Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 66

Thread: Lack of salmon returns

  1. #1
    Member Lake creek fishermen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Skwentna, AK
    Posts
    854

    Default Lack of salmon returns

    Recent thread got closed so just trasporting topic to here. Time to let the flame of a convo start... Whats your theory on lack of salmon returns?
    -Its better to die on your feet, than to live on your knees.
    -Put some excitment between your legs, ride a polaris!
    -Local 907 Riders Union
    http://www.youtube.com/user/AKMackdaddy?feature=mhee

  2. #2

    Default

    Air Taxi's and Private Pilots have destroyed the fish stocks. They have taken All the Spawners from the holes in the upper reaches of the rivers.
    Looking to propose a Ban on Same Day Airborne Fishing, if we ever hope to regain our fishing. I have my peeps looking into it!!!
    "96% of all Internet Quotes are suspect and the remaining 4% are fiction."
    ~~Abraham Lincoln~~

  3. #3

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lake creek fishermen View Post
    Recent thread got closed so just trasporting topic to here. Time to let the flame of a convo start... Whats your theory on lack of salmon returns?
    After reading the closed thread, one would be led to believe; Those Hippies have caught them all. Then again it could be all the head-on collisions at the bridge crossings too.
    squab (probably of Scandinavian descent; skvabb, meaning "loose, fat flesh") is a young domestic pigeon or its meat

  4. #4

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lake creek fishermen View Post
    Recent thread got closed so just trasporting topic to here. Time to let the flame of a convo start... Whats your theory on lack of salmon returns?
    Did You notice??? This post of yours was number "666"....oooooh, Evil Talk here.

    Maybe the Devil did it...got the fish!
    "96% of all Internet Quotes are suspect and the remaining 4% are fiction."
    ~~Abraham Lincoln~~

  5. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    2,448

    Default

    Aliens from the Planet Ekton have been raiding the stocks. They fish with cloaked space craft and beam them up. they are very fond of salmon.

  6. #6
    Thewolfwatching
    Guest

    Default

    You're a foolish sort.. I guess you never met any of those head-on collision folks either.. Those bridges can be a real stink - let me tell you... Yeah, I lost one.. your a jack ass if I ever read one..
    Quote Originally Posted by squab View Post
    After reading the closed thread, one would be led to believe; Those Hippies have caught them all. Then again it could be all the head-on collisions at the bridge crossings too.

  7. #7
    Member sayak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Central peninsula, between the K-rivers
    Posts
    5,790

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Akres View Post
    Air Taxi's and Private Pilots have destroyed the fish stocks. They have taken All the Spawners from the holes in the upper reaches of the rivers.
    Looking to propose a Ban on Same Day Airborne Fishing, if we ever hope to regain our fishing. I have my peeps looking into it!!!
    Here's a radical thought (coming from a former commercial fisherman): put a moratorium on all commercial activity regarding Alaska salmon for the period of a year. I'm not just talking the com guys, I'm also talking about guides as well. That sounds harsh I know, but consider what would happen anyway if the stocks are destroyed for good. Probably a year wouldn't be enough though.

    Maybe we should all (commercially motivated or recreational) leave them alone for a while.

    Never thought I'd be talking about the demise of Alaska king salmon. This is heart breaking, but no sense in living in denial. The numbers just aren't there anymore.

  8. #8
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    5,534

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sayak View Post
    Here's a radical thought (coming from a former commercial fisherman): put a moratorium on all commercial activity regarding Alaska salmon for the period of a year. I'm not just talking the com guys, I'm also talking about guides as well. That sounds harsh I know, but consider what would happen anyway if the stocks are destroyed for good. Probably a year wouldn't be enough though.

    Maybe we should all (commercially motivated or recreational) leave them alone for a while.

    Never thought I'd be talking about the demise of Alaska king salmon. This is heart breaking, but no sense in living in denial. The numbers just aren't there anymore.
    Gee Sayak, I could not get 400 additional yards downstream of Slikok Creek to protect that stock and you think that the guide industry would go for a complete year off? The truth is that short term greed always trumps resource protections unless an adult comes into the room. Right now ADF&G, KRSA, KRPGA, and the Mat Su blue ribbon committee are more concerned about self interests and allocation than the resource. The record is pretty clear.

  9. #9

    Default

    I find it telling that you didn't include UCIDA and KPFA in your post. Your constant bashing of sport fishing groups and sport fish division displays your bias towards commercial fishing interest over other users. Ofcourse, this is just my opinion like many of what your posts are. I'm surprised that as a former biologist you didn't comment on the unnecessary consequences of not allowing fishing for five years.

  10. #10
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    2,883

    Default

    That's funny commfish. The CI commercial guys don't even fish the early King run...They've already taken their lumps and totally sacrificed on conservation there...It's completely closed to them. It is not UCID or KPFA who is rejecting in-river restrictions like a simple 400-yard sanctuary extension, so there is no reason why Nerka should include them. So I think we can see who is being "biased"...such hypocrisy.

    The writing has been on the wall so long now we can honestly say "I told you so". Sportfishing interests (mostly commercial sportfishing) has corked the river off for decades. Folks like yourself could never make their own sacrifices over economic gain and self interests. It is easier to drive wedges between users, scapegoat, and lay blame on others, all driving an emotional-managed fishery. And so it goes...in the mean time the fishery imploded. Poor runs of dinks. Never again will we see the most fabulous run of Kings in the world.

    I always thought the whole idea was to make things better for our future generations, not worse. So not sure exactly what "unnecessary consequences" you think would result in completely closing the fishery. I can't see it getting much worse...Maybe because I remember what the fishery once was 50 years ago...ironically a time when the commercial fishery was in full-swing, and sportfishing commercialization was absent. Go figure.

  11. #11

    Default

    "Folks like yourself......" You know nothing about me. This thread is not limited to the Kenai early run and neither was my comment.

  12. #12
    Member Mkay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    anchorage
    Posts
    748

    Default

    I am a little late to the topic, but, it seems the Gulkana has been closed early the last three years. I may not know the impact of guides but it is difficult to imagine guides harming the run to the extent of closing it. Commercial activity is non-existent on the Gulkana unless I am missing something. I remember being successful on the Gulkana in the late 80's and hooking and catching multiple Kings from 1999 to 2007. The folks running the Gulkana RV Park can't be making much money with such a short season and expensive "access" permits.
    Would think the Klutina would be a problem as well since the Kings originate in the Copper. Any ideas?
    My child was inmate of the month at Mat-Su pre-trial Correctional facility.

  13. #13
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    2,883

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by commfish View Post
    "Folks like yourself......" You know nothing about me.
    On the contrary, I know you as you represent yourself in your posts. And after your false accusations against Nerka, you are certainly no authority on who knows who.

    Quote Originally Posted by commfish View Post
    This thread is not limited to the Kenai early run and neither was my comment.
    Exactly. Apparantly you don't realize that Nerka's comment, which you bashed, included the Slikok Creek issue which is on the Kenai River. Also UCIDA and KPFA, which you mentioned, focus their primary efforts on Kenai area runs, particularly the Kenai River. Not to mention the Kenai River is a perfect example exposing your bias hypocritical comments for what they are, since it is the most exploited salmon sportfishery in the state. So in fact, my post was in exact context to your response to Nerka's post. You simply avoid my points with distracting banter.

  14. #14
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    5,534

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by commfish View Post
    I find it telling that you didn't include UCIDA and KPFA in your post. Your constant bashing of sport fishing groups and sport fish division displays your bias towards commercial fishing interest over other users. Ofcourse, this is just my opinion like many of what your posts are. I'm surprised that as a former biologist you didn't comment on the unnecessary consequences of not allowing fishing for five years.
    First, KPFA put in the proposal to extend the closure 400 yards and UCIDA did not object. So Grampyfishes is right about why I should not include them. Second, when a stock is so far down that only 16 spawners are in a tributary and ADF&G finally agrees that overcounting of early run chinook has been happening - there is a reasonable arguement to be made the stock has been overharvested - both in the tributaries and mainstem (no doubt in the mainstem in my opinion). At this point no harvest may make sense so sayak suggestion on a limited level may be reasonable. I would not suggest it for all streams but my main point was that self interests will never allow resource issues to trump harvest opportunity. The adult in the room I mentioned would be the Endangered Species Act, Clean Water Act, Federal ownership of the resource, .....

    As far as bashing the other groups I just stated the facts. They all objected to a larger closure around Slikok Creek. If stating the truth is bashing then so be it. As far as bias we all have bias but in my case my bais is for the resource. I never commercial fished and stopped salmon sport and PU fishing years ago. Also if you remember other posts about the 8 mile corridor I said from the start that it was a stupid idea for protecting Northern stocks. So say what you want but what is really bothering you is that the truth hurts.

  15. #15

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nerka View Post
    Right now ADF&G, KRSA, KRPGA, and the Mat Su blue ribbon committee are more concerned about self interests and allocation than the resource. The record is pretty clear.
    My comment was specific to this statement which did not appear to be specific to Slikok since the Mat Su group was included and the topic isn't Kenai centric. The same could be said of all user groups, PWS seiners, gill netters, dipnetters, subsistence, Bristol Bay guides, Area M, trawlers, etc. There are many factors affecting king salmon production throughout the state that could provide for a good discussion rather than going down the same worn-out road that got the other thread closed.

  16. #16
    Member sayak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Central peninsula, between the K-rivers
    Posts
    5,790

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nerka View Post
    ...The adult in the room I mentioned would be the Endangered Species Act, Clean Water Act, Federal ownership of the resource, .....
    Oh God, please no! There has to be some kind of rational, long term solution seen by the biologists, policy makers and rank and file citizens of Alaska that will keep control of these fisheries out of the hands of the feds.
    While these fisheries seem to be suffering from the ill effects of mismanagement, the feds do not have a stellar reputation for striking a compromise between the well being of various animals and reasonable development. They are reactionary and often seem to answer to extreme environmentalist interests or indigenous groups.

    No, Alaskans need to be persuaded to look at a future without king salmon and make the hard decision to give them a break. That will be a very difficult to carry through and will require great resolve and sacrifice by all parties until things turn around.

  17. #17
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    5,534

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by commfish View Post
    My comment was specific to this statement which did not appear to be specific to Slikok since the Mat Su group was included and the topic isn't Kenai centric. The same could be said of all user groups, PWS seiners, gill netters, dipnetters, subsistence, Bristol Bay guides, Area M, trawlers, etc. There are many factors affecting king salmon production throughout the state that could provide for a good discussion rather than going down the same worn-out road that got the other thread closed.
    I agree, history of marine commercial fisheries is full of examples of self interests and overharvest.

    Relative to the federal issues we may have no choice. Right now in the Susitna drainage there are two lakes that had sockeye salmon that no longer have any - pike infested. Red Shirt lake is one of them. With over 110 lakes impacted by pike and the State taking little action and not with a coordinated plan the federal laws will someday come into play - like it or not. The State can change that but I see no indication of the political will to do so.

  18. #18
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    fishhook, ak
    Posts
    1,124

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mkay View Post
    I am a little late to the topic, but, it seems the Gulkana has been closed early the last three years. I may not know the impact of guides but it is difficult to imagine guides harming the run to the extent of closing it. Commercial activity is non-existent on the Gulkana unless I am missing something. I remember being successful on the Gulkana in the late 80's and hooking and catching multiple Kings from 1999 to 2007. The folks running the Gulkana RV Park can't be making much money with such a short season and expensive "access" permits.
    Would think the Klutina would be a problem as well since the Kings originate in the Copper. Any ideas?


    Mkay, have been reading through the sportfish harvest reports and the guide logbook reports, here's numbers for year 2006 and 2009. I think you're greatly underestimating the guided harvest on these streams. The copper river princess there has near daily boats hitting the lower gulkana for kings, plus there are several guides operating out of the various rv parks/campgrounds. There are several short floats that can be done in a couple quick hours to sit on holes and catch kings with bait. Any guided nonresident can catch a king with bait in these streams if they're there. It ain't rocket science. But it definitely seems to be some commercial fishing and it is a rapidly growing percentage of the inriver harvest.





    KLUTINA:

    In 2006, there were 22 guides, 476 guided trips, (434 resident days, 1104 nonresident days), 842 kings kept. A 2006 kreel survey estimates that around 1250 kings were kept total in the klutina sportfishery, so 2/3 may have been guided trips.

    In 2009, there were 28 guides, and 358 guided trips, (330 resident days fished, and 755 nonresident days) of the guided trips, 374 kings were kept. I can't find a number for the total sport catch for 2009


    GULKANA:
    In 2006, there were 25 guides, 240 trips, (170 resident days, 647 nonresident days), 478 kings kept.

    In 2009, there were 12 guides operating, 104 trips, 67 resident days, 261 nonresident days, 147 kings kept


    Keep in mind 2009 was the true first year of the statewide meltdown and closures. 2006 was more typical of a good statewide year i think though haven't looked at the specifics.



    Anyhow, it seems to me to be a significant portion of the inriver harvest Guides can operate every day on most rivers in the state, and they're being paid for the fuel, vehicles, and boats needed for the trip, so they are more flexible in when and how they can "fish" (with their customers). And the guides hit the early runs of kings especially hard, much moreso than the independent (and usually resident) angler.

    With those stocks, it's also worth talking about the increased personal use and subsistence harvest in the copper mainstem. A lot more people are running wheels and dipping. I'm sure the data would support that claim if it exists.



    Anyone know what federal? documents would have the subsistence and personal use (state?) harvest info for the copper?

    Also, is there a document with statewide sportfish harvest estimates for more recently than 2004?

  19. #19
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    fishhook, ak
    Posts
    1,124

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sayak View Post
    No, Alaskans need to be persuaded to look at a future without king salmon and make the hard decision to give them a break. That will be a very difficult to carry through and will require great resolve and sacrifice by all parties until things turn around.

    Completely agree with your post, especially the last part, bu I do not think I would say "no King salmon" as the folks down in SE are rapidly raking them in at two per day for their fancy lodge clients, and last I checked guides were still filling their boats and wallets on the kenai still chasing at least the illusion of a king fishery that can support their activiites. etc. etc. The N pacific trawlers seem to be finding no shortage of the Kings as well, but, of course, they could care less if the kings crash. less bycatch.


    I would not expect a substantial tightening of the belts by any parties. especially those who are in it for quick money, and not the long-term health of the resource itself.

    One only needs to look at the kenai king sportfish regulations to see which takes precedence, the health of the chinook resource or money.

  20. #20

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by andweav View Post
    Also, is there a document with statewide sportfish harvest estimates for more recently than 2004?
    Harvest estimates through 2009 can be seen at: http://www.adfg.alaska.gov/sf/sportfishingsurvey/

Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •