Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 24

Thread: Les Palmer - "Tourist Trap"

  1. #1

    Default Les Palmer - "Tourist Trap"

    http://peninsulaclarion.com/outdoors...w-tourist-trap

    Thought this was interesting. I always like reading Les' stuff.

  2. #2
    Member 4merguide's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Kenai Peninsula, Alaska
    Posts
    9,749

    Default

    Enjoyed the article as well. Unfortunately it just enforces what many of us have believed has taken place for far too long now.....the once world class Kenai river king is now managed by the almighty dollar....
    Sheep hunting...... the pain goes away, but the stupidity remains...!!!

  3. #3
    Member sayak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Central peninsula, between the K-rivers
    Posts
    5,788

    Default

    I don't always agree with Les palmer, but when I do...
    IMO the guides mortally wounded the goose that laid the golden egg for so many years, and now they want to deliver the coup de grace to make a buck. It's over folks, and it will never be the same again.

  4. #4
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    155

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by smithtb View Post
    http://peninsulaclarion.com/outdoors...w-tourist-trap

    Thought this was interesting. I always like reading Les' stuff.
    The Kenai River reminds me of the old fishing or hunting gear you use to have that was really awesome, then one day it breaks or the zipper on that jacket fails and you go back to the store to buy a new one the same model. You get it and find out it is not nearly as good. So yo investigate and find out the company changed hands and they started making stuff overseas or a new owner cut some corners. You still got what you need but it ain't as good as it use to be.

  5. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Palmer, AK
    Posts
    723

    Default

    Sounds like the state needs to close them down and live off the new windfall of Pittman-Robertson money thanks to AGL4NOW.

    http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2...hoarding-ammo/

  6. #6

    Default

    Les has some interesting incites but he's become a bitter old man that needs to retire. Nothing is ever as good as was when he first came up here from Washington. I take that back, the only thing he writes about that is better than the good old days is his diet.

  7. #7
    Member fishNphysician's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Aberdeen WA
    Posts
    4,516

    Default

    Sometimes the truth hurts... just sayin'
    "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

  8. #8
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    155

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mike h View Post
    Sounds like the state needs to close them down and live off the new windfall of Pittman-Robertson money thanks to AGL4NOW.

    http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2...hoarding-ammo/

    Interesting part and paradox of this is the more conservative states like Alaska will not ever reachout or give to sportsmen of the state the full potential of possible benfits of this funding source because of the conservative nature of legislators/governors who want to maintain low levels of state services and keep government small. This is an issue all over the west. wildlife management in many state agencies is fully funded to the point money is being turned away including here. some states are growing management agency research developing programs for more hunting opportunities and purchasing land to add to state land banks that produce game to hunt. Some of the state's whose residents are really helping to create the nationwide tax-based surplus are basically watching their money go to other states.

  9. #9
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    155

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mike h View Post
    Sounds like the state needs to close them down and live off the new windfall of Pittman-Robertson money thanks to AGL4NOW.

    http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2...hoarding-ammo/

    Interesting part and paradox of this is the more conservative states like Alaska will not ever reachout or give to sportsmen of the state the full potential of possible benfits of this funding source because of the conservative nature of legislators/governors who want to maintain low levels of state services and keep government small. This is an issue all over the west. wildlife management in many state agencies is fully funded to the point money is being turned away including here. some states are growing management agency research developing programs for more hunting opportunities and purchasing land to add to state land banks that produce game to hunt. Some of the state's whose residents are really helping to create the nationwide tax-based surplus are basically watching their money go to other states.

  10. #10
    Member 4merguide's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Kenai Peninsula, Alaska
    Posts
    9,749

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fishNphysician View Post
    Sometimes the truth hurts... just sayin'
    Oh believe me...........it's "hurt" for a long time now.
    Sheep hunting...... the pain goes away, but the stupidity remains...!!!

  11. #11
    Member 4merguide's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Kenai Peninsula, Alaska
    Posts
    9,749

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by penguin View Post
    Les has some interesting incites but he's become a bitter old man that needs to retire.
    I met the man a number of years ago, when some would call him "older" and didn't see him that way. He was helping the kids with hunter's ed and always had a smile on his face. Agreed that I too don't always agree with what he says, but unless he's changed quite a bit I surely didn't see him as bitter.

    I have to say that IT IS very hard for some to see the Kenai become what it is now. I will be the first to admit that 30 years ago I never thought I'd see the day the traffic would get to what it is now in the summer. It just gets to be a pain. I try to stay positive but it wears on a guy.

    You really can't fault a guy for longing for the way it was......at least some of the time. I don't know how old you are, but maybe you'll feel a little bit of the same in a few years...???
    Sheep hunting...... the pain goes away, but the stupidity remains...!!!

  12. #12
    Member fishNphysician's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Aberdeen WA
    Posts
    4,516

    Default

    But as Les said, it's NOT fair to demonize the guides working hard to make a living doing EXACTLY what the law allows. They're operating within the sideboards of the regulatory agencies responsible for managing the river and her kings. ADFG Parks and DNR are the guys making the decisions.

    That said, any guide still advertising their business with claims of world's largest kings, 70 and 80 pounders are commonly caught (yeah maybe back in the 70's and 80's), runs of 50K.... without mention of the current downtrend... well that's simply disingenuous non-disclosure.

    I got on the web just now and found several that fully disclose the decline of big fish...

    http://www.ezlimit.com/Kings.shtml

    http://www.akfishology.com/king.html

    http://www.mgfalaska.com/alaska-salmon-fishing/

    http://www.beavercreekcabins.blogspot.com
    "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

  13. #13
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Palmer, AK
    Posts
    723

    Default

    It's lying. No need to sugarcoat.

  14. #14
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    155

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fishNphysician View Post
    But as Les said, it's NOT fair to demonize the guides working hard to make a living doing EXACTLY what the law allows. They're operating within the sideboards of the regulatory agencies responsible for managing the river and her kings. ADFG Parks and DNR are the guys making the decisions.

    That said, any guide still advertising their business with claims of world's largest kings, 70 and 80 pounders are commonly caught (yeah maybe back in the 70's and 80's), runs of 50K.... without mention of the current downtrend... well that's simply disingenuous non-disclosure.

    I got on the web just now and found several that fully disclose the decline of big fish...

    http://www.ezlimit.com/Kings.shtml

    http://www.akfishology.com/king.html

    http://www.mgfalaska.com/alaska-salmon-fishing/

    http://www.beavercreekcabins.blogspot.com
    One of the worst parts of a newspaper actually publishing Les Palmers article is to listen to what people say about it and realize he and many many others think the Kenai River is the greatest king salmon fishery in Alaska, also that all big king salmon are gone and it is because of ADFG Parks and DNR are to blame. All of these claims are not true.

  15. #15
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    5,522

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kidfromgarcia View Post
    One of the worst parts of a newspaper actually publishing Les Palmers article is to listen to what people say about it and realize he and many many others think the Kenai River is the greatest king salmon fishery in Alaska, also that all big king salmon are gone and it is because of ADFG Parks and DNR are to blame. All of these claims are not true.
    Having been around since the Kenai River was made a Special Management Area I challenge anyone to tell me what DNR or ADF&G has done in a comprehensive way to reduce social conflict, reduce boat wake erosion, reduce turbidity (violations of Clean Water Act are still going on), reduce hydrocarbons (this was led by the Cities not Parks), or any of the other problems which set up the Special Harvest Area in the first place.

    Please do not reference the 50 hp rule for erosion or boat size limitations as solving the issue of erosion. Also, social conflict is increasing not decreasing with the PU fisherman launching upstream. The KRSMA advisory board is controlled by people who want status quo and the Director of Parks is a past KRSA executive director. He has provided no leadership. Yet we have 1 million dollar in studies that indicate something should be done but they sit on the shelf.

    ADF&G is no better. They have pushed opportunity and refuse to engage in meaningful discussion of how the river should be managed for the above issues. In fact, the last Commissioner refused to even discuss turbidity issues in the river.

    So we should blame these agencies or at least the puppet masters who control them - read KRSA.

    l

  16. #16

    Default Some Examples

    GUIDES: Kenai River Guide Academy - there is a mandatory one week training for all guides on the Kenai River - DNR regulations. Only place in the state that has this requirement for sport fish guides.

    TURBIDITY: According to DEC and KWF water quality studies on the lower Kenai River, the only section of the river to exceed turbidity levels is the tidally influenced zone from Eagle Rock to the mouth of the Kenai River. The standard exceeded is the drinking water standard of 5 NTUs, at the border of recreational standard of 10 NTUs, and does not exceed fish and wildlife standard of 25 NTUs. There is no water quality violations for turbidity in the non-tidal areas of the Kenai River. That means boat wakes do not contribute to turbidity issues above Eagle Rock, which is about 75 percent of the lower / middle river.

    It is questionable whether the drinking water standard fits in a tidally influenced zone of a glacially fed river that feeds into upper Cook Inlet, which is itself a glacially fed system that receives more than a million metric tons of glacial sediment annually.

    Tidal zones are important biological systems - just not prime areas for salmon spawning / juvenile rearing. Given that the natural variability of NTU counts in the tidal zone of the Kenai River (50 - 3,300 NTUs in spring, summer, fall data collected by KWF) dwarfs a 5 to 10 NTU impacts from boat wakes, nature is primary driver turbidity variation in the tidal areas; turbidity from boat wakes in the tidal area is short duration (hours), seasonal (July), and lower level exceedances (less than 100 NTUs in spikes) versus natural events that are long duration (days), year-round (spring, summer, fall), and high level exceedances (more than 1,000 NTUs in spikes).

    BANK EROSION: The largest bank erosion study on the Kenai was by the ACE (Army Corps of Engineers) / KWF and it showed that the two biggest causes of erosion on the Kenai River are large summer flood events and large winter floods from winter ice events. The study indicated that boat wakes are a minor contributor to bank erosion on the Kenai, about 10 to 15 percent. For salmon ecology 101, bank erosion contributes to the new gravels that are necessary for continuing salmon spawning success.

    The single largest bank erosion issue on the Kenai River is the city of Kenai bluff erosion problem, the fix to which is estimated between $40 - 50 million and is to be an armoring of the outside high bank with a tiered design heavily dependent on rip rap (a non-biological solution). The same ACE agency indicated that the source of erosion is a natural process, primarily large waves from storm events during high tides. Heavily laden commercial drift boats returning at high tide that produce large wakes are a minor contributing component. Haven't heard too many supporters on this blog or elsewhere looking to scalp the ability of the commercial drift fleet to reenter the Kenai River at high tides.

    ADFG with USFWS COST SHARE PROGRAM: The agencies developed the private public partnership program that invests heavily in the protection, rehabilitation, and restoration of fish habitat on the Kenai River. More than one third of the private property owners on the Kenai River have participated in the program, work which is based upon bio-engineered methodology of willows, cabled spruce, root wads, etc., instead of non-biological efforts such as rip rap, which negatively impacts fish habitat due to increased laminar flow velocities along the riparian zone. The Kenai River has more private property owners that have invested in fish habitat projects than any other river system in Alaska. The Kenai River, for river miles that are open to fishing, has more riparian habitat closures to bank fishing than any other river system in Alaska.

    50HP, FOUR STROKE MOTOR and BOAT LENGTH RESTRICTIONS: DNR regulation restricts motors to 4-stroke only, 50 HP or less, in KRSMA, ADFG restriction to 4-stroke only below KRSMA in July for boats that are dipnetting. The HP and boat length paired restrictions are empirical data based that produce less wakes from properly sizing boats to motors. The older 35 HP regs forced mismatches between boats and motors, and often generated the largest boat wakes possible. These are all DNR and ADFG regulations - not city or borough ordinances; many people work together to craft these state regulations.

    BAN ON DRIFT BOAT ANCHOR DRAGGING THROUGH SPAWNING BEDS: It is an ADFG regulation that bans the practice of anchor dragging from drift boats through spawning beds.

    SOCIAL CONFLICT: Is it a social conflict for anglers choosing to fish for king salmon and other anglers choosing to fish for sockeye salmon (either bank fishing or dipnetting) to use the same boat launch facilities on the Kenai River? If so, during times when the parking lots are near empty, what exactly is the social conflict?

    The Kenai River is open to multiple fisheries at all times of the year - should boat launches only cater to one type of sport fishery? If so, why?

    To reduce "social conflict", if there are no drift boat takeout between Eagle Rock and the city of Kenai docks, does this now mean drift boats should be banned below Eagle Rock and not be able to take out at the city of Kenai docks, in order to "reduce social conflict" between sport anglers fishing for different salmon?

    To "reduce social conflict" even more, should anglers only be allowed to take either king or sockeye gear on their boats? Is fishing for rainbows and sockeyes or rainbows and silvers the same type of "social conflict"?

  17. #17
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    5,522

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Vidalia View Post
    GUIDES: Kenai River Guide Academy - there is a mandatory one week training for all guides on the Kenai River - DNR regulations. Only place in the state that has this requirement for sport fish guides.

    TURBIDITY: According to DEC and KWF water quality studies on the lower Kenai River, the only section of the river to exceed turbidity levels is the tidally influenced zone from Eagle Rock to the mouth of the Kenai River. The standard exceeded is the drinking water standard of 5 NTUs, at the border of recreational standard of 10 NTUs, and does not exceed fish and wildlife standard of 25 NTUs. There is no water quality violations for turbidity in the non-tidal areas of the Kenai River. That means boat wakes do not contribute to turbidity issues above Eagle Rock, which is about 75 percent of the lower / middle river.

    It is questionable whether the drinking water standard fits in a tidally influenced zone of a glacially fed river that feeds into upper Cook Inlet, which is itself a glacially fed system that receives more than a million metric tons of glacial sediment annually.

    Tidal zones are important biological systems - just not prime areas for salmon spawning / juvenile rearing. Given that the natural variability of NTU counts in the tidal zone of the Kenai River (50 - 3,300 NTUs in spring, summer, fall data collected by KWF) dwarfs a 5 to 10 NTU impacts from boat wakes, nature is primary driver turbidity variation in the tidal areas; turbidity from boat wakes in the tidal area is short duration (hours), seasonal (July), and lower level exceedances (less than 100 NTUs in spikes) versus natural events that are long duration (days), year-round (spring, summer, fall), and high level exceedances (more than 1,000 NTUs in spikes).

    BANK EROSION: The largest bank erosion study on the Kenai was by the ACE (Army Corps of Engineers) / KWF and it showed that the two biggest causes of erosion on the Kenai River are large summer flood events and large winter floods from winter ice events. The study indicated that boat wakes are a minor contributor to bank erosion on the Kenai, about 10 to 15 percent. For salmon ecology 101, bank erosion contributes to the new gravels that are necessary for continuing salmon spawning success.

    The single largest bank erosion issue on the Kenai River is the city of Kenai bluff erosion problem, the fix to which is estimated between $40 - 50 million and is to be an armoring of the outside high bank with a tiered design heavily dependent on rip rap (a non-biological solution). The same ACE agency indicated that the source of erosion is a natural process, primarily large waves from storm events during high tides. Heavily laden commercial drift boats returning at high tide that produce large wakes are a minor contributing component. Haven't heard too many supporters on this blog or elsewhere looking to scalp the ability of the commercial drift fleet to reenter the Kenai River at high tides.

    ADFG with USFWS COST SHARE PROGRAM: The agencies developed the private public partnership program that invests heavily in the protection, rehabilitation, and restoration of fish habitat on the Kenai River. More than one third of the private property owners on the Kenai River have participated in the program, work which is based upon bio-engineered methodology of willows, cabled spruce, root wads, etc., instead of non-biological efforts such as rip rap, which negatively impacts fish habitat due to increased laminar flow velocities along the riparian zone. The Kenai River has more private property owners that have invested in fish habitat projects than any other river system in Alaska. The Kenai River, for river miles that are open to fishing, has more riparian habitat closures to bank fishing than any other river system in Alaska.

    50HP, FOUR STROKE MOTOR and BOAT LENGTH RESTRICTIONS: DNR regulation restricts motors to 4-stroke only, 50 HP or less, in KRSMA, ADFG restriction to 4-stroke only below KRSMA in July for boats that are dipnetting. The HP and boat length paired restrictions are empirical data based that produce less wakes from properly sizing boats to motors. The older 35 HP regs forced mismatches between boats and motors, and often generated the largest boat wakes possible. These are all DNR and ADFG regulations - not city or borough ordinances; many people work together to craft these state regulations.

    BAN ON DRIFT BOAT ANCHOR DRAGGING THROUGH SPAWNING BEDS: It is an ADFG regulation that bans the practice of anchor dragging from drift boats through spawning beds.

    SOCIAL CONFLICT: Is it a social conflict for anglers choosing to fish for king salmon and other anglers choosing to fish for sockeye salmon (either bank fishing or dipnetting) to use the same boat launch facilities on the Kenai River? If so, during times when the parking lots are near empty, what exactly is the social conflict?

    The Kenai River is open to multiple fisheries at all times of the year - should boat launches only cater to one type of sport fishery? If so, why?

    To reduce "social conflict", if there are no drift boat takeout between Eagle Rock and the city of Kenai docks, does this now mean drift boats should be banned below Eagle Rock and not be able to take out at the city of Kenai docks, in order to "reduce social conflict" between sport anglers fishing for different salmon?

    To "reduce social conflict" even more, should anglers only be allowed to take either king or sockeye gear on their boats? Is fishing for rainbows and sockeyes or rainbows and silvers the same type of "social conflict"?
    Typical KRSA response. First, the turbidity violations take place in tidal influence means that water is backed up. No salt water reaches the area we are talking about. Second the violation is a violation and EPA and DEC both admit that. KRSA wants to use the high turbidity levels downstream to make the case these violations are not significant. No data to support that position. The turbidity violations are in July when rearing chinook salmon are present and the violations take place on a significant number of days due to boat wakes. To try and divert this by comparing to natural events is just plain dishonest relative to the Clean Water Act requirements. Natural events serve a purpose - this unnatural source of turbidity does not.

    Guide Acad. It does nothing to reduce the number of guides as there is no limit. It has been used in the past and I assume in the future to push an allocation agenda. Kenai Watershed Forum does not participate anymore since hearing comments by the KRSA director on allocation issues. Does it deal with the issues identified in the Carrying Capacity study. Not really.

    The boat and horsepower regulations were fought by KRSMA advisory board and DNR and ADF&G only took lead when the cities and other groups pushed than via the EPA oversight authority. For anyone to say ADF&G and DNR acted responsibility here is again rewriting history. Again KWF has a full history of this and everyone knows that horsepower and boat length discussion relative to erosion was a smoke screen. Thousands of wakes still hit the shoreline and erosion is still taking place at a faster rate than normal. Ask some property owners about how the new regulations are working.

    Next, the 50/50 program is costing tax payers hundreds of thousands of dollars to protect a guide industry and use patterns that are knowingly causing damage to the shoreline. This is not a good program. It is a diversion from dealing with the real cause of the problem. It does not maintain natural banks.

    In summary, I said no comprehensive plan exists to deal with the issues identified in the million dollar studies. Instead, diversions like the post by Vidalia continues to keep things as basically status quo.

  18. #18
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    155

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nerka View Post
    In summary, I said no comprehensive plan exists to deal with the issues identified in the million dollar studies. Instead, diversions like the post by Vidalia continues to keep things as basically status quo.
    You guys are talking like Kenai River salmon are all about to go extinct because of harvest and habitat damage, is that true? and is it possible for a salmon to maintain the perfect or ultimate number of fish every single year or animal population for that matter? Is what you are talking about constant harvest yields even possible, even if the fish and game department makes the fish goals each year? My friends who dip net or guide or commercial fish seem to expect the same result as their best year every year but really what appears to happen is each year is different, different in the number fish and size of fish and days that they catch the fish that they catch.

  19. #19
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    5,522

    Default

    There will be significant variations in returns as the variables are numerous. However, one thing we know is that to get the best average returns we should keep the habitat functioning as it is and not mess it up. Also, we should deal with the social issues as they can create habitat issues as well as people to people conflict.

  20. #20
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    155

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nerka View Post
    There will be significant variations in returns as the variables are numerous. However, one thing we know is that to get the best average returns we should keep the habitat functioning as it is and not mess it up. Also, we should deal with the social issues as they can create habitat issues as well as people to people conflict.
    Then using the idea of the habitat is not functioning to the ability it could, all you have to do is drive down the Kenai River or fly it in an airplane and see that probably a third of it has been dismantled by houses cabins, roads, bridges, the Kenai and Soldotna towns just huge land use which is expected because the river is an urban area So reasonably I can see that much of a reduction in the fish. Makes sense a burning down the rain forest idea. So you are past meaning below the best average returns because it is not fully functioning and probably going to get less judging by land changes happening around the River.

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
  •