Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 21

Thread: Would "banning all bait" on EVERY river in Alaska...

  1. #1
    Member ysr_racer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Happily in So Cal.
    Posts
    583

    Default Would "banning all bait" on EVERY river in Alaska...

    Have any significant effect on run numbers?
    brad g.
    So Cal, USA
    Visit my Sporting Clays website
    http://www.ysr-racer.com

  2. #2

    Default

    It would certainly affect the number of folks running to their favorite politician.

    I figure a move like that would net newspapers and the TV and radio stations more advertising money than the average senatorial election. Shoot, there'd be enough money in lawsuits to buy BMWs for half the lawyers in the state.

  3. #3
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Palmer
    Posts
    190

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ysr_racer View Post
    Have any significant effect on run numbers?
    I'd love to see bait banned not only in the rivers but the lakes as well.

  4. #4
    Member c6 batmobile's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Interior
    Posts
    2,101

    Default

    It would certainly cut down on the catch rate. Most fish simply can not resist the scent. There is a reason its so popular. If you go to artificial lure and single hook the catch rate would probably be easily reduced 50%.
    Makin fur fins and feathers fly.

  5. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Palmer, ak
    Posts
    473

    Default

    In river fisherman have such a minimal impact on the overall situation I doubt it would make any significant difference in the long run. There are much more pressing problems that need to be understood and dealt with.

  6. #6
    Member c6 batmobile's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Interior
    Posts
    2,101

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AaronP View Post
    In river fisherman have such a minimal impact on the overall situation I doubt it would make any significant difference in the long run. There are much more pressing problems that need to be understood and dealt with.
    The comm guys certainly take more than enough but in river fisherman take their fair share as well. Im not sticking up for comm fisheries because it is sort of disgusting to me knowing that a lot of that fish doesnt stay here and a decent lump of it will spoil in stores before its bought, but you seriously cannot say that when there are over 100 boats in the mouth of the Deshka or Kenai that In river fisherman do not have a large impact.
    Makin fur fins and feathers fly.

  7. #7
    Member 4merguide's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Kenai Peninsula, Alaska
    Posts
    9,749

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ysr_racer View Post
    Have any significant effect on run numbers?
    I really doubt it......for a number of reasons....
    Sheep hunting...... the pain goes away, but the stupidity remains...!!!

  8. #8
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    215

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AaronP View Post
    In river fisherman have such a minimal impact on the overall situation I doubt it would make any significant difference in the long run. There are much more pressing problems that need to be understood and dealt with.
    Harvest of king salmon in the Northern Cook Inlet area by user group can be found on Table 2, page 49:
    http://www.adfg.alaska.gov/FedAidPDFs/FMR10-50.pdf

    Harvest of Kenai River late-run king salmon by user group can be found on Table 242-1, page 252:
    http://www.adfg.alaska.gov/static/re...2A.2010.04.pdf

  9. #9
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Palmer
    Posts
    190

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by aktally View Post
    Harvest of king salmon in the Northern Cook Inlet area by user group can be found on Table 2, page 49:
    http://www.adfg.alaska.gov/FedAidPDFs/FMR10-50.pdf

    Harvest of Kenai River late-run king salmon by user group can be found on Table 242-1, page 252:
    http://www.adfg.alaska.gov/static/re...2A.2010.04.pdf
    From the information found on Table 2, page 49 it definitely looks like recreational fishermen are taking alot more than the commercial fishermen. What I would like to know though is where the commercial measurements are being taken from. Alot of these Northern Cook Inlet kings are possibly being intercepted outside of the commercial reporting area.

  10. #10
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    215

    Default

    The boundary for the Northern District commercial king salmon fishery is found on page 55, Figure 2.
    http://www.adfg.alaska.gov/FedAidpdfs/FMR12-25


    Most of the king harvest in the Central District fishery likely takes place after northern bound stocks have transited the area. The havest of kings in the Central District are found on the other table provided (Table 242-1).

    The amount of Cook Inlet king salmon that are harvested in commercial fisheries outside of Cook Inlet (i.e. trawl fisheries, international fisheries outside the 200 mile limit, etc) is unknown.

  11. #11
    Member danattherock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    5,608

    Default

    Would "banning all bait" on EVERY river in Alaska...

    Have any significant effect on run numbers?




    I suspect banning fisherman from other countries would have a bigger impact.


    Especially those from California and Europe

  12. #12

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by danattherock View Post
    Would "banning all bait" on EVERY river in Alaska...

    Have any significant effect on run numbers?




    I suspect banning fisherman from other countries would have a bigger impact.


    Especially those from California and Europe
    We better throw NC in there also haha....

  13. #13
    Member danattherock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    5,608

    Default

    Nah, we are part of the United States.

  14. #14
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Big Lake
    Posts
    1,593

    Default

    Man, you go banning Californians & we'll lose all of our (illegal) lawn workers. Not to mention most of the Anchorage assembely members.

  15. #15
    Member kenaibow fan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    In a van down by the river
    Posts
    2,039

    Default

    Yeah but we will still have a surplus of russians, better add asia to that list.

    And before any one gets there feelings hurt I am kidding…………….

  16. #16
    Member fishNphysician's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Aberdeen WA
    Posts
    4,516

    Default

    Banning bait in most rivers means banning eggs. Would sure take a lot of the urgency for hen-hunting out of the equation.

    "I need the eggs" = all-time worst dumbazz excuse to kill a hen.
    "Let every angler who loves to fish think what it would mean to him to find the fish were gone." Zane Grey
    http://www.piscatorialpursuits.com/uploads/UP12710.jpg
    The KeenEye MD

  17. #17
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Juneau
    Posts
    266

    Default

    Bait is banned in all freshwater in southeast until September, and we've no problem catching limits. The only place you really "need" bait would be on big glacial rivers, I'd think. I don't see any reason to not ban bait in small streams and lakes.

  18. #18
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    499

    Default

    In some rivers it's not bait that is a problem, it's the fact that the rivers never get a break from constant fishing pressure. Go to the Kenai River in July and you'll see. Other rivers have restrictions in place like weekend only, etc. In my opinion all rivers need to have windows where no fishing takes place just like for cook inlet gillnetters.

    Some rivers and streams now have pike problems which are having a big impact in some systems. It's also probable that some streams have disease problems.

    Then there's the open ocean problem. It seems like a lot of Alaska kings are struggling to survive out in the open ocean. Not sure how well ever find out what is the main problem there. I have a feeling that trawlers are one of the biggest problems, but it could be something else.

    One thing people in southcentral AK need to think about is the fact that there is too many people here for everyone to catch kings. The natural king runs can't support the fishing pressure we put on them, so either every river needs to be more restricted or we need to select some streams and start more stocking. The ninilchik river and crooked creek runs haven't been anything in comparison to when they were stocking them with large numbers of kings.

  19. #19

    Default

    I have a feeling that trawlers are one of the biggest problems......ding ding ding....!

    I hate pointing fingers over all...we ALL have a significant impact.

    Something to sit down and ask yourselves. When did we start having failing returns and what changed in the fishery????

    You wont see the numbers in most of the current 'take' graphs...becuase they are NOT TAKEN! they are dumped back into the bottom of the ocean, wasted bycatch!

    In the end...we cant take away from one without taking away from all! We've sat on the fence with whose 'more entitled' to fish and game in this state. The fact is every one of us are, and every one of us as user groups needs to accept the guilt our dirty hands have on these resources and man (or woman) up! Allocation becomes our worst enemy....with access a close second (more on the game side).

  20. #20
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    NW Florida
    Posts
    44

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 33outdoorsman View Post
    In some rivers it's not bait that is a problem, it's the fact that the rivers never get a break from constant fishing pressure. Go to the Kenai River in July and you'll see. Other rivers have restrictions in place like weekend only, etc. In my opinion all rivers need to have windows where no fishing takes place just like for cook inlet gillnetters.

    Some rivers and streams now have pike problems which are having a big impact in some systems. It's also probable that some streams have disease problems.

    Then there's the open ocean problem. It seems like a lot of Alaska kings are struggling to survive out in the open ocean. Not sure how well ever find out what is the main problem there. I have a feeling that trawlers are one of the biggest problems, but it could be something else.

    One thing people in southcentral AK need to think about is the fact that there is too many people here for everyone to catch kings. The natural king runs can't support the fishing pressure we put on them, so either every river needs to be more restricted or we need to select some streams and start more stocking. The ninilchik river and crooked creek runs haven't been anything in comparison to when they were stocking them with large numbers of kings.
    I am an outsider, so pardon me for my interjection, but I am a supporter of conservation here on the Gulf Coast. I think your idea of a day or 2 of closure on all rivers in Alaska would be a good way to insure continued natural spawning success.

    One conservation issue that doesn't get considered often is the interaction between species--if food is not available--populations will decline. I don't know if that is a problem in Alaska, but I believe it is here.

Page 1 of 2 12 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
  •