Now that the Sportfish Division of F and G has has closed the Deshka River to the keeping of kings four days of the week, what actions should the commercial department take to share the burden of conservation?
By their own claims before the Board of Fish, Commercial fishing is the most effective means of harvesting large numbers of salmon. If Commercial fishing is the most effective, then it follows that sport fishing is less effective. It seems logical to me that if the less effective means of harvesting salmon has been heavily restricted due to concerns over not making the escapement, then the most efficient means should also be restricted.
I shall wait to see if the Commercial Fishing Division really does care about conservation of the resource, or just ensuring that the commercial fisheries harvest the maximum amount of fish possible before being forced to restrict?
If the affected runs of kings cannot be effectively quantified as they pass through the various commercial fisheries before arriving at streams where there are escapement concerns, then some restrictions to all commercial fisheries intercepting Deshka bound kings can only have a positive effect for escapements. If that is unpalatable, tough- spend some money on more genetic studies to find out what fish are being caught and in what numbers.
The Department is called upon to act upon the best available science, to conserve the resource, and to share the burden of conservation. All excuses aside, about how poor the science is, yada yada, thats the bottom line. The best available science that we have shows varying proportions and numbers of Susitna and Deshka bound kings in each commercial fishery. It also shows that unless more adults are allowed to enter the river, there will be some very lean years ahead, with no surplus for harvest. Therefore, that is the science that must be used in the management of the fishery. Don't like it? Get better science. In the meantime, though, follow your statuatory requirement to "act upon the best available science, and share the burden of conservation."
Since a burden of conservation has been placed on the sport fishery, which will likely cost Valley businesses hundreds of thousands of dollars, if not more, the department must not forget its duty under the SMP to "share the burden."
I await the announcement.
By their own claims before the Board of Fish, Commercial fishing is the most effective means of harvesting large numbers of salmon. If Commercial fishing is the most effective, then it follows that sport fishing is less effective. It seems logical to me that if the less effective means of harvesting salmon has been heavily restricted due to concerns over not making the escapement, then the most efficient means should also be restricted.
I shall wait to see if the Commercial Fishing Division really does care about conservation of the resource, or just ensuring that the commercial fisheries harvest the maximum amount of fish possible before being forced to restrict?
If the affected runs of kings cannot be effectively quantified as they pass through the various commercial fisheries before arriving at streams where there are escapement concerns, then some restrictions to all commercial fisheries intercepting Deshka bound kings can only have a positive effect for escapements. If that is unpalatable, tough- spend some money on more genetic studies to find out what fish are being caught and in what numbers.
The Department is called upon to act upon the best available science, to conserve the resource, and to share the burden of conservation. All excuses aside, about how poor the science is, yada yada, thats the bottom line. The best available science that we have shows varying proportions and numbers of Susitna and Deshka bound kings in each commercial fishery. It also shows that unless more adults are allowed to enter the river, there will be some very lean years ahead, with no surplus for harvest. Therefore, that is the science that must be used in the management of the fishery. Don't like it? Get better science. In the meantime, though, follow your statuatory requirement to "act upon the best available science, and share the burden of conservation."
Since a burden of conservation has been placed on the sport fishery, which will likely cost Valley businesses hundreds of thousands of dollars, if not more, the department must not forget its duty under the SMP to "share the burden."
I await the announcement.
Comment