Kenai Dipnet Fishery Open 24hrs

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Originally posted by smithtb View Post
    Last year King retention was prohibited in the PU fisheries, yet estimated harvest was 50 Kings in the Kenai dipnet fishery, with 85% of harvest reports returned.

    I dipped with my wife a twice on the Kenai last weekend. We caught a 50lb buck the first night and a 30lb hen the second. I know several other folks who also netted them.

    The entire setnet fleet was shut down for the season this year in early July after an estimated harvest of 32 large Kenai Kings. I fished 4 setnet permits every day the Kasilof section was open and the largest King I saw was 17lb. We caught approximately 5 more jacks, all under 10lb. I caught more large Kenai Kings with a dipnet last weekend than our setnet site has in the last 2 seasons.

    Not trying to poke at the PU fishery on this issue - I think it's generally true that people let them go. I'm just really disappointed by the yield tradeoffs were making when "every fish counts", but only in some fisheries.
    I remember when this fisherie started. It's just strange to me anyway. Why not net these fish upstream where the current has separated most of the Kings from the Sockeye? Why not use a smaller net that most Kings wouldn't fit into?
    What I believe I was seeing over time on the Kenai was a run of Kings that could withstand either a regulated commercial fisherie, or a sport fisherie, but not both. Whats that saying about a thousand cuts...Then you have ADFG gillneting in the river in the name of data collection, where they tie Kings up by the tail while they work on one fish they caught at a time, then the Kodiak fisherie, and then they add this personal use fisherie. I don't have any data about how the pu fisherie affects the King run, and by its self probably has little effect, but one has to wonder about the King crash after this fisherie started. Coincidence? The final nail?

    Alaskan residents need to take a hard look at the King impacts across the board. I quit 15 years ago and I hoped to be able to fish it again and take my kids. It's only gotten worse. If you don't sacrifice now, what do you think the king run will be like in 15 more years?

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by hawg boss View Post

      I remember when this fisherie started. It's just strange to me anyway. Why not net these fish upstream where the current has separated most of the Kings from the Sockeye? Why not use a smaller net that most Kings wouldn't fit into?
      What I believe I was seeing over time on the Kenai was a run of Kings that could withstand either a regulated commercial fisherie, or a sport fisherie, but not both. Whats that saying about a thousand cuts...Then you have ADFG gillneting in the river in the name of data collection, where they tie Kings up by the tail while they work on one fish they caught at a time, then the Kodiak fisherie, and then they add this personal use fisherie. I don't have any data about how the pu fisherie affects the King run, and by its self probably has little effect, but one has to wonder about the King crash after this fisherie started. Coincidence? The final nail?

      Alaskan residents need to take a hard look at the King impacts across the board. I quit 15 years ago and I hoped to be able to fish it again and take my kids. It's only gotten worse. If you don't sacrifice now, what do you think the king run will be like in 15 more years?
      Agreed, the dipnet fishery itself probably doesn't make a huge impact, although maybe the weekend level of activity does. And I think local harvest levels are very low, so my current concerns are more with inriver habitat and ocean harvest/mortality.

      That is not to say I don't worry about local harvest. I think it's entirely possible (50/50 maybe?) that the Kings bounce back in the next 15 years, but if we don't establish more sideboards on these fisheries, the level of local activity/harvest will again balloon to unsustainable levels. Everyone loves them.

      Comment


      • #48
        PU and subsistence fisheries are the smallest harvesters of chinook in Cook Inlet....sport and commercial are the largest by far, according to the harvest data we have available. One huge problem with Kenai chinook is the fact that we're unable to accurately estimate juvenile abundance...as a result, we can't know what marine mortality looks like. We can estimate harvest and escapement, but it's kind of like trying to assemble a puzzle upside down...we need way more data across the entire life cycle of these fish...
        " Gas boats are bad enough, autos are an invention of the devil, and airplanes are worse." ~Allen Hasselborg

        Comment


        • #49
          Rainbows in the Kenai are eating tons of king eggs, we should be able to retain them and get their population in check

          Comment

          Footer Ad Module 300 x 300

          Collapse

          Footer Adsense

          Collapse
          Working...
          X