Page 1 of 6 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 115

Thread: Kenai River guides numbers set record high. . .

  1. #1
    New member
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Soldotna
    Posts
    5,639

    Default Kenai River guides numbers set record high. . .

    from: EAGLE WATCH, Dept. Natural Resources, August 2007:

    "The Kenai River S[pecial] M[anagement] A[rea] has an official total of 439 guides this summer (400 fishing) - an all-time high!"


    Contact:
    Jeanette Wilkinson
    Administrative Assistant
    Director's Office
    DNR-Parks & Outdoor Recreation
    Ph: 269-8700
    Fax: 269-8907




  2. #2
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    3,073

    Default

    What is your point Marcus?

  3. #3
    New member
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Soldotna
    Posts
    5,639

    Smile You first. . .

    Quote Originally Posted by yukon View Post
    What is your point Marcus?

    You first . . . answer the question I asked you some days ago:

    Do you support a continuance of Cook Inlet's gill-net industry or would you too like to see it gone? . .


  4. #4
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    3,073

    Default

    I support it, I would just like to see more time between EO's.

  5. #5

    Default Hmm......

    Quote Originally Posted by Marcus View Post
    from: EAGLE WATCH, Dept. Natural Resources, August 2007:

    "The Kenai River S[pecial] M[anagement] A[rea] has an official total of 439 guides this summer (400 fishing) - an all-time high!"

    400 fishing guides (part of which are Trout and Sockeye guides.) using a single hook on each of up to 4 rods. -VS- 334 Cook inlet gill net permit holders each deploying several hundred feet of net.. Hmmm.....

  6. #6
    New member
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Soldotna
    Posts
    5,639

    Smile Fair enough. . .

    Quote Originally Posted by yukon View Post
    I support it, I would just like to see more time between EO's.
    And here's my answer:

    First of all, I didn't make the observation about record Kenai River guide numbers, DNR did, and I have no idea what their point was.

    I posted DNR's observation, copied from their August newsletter, simply to pass on information, letting readers form any opinion they wish.

    My point was to pass on objective information.

    Thanks. . .


  7. #7
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    3,073

    Default

    You kill me Marcus! Really.......becuase you really must think we are as dumb as a block of wood. Do you really think you are fooling anyone? Wow!

  8. #8
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    3,073

    Default

    Also, seems when doc posts similar information, just information, you accuse him of dividing the community and posting it just to inflame people. Man, I can't believe your double standards. I must have "Stupid" written accross my face. I bet I do, I should go look in the mirror right now.........
    Wow, didn't find a mirror but met a dim-witted individual that looks a lot like me, I tried to shake his had but there seemed to be a peice of glass inbetween us.

  9. #9
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    3,073

    Default

    Okay, I have calmed down a little, very little, I will play your game.

    Do you think there are too many guides?

    Simple answer, yes or no
    Then I will follow up.

  10. #10
    New member
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Soldotna
    Posts
    5,639

    Smile Guides are not the problem. . .

    Quote Originally Posted by yukon View Post
    Okay, I have calmed down a little, very little, I will play your game.

    Do you think there are too many guides?

    Simple answer, yes or no
    Then I will follow up.
    A yes or no answer doesn't fit because I have never been and am not now in favor of limiting guide numbers. . .

    I am in favor of limiting resident/nonresident, methods, means, times, and other options, letting the marketplace dictate the number of guides.

    Guides are not the problem. The problem is "opportunity."


  11. #11
    Member Danny Boy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Kenai
    Posts
    182

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by yukon View Post
    You kill me Marcus! Really.......becuase you really must think we are as dumb as a block of wood. Do you really think you are fooling anyone? Wow!
    Yukon, if I pose a question to you in this thread, will you answer it?

    I haven't had a comemrcial fisherman spoil a trip on the Kenai River for me yet. Sure, I've fished some days when it's been slow because the nets are out, but that's an accepted part of the process. If I want bumper-to-bumper traffic, I can either move to Chicago or fish the Kenai in July. There have certainly been a fair number of days when the guides have made it less than desirable.

  12. #12
    New member
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Soldotna
    Posts
    5,639

    Thumbs up Limiting "opportunity," not guides. . .

    Consider how limiting nonresidents to taking 50 lbs. of fish per head-of-household out of state with additional family members limited to 10 lbs. of fish taken out of state. . .

    That's just one example—and one that needs to be explored—of limiting opportunity. Others abound. Guide numbers would adjust because guides are nothing more than a free-market response to "opportunity."

    Guides aren't the problem. . . opportunity is the problem. . .


  13. #13
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    3,073

    Default

    Danny Boy ask away, Honestly sorry I didn't answer your last set, keep it simple for me, only a question or two per post, otherwise I get confused! LOL

    To your crowded July situation. Depends on when and where you fish, there are plenty of times in the peak of July where the lower river is not crowded. One day on a July Friday afternoon I was going in around 3:00 and counted 8 boats between Beaver Creek and the actual Eagle Rock, granted same stretch at 7:00am is a little different. Heck many days I started at the Sonar Counter at 6:00am and there were 3 or 4 boats. I don't consider either of those situations crowded.

    Honestly, I have more trouble with non-guides than I do guides. The guys going dipnetting sometimes are very dangerous, obviously not familiar with the travel lanes, they almost hit some guys just backtrolling. The non-guides that you see fishing day in and day out are awesome and great fishermen.

  14. #14
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    3,073

    Default

    Marcus, as far as your answer I don't know what to do because you say that all the time but never come up with any concrete solutions so until I see an actual plan I won't comment further, thanks.

    Dannyboy, ask away.

  15. #15

    Default Whew!

    Thank God for you clarifying that non-guide thing Yukon. I was about to get offended!

  16. #16
    Member Danny Boy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Kenai
    Posts
    182

    Default

    I think Marcus provided a clarifying thought; the problem is, in many facets, the opportunity rather than the number of guides. I concur with that thought although in many fashions opportunity can breed greed. I'd like to see zero non-resident guides. I'd like to see limited entry. For every potential guide who might pass up the chance to guide on the Kenai with respect for the resource, there are five ready and willing to take his/her place. I'm quite verbal when expressing my distaste for the state of the Kenai and most of the issues with the river correlate to the number of boats on the water so please don't take it personally if you happen to guide on the Kenai and I embark on a rant.

    Yukon - I know you and a number of other guides peruse these threads and I posed a significant number of questions in the KAFC thread that NOT ONE OF YOU answered. If one at a time's easier, we can start chipping away.

    What solution would you offer to provide less strenuous impact on the Kenai to allow for a more peaceful fishery and prolonged life of the resource?

    Without providing for proper management of the Kenai, an economy fueled by its bounty will not exist.

  17. #17

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Danny Boy View Post
    I. I'd like to see zero non-resident guides. I'd like to see limited entry. .
    What solution would you offer to provide less strenuous impact on the Kenai to allow for a more peaceful fishery and prolonged life of the resource?

    .
    The United States of America bought Alaska for all of its citizens, not just the ones who chose to live there.

  18. #18
    Mark
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Marcus View Post
    Originally Posted by yukon
    Okay, I have calmed down a little, very little, I will play your game.

    Do you think there are too many guides?

    Simple answer, yes or no
    Then I will follow up.
    A yes or no answer doesn't fit because I have never been and am not now in favor of limiting guide numbers. . .

    I am in favor of limiting resident/nonresident, methods, means, times, and other options, letting the marketplace dictate the number of guides.

    Guides are not the problem. The problem is "opportunity."

    In other words, you want creative access restrictions like we have in the Alaska hunting world: Controlled use areas, registration permits, draw permits, subsistence permits, short seasons, timed when the animal is most wary and inaccessible, closed areas, pack meat out on the bone, cut antlers, harvest hides and kidneys, etc, etc, etc.

    In other words, you have to be half lawyer in order to enjoy the outdoors legally.

    It works, I suppose. But I'm not sure how many folks are happy with it; both on the state management side as well as the public side..........

    And what's more is that limiting opportunity hits the do-it-yourself guy, too............

  19. #19
    Mark
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hawg boss View Post
    Originally Posted by Danny Boy
    I. I'd like to see zero non-resident guides. I'd like to see limited entry. .
    What solution would you offer to provide less strenuous impact on the Kenai to allow for a more peaceful fishery and prolonged life of the resource?
    The United States of America bought Alaska for all of its citizens, not just the ones who chose to live there.
    No doubt about that, and they proved it when Congress put Alaska back into colonial status with the passage of ANILCA.

  20. #20

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Danny Boy View Post
    I
    What solution would you offer to provide less strenuous impact on the Kenai to allow for a more peaceful fishery and prolonged life of the resource?

    .

    Non guided anglers get 1/2 of every day and 2 full days to themselves already. I have not heard of such a thing anywhere else in the country. I am certain that if we were so inclined we could file suit for discrimination as it is not the guides who are fishing but other licensed anglers.

    I am satisfied to let it be where it is, but I do get a bit upset that I cant fish by myself from my own boat on a sunday, if I am so inclined.

Page 1 of 6 123 ... 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
  •