WOW...just noticed....QIN took 817 Chinook in thier 2A, 2A-1, & 2D gill net fishery....wouldn't it be nice if that part of the "co-management team" cared enough about "getting fish to gravel". Sure would be nice to have 1/2 of that total go to Myhr Brothers or to Satsop Springs. They might be hatchery raised but if we wait for "wild chinook" to get to a level that might enable a "up-river" sports fishery......the cowboys will want thier share, and we know how quickly that can get "out of hand".

ohhhhh for the days of the late 60's - 70's - 80's....

How about no Guide Boats until.....10/1??????...Easy to check....WDFW has list, boat numbers, license plate.....just a swing thur parking lot...if caught...pull thier Guide License.

Until the system is rid of non-selective gillnets, getting enough wild fish to the gravel will be a perennial problem.

Until then, our best bet is to manage the nets on a quota system, NOT a harvest rate model. Let them fish in real-time up to the predicted harvest/impact on paper, then STOP!

There's too many in-season variables to factor into a harvest "model"... far too much uncertainty in how many fish will actually be caught in real-time on the water. The harvestable numbers and allowable impacts are already calculated. The mechanism for quick reporting is already in place on the non-treaty side.... in fact it's a requirement to participate in the fishery. USE IT!

Set a tentative non-treaty gillnet season based on pre-planned fishing days, BUT prosecuting each day of fishing is predicated on a full accounting of the total wild harvest/impact at the end of the previous day of fishing. If the allowable harvest/impact has been consumed..... GAME OVER!

It ain't rocket science folks. Everyone that feels likewise should make it a point to e-mail Region 6 managers with those sentiments... or better yet show up to the Mar 19 meeting to make our collective voices heard!

Time to step up to the plate WDFW. You can't reasonably ask the QIN to clean up its gillnetting practices when we're doing the same thing on the non-treaty side.

Collective voice.

It would be great if we could come up with an agreement that we could live with and present it to WDFW before the 19th meeting. Francis I would expect you to take the lead on this...You have been the point man for the Chehalis fish now for a number of years and though I know very frustrating I certainly appreciate it.

Here is what I would like to see:

Commercial harvest managed on a quota system.

August 1 Opener from Aberdeen bridge upstream

2 Adult Coho 1 may be wild if the tier system allows for it. Retain 6 Jacks coho or chinook.

No Bait until October 15th

Non Buoyant Lure restriction

Designated LE on the river...I will donate my boat and time. (dreamer)

An understanding from WDFW that we as sportsman love to fish, but we are more concerned that the generations to follow wont have to fight so hard for the Chehalis Basin Salmon.

Fish checkers at every launch during the season, necessary if we are going to be managed on a quota system.

I'm sure there are more and boy do I hate having it be so complicated but I really don't see any other way.

I think a meaningless opener (August 1) is important.

Can we put a unified voice together?? I think we can lets add to and make changes...

JimB

Yes!!!!

Got this as a PM, but I thought it would be constructive to post my reply for everyone to see.



Each participating gillnetter MUST already sign up for the fishery before it actually starts, and one of the stipulations is that they must agree to "quick reporting" of their catch and harvest. Failure to sign up and report is an automatic forfeiture of participation.

It's simply a matter of summarizing the collective data from each participant at the end of each fishing day. What..... 20-25 boats fishing.... should take a whopping 10-15 minutes to enter the catch data on an Excel spreadsheet. Excel automatically figures out 45% chinook impact for every chinook encountered. Push the "TOTAL" function key at the bottom of each column for each stock (hatch vs wild for each species) one second for each column.... and VOILA!.... total gillnet exploitation in real time. (Actually you can ignore those last few seconds as the spreadsheet can already be designed to total those columns automatically).

It ain't rocket science. The mechanism and infrastructure is already in place to get an instantaneous answer. It's just a matter of making a commitment to do something with the data instead of having it rot in the books until the next NOF meeting in 2010!

WHO'S IN?

And if WDFW or the netters balk at the notion that the data could actually be gathered that fast, then let's lobby for no consecutive days of gillnetting. Let them use the off-day to finish calculating the previous day's exploitation.

Given the tools readily available to Region 6, there simply is NO excuse for overharvesting the gillnet allocation in the non-treaty share.

Sounds good to me.

But who would decide if this becomes the official parameters for the gillnetters? The fleet themselves or WDFW?

Who would officially make the call if this were to be put into practice?

If it's anyone other than the netters themselves, I suggest a flood of e-mails to personnel or legislators(or both) supporting this idea. It would be equally nice to get the tribes to buy in the same way.

I'm in.

Region 6 makes the call.

And for the record, I am not advocating this concept just to pick on commercials. The sport fleet should be held to the same standard as well... and hopefully someday it will happen. Bottom line is the participants will harvest to the full extent allowed by law. You can't blame an individual gillnetter any more than you can blame an individual sport fisher.... if it's legal to bonk, they're gonna whip out the wood shampoo! It's the gillnetter's job to fill that fishbox.... the fuller the better... to the extent allowed by law.

Sadly most "sport" fishermen seem to feel the same way.... it's their duty to limit out and fill that box.... to the extent allowed by law. The responsibility to prevent overexploiting the resource does not legally fall on the user.... it's not about "greedy" gillnetters or "greedy" sports. Let's get real here, the participants aren't realistically going to limit themselves.... it's up to a higher entity to do it for them. That accountability falls squarely on Region 6 and the harvest management strategy it puts on the table.

Given the opportunity, sports have had just as guilty a history of overharvesting the recreational allocation in the non-treaty share. Look no further back than 2006 for the chinook massacre ordained by Region 6 in MA 2-2.

The challenge that must be overcome is getting a handle on real-time recreational harvest/impact. Right now we don't know how many the sports take (took) until 18 months or more (in some instances years!) out from the date of actual harvest.

Region 6 has emphatically stated that creel data at the ramps was NEVER intended as a means of estimating in-season harvest. It begs the question, "Then what in the hay is the data even being collected for?"

Again I feel this is a complete waste to even do the creel checks if nothing ever comes of the data. We've already got the data.... let's put it to some useful purpose! If creel data is used in every other region of the state to arrive at an estimate of in-season exploitation, why don't the same mathematical laws and statistical principle apply in Grays Harbor?

I already know what the answer will be. "That takes money, staff, and time.... and given the budget crunch, there's a shortage of all three." So be it. But it's certainly something we should strive for as we move this process along. Hopefully there will still be fish around by the time we have it all figured out and have the money to pay for it.

I'm being taken to task on the accuracy of that opening assertion.

In all fairness, I'll take this opportunity to clarify the statement to prevent fracturing what has been a mutually beneficial dialogue with Region 6.

For the record, WDFW came into the discussion with grave concerns for chinook impacts in MA 2-2. While the Tier Plan specified a start date of Sept 16 to target coho, WDFW was uncomfortable with the potential chinook impact with that opening date AND the broad access to chinook encounters over the ENTIRE customary fishing zone. WDFW proposed an Oct 1 start date with a lower MA2-2 deadline at Stafford Creek (Prison Water Tower).

I countered that the Plan clearly states an opener no later than Sept 16 and that an Oct 1 opener was unacceptable, especially given the abundance of harvestable hatchery coho in that area in the last two weeks of September. An October 1 opener was simply too much forgone harvest opportunity for the recreational community to bear. Certain gillnetters countered that the only thing in the bay at that time was chinook and that's all the rec guys were there to catch. Good thing I came armed with previous years' fishing logs and a mess of supporting fish porn to corroborate the abundance of said coho.... and caught during what is some of the best weather Grays Harbor has to offer all year! Squandering that kind of opportunity would be criminal!

I also raised objections to the Stafford Creek line... reduced area = reduced harvest opportunity on abundant hatchery coho. There simply was no justification for it.

Phil Anderson made it VERY clear that if a Sept 16 opener was going to happen, sports would NOT get the entire bay if the simultaneous objective of chinook conservation was to be achieved. He was willing to give on timing, but sports would have to be willing to give on area. He struck the Goal Posts off the list of potential deadlines. I suggested he strike Stafford off the list in turn. The three big remaining landmarks were the Johns River mouth, the Farm House, and the Cell Tower near the O'Leahry Creek mouth.

After considerable negotiating with the entire group, it was gonna come down to either O'Leahry Creek or the Cell Tower a few hundred yards west. The competing points came down to which landmark would better facilitate compliance/enforcement. Points favoring the Cell Tower were its large physical presence (easily identifiable even from a long distance), and the blinking strobe at its apex making it more readily identifiable in poor viz conditions (rain, clouds, fog) particularly for those without sophisticated electronics. Points in favor of O'Leahry Creek were the fact that it is actually a charted geographic landmark and ??? (I sure as hell couldn't think of any others.... not sure WDFW could either)

I left the meeting for a surgical conference in Seattle before a final decision was made... but hey, y'all know the final outcome now.

So getting back to the original intent of this post.....

Reducing the fishing area in MA 2-2 was the brainchild of WDFW Arriving at the O'Leahry Creek line was the product of bipartisan compromise.

And it's in that bipartisan spirit that we should all engage this NOF process. Nobody gets everything on the wish list. If you want to get something you like, be prepared to give a little, too.

Truce?

"I already know what the answer will be. "That takes money, staff, and time.... and given the budget crunch, there's a shortage of all three." So be it. But it's certainly something we should strive for as we move this process along. Hopefully there will still be fish around by the time we have it all figured out and have the money to pay or it. "

Computer time, spread sheets, emailing, word processing.......I'd do whatever I can.........pretty good at lot's of those skills....


Just set up a simple spread sheet...........took about 6 minutes.........had 4 column headings..........Chinook, coho, chum, sturgeon......pretended 4 cowboy gill netters...and they were on "call in".....put the numbers in for each fisherman, used Auto Sum...had everything done in less than 10 minutes

What I'm trying to say...WDFW, has been blowing smoke.....it is possible to have "fast in-season" accounting...they have chosen not to do it........OR They don't have the personnel with the necessary computers skill to get it done. I think WDFW is afraid to have people outside the agency, really find out, how easy accountiability can be.........cause then they have to act and make some decisions.

All the information that is gathered, is public information, they just have chosen to be very selective with giving the information out. They would love to be able to say "budget crunch", man power shortage, etc. , sorry we could only, get a sample of the fish that were taken, thus never having a 100% take on what's really going on.

What we all seem to forget.........WDFW works for us........they are employees of the State, salaries paid for by the Tax payers........and they need to "have thier feet held to the fire" to do what is best for the vast majority.

I think its time, we light the match in Region 6.

Years ago WDF had a system that got 95% of the commercial catch reported within 3 days. they have to sell to a buyer, the fish tickets can be summarized every day. Canada used to have what were called "hails". The fishermen had to call in their catch. It can be done, it has been done.

True, it might cost some money. If the fish aren't worth the money, then simply say so. If the state does not wish to invest in good accounting then we eiother have no fishing or just fish them into extinction.

Drifter Wa,

Forget the restriction on guide boats. How about locals only ! Close all public launches like the state wants to close state parks. If you have private access than you can fish otherwise go some where else !

Local !

P.S Lighten up a little Drifter and I will tell you where a caught the 80 pounder !

Who's a "buyer" these days? Everybody and anybody can be a buyer... out of the back of a pickup with a few local customers... or all the way up to the largest brokers/wholesalers in the NW with world wide markets... and lots in between.

They have to have a state license to legally by from the Cowboys. Mandatory requirement can be set up. We have it for big game tags. Just a cost of doing business.

Happy to be of 'Puter Service AuntyM

We have to oppose that. The public doesnt know the difference between a wild fish and a hatchery fish. Im wondering why they want that. I wonder if they are losing market share to farmed fish.

OK....so this veered off the track.


Anymore ideas on the Chehalis?


JimB

I only speak for myself, but I am a fisherman, which means that I like the act of fishing. I would vote for whatever method gets us on the river earlier, and in the warmer weather so that I can take my young kids. If that means no-bait, that is fine, but the point is to enjoy September on the river and have a chance at the early-returning hatchery coho which we haven't got to catch for a while.

Speaking of reporting, we have to report our deer, ducks and everything else hunting on the internet. If WDFW is going to ask the commercials to report daily, can they ask us to report via internet or phone line daily (if you caught something)? I mean it would be a pain in the rear, but really would not take that long, plus it would be really interesting to see the sports results real time compared to the commercial results.

Dial a phone number, input your WILD id#, input river code, input 1 for jacks, input 2 for wild coho released, input 3 for hatchery coho retained, input 4 for adult chinook released, input 5 for adult chum released, then make inputs for the number of each, blah, blah, blah. It would confuse the hell out of some of the old timers, but it could work. The internet version would be much easier.



I know they will say there is no money for that kind of thing, but they could put out a contract for just one basin, and have it run by someone else in the pilot format.