but ALL should be made to pay. Failure to pay would result in forfeiture of the permit... that would help to weed out all the inactive permits. No gear can be deployed for the season until the tax is paid in full.

Now don't accuse me of bringing financial ruin to an active permit holder. The netters could defray these expenses by merely passing them on to the consumer. That way the market price of the fish would reflect the true costs associated with their harvest. Economic forces would eventually bring the industry to a viable equilibrium that would allow a sustainable, efficient and responsible commercial fishery instead of the destructive overcapitalized monster we are cursed with today.

Big John... feel free to bring this idea/concept to the next CCA board of directors meeting.

Would our fleet of old ferries that are no longer suitable for passenger servicebe able to yank a few nets before being scrapped? Hmmmmm.

Steel Electric Class Vessels
We are in the process of disposing of the four decommissioned Steel Electric class vessels. This
week we submitted an update to the Legislature. The next step in this process is to advertise the
vessels for sale to state agencies, local entities and non-profit organizations beginning on
Monday, June 2. After that, if they don’t sell, we will post them on EBay.

I'm not going to quote your whole post, FnP but AMEN!!! That is the "tragedy of the commons" statement I mentioned above. We all, collectively, are paying for something that someone else benefits from. While we can't know who specifically is responsible for the derelict gear (um... would tags or some sort of required ID be that hard to install)?, we can narrow it down to a very narrow user group. That group should be responsible for the cost of removal.

Toy Boat, I think you have a good point but I look at this in another way. Being that the netters aren't going to pay for it, and the state and/or groups won't get to it for a long time, why shouldn't or can't a group of regular citizens deal with this? If it simply involves rakes (and not divers), couldn't it be done with a boat or two? This is probably right in line with removing derelict crab or shrimp pots though where helping out would end up with a ticket from some regulatory agency. Arg!!!

kaiser D. I found out some things today that should clear up the questions. I called Jeff and he explained the program to me.

When this all came about, they had to establish protocols and get people and jurisdiction as well as solve to insurance issues. They initial got some money from the Feds, I think NOAA about five years ago. It took a lot of cash on the start up. The contracted with salvage divers to bring up the nets and they are very expensive. They got in touch with some commercial fishing divers (sea cucumbers etc and found them a lot more reasonable on price. Plus, for the divers, its a second source of income.

The divers wear hard helmets and get air pumped in. The nets changed in the seventies and so they can tell how old the net from the size of the opening. Not all of the nets come up in one piece. The recent article in the cca Tide magazine, said the nets get recycled. That was a misprint. Nets get buried. The commercial and personal crab traps can be returned, but most of them are trash. The nets are usually a mess and the wildlife and fish are all recorded and filmed and reports yadayada. The nets are rolled up in heavy plastic bags and then one of the divers (two boats) has a dump truck to take to the landfill.

The program has gotten some fame and california and other states are now putting programs together on this model. They are however, competing for the same federal money, which is not nearly enough. It costs about 3000 dollars per day for net removal and dumping with all the extra expenses.
Bottom line the project is WAY underfunded. The state passed a law a few years back to hold commercial fisherman harmless if they lost a net. Keep in mind, they already had one case where the gillnetters boat broke down and he ended up on the beach and had to cut the net. He called it in right away and within a few days, these guys went out and picked up the net. They found 300 salmon in the net. Granted it was a working net. At least the Gillnetter did the right thing. Many of them are involved and want the nets out.

The Feds are expecting the state gov to pony up some funding for these projects, which will have to be paid for somehow. Considering the pro fishing nature of the legislature, I expect there is going to be enough egg to go around and create some backlash, in regards to future funding of the program. GN should have to pay in for this. Not doubt we all will.

The straits commission is the dept of ecology side and the straits foundation is the nonprofit, that can accept donations from all of us. It didnt sound like, anyone was pulling nets on a regular basis. The more money the foundation has, the sooner this will get done.

He also mentioned that Mike from DIRTY JOBS has been in touch and the guy is a diver, so they may come out and do a segment for the show. VERY COOL.

If six hundred people donated five bucks each, we could put them to work for one day.

Im in.

Doc: Absolutely! I’ve copied your post and will bring it up at the next state board meeting. Will keep ‘ya in the information loop, and thanks again.

In addition to all that Lead Bouncer just said . . . . . . . . . .

Kaiser D: Unfortunately, “snag-n-drag” is not an accepted method of removing derelict fishing gear. In November, 2002, the legislature required WDFW to partner with nine agencies, including the U.S. Navy and OSHA, to developed a 36-page document entitled “DERELICT FISHING GEAR REMOVAL GUIDELINES.” It is downloadable as an Adobe PDF.

I’m no expert on those guidelines, but typically a dive company that uses surface-supplied air is hired. Diver entanglement is a large risk, and I understand that a stand-by diver is also required on the boat. To minimize further environmental damage, nets are painstakingly removed, little by little, from where they are attached, and then “air-bagged” to the surface.

Derelict CRAB POTS are another killer that sport fishermen can at least do a little about. If you lose a pot, PLEASE call the WDFW hotline, 877-933-9847, and report it. The reporting system is “no-fault;” it’s a lot better to know about lost gear even with no fault being attached than to not hear at all about the lost gear.

In 2004, a sonar side-scan survey was conducted in Port Gardner Bay, from Mukilteo to Everett to Tulalip Bay, plus Gedney Island. The survey identified about 850 targets as potential crab pots. Some of them have been removed, and they included both commercial and recreational pots. Some were still fishing, others were not.

The high cost of commercial diving tends to result in crab pot recovery efforts focused in small areas that have a lot of targets.

In addition to gillnets and crab pots, other types of derelict gear can kill fish, mammals, and birds plus damage the bottom environment in general: purse seine nets, mid-water and bottom trawl gear, longlines, etc.

So far, I’ve yet to hear of any fish wheels, pound nets, or beach seines that have been lost and are killing. Come to think of it, those three fish catchers can all be fished on a COMMERCIAL SELECTIVE HARVEST basis! Wow, wouldn’t that be something . . . .

FnP, I agree totally. My understanding is that we are paying for this to happen it just has not been funded by the state and we should not "Tax" ourselves again. I certainly think the resource users should foot the bill as they reap the benefits of it