Page 1 of 10 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 187

Thread: Comments Requested - New Limits on Sports Fishing

  1. #1

    Default Comments Requested - New Limits on Sports Fishing

    I am doing an article for the next issue of Sportsman's News Magazine and would like any of your comments on the new limits and the emergency regulations curbing sports fishing in Alaska to compensate for the overfishing by commercial operators.

    1) should sports fishermen have to pay for the sins of the commercial fishermen?
    2) I see lots of numbers on how many fish are harvested by commercial fishermen, but nothing on how many fish are harvested by sports fishermen. Anyone have a source for those numbers?
    3) Any thoughts on how much tourist revenue Alaska stands to loose as a result of these new regulations.

    Any thoughts or directions greatly appreciated. Thanks.

    Dan Kidder
    Managing Editor
    Sportsman's News

  2. #2
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    1,293

    Default

    1) I don't think you know what you are talking about.

    2) You should know what you are talking about to ask a pertinent question

    3)"to compensate for the overfishing by commercial operators." is the main one.......care to explain with facts how that is so? Which commercial operators? Overfishing in what way?

    4) I think you are intentionally trying to starts some kind of flame thread and wonder if you are really even writing an article.

    Anyway have to go teach some fish ID. Have a great day, and think about how you could illuminate us on your position better if you would.

  3. #3
    Sponsor potbuilder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Palmer
    Posts
    4,229

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sportsman's News View Post
    I am doing an article for the next issue of Sportsman's News Magazine and would like any of your comments on the new limits and the emergency regulations curbing sports fishing in Alaska to compensate for the overfishing by commercial operators.

    1) should sports fishermen have to pay for the sins of the commercial fishermen?
    2) I see lots of numbers on how many fish are harvested by commercial fishermen, but nothing on how many fish are harvested by sports fishermen. Anyone have a source for those numbers?
    3) Any thoughts on how much tourist revenue Alaska stands to loose as a result of these new regulations.

    Any thoughts or directions greatly appreciated. Thanks.

    Dan Kidder
    Managing Editor
    Sportsman's News
    Get your wording right! By "commercial fishermen" do you mean the longliners or the charter boats??? The longliners have a limited number of pounds to catch(quota's) but there are more and more charter boats in business each year and that in turn means more people going out on the charters and catching more fish. So why should the fish be taken away from the true commercial fishermen and be given to the new charter operators. It's like me going to your job and saying go take a break(without pay) and i'm going to do your job for awhile because i want to do what your doing. I think you got things backwards its, should the commercial fishermen have to pay(with fish) for the sins(large growth) of the charter fisheries.

    Alaska Shrimp Pots

    Rigid & Folding Shrimp & Crab Pots
    Electra Dyne Pot Haulers
    Ropes, Buoys, Bait
    alaskashrimppots.com
    akshrimppots@mtaonline.net
    907 775 1692

  4. #4
    Member DRIFTER_016's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Yellowknife, NWT
    Posts
    3,318

    Default

    Commercial=those that make their living removing fish from the available stocks. Wether it be by the charter fleet, commercial netters/long liners etc. This includes targetted as well as bycatch species.

    I'm one of your tourists and I think there are already repercussions from the decreased limits in south east AK. One of the captains in Juneau reported last week that he had to refund $7500 due to cancellations.
    As an outsider I don't agree at all with sports fishermen having to foot the bill for commercial overharvest.

    I am particularly bitter that as a non Alaskan I have to cough up $145 for a seasonal license to pay for a hatchery so that commercial fishermen can keep up their catch ratios. I think as the main consumer of fisheries stocks that the cost of the new hacheries should be put on them. I would be even more bitter if I was there to fish kings and had to pony up another $100 for a king stamp. As a tourist I can forsee a sizable drop in tourist revenues due to the make the tourists pay attitude of the ADFG.
    In my previous 4 trips to Alaska I have harvested 4 fish, 2 chicken halibut and 2 silvers for the BBQ back at camp.

    If Alaska wants to charge non resident sportsmen to build their new hatcheries the least they could do is offer a conservation license for those of us that do not fill our coolers for the trip outside.

    It may be time for me to start filling my cooler to make it worth while paying the $145 just to fish in Alaska.

    That's my .02 from an outsider.

  5. #5
    Member bushrat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Now residing in Fairbanks from the bush
    Posts
    4,363

    Default Dan Kidder - you are way over the line

    Dear Dan,

    We have no way of telling if you really are Dan Kidder or not, but if you really are him, then as managing editor of the official publication of Sportsman's Warehouse, you are completely unaware of journalistic integrity, ethics, and objectivsim in reporting. Talk about coming in with an extremely biased slant! Not only is your post requesting information ridiculous and pot-stirring more than anything, but if this is the way Sportsman's Warehouse intends to do business, then they have just lost a customer.

    Sincerely,

  6. #6
    Member bushrat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Now residing in Fairbanks from the bush
    Posts
    4,363

    Default Dan Kidder - completely over the line


  7. #7
    New member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    49

    Default Premise problems

    I also don't agree with the bias of your premise. Perhaps you should scrap the us vs. them mentality and do some real conservation research before publishing said article.

  8. #8
    Member Alaska Gray's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Anchorage, Alaska, United States
    Posts
    4,925

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sportsman's News View Post
    .

    1) should sports fishermen have to pay for the sins of the commercial fishermen?
    2) I see lots of numbers on how many fish are harvested by commercial fishermen, but nothing on how many fish are harvested by sports fishermen. Anyone have a source for those numbers?
    3) Any thoughts on how much tourist revenue Alaska stands to loose as a result of these new regulations.
    1) We all need to make adjustments to preseve what we have before it's to far gone to bring back. We need to get away from the mentallity "as long it dosen't affect me I'm not worried about it" What one does affects all.
    It really stinks when we have to point/single out one group IE, commerical, charters, or private fisherman. this turns everyone against that group.

    2) Fish and Game does dock checks and takes samples. Give them a call. I had this done to me about a dozen times. They also ask where (location) the fish was caught.

    3) This year might not be to bad but next year should affect the charters. I do belive the price of gas will have a bigger affect of the tourist going out. Charters are going have to raise prices to maintain there business and with the one fish limit I don't see people paying all that money just for one fish.
    Living the Alaskan Dream
    Gary Keller
    Anchorage, AK

  9. #9
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    2,883

    Default

    I kinda agree with ABF.

    Exactly what fishery(s) are you talking about? How are they being "overfished" by commercial fishermen? Hopefully you aware that emergency orders are a lawful, effective, and successful way to manage Alaska fisheries.

    1) What "sins of commercial fishermen" are you talking about? It seems to me you're already bias, which makes for horrible journalism. Hopefully you realize it's a two-way street...commercial fishermen are also regulated by what happens in the sport fishing industry, and the sportsfishing industry is not without their own "sins".

    2) Please do some research. ADF&G will have data available for most fisheries. Also consider the negative impacts sportfishing has on other important fish-rearing aspects...habitat degradation, pollution, etc. and the costs associated with rehabilitation.

    3) "Tourist revenue" is of little concern in the face of healthy fisheries and the future of healthy fisheries for generations to come.

    Dan, what experience do you have with these fisheries that qualifies you for writing an article, and where have you gotten your information so far? Unfortunately so many people believe what they read in magazines, when really what they are reading is nothing more than misinformation written by someone with either an agenda, or someone who doesn't understand what they are writing. You're in a perfect position to do what is right and provide accurate, non-bias information. Lets hope you do that.

    Edit: Thanks bushrat...I just read that.

  10. #10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sportsman's News View Post
    I am doing an article for the next issue of Sportsman's News Magazine and would like any of your comments on the new limits and the emergency regulations curbing sports fishing in Alaska to compensate for the overfishing by commercial operators.

    1) should sports fishermen have to pay for the sins of the commercial fishermen?
    2) I see lots of numbers on how many fish are harvested by commercial fishermen, but nothing on how many fish are harvested by sports fishermen. Anyone have a source for those numbers?
    3) Any thoughts on how much tourist revenue Alaska stands to loose as a result of these new regulations.

    Any thoughts or directions greatly appreciated. Thanks.

    Dan Kidder
    Managing Editor
    Sportsman's News
    is this someone,s idea of a very bad joke?

  11. #11
    Mark
    Guest

    Default

    Well, this thread ought to end up being a real kick in the pants.

    Quote Originally Posted by bushrat View Post
    Dan Kidder - you are way over the line......
    Well, Dan, welcome to the "Over the Line Club"! I think I'm a charter member.

    Keep up the good work. A few more posts and bushrat will put you on electronic ignore (IOW, cup his hands over his ears, sing "la, la, la, la" repeatedly, and then call you "out of touch with reality".............)

    I agree with potbuilder when it comes to halibut. Commercial fishermen (the ones who catch and sell in bulk) have already been effectively limited with quotas, which is a hellava lot better scheme than the "limited entry" scam that limited commercial salmon fishing.

    More, since IFQs for halibut came into play, the number of charter operators has ballooned. There should be limits on this, too, if fish numbers are shown to be suffering.

    ......2) I see lots of numbers on how many fish are harvested by commercial fishermen, but nothing on how many fish are harvested by sports fishermen. Anyone have a source for those numbers?....
    I don't think you'll find tallys with these numbers consistently from year to year like with the commercial industry, and there should be an effort to acquire them before launching into sport limitations "based on science".

    .....3) Any thoughts on how much tourist revenue Alaska stands to loose as a result of these new regulations.
    I don't care about tourist revenue. I don't gain from it, I'm not employed in an industry that benefits from it, I don't like visiting their homeland, and don't much care if they visit here or not.

  12. #12

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sportsman's News View Post
    I am doing an article for the next issue of Sportsman's News Magazine and would like any of your comments on the new limits and the emergency regulations curbing sports fishing in Alaska to compensate for the overfishing by commercial operators.

    1) should sports fishermen have to pay for the sins of the commercial fishermen?
    2) I see lots of numbers on how many fish are harvested by commercial fishermen, but nothing on how many fish are harvested by sports fishermen. Anyone have a source for those numbers?
    3) Any thoughts on how much tourist revenue Alaska stands to loose as a result of these new regulations.

    Any thoughts or directions greatly appreciated. Thanks.

    Dan Kidder
    Managing Editor
    Sportsman's News
    try asking where the answer isn't implicit in your question. why ask when you already know what you want to hear?

  13. #13
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    2,883

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bushrat
    as managing editor of the official publication of Sportsman's Warehouse
    Well, it is called "Sportsman's" Warehouse, and they make tons of money from sportsfishermen. If it were called "Commercialman's" Warehouse, and sold commercial fishing gear, Dan would be singing (writing) to a different tune.


    DRIFTER_016, nobody is forcing you to come to Alaska. If you don't like their fees or their fisheries, you certainly have the choice to go somewhere else. But I know of no other State that offers the opportunity to take unlimited quantities of salmon, halibut, shrimp, rockfish, trout, clams, crab, etc. for a lousy "$145" in non-res licensing fees. The amount of resource that leaves this state is mind-boggling. Demand for their fish is astounding, and Alaska can't charge enough for it if you ask me.


  14. #14
    Member DRIFTER_016's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Yellowknife, NWT
    Posts
    3,318

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Grampyfishes View Post
    DRIFTER_016, nobody is forcing you to come to Alaska. If you don't like their fees or their fisheries, you certainly have the choice to go somewhere else. But I know of no other State that offers the opportunity to take unlimited quantities of salmon, halibut, shrimp, rockfish, trout, clams, crab, etc. for a lousy "$145" in non-res licensing fees. The amount of resource that leaves this state is mind-boggling. Demand for their fish is astounding, and Alaska can't charge enough for it if you ask me.
    Unlimited=over fishing wether it be by sports or commercial fishiermen. Why is it that commercial fishermen have a quota but sports fishermen can take all they want????
    If you read my post a little closer the reason I'm bitter is because they don't offer an alternative conservation type license for thos of us that don't pillage the fish stocks.
    In Ontario, CA they have regular and conservation licenses, with reduced limits on the conservation licenses.
    Also regulations on posession limits in Canada refer to fish in your posession wether they be frozen & packaged or not. I don't know how the fact that the fish is frozen and vaccume packed it is no longer deemed in posession. If you posess the fish is it not in posession????
    In Canada a fish is deemed in posession until it is consumed.
    Makes sense, no?
    If posession regulations were reformed the strain on the resource would decrease, would it not?
    It's rediculous to me that I can go and get a limit every day and as long as it's processed and frozen it doesn't cout!

  15. #15
    Member Alaska Gray's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Anchorage, Alaska, United States
    Posts
    4,925

    Default

    DRIFTER_016, You bring up an interesting point about "posession".
    Living the Alaskan Dream
    Gary Keller
    Anchorage, AK

  16. #16
    Forum Admin Brian M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Eagle River, AK
    Posts
    13,392

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sportsman's News View Post
    3) Any thoughts on how much tourist revenue Alaska stands to loose as a result of these new regulations.

    Dan Kidder
    Managing Editor
    Sportsman's News
    A managing editor of a large publication that is asking on a forum about lost revenue instead of looking at actual economic projections? One who is pretending to ask a question when the answer to #1 is already contained in the wording of the question? Wow.

    Which "sins" you're referring to? Please don't give me info about East coast fisheries, but instead some specific "sins" of the Alaskan commercial fleet that sport fishermen are having to pay for.

    I already prefer supporting the local shops. This solidifies it for me. I am done with Sportsman's Warehouse for good. I am absolutely appalled that one of their representatives has posted such a divisive and inflammatory statement.

  17. #17
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    1,293

    Default

    I think he might be serious!! Not the best speller but actually Dan Kidder. The website has him listed as an editor or something. Here is his email address from the sportsman's warehouse site.

    dkidder@sportsmansnews.com

  18. #18
    Forum Admin Brian M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Eagle River, AK
    Posts
    13,392

    Default

    There may be some redundancy here, as I merged the two identical threads.

  19. #19
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    2,883

    Default

    DRIFTER_016, unlimited does not mean over-fishing. Take the Kenai River...unlimited number of guides, yet a surplus number of fish escape. The impacts come in other ways...habitat, pollution, crowding, etc. For decades Alaska has allowed an unlimited amount of fish to leave the State, yet their fisheries are sustained. My point was that, after spending money on coming to Alaska and on everything else you buy, you're complaining about paying a lousy $145 in fees for an unlimited amount of fish you can leave Alaska with. Whether you do that or not is beside the point. Most do.

    Commercial fishermen have quotas to establish and keep a sustained fishery.

    Your licensing fees are not compensation for how much fish you take from Alaska. Those fees go to many different faucets that support your opportunity to fish. Management, facilities, etc. And whether you actually take fish home or not, you are still sportfishing, using the resource and those things required to sustain the resource.

    In Canada a fish is deemed in posession until it is consumed.
    Makes sense, no?
    Alaskans consume fish year-round, when those fish only run for a few weeks. So fish must be stock-piled (in possession) before they are consumed. So those types of possession limits do not make sense for Alaskan's since many rely on those fish as a way of life. Whereas a non-resident does not do the same.

    I am in support of a limit, tax, or fee for every pound of sport-caught fish leaving the State.

  20. #20
    Mark
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DRIFTER_016 View Post
    Originally Posted by Grampyfishes
    DRIFTER_016, nobody is forcing you to come to Alaska. If you don't like their fees or their fisheries, you certainly have the choice to go somewhere else. But I know of no other State that offers the opportunity to take unlimited quantities of salmon, halibut, shrimp, rockfish, trout, clams, crab, etc. for a lousy "$145" in non-res licensing fees. The amount of resource that leaves this state is mind-boggling. Demand for their fish is astounding, and Alaska can't charge enough for it if you ask me.
    Unlimited=over fishing wether it be by sports or commercial fishiermen. Why is it that commercial fishermen have a quota but sports fishermen can take all they want????....
    Who interpreted sport fishermen to be "unlimited"?

    There's a limit for everybody except commercial salmon fishermen. They can take all they can catch during openings (which regularly occur on an "emergency" basis whenever the fish are located in giant schools at the mouths of major salmon rivers).

    Grampy writes that "The amount of resource that leaves this state is mind-boggling."

    I agree. The vast majority of fish flesh that leaves this state goes to Japan, and it isn't the sportfishermen who send it there.

Page 1 of 10 123 ... 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
  •