$109 for a native summer run?

That's an ESA listed fish...USFWS would do a lot more than take $109 from him.

Fish on...

Todd

No doubt, historically only roughly 14% of Steelhead that spawned once return to spawn twice..these days I think if we get 3% to return that is great... Especially in Puget Sounds streams. But really they don't matter...Who needs more spawners taking up perfectly good spawning gravel. Net them bastards and anything else that gets in the way. It's all in the name of conservation right ??

If we are talking kelts I disagree. Repeat spawners have been shown to have increased fecundity rates compared to same-sized first time spawners. We should be protecting every one that we can.

Methinks Carcassman was being fascetious

Fish on...

Todd

Those northern tribes have something up there selve for the future to net more socks.

You'll see. I'll post something on it when I get the go ahead to.

or you can tell me at work tomorrow Jeremy ...

Me thinks you got it right! Cagey devil ole CM.

Maybe if ya keep it quite for awhile. But that's a big maybe. I don't want to piss off my big iron worker friend. I'll ask him tomorrow. It's a trust thing from him to me. Don't want to be put out of the circle.

My buddy wants spill the Beans on his own on another forum.

I'll see ya tomorrow.

Ill be there. Bring those spoons too. Gotta get em rigged

Somebody say spoons?

Fish on...

Todd

Haha.

Maybe

Just because today's steelhead run has some number of repeats in it is not an accurate measure of what it should have. A century of net and sport fisheries that cover the entire timing has certainly changed the numbers and proportions.

wooooooooh! 100 sockeye at Baker lake now!

The big news is almost 10,000 at Ballard locks!! That's way more then they usually see for this early in the run!

I'll have to run down to the locks and have a look. Only a few minutes from my house. Always a good time watching that run. I'm sure the local fur bags are already taking full advantage of them too.

WOW! Over 13,000 Sockeye at Ballard locks now!It's gonna be a huge run...or there just coming early?

160 at Baker lake.

Huge? Looking at the historic numbers this would be on a pace to meet, or slightly exceed, the goal.

This is what should be a "poor" return. Nice to see the rebound, though.

SG.
This seems so simple. Why can't an allocation based system be utilized with the traps? Just like in AK where historical catch for the bad [Bleeeeep!], big catchers established quotas. The highest catchers historically get the highest quota allocated per season, whether crab, halibut etc. On the Skagit and out in the the bay it may take a few seasons to establish historical catch. The bottom line is livelihood/money, right? Take them out of the trap, allocate, one for you, one for me, one for the river, etc. These are high quality market available fish at the trap! The notion of being out and battling nature to get the most individually, has to change if we are to manage these resources effectively. Tribal life has come as far as casinos, so I have trouble with the idea of " Historical lifestyle". Same should occurr @ Bonneville on the Columbia. Trap, separate, allocate, is the ultimate in management! This discussion never seems to come up because those who commercial fish want their cake and eat it too at the expense of finite resources. This is what needs to change! Don't want derail this thread, BUT. Interested in your knowledgeable comments on a state wide allocation based system for ALL commercial fishers where there are traps available to accurately count, separate, and allocate harvestable fish.

R&G,

You're preaching to the choir here. Most biologists I've ever known would prefer the use of selective fishing methods. But what is simple in concept is so far impossible in practice. Fisheries management occurs within our system of pluralism. In addition, where tribal treaty fishing rights are involved, the tribes can manage as they wish up to the point of risking extirpation of the resource. Rediculous as that seems to those who wish to preserve intact ecosystems, it is the political and management reality that we live in.

While you may have trouble with historical lifestyle, most tribes value that, along with that rugged individualism of outfishing their competitor. That and the fact that the burden of conservation falls first upon you, and last upon them. What's not to like about that from a treaty tribal point of view?

Sg