Ban Downriggers?

Hi All,

I've been fishing in PS since 2011 and have really enjoyed it. I've also really benefited from reading this forum to learn more about the life cycle of salmon and the politics and management surrounding it. The depth of knowledge here is impressive.

Like the rest of you I'm concerned about where the fisheries in WA are headed. This last year had relatively short salmon seasons and I understand this year will likely be worse.

I was thinking back on when MA 9 was only open to shore fishing. Now I troll with downriggers almost all of the time, though when I first got my boat I mooched, with less but not zero success. I wonder, what about just banning downriggers? Would this allow an extended season? I've never felt it was the most noble form of fishing, getting in line with everyone else. It is productive, obviously and maybe that's part of the problem. Maybe at this point if you want the privilege of fishing for salmon you should have to really learn how to target them. I for one would have no problem with this. I am there to be on the water and learn about the fish and their habitat. I would be happy to catch less fish and when I do consider it a luxury if it meant preserving the fishery. If you want to fish then really learn how to do it. Thoughts?

Maybe we should ban hooks next, if you really want to hinder the ability to fish, maybe some of us who only "fish for fun " and don't eat fish should stay off the waters. After all, shouldn't we not "play with our food"? What other wild ideas are next? I can't wait to see! Bob R

I'm siding with Bob and thousands of other stakeholders on this one. All that reg would do is widen the gap between our legal gear and legal Tribal gill nets...

As an only occasional salt angler, I've developed a sense that you only need downriggers to catch kings more consistently. 8-16 oz. balls get it done in a lot of the same fisheries, especially for coho. Looks like there's not going to be a lot of kings to be caught (or even legal to target) in Puget Sound for a while.

I almost dislike fishing with downriggers. That said, it seems the best answer to how to catch migrating fish at the bottom of 250 feet of water, and it's better than not fishing, so when in Rome....

As someone who is usually confined to rivers (and likes that just fine), I am all about angling for fish. The pursuit sits high on the list of what I love about fishing.

It is a good discussion to have. What is the goal of a fishery? Dead fishing the boat? Limits? Time on the water?

Ban down riggers and you will reduce individual success. Make season longer. This may push out the angler who has a limited number of days to fish. But, it will extend the fishery for those who can participate. It would also (probably) benefit the good moocher at the expense of someone who just can't catch fish that way.

The value of a recreational fishery, from a management perspective, is participation/days on the water. A commercial fishery goal is to harvest their fish in the shortest amount of time as that is the economically best way to go.

So, I think this is a good discussion, realizing that whatever is done will hurt one group or theater. I am kinda like Flea, I would much rather fish freshwater walk and wade. Really don't care a lot for boats and fishing in salt has never been great fun so salt fishing for salmon could be completely closed and I wouldn't mind. Ecologically it's much better, too, but that's another argument. But, I recognize that without saltwater fishing there is a lot of people who would not be able to access salmon. a lot of folks who believe that a salmon has to be chrome silver to be edible, and so on.

A river angler in the know can catch salmon that are plenty chromey... And bigger than they would have been a month before in the salt. Of course, you knew that, but I felt inclined to add it, since you teed it up so nicely.

Before anyone says it, okay, I admit it. Salt fresh salmon (especially chinook) is as good as salmon gets from a food perspective. Really fresh river fish are very close to the same quality, but they can be inconsistent. For the record, I'd give up eating salmon today if I knew it meant I could still fish for them tomorrow, and that thinking dominates my "how it should be" scenarios.

No. No more concessions. Either shut it totally down for all user groups or screw right off. I'm not going to voluntarily handicap myself with my single line when the groups next to us use gill nets and also makes deals behind closed doors.

The day I stop using DR's will happen to be the exact same day that tribes pick up spears and dip nets. After all, it's my usual and accustomed way to catch fish and my heritage to do so. My people invented the DR and it's a part of my culture. We already lost the poker chip through cultural appropriation.

Turnabout is fair play no?

Good one, Nick! Usual and accustomed... Might even fly in court!

You’re already there, dude. No downriggers, that would only cut into your napping time.

I only beach fish Puget Sound, but I thought the shore only fishing requirement this past summer was total BS.
Letting downriggers get outlawed is just another step to more restrictions on non tribal anglers.
SF

No worries Jake - I have it covered. I tie a little bell to my DR so I can fish and sleep at the same time ya smartass. I always seem to find my fish and stay well rested.

To be clear, I'm not anti-tribe at all. I'm anti-unfairness. 50/50 is 50/50. It's the law. Don't like a law? Vote to change it. Gill nets kill everything. A single hook and line can be selective with proper landing and release skills. If anything, the tribes should be moving towards how we do it. Hook and line only. Tribes have already appropriated outboards and nylon, so they can show us what real stewards & sportsmen they all are by moving over to a less deadly means of responsible harvest.

I have real concerns, when we as a user group, starting thinking up ways to further hinder ourselves when the folks next to us are fishing non-selective walls of death. It's insanity to voluntarily give an inch IMO.

Interesting that this hot potato was thrown out by the OP on his first post. Agenda??

Now, back to something seemingly presented as fact....but isn't. A downrigger is not only a tool for fishing deep (as in, for blackmouth) but is also a very effective way of keeping terminal gear in the zone when fishing for mature, returning Chinook higher in the water column as well as coho and even chum.

I truly enjoy daybreak on a cloudy, damp morning in October at Possession slow trolling a cut plug herring with a five ounce lead for late coho. If you can't visualize that anticipation as you work along a rip then you've missed the whole salt water experience.

But when mid-day comes those fish commonly drop down to 100 feet or deeper where the downrigger allows use of a flasher and lure. Now, just try that with 16 ounces of lead. Yup, back to the Point Defiance meat line set up of several pounds of lead on a stubby broomstick of a rod and wire line - sure sounds like fun (not).

If one method were to be banned, it probably should be mooching. I don't endorse this, but in mooching salmon can tend to take the bait deeper into their mouth, whereas trolling with lures on downriggers, they don't. It would further minimize injuries to the released salmon but hard to quantify. If we banned bait for salmon in saltwater, a lot more baitfish would be allowed to provide natural food for the endangered species. I'm only chiming in with my two cents worth here, not suggesting it. The charter fleet would be harmed with a bait ban.

Even if WDFW actually tries to achieve 50:50 that is for the whole catch. If a downriver takes 5 days to get the share and mooching 10 or 20 what does it matter if the share is caught? A fish taken on a downriver, or by mooching, or by plunking, or with a swung fly it is still dead and counts in the catch accounting.

The share is not to an individual fishery, like sports get 50 and the nest get 50. I have seen DFO try to divide up sockeye among inside and outside trollers, two different purse seine groups, and three different sets of gillnettters. Not pretty, especially when the targets were to the fourth decimal point.

I remember that 20 or so years ago for a couple summers the fishing in MA 10 was limited to weights of no more than 2 ounces. As CM said those of us that adapted to the mooching game did quite well. An interesting side observation was that it seemed that we caught fewer shakers with a high percentage of the Chinook in the top 75 feet of the water column being migrating adults than when we were dragging the bottom.

Just an observation; the most constraining ESA listed Chinook stocks would not likely benefit significantly with a complete fishing closure. Those populations even with conservation hatchery programs are limited by habitat conditions (mostly freshwater). The one thing we have learned in the 20 years that Puget Sound Chinook has been ESA listed is that we as a society are not likely to restrict our activities (ability to make money) to benefit those fish. This of course that restrictive situation we currently find ourselves is likely to continue into the future. Having a discussion about how best use the available impacts in mixed stock recreational fishery seems appropriate.

One thing about limiting the effectiveness of those fishing mixed stock areas would benefit those anglers fishing many of the terminal areas and rivers where less constraining stocks are returning.

Curt

Just to stir the pot:

Keep downriggers but ban all electronic fish locating, finders, get back to the day when fishermen, were fishermen !!!!!

I do not use any downriggers in my fishing. I do use a Hummingbird 597 ci hd di but 99.9% of use is for water depth, boat speed, and water temperature, way over kill for what I use it for.

No electronics would sure change the charter boat fishery......hehehehe

Happy New Year, to all !!!!!!

Go Hawks!!!!!!!!

What's lacking here is a "buy back" proposal.

Bring your downrigger, working or not, cable or braid, manual or electric to any WDFW boat ramp and you will receive a Discover pass, a 2018 Women in Waders calendar, an autographed picture of Jay Inslee, and a hole-punched deck of used casino cards.

While supplies last!

My only agenda is to join the discussion about how to continue doing something I love that is obviously waning and has management issues (that at least we can all agree?). I was not suggesting making concessions regarding quotas re: recs vs coms vs tribes. Just wondering if there were some ideas recs could practically self impose to draw out the seasons a bit longer. Kind of like fly only or no live bait on rivers. I'm sure there are plenty of other ideas I hadn't thought of...

I don't agree with this downrigger idea. Sport fishing is a lifestyle and the word lifestyle is just another word for the word "habit". Downriggers make the fishing easier and more productive, thus enhancing the lifestyle.

When a particular lifestyle gradually turns into just a big hassle, guess what, it dies!

Sport salmon fishing in Putrid Sound with all of its rules, closures, constant threats, restricted seasons and all the rest has become just a big hassle. Lots of guys have just given up on it in treaty waters. That's the goal of the WDFW and the Tribes, they want us off the water. No downriggers would be just another nail in the coffin!

Why not just close the whole mess, and end it. Better than this drip, drip, drip water torture.

I presume the main reason anglers use downriggers and electronic depth/fish finders is because salmon have become relatively scarce, making it more difficult and time consuming to catch one. It's hard for me to realize that during the early years of Puget Sound salmon fishing, most recreational angling was done with skiffs - with oars, not outboard motors - and mooching gear. There were many dozens of boathouses that rented the skiffs, so the Sound was covered with hundreds, if not thousands of small salmon fishing boats. And they caught salmon. Because salmon were abundant.

I think you might be on to something there....

So in practially speaking this has been done before, if I understood correctly. Are you able to shed some light on what the thought process was at the time? And the reaction to it?

Among the goals of rec management is to maximize time on the water and spread the catch over the most folks. For example, way back, WDG used to very closely enforce the rule that EACH steelhead be punched (released or not) and the daily limit was 2. C&R 2 and you're done so that somebody else will have access to those fish.

Same with hunting. ML and archery are both considered less effective (at least in a kill/day) so they get more days.

This has to be balanced by what is the minimum kill to attract an angler. A salmon limit of 1 or a razor clam limit of 5 may theoretically allow a longer season but fewer would participate.

This will get complicated by the business aspect of, say, the Westport Charter fleet. They need days, rather guaranteed, to book folks in. In recent decades the number of charter boats seems too have declined while private craft have boomed. Different drivers of who fishes and what they need.

WDFW needs (boy does it get old to say this) to take a long and deep public look as to how rec hunting and fishing seasons are structured; what the concepts are, what the benefits and costs are.

Just reading through threads here it is obvious that one size does not come close to fitting all. Which means that that we all won't get everything we want all the time.

It’s insulting that some here are comparing how I fish as a sportsman, with how the 1% Royal elite tribes fish.
I have been using barbless hooks for 35 years where required or not. I’ve never targeted wild Steelhead, or used a downrigger.
How we manage what is left of our fisheries should be up to us and not what the tribes, or those who want us to fish like tribes, want.
So ban downriggers, have bait or weight restrictions. Anything that keeps us on the water setting an example for the rest of society. Lead by example or get out of the way.

Ban electronics!

Back when the fly shop was still in Carnation, i had an interesting conversation with the owner (Jack Cook?). Anyway, pleasant sorta hippy guy that showed me his old techniques from years of fishing all over. I liked and respected him a lot so listened to him a bit and what he told me totally threw me a curveball. He said he loves to fish the dry fly only these days and cuts the hook off of his flies. He said he only fishes for the rise and called it fishing pointless. I have to admit, I absolutely agreed with him. Truth be told I do get my kicks off of the first take whether a tug or a float going down so I understand that aspect but man I couldn't bring myself to casting for days to see one rise. Anyway, this conversation reminded me of the story so I thought I'd share.

I have a good friend who was the assistant director shortly after the state's management changed from DOE to the WDFW.
He could not agree more.

The agency needs more people with balls who can get deals done and less biologists.

State's management of what? What went from DOE to WDFW?

I'd like to agree with the balls part, though I don't believe anyone at WDFW has enough authority to change this without losing his/her job, regardless of testicular fortitude. WDFW's "decisions" get made on the Hill, by people we never see and by means even less transparent than NOF.

I doubt very seriously that Chuck Frigging Norris could turn the tide from any WDFW post today.

Your friend was a manager in a very different political climate. When he was calling the shots, there were still enough fish to support all State fisheries, to your point, largely because we weren't shy about planting fish. The Tribes also had nowhere near the lobbying power in the pre-casino era, so what the Tribes got at NOF was what the treaty provided (you know, as it should be).

Due to irresponsible, financially-driven decisions made at the Federal level (by the Department of frigging Commerce), mixed stock, open ocean fisheries have shrunk and depleted our native stocks to the point where whatever makes it back to severely compromised habitats is less in both number and fecundity. That paradigm assures more and more ESA impacts coming into play. As ESA impacts come into play, all of us (Tribes included) lose opportunity. The available opportunity is no longer enough to go around, so now someone has to lose. The treaty does a lot more to protect tribal rights in the current climate, so here we are.

I don't blame biologists. The science selected to support policy decisions is often the science that causes the least political pain at the end of the day, regardless of whether the staff biologists put it forward as "best available."

I would add that the science in WDFW is often directed by admin. That is, tell us what we want to hear. Unfortunately, this has been going on at some level since at least the late 70s.

Yes, one only needs to look at the myriad of advisory groups which have been established ostensibly to improve communications between the Department and constituents yet which haven't met in years let alone have their information to include meeting dates, agendas and meeting minutes published on WDFW's webpage.

Old adage:

It is more important to look good than be good.

An ounce of Image is worth a pound of Performance

Ban DR. You must be kidding.

WDFW dipsh%ts do aerial surveys to guess how many fish were caught. So regardless of numbers area 10 will close just before the peak of the run. Halibut fishing will close early even though no one caught anything.

The seasons, staff and other resources are allocated and budgeted before it begins.

Fire them all

I'm stealing this. It's probably gonna get me fired upon snarky deployment, but it's pure smartass gold.

Just plan carefully. More than a few wore "The beating will continue until morale improves" shirts. Morale never improved.

What if we had a "Good To Go" style cell phone app for fishing.

Pay for your license, but $5 for every Chinook you kept during the Puget Sound fishery. All funds collected directly go towards hatchery production. If you keep nothing you pay nothing extra. If you cheat you pay quadruple. If you fish every day and help drain the quota you pay your fair share via fees. I fished 4 days a week during the 2017 fishery and we caught just enough Chinook to feel good, but not enough to feel like heroes. It sounds crazy just typing this idea but batsh!t crazy ideas are all that get approved in this state so lets go for it!