Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 21

Thread: what do you think about these BOf proposals?

  1. #1
    Member AKCAPT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Seward
    Posts
    1,126

    Default what do you think about these BOf proposals?

    1. Dogfish to become a misc. Finfish. Can be used for bait, can be harvsted without a bag limit?

    2. Sport caught pink salmon to be able to be used as bait? Seems like there are plenty of them. Thousands went to waste in Valdez onthe beach, why not catch one and use it for halibut or shirmp pot bait?

    I am interested to hear your comments on both to determine if we should put them in.

  2. #2
    Forum Admin Brian M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Eagle River, AK
    Posts
    13,391

    Default

    #1 - I would fully support this proposal. Dogfish are a tasty sportfish that are far underutilized as a resource. That they are grouped with salmon sharks makes no sense in light of the intent of the 2/year regulations. This would be a win-win proposal, as fishermen would be able to increase their overall daily take of fish while lessening the hassle of losing bait and gear for those targeting only halibut. The population, according to many people that have fished southcentral for decades, has continued to climb without an increase in bag limit. Put this one in.

    #2 - I'm not so sure about this one. In rivers with native pink populations, I would certainly not support it. Allowing the harvest of hatchery pinks in PWS for bait would make sense due to the waste that you mention, but it would be impossible for enforcement to know the origin of the fish. Furthermore, allowing additional harvest of the pinks in PWS is like putting a band-aid on a cut artery. Why not get to the root of the problem instead of just treating the symptom? The fact that we dump millions upon millions of pinks into PWS is a huge ecological experiment with unknown long-term ramifications. The argument that "the ocean is a big place" is a ridiculous support for this large-scale fish dumping. We dump the smolt in, pay the seiners to scoop up enough to feed the hatcheries, let the excess fish swim in circles until they die (thus increasing the eutrification of bays and estruaries, leading eventually to less productive near-shore areas because of this nutrient dumping), and then do it all over again. To what end? To support a small number of aquaculture and fishing jobs at the expense of natural runs and potential long-term ecological damage? Man, I love catching fish, but I just don't get this one. Your proposal has merit, but I'd rather see this one go an entirely different route.

    -Brian

  3. #3
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    1,956

    Default

    I have to agree with B_M. No problem with the dogfish, we sometimes get tired of them even after moving to try and get away from them. as far as the pink, the stocked ones are one thing but native runs should be protected and the normal salmon limits and "rules" stay in place.

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

    Default

    I'm all for the dog fish OPEN SEASON!!!!!!!!!!!
    No way i would ever eat one again. In Maryland I ate one and it was bad

    Not for the Pinks it's a place that has high numbers IE Valdez I would not mind it, but local steams I would not suport it. I have to agree with BM on this one.
    Living the Alaskan Dream
    Gary Keller
    Anchorage, AK

  5. #5
    Member homerdave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    homer, alaska
    Posts
    3,922

    Default dogfish

    I am in agreement with B.M. and co. on the pinks , but i would be more willing to support a dogfish proposall that classed them as a sportfish, say with a 5 per day limit.
    Misc. finfish designation would be an invitation to wanton waste. If cared for properly dogfish are quite tasty.
    Alaska Board of Game 2015 tour... "Kicking the can down the road"
    http://www.alaskabackcountryhunters.org/

  6. #6
    Member Alaska Gray's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Anchorage, Alaska, United States
    Posts
    4,925

    Default

    My two cents!!!! Arrow tooth and dog fish have no purpose in life.
    Living the Alaskan Dream
    Gary Keller
    Anchorage, AK

  7. #7
    Sponsor potbuilder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Palmer
    Posts
    4,229

    Default

    BM,
    What do you mean by this, "We dump the smolt in, pay the seiners to scoop up enough to feed the hatcheries, let the excess fish swim in circles until they die". Who is the "we" and who pays the seiners to scoop??

    What would you think of a gillnet fishery for dogfish for the holders of PWS gillnet permits?? if a market could be found.

    Alaska Shrimp Pots

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

  8. #8
    Forum Admin Brian M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Eagle River, AK
    Posts
    13,391

    Default

    OK, I guess I should say that "we" allow this ranching of the ocean in PWS with the hatchery raised pinks. It doesn't make a lot of sense to me, economically or ecologially.

    -Brian

  9. #9
    Member ak_powder_monkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Eagle River/ Juneau
    Posts
    5,154

    Default

    I think exceptions could be made for pinks in terminal harvest areas like valdez there shouldn't be a bag or possession limit there millions of fish littering the beach can't be good (see hood canal dead zones). Personally I think stocking 950 million pinks yearly is stupid and selling out the hatchery system to 200 seiners.
    I choose to fly fish, not because its easy, but because its hard.

  10. #10
    Sponsor potbuilder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Palmer
    Posts
    4,229

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ak_powder_monkey View Post
    I think exceptions could be made for pinks in terminal harvest areas like valdez there shouldn't be a bag or possession limit there millions of fish littering the beach can't be good (see hood canal dead zones). Personally I think stocking 950 million pinks yearly is stupid and selling out the hatchery system to 200 seiners.
    Go to some of the PWSAC meetings and you'll see that what cordova wants cordova gets Don't get me started on the gillnet fishery

    Alaska Shrimp Pots

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

  11. #11

    Default Aye for the Dogfish

    Numbers (population), not species type, should to dictate harvest limits.

  12. #12
    Member AKCAPT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Seward
    Posts
    1,126

    Default salmon are out!

    Okay
    thanks for the input. I can see that the Pinks are going to be an issue, so we will hold off on that one. I guess I was thinking that if they were already part of the bag lmit using them for bait should be okay.
    But salmon are always a delicate subject.....

    Dogfish, however are not delicate and we will forward this proposal on to the BOF. Hopefully we will be able to load up on some tasty dogfish this summer! Ummmmmmmmmm

    Thanks for the input!!

  13. #13
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Yakutat AK
    Posts
    142

    Talking

    I feel the pinks that you keep and use for bait should be part of your limit.
    Dogfish should be treated like Gray Cod. You can use them any way you want. I've read that if you dry them out they burn pretty good.
    Let's not kid ourselves, legal or not it's happening!

  14. #14
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Yakutat AK
    Posts
    142

    Default name change

    We need to stop thinking of them as sand sharks, spiny dogfish etc... The English sell them as Rock Salmon. It sounds more appetizing, and more expensive. I'm sure a client would gladly keep a rock salmon, esp if the limit were two a year and no commercial fishery to get them to the lower 48.

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

    Default

    No matter what you call it, it's still a SHARK!!!!!!! If I had a dollar for every one that we caught on my boat. I could retire
    Living the Alaskan Dream
    Gary Keller
    Anchorage, AK

  16. #16

    Default Yes to both

    I think you should put in for both proposals.

    Change the limit on dog fish to something more reasonable, there appears to be plenty.

    I really doubt we are going to fish-out pink runs simply because we can use them for bait, natural or otherwise. Few people keep these to eat and, honestly, how many are you going to catch and keep for bait? We go after kings, reds, and silvers like no tomorrow, while pinks and chums by the millions go by.

  17. #17
    Member CanCanCase's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Bandon, OR
    Posts
    614

    Default

    Just a quick SE perspective on the issues...
    1) What's a spiny dogfish? Haven't caught one in 32 years here in Juneau... Because I've never caught one must mean they're endangered... right? Remember there are different regions to this massive state. Sure, I'd hate to catch a 2' shark and have it count against my annual shark limit...

    2) As long as it counts toward bag/posession limits, I'd LOVE to be able to (legally) use pinks for bait. We're over run with em down here in SE. Besides, what do you use for bait when fishing for salmon shark? You know, I don't buy the argument that it would hurt commercial pink fisheries... I can hardly BUY whole pink salmon down here... nobody wants them, and it's the commercial boats I see tossing them aside and wasting them, not sport fishermen. Heck, if we're placing blame for wasting fish, why not blame the bears and eagles that only pick out the eyes or bellies of the little fish???

    -Case
    M/V CanCan - 34' SeaWolf - Bandon, OR
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

  18. #18
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    59

    Default Pinks and Dogfish

    I say if a sport angler is within his bag limit that pinks should be allowed to be used for bait. A commercial guy fishing for Reds in Cook Inlet loads his nets on pink years then sells them to the cannery for 10cents a pound. They turn around and sell them to sport guys for 60 cents a pound for bait! Whats the difference if that pink was caught on a rod or in a net. It would still end up bait or dog food. Very little of our local pink salmon becomes food for people.

    On the dog fish that sounds good to me. I am tired of catching 30 a day tearing up all my lines and devouring bait.

    AK CAPT, I say put in both proposals. If there is a problem with the number of pinks being caught by sport guys they can lower the limit. I dont forsee a problem.
    Rod

  19. #19
    Member Snagger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    A
    Posts
    99

    Default

    Yes on both.
    Bloody dogfish have taken my share of gear and for some reason they just swim in circles at the surface alot of the time after release.

    Love to use pinks for bait, save me having to fillet them before I can use the head and carcass for bait. Then I have to give some mystery salmon filets away to some poor soul when I get back to town. Plenty of nice anchorages in western and eastern PWS are so plugged with pinks in August that the stench will run even me out.

  20. #20
    Sponsor potbuilder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Palmer
    Posts
    4,229

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CanCanCase View Post
    Just a quick SE perspective on the issues...
    1) What's a spiny dogfish? Haven't caught one in 32 years here in Juneau... Because I've never caught one must mean they're endangered... right? Remember there are different regions to this massive state. Sure, I'd hate to catch a 2' shark and have it count against my annual shark limit...

    2) As long as it counts toward bag/posession limits, I'd LOVE to be able to (legally) use pinks for bait. We're over run with em down here in SE. Besides, what do you use for bait when fishing for salmon shark? You know, I don't buy the argument that it would hurt commercial pink fisheries... I can hardly BUY whole pink salmon down here... nobody wants them, and it's the commercial boats I see tossing them aside and wasting them, not sport fishermen. Heck, if we're placing blame for wasting fish, why not blame the bears and eagles that only pick out the eyes or bellies of the little fish???

    -Case
    CCC,
    What do you think all those seiners in SE target? The gillnetters may not want the pinks but the seine fishery is based on them.

    Alaska Shrimp Pots

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

Page 1 of 2 12 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
  •