Locals get dibs. Fact of Life. Quitcherbitchen.

OURS vs THEIRS

How 'bout this....

Why should we as coastal WA residents be happy about "outsiders" taking 3/4 of the harvest before "our" fish even get back to "local" waters.

Allocations and regs are so screwed up locally that the only way for WA locals to reliably catch "local" fish is to fly up to AK or BC to have a chance at 'em.

This is the monster that present day fish managers have created.... what a frickin' mess!

No argument there Doc. Thankfully the treaty was re-negotiated and more fish should make it south. The issue is (as you noted in another thread) there is no way that we are going to close all ocean fisheries. As a saltwater fisherman I would never be for that. And lets not forget we are just as guilty in harvesting oregon and california fish before they get back to them and columbia fisheries harvest both oregon and Idaho fish. It is a problem with no easy solution.

ha, i want some of those bumper stickers for my charter boat.

No matter what has been done in the past, no matter who already has IFQ, no matter who is old or new, the issue is allocation. Is the allocation between sectors equitable? Is the allocation fair to all user groups? Is the allocation in compliance with state and federal constitutions?


The split is approximately 90/10, with commercials holding the lion's share. The Boldt decision sets the precedent for a 50/50 split between commercial and sport/charter users.

Because sportfish are a public resource, sportfishermen should be entitled to their 50% of the resource. If, in any given year, the sporties don't take their 50%, then commercial fishermen should be allowed to catch the remaining share. IFQs are set up as a percentages of a total allowable catch. If the feds decide that 50/50 is equal, then the value of each IFQ will go down, just like stocks in a stock market. Government buy-backs would not be necessary.

This is a statewide issue, it's not an issue of whether or not individual towns like or dislike cruise ships and the people they bring. Allocation issues in Alaska set the precedent for allocation across the U.S. If you, as a sportsman, are happy with only being allowed 10% of a resource, be it halibut, clams, salmon, deer, what have you, then step aside and let the Alaska sport fishermen get rolled over. If not, write a letter.

Boldt split is 50/50 tribal and non-tribal, not commercial and sport. We split our 50 with the non-tribal commercials.

Sorry, I was worried that would sound wrong. What bushbear said... I meant a 50/50 split of the fish available after the tribes took their share.

Just sayin'...
Surely less than 10% of the citizens of the United States of America ever wet a line fishing for halibut, yet a full 10% of the harvest is allocated for those who do. Hmmm...