Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 65

Thread: What were you thinking Kenai Guides!?

  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Kenai, Alaska
    Posts
    195

    Default What were you thinking Kenai Guides!?

    I have taken my first look at Kenai River sport fish king salmon proposals. I am not anti-guide by any means but I am absolutly astounded by the greed and ignorance evidenced by several of the proposals submitted by guides. Totally unbelievable! This is not going to help your reputation guides: Opening up known spawning and staging areas that have been closed for years; starting off the much distressed early run with the use of bait; doing away with the early run slot limit; allowing guided fishing 24 hours per day during parts of the season; allowing guided fishing on Sundays; and allowing the use of treble hooks. And there are more. The above are by individual guides and I certainly hope that the guides association takes a strong stand againt these.

    Thankfully there a couple guides out there who understand what is going on and have a concern for the resource. Kudos to you guys and your more consevative proposals, one which would introduce the slot limit to the late run.

    I'll provide a link to the Upper Cook Inlet proposals on my next post as I have to go retrieve it.

  2. #2

  3. #3
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    3,080

    Default

    I think there were 2 guides that put those proposals in, they do no speak for the guides, nor the guide association.

  4. #4
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Kenai, Alaska
    Posts
    195

    Default

    Yukon: It would be very beneficial for the guide association to get these guys to withdraw these stupid proposals prior to the first round of advisory board meetings and definately before the Fish Board meeting. These proposals reflect badly on guides and are in no way going anywhere, especially in light of this season. It would save a lot of time at meetings and I think the BOF would appreciate the guide association taking this action. Don't know if you are a member but if you agree perhaps you could pass the idea along to the appropriate people. Then again, knowing the two main guides involved, this is probably a long shot!

  5. #5
    Member fullbush's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Wasilla
    Posts
    2,674

    Default

    When is the deadline for proposals, or are we past it?
    If not somebody needs to propose barbless hooks in all salmon streams to get a handle on this snagging crap.

  6. #6
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    5,534

    Default

    All user groups have figured out that putting proposals in that are controversial is not good for their organization unless they have some other objective - like building a record for a lawsuit. So when I see groups say that individuals put these in that does not answer the question - are you supporting them or not? I can tell you from my experience that all organizations have used individuals to put in the organization's desired outcome and then lobby for it in public or behind closed doors. If it goes wrong they say they did not put the proposal in. I am sure Mr. Fish has experienced this first hand.

    So I really do not care who put it in but what are the organizations public and private positions? Just keep that in the back of your mind when looking at the responses to the proposal discussions on this forum. So in this case what is the guide associations written stated position on these proposals? What are the other organizations positions? I know KAFC has not taken any positions yet as it is early in the process but they will within a short period of time.

  7. #7
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    3,080

    Default

    From what I know the KPGA has not taken positions on any proposal. Those meetings will happen this fall and winter.

    Nerka, believe me, the KPGA did not put any individual up to put in any proposal on their behalf, none. If the guide association supports something, they will put in a proposal, if not, they don't put in the proposal.

    Let's not talk about some of the proposals that commercial fishermen put in regarding in river users, sportfishers and dipnetters. That will be for another thread.

  8. #8
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    2,883

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by yukon View Post
    If the guide association supports something, they will put in a proposal, if not, they don't put in the proposal.
    I would disagree. KPGA commonly supports proposals they don't put in, particularly those of their members, or those that benefit their guides. And likewise, individual leaders of KPGA submit self-benefitting proposals under the organization's moniker. We have seen time and time again where an individual guide makes a proposal, and KPGA waits for the response before they go all in or not. And likewise we have seen the KPGA leadership take the bull by the horns without necessarily having their full membership in agreement.

    I'm sure yukon will argue it differently, but I take his view with a grain of salt since he is a guide and member of KPGA.

  9. #9
    Member thewhop2000's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Wasilla
    Posts
    2,366

    Default

    I don't know about in the past but when two people convinced the Kenai/Soldotna AC to put in a proposal to do away with King retention in the dipnet fishery, I received calls from the president and three other members of KPGA and all were in agreement that this was not right. It would be like telling your friends and neighbors that they can't retain kings but certain other groups could. Now... that proposal would benefit guides and yet, they do not support it. So the assumption that you made in the last post is, in my mind, moot, or in your words, misguided.
    BTW, I am not a guide nor a member of KPGA
    If a dipnetter dips a fish and there is no one around to see/hear it, Did he really dip?

  10. #10
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    2,883

    Default

    Whop, I would ascertain that guides don't support that proposal because, even though it might benefit them, they would never get the support of the dipnetters or public. They know that. They are better off becoming allies with the dippers and joining forces against the commercial guys. That will get them way more Kings. Politics. Not to mention I doubt the number of Kings taken in the dipnet fishery effects their guide fishery much.

    BTW, I did not say KPGA supports every proposal that might benefit them, so my points above were not moot or misguided. And although you might not be a guide nor member of KPGA, you are the leader of the dipnet association. So you do have a special interest where these proposals are concerned...another grain of salt.

    As for Kings in dipnets...As poor as the size and runs are lately, I see no reason to keep Kings caught in a dipnet. We are in trouble here with the Kings and there are plenty of sockeye to go around. It is not about neighbors and friends not keeping Kings while other users can. It's about method and means. Your neighbors and friends can always catch Kings just like anyone else ever did...on a rod/reel or even a commercial gill net.

  11. #11
    Member fullbush's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Wasilla
    Posts
    2,674

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fullbush View Post
    When is the deadline for proposals, or are we past it?
    If not somebody needs to propose barbless hooks in all salmon streams to get a handle on this snagging crap.
    you guys have me on your iggy list? Nerka do you hear me? grampy, whop? maybe its just a dumb question.
    Last edited by fullbush; 08-05-2010 at 19:01. Reason: Hello?

  12. #12
    Member thewhop2000's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Wasilla
    Posts
    2,366

    Default

    We are waaaaaaay past the deadline for proposals, the book just came out with all that were vetted and accepted. Better luck next year if it pertains to all salmon fishing, not just in UCI. If it only pertains to UCI,see you in three years. Hope that helps and Hello back at ya. BTW, what is an iggy list?
    Last edited by thewhop2000; 08-05-2010 at 19:39. Reason: cause I can!!!
    If a dipnetter dips a fish and there is no one around to see/hear it, Did he really dip?

  13. #13
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    5,534

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fullbush View Post
    you guys have me on your iggy list? Nerka do you hear me? grampy, whop? maybe its just a dumb question.
    I have been away dealing with a sick mother (91 and still kicking) so the answer is no I do not have you on an ignore list. The proposal deadline is past but that does not mean much. Once a regulation is opened up by a proposal the whole topic is open for discussion including new ideas. So you can pretty much tackle anything given the number of regulations open for discussion.

  14. #14
    Member fullbush's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Wasilla
    Posts
    2,674

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by thewhop2000 View Post
    We are waaaaaaay past the deadline for proposals, the book just came out with all that were vetted and accepted. Better luck next year if it pertains to all salmon fishing, not just in UCI. If it only pertains to UCI,see you in three years. Hope that helps and Hello back at ya. BTW, what is an iggy list?
    iggy=ignore
    whop you are hilarious! BTW when this dipnetting fad passes we need your humor over at CDFU
    Last edited by fullbush; 08-05-2010 at 20:50. Reason: LMFAO! (whoops)

  15. #15
    Member fullbush's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Wasilla
    Posts
    2,674

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nerka View Post
    I have been away dealing with a sick mother (91 and still kicking) so the answer is no I do not have you on an ignore list. The proposal deadline is past but that does not mean much. Once a regulation is opened up by a proposal the whole topic is open for discussion including new ideas. So you can pretty much tackle anything given the number of regulations open for discussion.
    Thanks for the reply Nerka
    Heres to a speedy recovery to your kicking mom

  16. #16
    Member thewhop2000's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Wasilla
    Posts
    2,366

    Default

    My friend, when this dipnetting fad passes, you and I will be in the passes. As an afterthought to our family elders. Sorry to say, it won't go away soon.
    If a dipnetter dips a fish and there is no one around to see/hear it, Did he really dip?

  17. #17
    Member fullbush's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Wasilla
    Posts
    2,674

    Default

    Reality just backhanded me!
    You mean to tell me more people are coming up here
    We're gonna have more humans stomping a mudhole in this joint?
    excuse me but I gotta lay down.
    This is way too much reality

  18. #18
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    soldotna
    Posts
    841

    Default

    First, the proposals were in before this season started so to imply that "WHAT ARE THE GUIDES THINKING" based on this season is way out in left field.

    Second, you cannot and should not manage a fishery based on what happend in one season. Keep it in mind yes but you should not base your management plan on such a small snapshot in the history of the fishery.

    Third, were is the science to back a slot limit in July? What about the commercial fishery that is takng place in Cook Inlet at that time will a slot limit be in effect for that area as well? There is no science that supports a slot in the first run let alone the second run of Kenai Kings. This is feel good biology at its finest.

    Fourth, KRPGA has submitted proposals that its members supported. Any proposal that was submitted without there name on it was done by individuals. The Board of Fish is set up so that everyone has a voice whether you agree with it or not.

    I will be at the BOF and hopefully those that have such strong opinions about how UCI should be managed are there as well.

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

    Default

    ice, the same question could be asked regardless of when the proposals were submitted, or what happened this year.

    The quality of the fishery has been in decline for decades (beginning from when it started), and driven more and more each year by economic influences and politics rather than conservation. Anyone who has a memory and lived here prior to the commericalization, or expereinced that transition, knows it. To pass that off as a "snapshot" in history" is just more bunk by someone who has more concern for his guide industry than what we leave for our grandkids.

    As for science...currently there appears to be a lack of confidence in sonar and management. And in that case, ruling on the side of conservation (slot limits, etc.) rather than status quo is not "feel good" biology. It is precautionary. The commercial fishery may well need to share in that burden of a precautionary approach. However, the commercial fishery had been in swing for many decades without incurring or inducing the current in-river problems. It is time those responsible for the in-river problems, take responsibility. You simply can't cork off the River with hundreds of harassing boats, thousands of fishermen, and cull large fish, decade after decade, without the fishery succumbing.

    KRPGA does not exclusively support their own proposals. They have supported, and not supported, many individual proposals. They frequently support individual guide proposals and frequently not supported individual non-guide proposals. They do what is in the best interest of their commercial, economic-driven industry. That hasn't been the best thing for this fishery, as we are seeing.

    Since you say KRPGA's proposals are member supported, would you please post the membership's "yah/nay" vote breakdown for this year's proposals submitted by KRPGA?

    FWIW, some of us non-guides have attended BOF meetings for nearly half a century now, only to see our suggestions be steam-rolled by organizations like your KRPGA, all in the name of your economic engine run hard. So I have no doubt you will be at the BOF meeting, supporting what benefits your group, and fighting against what benefits other groups. And now here we are in our current situation. Go figure.

  20. #20
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Kenai
    Posts
    233

    Default

    The burden of conservation lies not just with the guides. The practice of harvesting large fish is not just a guide issue. Locals have been doing it for years too. Like it or not, the local users pose just as large a problem as the guided users. As long as we continue to try and solve this problem by throwing the blame at the "other" sport user groups we can count on more of the same results. When we accept that we "all" have a responsibility for caring for the resource, and stand together as sportsmen instead of polarizing ourselves as guides or non guides then maybe we can begin to address the issues. I have seen a big improvement in guide behavior. The reason there are so many of them is because many people want access to the fish in the Kenai. If I am not mistaken the salmon in the Kenai River belong to the people of the United States, not to the people from Kenai and Soldotna. I live here too. I might not like it that I have to share the fish in my back yard with the people of the world, but thats reality. The issues facing the management of Kenai River kings has very little to do with guides or non guides. This year, in my opinion, the management of the fishery showed an alarming lack of leadership. By their own admission, fish and game knew that the counts were inflated, yet they based all of their management decisions on this number. Early bait, harvesting above the bridge, no in river or commercial restrictions, even though there was concern from guides, non guides, biologists, etc etc etc....... With the second run of fish teetering on a disasterous escapement, the set nets were given numerous EOs, further jeopardizing an already pathetic run. All this based on a sonar counter known to be counting "phantom fish". It is pretty hard to do real damage with a rod and reel when so few kings are present. For your information, I know many guides who talked to fish and game to express their concerns and supporting restrictions. I think the real rub with fish and game was that if they restricted in river use then they would have to also restict commercial opportunity. I know that some guides are driven by the fact that the loss of opportunity to fish could mean financial ruin. I know way more who are driven by "having fish for our grandkids". Like I said, as long as we keep fighting between ourselves, expect more of the same. We would stand a much better chance of addressing issues like sonar error, fish and game management decisions based on flawed information, kings leaving the set net sights unrecorded, emergency openers for set nets etc etc etc if we could stand together as sportsmen. When was the last time you witnessed commercial fishermen publicly fighting between themselves? Do you really think that set netters and drifters agree on things....no, but they are smart enough to address these issues behind closed doors and stand united in their "fight" for their interests. So far, it seems to have worked pretty well for them.

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
  •