Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 72

Thread: Board of Fisheries Proposals for Limiting Dipping

  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    155

    Default Board of Fisheries Proposals for Limiting Dipping

    I am creating a proposal to limit the number of people in the future. I have spoken to the Keani Borough, City of Kenai, City of Soldotna, DNR, Fish & Game, Guides, Commercial Fishermen as well as many many PU people themselves and they all like the idea. However the government people are all afraid to talk about it or do it because of they don't want anything to do with it. Anyway how do you think such program regulations should be or how would it be done?

  2. #2
    Member hoose35's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Soldotna, Alaska, United States
    Posts
    2,891

    Default

    I don't think there's a good way to limit the number of people, how would you decide who gets to fish and who doesn't? It makes more sense to me to make a less generous bag limit.

    Sent from my HTC One A9 using Tapatalk
    Responsible Conservation > Political Allocation

  3. #3
    Member 0321Tony's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Sterling, Alaska, United States
    Posts
    1,712

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hoose35 View Post
    I don't think there's a good way to limit the number of people, how would you decide who gets to fish and who doesn't? It makes more sense to me to make a less generous bag limit.

    Sent from my HTC One A9 using Tapatalk
    I whole heartedly agree with dropping the bag limit.
    It could be limited the same way that hunting is limited. Make it a drawing permit. Or since it's a "subsistence" fishery and is ment to keep people from starving to death. Sell one or the other fishing licenses, either a subsistence license that only allows you to get your limit of fish via a net or a sport license that only allows you to do it with a rod and reel.
    Personally the biggest thing I have against dip netting is that to me subsistence fish should be kept here in Alaska to feed Alaskan families, not sent out by the semi load to people in the lesser 48 as so much of this subsistence fish does.

    Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk

  4. #4
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    1,904

    Default

    IMO, the best way to limit the number of people who dip net would be to have someone constantly checking licenses and ID. The non res dippers would be fleeing like the outlaws they are. Numbers would be way down without a doubt.
    Hunt Ethically. Respect the Environment.

  5. #5
    Forum Admin Brian M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Eagle River, AK
    Posts
    13,393

    Default

    The primary things I would like to see changed about dipnetting are:

    1. Charge a nominal fee for the permit that at least covers the cost of printing the cards and processing the data in addition to the costs associated with enforcement and cleaning. Perhaps $10 or $15 to start?

    2. Reduced limit - maybe 10 per head of household plus another 5 or 10 per family member.

    While reducing numbers on the beach at any given time seems like a good idea, I've not yet read of an idea that I think would pass.

  6. #6
    Supporting Member iofthetaiga's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Tanana Valley AK
    Posts
    7,217

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SmokeRoss View Post
    IMO, the best way to limit the number of people who dip net would be to have someone constantly checking licenses and ID. The non res dippers would be fleeing like the outlaws they are. Numbers would be way down without a doubt.
    Quote Originally Posted by Brian M View Post
    The primary things I would like to see changed about dipnetting are:

    1. Charge a nominal fee for the permit that at least covers the cost of printing the cards and processing the data in addition to the costs associated with enforcement and cleaning. Perhaps $10 or $15 to start?

    2. Reduced limit - maybe 10 per head of household plus another 5 or 10 per family member.
    I would second both of these ideas.
    ...he who knows nothing is nearer to truth than he whose mind is filled with falsehoods & errors. ~Thomas Jefferson
    I would rather have a mind opened by wonder than one closed by belief. ~Gerry Spence
    The last thing Alaska needs is another bigot. ~member Catch It
    #Resist

  7. #7
    Premium Member kasilofchrisn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Central Kenai Peninsula
    Posts
    4,887

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Brian M View Post
    The primary things I would like to see changed about dipnetting are:

    1. Charge a nominal fee for the permit that at least covers the cost of printing the cards and processing the data in addition to the costs associated with enforcement and cleaning. Perhaps $10 or $15 to start?

    2. Reduced limit - maybe 10 per head of household plus another 5 or 10 per family member.

    While reducing numbers on the beach at any given time seems like a good idea, I've not yet read of an idea that I think would pass.
    I agree 100%!
    I believe reducing the bag limit will have a positive effect on limiting the numbers of dippers on the beach.
    Get your limit sooner and go home sooner.
    And before someone goes there I don't believe the reduced bag limit will result in any starving children either.
    "The closer I get to nature the farther I am from idiots"

    "Fishing and Hunting are only an addiction if you're trying to quit"

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

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by iofthetaiga View Post
    I would second both of these ideas.
    Thanks all for the ideas. I have been told a lower limit has been proposed for the last several times the fish board meetings have been done. Nothing has happened the limit is still the same. If the limit was lowered it would not reduce the number of people is also what they said, do you think that is smoke and mirrors? The logic is if less fish needed to be caught people would come and go quicker so more turnover more people. That all means more people in total. I also am told I can write a proposal to do a drawing but it will not pass because such a thing would cost money and the fish board can't make fish and game do it. I'm just surprised about the gridlock, I haven't talked to anybody who has not been opposed to more controls but every control appears to be a dead end.

  9. #9
    Supporting Member iofthetaiga's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Tanana Valley AK
    Posts
    7,217

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kidfromgarcia View Post
    Thanks all for the ideas. I have been told a lower limit has been proposed for the last several times the fish board meetings have been done. Nothing has happened the limit is still the same. If the limit was lowered it would not reduce the number of people is also what they said, do you think that is smoke and mirrors? The logic is if less fish needed to be caught people would come and go quicker so more turnover more people. That all means more people in total. I also am told I can write a proposal to do a drawing but it will not pass because such a thing would cost money and the fish board can't make fish and game do it. I'm just surprised about the gridlock, I haven't talked to anybody who has not been opposed to more controls but every control appears to be a dead end.
    Personally, as I indicated, I like all three of those ideas, together. I don't think simply proposing a lower limit will see much chance of passage, or have any appreciable impact on crowding. I think we should all be willing to pay the administrative cost of the permit program, as well as enforcement. I do believe enforcement might have a significant effect on numbers of participants.
    ...he who knows nothing is nearer to truth than he whose mind is filled with falsehoods & errors. ~Thomas Jefferson
    I would rather have a mind opened by wonder than one closed by belief. ~Gerry Spence
    The last thing Alaska needs is another bigot. ~member Catch It
    #Resist

  10. #10
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    155

    Default

    Another thing is that if a drawing was done that cost money the fish board could not vote it in to do because only the legislature can put in the law to charge money to apply or to charge for the permit. So it could be a situation where the fish board says great idea but not up to us. I start to wish for very low sockeye runs so that's not what we want either.

  11. #11
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    155

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by iofthetaiga View Post
    Personally, as I indicated, I like all three of those, together. I don't think simply proposing a lower limit will see much chance of passage. I think we should all be willing to pay the administrative cost of the permit program, as well as enforcement. And I believe enforcement would have a significant effect on numbers of participants.
    I think an electronic program like hunting permits have and only electronic like that would go a long way for enforcement.

  12. #12
    Supporting Member iofthetaiga's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Tanana Valley AK
    Posts
    7,217

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kidfromgarcia View Post
    I think an electronic program like hunting permits have and only electronic like that would go a long way for enforcement.
    Not sure I understand how that would change anything. Anyway, I'm not looking for a debate. You asked for opinion... I'll just reiterate that we should pay a fee to cover the cost of administering the permit program, and enforcement. I agree with SR that having enforcement on the river banks and at boat launches constantly checking permits and bag limits would be a good thing. That's my opinion. Right now it doesn't even matter if anybody even bothers to get a permit, because there is virtually zero field enforcement.
    ...he who knows nothing is nearer to truth than he whose mind is filled with falsehoods & errors. ~Thomas Jefferson
    I would rather have a mind opened by wonder than one closed by belief. ~Gerry Spence
    The last thing Alaska needs is another bigot. ~member Catch It
    #Resist

  13. #13
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    155

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by iofthetaiga View Post
    Personally, as I indicated, I like all three of those ideas, together. I don't think simply proposing a lower limit will see much chance of passage, or have any appreciable impact on crowding. I think we should all be willing to pay the administrative cost of the permit program, as well as enforcement. I do believe enforcement might have a significant effect on numbers of participants.
    I think your right. I also think it could be operated at least initially to include most people who want to go now and if the number gets too large it could be cut based on say the first some thousands of permits. In that case more could also be added like a registration hunt if there were more sockeye more permits. The application period could also control numbers some. Have you ever missed applying for hunts at some time? So an application time that matches the permanent fund or hunting application time frame you snooze you lose plus all the resident verification is right there for cross checks.

  14. #14
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Wasilla, AK
    Posts
    263

    Default

    I don't presume to have the answers but perhaps a lower limit would also reduce the amount of wastage. So sad to see piles of carcases with only a third to a half of the meat taken off. I am fairly new to dipping but saw quite a bit of this wastage last year on the Peninsula and up hear near home at Fish Creek.

    Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

  15. #15
    Member willphish4food's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Willow, AK
    Posts
    3,365

    Default

    The purpose of dipnetting is to allow a family to gather a years supply of fish in one trip instead of multiple trips. I dont mind covering the cost of program administration through fees. I disagree with other postets who want limits to be barely higher than sport limits. That is not the purpose of a subsistence style fishery.

  16. #16

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by willphish4food View Post
    The purpose of dipnetting is to allow a family to gather a years supply of fish in one trip instead of multiple trips. I dont mind covering the cost of program administration through fees. I disagree with other postets who want limits to be barely higher than sport limits. That is not the purpose of a subsistence style fishery.

    While I agree that the purpose of dipnetting is ultimately to allow Alaskans to get food in the freezer (while having fun), I'm not so sure about the "in one trip" part. IMO, that thinking is responsible for a lot of unrealistic expectations and waste in that fishery. A gold rush mentality, if you will. I live near the river mouth, know a lot of local people who dipnet every year, and have spent plenty of time behind a dipnet myself. I don't know many who expect to fill their freezers in one trip. I don't think the limits are unreasonable, however I think that the limits should be structured so you cannot harvest the season limit in a single day. I think a reasonable daily limit will curb both unrealistic expectations (which have an effect on management), and waste.

  17. #17
    Member willphish4food's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Willow, AK
    Posts
    3,365

    Default

    Smith, its never a guarantee. Just as you're not guaranteed a good push of fish on the tides that are open for setting. But if you have enough net in the water when the push comes, you're able to do very well. Same with dipping. Subsistence is much more than just fish for the freezer. Its also meat in its season, berries in their season, gardening, putting up firewood, etc, all while working full time to keep the bills paid. Being allowed to spend less time on the fish part, by having a limit that allows a family to put up a good part of their yearly fish in one or two trips instead of 3 fish at a time, allows that family to work on the other parts of their subsistence lifestyle.

    As to wasteful fillet jobs, there is waste everywhere. A person who can't fillet a fish can't fillet 1 fish just as much as he can't fillet 50. Catching fewer at a time doesn't change that. A very popular youtube video shows a slimeliner filleting salmon in a few seconds a side, with a large amount of waste. Being as millions of fish are processed on the slimelines, if this is an example of how its done, then the slime lines and people supplying them are responsible for much more waste than dipnetters. Matthew 7:3 comes to mind.

  18. #18

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by willphish4food View Post
    Smith, its never a guarantee. Just as you're not guaranteed a good push of fish on the tides that are open for setting. But if you have enough net in the water when the push comes, you're able to do very well. Same with dipping. Subsistence is much more than just fish for the freezer. Its also meat in its season, berries in their season, gardening, putting up firewood, etc, all while working full time to keep the bills paid. Being allowed to spend less time on the fish part, by having a limit that allows a family to put up a good part of their yearly fish in one or two trips instead of 3 fish at a time, allows that family to work on the other parts of their subsistence lifestyle.

    As to wasteful fillet jobs, there is waste everywhere. A person who can't fillet a fish can't fillet 1 fish just as much as he can't fillet 50. Catching fewer at a time doesn't change that. A very popular youtube video shows a slimeliner filleting salmon in a few seconds a side, with a large amount of waste. Being as millions of fish are processed on the slimelines, if this is an example of how its done, then the slime lines and people supplying them are responsible for much more waste than dipnetters. Matthew 7:3 comes to mind.
    Thank you, I am aware of how and when to catch fish with a variety of gear, and what a subsistence lifestyle consists of. I also know how to fillet fish, and am not quite sure why this needed to turn into a sport/commercial thing. I commented here because I wanted to talk about dipnet proposals. If there are poorly skilled people working the slimelines, that is a shame and I did not teach them. I'm not quite sure how it factors into a discussion about dipnet proposals to the BOF.

  19. #19

    Default

    What bothers me the most is the people that still have a freezer full of freezer burned fish come July, and they have to get rid of it so they can get more fish. How is that not want and waste?

  20. #20
    Member 0321Tony's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Sterling, Alaska, United States
    Posts
    1,712

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bill C View Post
    What bothers me the most is the people that still have a freezer full of freezer burned fish come July, and they have to get rid of it so they can get more fish. How is that not want and waste?
    Just go to the dump and see the thousands of lbs of fish dumped there.
    The way the regs are if a person or family was to get all their fish and actually put it in their freezer and not send it to family in the lesser 48 that family would need to eat salmon 3 times a week minimum just to eat the salmon they catch during the dip net season. That doesn't count the fish caught on rod and reel or other fish and game. Simply dip netted fish would have to be on the table 3 times a week. Very few families can actually say they eat that much salmon through the winter.
    The limit needs to be lowered, too much is wasted and sent outside. Subsistence is to be used on the tables of Alaskan families not sent outside.

    Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk

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
  •