Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

PWS Shrimping is in trouble

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Ak

    AK: I am 57 so it can be done. Only time I have needed help is one coral reef that I like to hit and once in a while I hang up in the stuff. Even the 3 1/2 hp Briggs could not pull that stuff up.

    I seriously doubt that the BOF is going to ban using pot pullers for recreational use. That would raise too much of a stink from all recreational users. And how would they patrol and enforce it? Writing a law that is not enforceable is a waste of time even in the troopers minds. I know a few guys that use their anchor winches to pull the pots. Are they going to arrest people for "being in possession of a pot puller"? Doubt it.

    Patriot Life Member NRA
    Life Member Veterans of Foreign Wars
    Life Member Disabled American Veterans


    Comment


    • #17
      ak 4 star - If you'd like to prohibit a commercial shrimp fishery in the Sound, that's understandable. I wouldn't agree with you, but I could see where you're coming from. With that in mind, I think you're wasting your effort being concerned about the banning of pot pullers. It is simply not going to happen. As someone else mentioned, the Board of Fish and the Board of Game get plenty of utterly ridiculous proposals every year that are poorly written and ask for things that are beyond the scope of reason. The proposal to ban pot pullers for recreational use is just such a proposal. The BoF will do what they do with all such proposals - hear testimony as they are required to by law, and then summarily defeat it. You efforts would be much better spent elsewhere.

      Comment


      • #18
        Thats what i said about the 1 Halibut rule and now look at it! ITS HEAR. Think about how stupid that rule is. after all halibut are a federal fish and arnt we US citizens the constution sayes we as citizens have the right to free and fair acc. to all federal resources. and comfish has taken that away from the few that us charter boats. DONT SIT BACK AND SAY THIS WONT HAPPEN it has in the past and will again

        Comment


        • #19
          The limit may end up being reduced for halibut, but they didn't come in and say that you can't use a rod and reel any longer. They are simply not going to prohibit a legitimate method for pulling in pots. Period.

          As for the halibut rule, that is determined by the North Pacific Halibut Commission, not the state BoF. As an aside, the commercial fishermen didn't take anything away from sport fishermen in that case. The sport take increased exponentially over many years. The reduced bag limit is to keep the sport fishery which has continued to grow from taking more of the commercial limit, which has been reduced by ~40% in area 2A over the past few years. So...the commercial take goes way down, the sport fishing take goes up, and somehow that's the comm fish guys taking fish away. :confused:

          But that's for another thread, I guess.

          Comment


          • #20
            shrimp fishery

            Looks like with three rotating areas, there will be plenty of areas for all to fish without conflict, unless people go looking for conflict.West of 148 degrees will be close, so all the western bays will be sport fish only all the time. The other three area's will rotate yearly so commercial fishing will only be in one relatively small area each year. Also 50 is the maximum number of pots allowed, but depending on how many boats sign up, it may be lower. Fish and game will reduce the number of pots allowed if they think the catch will be too drastic. I think they'll keep a pretty tight rein on things.

            Also, once the quota is reached, commercial fishing will be closed for the year, unlike Charter fishing in Southeast. Maybe that's how the charter fleet there should be managed, when they reach their recommended catch limit, shut the fishery down. I'll bet they'd be all for a one fish limit then.
            An opinion should be the result of thought, not a substitute for it.
            - Jef Mallett

            Comment


            • #21
              ADF&G doesn't have the resources to manage.

              35 years of watching the different resources on the Kenai P be depleted due to over use, bad management and over use pretty much tells me they will mess it up. I would like to think the glass is half full - not half empty- but I have seen trout streams where the dolly varden used to flow with abundance, the overall size of the halibut drop like a rock (feds) and the number of trophy class Kenai kings drop like a rock. Right now I would bet there are a few bays in the PWS that are being overfished and should have some restrictions on them so the shrimp could replenish.The dept of F&G is a reactionary organization. After it's already well on its way to a crash, they will say WOW - maybe we should close it for EVERYBODY so the resource can replenish.
              How stupid is it to be wasting tons of salmon and halibut as bycatch in the Bering Sea and then have the coastal villages hollaring they have no food? It's got to stop!

              Comment


              • #22
                Write a proposal!!!

                And if youíd like to know what impact commercial pot shrimping had in the past, I would suggest reading this report.
                http://www.adfg.state.ak.us/pubs/afrb/vol3_n1/kmkrv3n1.pdf


                Brian M has a good point, and Iíve said it before in that the state gets all sorts of ridiculous proposals every year. The shocking truth is most all proposals come from either commercial fisherman or individuals with vested commercial fishing interests. Anyone can write a proposal, Iíve posted the link here before:
                So letís sharpen our technical writing skills and submit some proposals; the state is almost begging for individual Alaskansí to write proposals.
                Suggestions:
                -Limit the days of the week, no commercial pot shrimping on the weekends
                -Stay out of small bays and areas frequented by sport fisherman

                What ever your gripe, put it in a proposal..

                CALL FOR PROPOSALS:
                http://www.boards.adfg.state.ak.us/fishinfo/meetinfo/fcall.php

                Proposal Forms:
                http://www.boards.adfg.state.ak.us/bbs/forms/propform.php

                Prince William Sound Proposals:
                http://www.boards.adfg.state.ak.us/fishinfo/meetinfo/2008-2009/propbook/pws_proposals2.pdf
                Start at Proposal 44 and read onÖ

                If we do nothing, we'll have nothing!
                Jay
                07 C-Dory 25 Cruiser
                OurPlayground.

                sigpic

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by breausaw View Post
                  [COLOR=black]Brian M has a good point, and Iíve said it before in that the state gets all sorts of ridiculous proposals every year. The shocking truth is most all proposals come from either commercial fisherman or individuals with vested commercial fishing interests. Anyone can write a proposal, Iíve posted the link here before:
                  So letís sharpen our technical writing skills and submit some proposals; the state is almost begging for individual Alaskansí to write proposals.
                  Suggestions:
                  -Limit the days of the week, no commercial pot shrimping on the weekends
                  -Stay out of small bays and areas frequented by sport fisherman

                  What ever your gripe, put it in a proposal..

                  CALL FOR PROPOSALS:
                  [FONT=Verdana]
                  You don't have to write an additional proposal at all to try and shape this current PWS proposal. Just comment to the BOF on it, or better yet show up and testify at their March 16-20 meeting in Anchorage. I think it's also scheduled for more committee discussion in March.
                  "Fishing relaxes me. It's like yoga, except I still get to kill something." --Ron Swanson

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    I agree public comment is essential, but why must we always be on the defense. Its time to turn the tables and be on the offence here, proposals we submit will have to go through the same public comment process.
                    Jay
                    07 C-Dory 25 Cruiser
                    OurPlayground.

                    sigpic

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      more info...

                      I think someone posted the link before, but here is the information again on the proposal as it now stands:
                      http://www.boards.adfg.state.ak.us/f...-proposals.pdf

                      I've loved fishing recreationally for shrimp in PWS for many years, and I tend to think this request is reasonable...it just needs a little more meat on the bones for a management plan.

                      If folks are concerned that the shrimp stocks haven't rebuilt enough yet to support a commercial fishery, then suggest a threshold biomass that should be met before the commercial fishery could be opened. In my opinion, it's pretty closed-minded to simply expect this fishery to be reserved exclusively for sport/PU if there is additional harvest that can be allowed, biologically. Sport users would (rightfully so) scream bloody murder if the comm guys wanted an entire fishery for their exclusive use.

                      Most of northwest PWS isn't being considered for a commercial fishery, but it's unclear if Port Nellie Juan would be opened. It may open most of the northern and northwestern bays...but that's still open for debate. There are a few maps in the above link that have some additional areas (in yellow) that stakeholders talked about keeping closed.

                      I think an additional thing that needs to be discussed is the concept that (as currently written) rotates the commercial fishery through three different areas in three years. There's merit to that idea, but there may also be value to keeping the entire commercial area open every year and allow the harvest to be more dispersed every year. I dunno which I prefer yet, but I want to understand the pros/cons of each approach a little more, first.

                      From my experience with Board issues in the past, sometimes it isn't all that helpful to take a simple "heck no" attitude (regardless of the issue). If you approach it more constructively, you may be able to get your specific concerns addressed. breausaw had some good ideas in his last post that might be worthy of discussion.

                      In any case, everyone who cares should engage the issue at the Board of Fisheries meeting in March.
                      "Fishing relaxes me. It's like yoga, except I still get to kill something." --Ron Swanson

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by MRFISH View Post
                        I think an additional thing that needs to be discussed is the concept that (as currently written) rotates the commercial fishery through three different areas in three years. There's merit to that idea, but there may also be value to keeping the entire commercial area open every year and allow the harvest to be more dispersed every year. I dunno which I prefer yet, but I want to understand the pros/cons of each approach a little more, first.

                        .
                        The reason for rotating the commercial fishery through three different areas in three years is because now they understand the life cycle of the spot shrimp is much longer than previously thought, as much as three times a long; read this State report and youíll understand. Back in the 80s and early 90s the sustainability of the stock was almost decimated do to the lack of understanding in this area. Rotating the fishing area is a good idea, one that makes sense.
                        Jay
                        07 C-Dory 25 Cruiser
                        OurPlayground.

                        sigpic

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by breausaw View Post
                          I agree public comment is an essential, but why must we always be on the defense. Its time to turn the tables and be on the offence here, proposals we submit will have to go through the same public comment process.
                          No, if you try to submit a new proposal through the regular process on this issue, it won't go anywhere right now. The proposal deadline for the meetings this winter expired back in April 2008. At this time, you have to work with what's already on the table. But the Board of Fish has broad authority to amend these proposals based on input recieved from ADFG, Advisory Committees and the public.

                          Technically, I believe proposal 44 was submitted by ADFG at the request of the Board of Fisheries. This one wasn't submitted by the "comm guys". The rationale was that the shrimp stock in PWS seemed to be rebuilding and there may (repeat, MAY) be additional surplus available to re-open commercial fisheries. It began as just a general framework for discussion purposes, and they built a little more substance into it this winter...but it's still open for any further modification or a complete rejection, if that's your wish.

                          But I still wonder why you feel you're "on the defense"? According to ADFG's data (can't find the link right now, so I'm going from memory, but will post when I find it), the sport/PU fishery has been taking about 50,000 pounds of shrimp as of late, and the biomass currently indicates a total allowable harvest around 80 or 90,000 pounds...and is still increasing. There seems to be room for other harvest...either now or later if the biomass continues to increase.

                          I do agree with many of the other above posts that sometimes crazy proposals get submitted that don't get much futher than being printed in the proposal book. These get submitted by sporties and commies, alike . Maybe I missed it, but I didn't see a proposal to prohibit the use of mechanical pullers in the recreational shrimp fishery (as discussed in some of the above posts). In any case, it wouldn't likely pass and I'd oppose it, even though I use one of those sliding-buoy-thingies.
                          "Fishing relaxes me. It's like yoga, except I still get to kill something." --Ron Swanson

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by breausaw View Post
                            The reason for rotating the commercial fishery through three different areas in three years is because now they understand the life cycle of the spot shrimp is much longer than previously thought, as much as three times a long; read this State report and youíll understand. Back in the 80s and early 90s the sustainability of the stock was almost decimated do to the lack of understanding in this area. Rotating the fishing area is a good idea, one that makes sense.
                            I've read the report you linked. It's quite interesting, and it did show that growth/maturity rates in PWS are slower/longer than they are in more southern waters. But the data in the report doesn't necessarily lend itself to the 3-year rotation idea. However as I said earlier, I don't know if I support the rotation idea or not. I just think it needs more discussion before I make up my mind.

                            I see (from your avatar, if I'm not mistaken) that you're a fellow SeaSport-er.
                            "Fishing relaxes me. It's like yoga, except I still get to kill something." --Ron Swanson

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              07 C-Dory Cruiser, but the resemblance is close. Looked at the SeaSport closely, a nice piece of work indeed.

                              Jay
                              Jay
                              07 C-Dory 25 Cruiser
                              OurPlayground.

                              sigpic

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by breausaw View Post
                                07 C-Dory Cruiser, but the resemblance is close. Looked at the SeaSport closely, a nice piece of work indeed.

                                Jay
                                D'oh! I hadn't noticed your signature line that said as much, Jay. Nice looking boat. They are quite similar.
                                "Fishing relaxes me. It's like yoga, except I still get to kill something." --Ron Swanson

                                Comment

                                Footer Adsense

                                Collapse
                                Working...
                                X