Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 86

Thread: October BOF Worksession, ACR's online

  1. #1

    Default October BOF Worksession, ACR's online

    http://www.adfg.alaska.gov/static/re...n/acrs_all.pdf

    ACR's are online. These will be considered at the October work session in Kenai.

  2. #2
    Member willphish4food's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Willow, AK
    Posts
    3,083

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by smithtb View Post
    http://www.adfg.alaska.gov/static/re...n/acrs_all.pdf

    ACR's are online. These will be considered at the October work session in Kenai.
    Thanks for link. ACR 7 "Not allocative at all." Funny!

  3. #3

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by willphish4food View Post
    Thanks for link. ACR 7 "Not allocative at all." Funny!
    I don't think it is allocative. This proposal isn't taking fish from one user group or reserving them for another. It's not reserving opportunity for one group at a cost to another. It's an attempt to deal with changing conditions, and an attempt to make drifters more effective at catching the sockeye available for harvest.

    To be clear, I'm not defending the proposal. I don't think decreased drift effectiveness due to deeper swimming fish constitutes an emergency. I just don't see this as allocative. Willphish, perhaps you could explain why you see it as allocative.

  4. #4
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    welfare state of Alaska
    Posts
    4,572

    Default ACRs 7 and 6

    What was the purpose of the depth restriction to begin with? An effective proposal should include why the restriction is in place.

    ACR 6 is interesting. They got rid of the 2 cycles and now we are getting big inboard jet boats and even larger boats that cause even more serious problems. Let's limit the horse power to 50 and allow 2 strokes again.

    ACR 6 also reminded me why they don't extend the dip netting season past July 31: 2 cycles are allowed again on the lower river. Putting the HP limit on and allowing 2 strokes would eliminate that concern.




    Quote Originally Posted by smithtb View Post
    I don't think it is allocative. This proposal isn't taking fish from one user group or reserving them for another. It's not reserving opportunity for one group at a cost to another. It's an attempt to deal with changing conditions, and an attempt to make drifters more effective at catching the sockeye available for harvest.

    To be clear, I'm not defending the proposal. I don't think decreased drift effectiveness due to deeper swimming fish constitutes an emergency. I just don't see this as allocative. Willphish, perhaps you could explain why you see it as allocative.
    Living the urban lifestyle so I can pay my way and for my family's needs, and support my country. And you?
    ".. ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country" JFK

  5. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    1,655

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by smithtb View Post
    Willphish, perhaps you could explain why you see it as allocative.
    Willphish4food doesn't see things any other way. He probably thinks removing the 45 mesh restriction means more fish for the commercial guys, and less for him. Problem is, it doesn't work that way. Commercial harvest is controlled to sustain yields and to meet in-river escapement goals. So the drifters can fish longer and harder with shallow nets, or less and easier with deep nets. Either way, they get the harvest available to them. The in-river goals still have to be met.

    The problem I see with deeper nets is intercepting Kings that usually run deeper.

    If the sockeye are in fact running deeper making them harder for the drifters to harvest, then what's allocative is willphish4food promoting the use of shallow nets, well-knowing it will get him more fish in-river.

  6. #6
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    1,655

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tvfinak View Post
    ACR 6 is interesting. They got rid of the 2 cycles and now we are getting big inboard jet boats and even larger boats that cause even more serious problems. Let's limit the horse power to 50 and allow 2 strokes again.

    ACR 6 also reminded me why they don't extend the dip netting season past July 31: 2 cycles are allowed again on the lower river. Putting the HP limit on and allowing 2 strokes would eliminate that concern.
    You should inform yourself before recklessly suggesting regulations be changed.

    2-strokes were eliminated as part of an Action Plan due to high hydrocarbon levels that caused the Kenai River to become "impaired" listed with EPA/Clean Water Act. Allowing 2-strokes again would likely result in the Kenai River being listed impaired again.

    HP was limited to 50, along with boat size, due to wake and bank erosion issues. Limiting the HP to 50 below the Ames Bridge (where the dip net fishery takes place) would eliminate all other users who require more HP such as the entire commercial drift fleet, some ESSN fishermen, and any other saltwater vessels or sports fishermen launching or mooring in that area. It is a multi-use, multi-user area, not just a dip net area.

    Personal Use dipnetting ends July 31 as a conservation concern - a measure to reduce Coho harvest.

  7. #7
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    3,018

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Funstastic View Post
    You should inform yourself before recklessly suggesting regulations be changed.

    2-strokes were eliminated as part of an Action Plan due to high hydrocarbon levels that caused the Kenai River to become "impaired" listed with EPA/Clean Water Act. Allowing 2-strokes again would likely result in the Kenai River being listed impaired again.

    HP was limited to 50, along with boat size, due to wake and bank erosion issues. Limiting the HP to 50 below the Ames Bridge (where the dip net fishery takes place) would eliminate all other users who require more HP such as the entire commercial drift fleet, some ESSN fishermen, and any other saltwater vessels or sports fishermen launching or mooring in that area. It is a multi-use, multi-user area, not just a dip net area.

    Personal Use dipnetting ends July 31 as a conservation concern - a measure to reduce Coho harvest.
    I really hate to jump in this, but.......limiting to 50hp in the dipnet fishery would not affect the commercial drift fleet. It is currently a 4 stroke/DFI only fishery, but I can take an old 2 stroke down there anytime I want and go water skiing, cruising, bird watching etc...anything but dipnetting. Commercial fishermen can still use a 2stroke to access their drift boats. One can not use a 2 stroke for the act of dipnetting. the BOF could write a regulation requiring lower than a 50hp 4 stroke or DFI for the act of dipnetting. BOF can only deal with a fishery. Similar to wading boats, one can not use felt soled boots for fishing, but you can duck hunt, bird watch, hike etc...in water with felt soled boots all you want, you just can not fish with felt soled boots.

    So if the personal use dip net fishery ends July 31st as a conservation concern to reduce coho harverst, then why do the commercial fishermen continue to fish? Seems if there is a conservation concern for coho more would be caught in the commercial fishery than the dip net fishery.

  8. #8

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by yukon View Post
    I really hate to jump in this, but.......limiting to 50hp in the dipnet fishery would not affect the commercial drift fleet. It is currently a 4 stroke/DFI only fishery, but I can take an old 2 stroke down there anytime I want and go water skiing, cruising, bird watching etc...anything but dipnetting. Commercial fishermen can still use a 2stroke to access their drift boats. One can not use a 2 stroke for the act of dipnetting. the BOF could write a regulation requiring lower than a 50hp 4 stroke or DFI for the act of dipnetting. BOF can only deal with a fishery. Similar to wading boats, one can not use felt soled boots for fishing, but you can duck hunt, bird watch, hike etc...in water with felt soled boots all you want, you just can not fish with felt soled boots.

    So if the personal use dip net fishery ends July 31st as a conservation concern to reduce coho harverst, then why do the commercial fishermen continue to fish? Seems if there is a conservation concern for coho more would be caught in the commercial fishery than the dip net fishery.
    Thanks Yukon for jumping in - and for doing it without the personal jabs that some can't resist. You are right about the motor restrictions. The BOF can only limit what people do on the river with regard to fishing.

    Coho harvest concerns are not the only reason the PU fishery on the Kenai closes on July 31st, just one of the reasons that KRSA and the big money lobby has been ok with the season ending then. I don't doubt that they are changing tune since they are increasingly seeking support from the PU fishery, and since efforts like a 50hp rule will increase barriers into the fishery, leading more to utilize guides (which I am totally ok with).

    The Kasilof PU fishery is open in August. Anyone look to see how many people actually utilize that fishery in August?

  9. #9
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    1,655

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by yukon View Post
    So if the personal use dip net fishery ends July 31st as a conservation concern to reduce coho harverst, then why do the commercial fishermen continue to fish? Seems if there is a conservation concern for coho more would be caught in the commercial fishery than the dip net fishery.
    Probably the same reason it starts July 10th (during commercial season) to minimize harvest of late-run Kings.

  10. #10
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    welfare state of Alaska
    Posts
    4,572

    Default WRONG- again

    If you want to make personal attacks on me or anyone else - I would advise you to check your facts carefully before you hit the keyboard.

    Many of us on the forum followed the debate about 2 strokes and the 35/50 hp limits and know the background. The HP limit was only on the river above the river or special use area ; the area around the mouth / below the bridge was never restricted to HP as far as I can determine.

    While the hydrocarbon level was "cleaned-up" in the lower river below the bridge, I can't find where anyone ever showed that the levels were a problem other than regulatory. I'm not aware of any improvements in the fisheries resulting from the 2 stroke band below the bridge - there may be some upstream but I haven't seen anything on them either.

    ACR 6 points out the hazards of unlimited size and HP; limited the HP to 50 would be a safety issue. Allowing 2-strokes would most likely not affect the environment at all, and could be a compromise position. Commercial fishing would not be effected, other than there would be smaller wakes from the smaller boats. That would be a benefit in some cases.


    Quote Originally Posted by Funstastic View Post
    You should inform yourself before recklessly suggesting regulations be changed.

    2-strokes were eliminated as part of an Action Plan due to high hydrocarbon levels that caused the Kenai River to become "impaired" listed with EPA/Clean Water Act. Allowing 2-strokes again would likely result in the Kenai River being listed impaired again.

    HP was limited to 50, along with boat size, due to wake and bank erosion issues. Limiting the HP to 50 below the Ames Bridge (where the dip net fishery takes place) would eliminate all other users who require more HP such as the entire commercial drift fleet, some ESSN fishermen, and any other saltwater vessels or sports fishermen launching or mooring in that area. It is a multi-use, multi-user area, not just a dip net area.

    Personal Use dipnetting ends July 31 as a conservation concern - a measure to reduce Coho harvest.
    Living the urban lifestyle so I can pay my way and for my family's needs, and support my country. And you?
    ".. ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country" JFK

  11. #11
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    3,018

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Funstastic View Post
    Probably the same reason it starts July 10th (during commercial season) to minimize harvest of late-run Kings.
    That doesn't make sense to me, can you clarify?

    If the dip net fishery starts at roughly the same time as the essn to minimize harvest of late run kings, but the dip net fishery ends July 31st to save cohos,as a conservation concern, as you say, but the commercial fishery continues until August 10th or so. I might be reading into your statement about minimizing late run kings caught and a conservation concern for cohos in the wrong way. Thanks for clarifying.

  12. #12
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    welfare state of Alaska
    Posts
    4,572

    Default ???

    The whole issue of the dates for dip netting and 24 hr dip netting does not appear to be explained by the concern for the kings or silvers.

    If kings were a concern just ban retention - the kings can be returned to the water with minimum injury from dip nets.

    And as you point out - the commercial season extended well into August so silvers couldn't have been too much of a concern. However - using 2 strokes in the lower river appears to only be banned in July. There is an easy work-around for that also - just allow shore dip netting or extend the ban on two strokes for the dip netting season.

    What would happen if dip netting dates, 24 hr dip netting, and extended limits for sport fishing were all tied to emergency openers for the commercial guys? If there are that many fish to allow an emergency opener we should all share in the wealth I believe. If there are concerns about the number of fish - simply keep everything as written and scrap the emergency openings.

    Good will and harmony would be much better if we all followed the same standards.


    Quote Originally Posted by yukon View Post
    That doesn't make sense to me, can you clarify?

    If the dip net fishery starts at roughly the same time as the essn to minimize harvest of late run kings, but the dip net fishery ends July 31st to save cohos,as a conservation concern, as you say, but the commercial fishery continues until August 10th or so. I might be reading into your statement about minimizing late run kings caught and a conservation concern for cohos in the wrong way. Thanks for clarifying.
    Living the urban lifestyle so I can pay my way and for my family's needs, and support my country. And you?
    ".. ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country" JFK

  13. #13

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tvfinak View Post
    Allowing 2-strokes would most likely not affect the environment at all, and could be a compromise position.
    You're joking, right? Most 2 stroke outboards are going on 2 decades old. They burn (or don't burn and instead dump into the river) at least twice as much gas, and are twice as loud. Keep em off the river, thanks.

    Quote Originally Posted by yukon View Post
    That doesn't make sense to me, can you clarify?

    If the dip net fishery starts at roughly the same time as the essn to minimize harvest of late run kings, but the dip net fishery ends July 31st to save cohos,as a conservation concern, as you say, but the commercial fishery continues until August 10th or so. I might be reading into your statement about minimizing late run kings caught and a conservation concern for cohos in the wrong way. Thanks for clarifying.
    I think Fun might be suggesting that the PU season is the way it is due in no small part to pressure from the sportfish lobby. Seems in the past, most of you have preferred that they keep it in July and focus on the bulk of the sockeye run. Not an unreasonable position, IMO, especially considering the amount of active management this fishery requires.

  14. #14
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    welfare state of Alaska
    Posts
    4,572

    Default perhaps?

    Does that apply for the commercial guys also that still them? They aren't banned like the dip netters in July as you are aware.


    Quote Originally Posted by smithtb View Post
    You're joking, right? Most 2 stroke outboards are going on 2 decades old. They burn (or don't burn and instead dump into the river) at least twice as much gas, and are twice as loud. Keep em off the river, thanks. .

    I also suspect it was a sell-out by the KRSA and the guides. The KSRA wanted the kings, guides wanted the kings, and silvers after the sockeye season was over or closed, and the comm guys obviously wanted the sockeyes, so the average Joe got the shaft yet again.


    Quote Originally Posted by smithtb View Post
    I think Fun might be suggesting that the PU season is the way it is due in no small part to pressure from the sportfish lobby. Seems in the past, most of you have preferred that they keep it in July and focus on the bulk of the sockeye run. Not an unreasonable position, IMO, especially considering the amount of active management this fishery requires.
    Living the urban lifestyle so I can pay my way and for my family's needs, and support my country. And you?
    ".. ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country" JFK

  15. #15
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    3,018

    Default

    I have no idea what "the lobby" wanted. I agree the less added pressure we can put on silvers the better. The dip net fishery should be on the sockeyes. I haven't participated in the dip net fishery in over 10 years, too crazy for me.

  16. #16
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    1,655

    Default

    tvfinak, while stating that you should inform yourself before making reckless suggestions might hurt your feelings, it is not a personal attack.

    It struck me as both uninformed and reckless to suggest reinstating 2-strokes on a river that was listed hydrocarbon impaired because of 2-strokes.

    It continues to strike me that way, particularly after your comment implying that there was no problem other than regulatory, as if violating Clean Water Act regulations is not a problem. Additionally, you talk about improvements in the fisheries, when improving the fishery was not the intent of the 2-stroke ban - meeting clean water regulations was.

    I did not say HP was restricted below the bridge. I told you why it was limited to 50 HP, because that reason why had little to do with the safety you seek in the dip net fishery via 50 HP.

    I mentioned the drift fleet, ESSN, and other users because that was a bone of contention during the HP and 2-stroke ban - why they were exempted.

    It also struck me as both uninformed and reckless to think that a HP limit and reinstating 2-strokes would eliminate the July 31st dip net season end. Only someone who does not understand why the season ends July 31 would say that.

    tvfinak, for the record, I would like to see a safer dip net fishery and have no problem with the right kind of restrictions.

  17. #17
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    1,655

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by yukon View Post
    That doesn't make sense to me, can you clarify?

    If the dip net fishery starts at roughly the same time as the essn to minimize harvest of late run kings, but the dip net fishery ends July 31st to save cohos,as a conservation concern, as you say, but the commercial fishery continues until August 10th or so. I might be reading into your statement about minimizing late run kings caught and a conservation concern for cohos in the wrong way. Thanks for clarifying.
    It's straight from ADFG, so if it doesn't make sense you might want to clarify it with them.

    http://www.adfg.alaska.gov/index.cfm...naiSalmon.main


    I was told it is because both the Kenai King and Kenai Coho are managed primarily for the sport and guided fisheries. That requires minimizing harvest in other fisheries. The Kenai River Coho and Chinook Salmon Management Plans are pretty clear...

    http://www.touchngo.com/lglcntr/akst...section080.htm
    http://www.touchngo.com/lglcntr/akst...section359.htm

  18. #18

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tvfinak View Post
    Does that apply for the commercial guys also that still them? They aren't banned like the dip netters in July as you are aware.
    How many commercial guys did you see in the river this year running 2 stroke outboards? Are you worried about managing these fishery responsibly, or is parity and "fairness" your only concern?

    Quote Originally Posted by tvfinak View Post
    I also suspect it was a sell-out by the KRSA and the guides. The KSRA wanted the kings, guides wanted the kings, and silvers after the sockeye season was over or closed, and the comm guys obviously wanted the sockeyes, so the average Joe got the shaft yet again.
    This fishery was created in an already fully allocated fishery. It has been allowed to grow and grow. Stop acting like you are losing opportunity. Nothing could be further from the truth.

    Quote Originally Posted by yukon View Post
    I have no idea what "the lobby" wanted. I agree the less added pressure we can put on silvers the better. The dip net fishery should be on the sockeyes. I haven't participated in the dip net fishery in over 10 years, too crazy for me.
    Not sure what the right name is for this group of people, but lobby was the nicest one I could think of. Big group of interconnected power players who've had a major influence in fish politics for a long time, and who were instrumental in creating the PU fishery - with the intention of using it to help kill the commercial fishery. Many if not most are connected to the commercialized sector of our sport fishery - guiding, lodging, real estate, 4 stroke outboards, etc...

    I'd like to put as much pressure on the silvers as is sustainable... But seriously, I think most people are ok with the PU season as is. No doubt there will be a major push to extend the season, and a lot of dwelling on the historical fairness aspect, as TV and Medred exemplify, but for the most part this comes from the allocation battlers, not actual fishermen.

    But what do I know, I'm just a slave trader.....

  19. #19
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    3,018

    Default

    Thanks for the clarification.

  20. #20
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    4,997

    Default

    Guys. Just read through numerous posts and frankly I am shocked with the misinformation. Here is one example. July 31 closure of dip net fishery was allocative. Coho are allocated to sport and impact commercial fishing. No conservation issue when fishery created.

    Next. The ban on two strokes is a dnr regulation not bof. Therefore they could not go below mile 4

    I am 3000 miles away from uci and glad i am right now

Page 1 of 5 123 ... 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
  •