Dip net fishery closure?

Marcus

New member
Joined
Feb 25, 2004
Messages
7,320
Reaction score
209
Location
Soldotna

Check the front-page story in today's Peninsula Clarion (peninsulaclarion.com) for a story on the dip-net fishery.

 

Marcus

New member
Joined
Feb 25, 2004
Messages
7,320
Reaction score
209
Location
Soldotna
Keep trying. . . just checked the Clarion's Web page, and it hasn't yet been updated from yesterday. Take a look in an hour or so. . .

 

Marcus

New member
Joined
Feb 25, 2004
Messages
7,320
Reaction score
209
Location
Soldotna
Part of the story. . .

Part of the story. . .

Attorney wants dipnet closure
Damage to Kenai beaches, salmon habitat concerns cited

By Phil Hermanek

A Kenai attorney who represents commercial fish harvesters and small processors rattled a loud sabre Wednesday night when he called for a halt to dipnet salmon fishing on the Kenai River.

Mouths were agape and the Kenai City Council chamber stood silent as Jim Butler said shutting down the personal use dipnet fishery would be "an excellent place to start" in taking action to protect Kenai's beaches and fish habitat. . .

. . . Butler, who said he is representing most local processors and small commercial fish harvesters, told the council action is being formulated to "correct the problem and prevent future damage to our beaches."

"We're going to become more aggressive," Butler said.


********************

You'll have to wait until the Clarion posts today's paper for the rest of the article.

 

Brian M

***** Admin
Joined
Sep 17, 2005
Messages
14,352
Reaction score
994
Location
Eagle River, AK
No way that they'll completely close it. I can certainly forsee more restrictions on access and numbers, but this fishery has quickly become ingrained as a Southcentral tradition.
 

Marcus

New member
Joined
Feb 25, 2004
Messages
7,320
Reaction score
209
Location
Soldotna
It's up. . .

It's up. . .

(for the whole story, go here)
http://www.peninsulaclarion.com/stories/030708/news_3990.shtml

Web posted Friday, March 7, 2008

Attorney wants dipnet closure
Damage to Kenai beaches, salmon habitat concerns cited

PHIL HERMANEK
Peninsula Clarion

A Kenai attorney who represents commercial fish harvesters and small processors rattled a loud sabre Wednesday night when he called for a halt to dipnet salmon fishing on the Kenai River.

Mouths were agape and the Kenai City Council chamber stood silent as Jim Butler said shutting down the personal use dipnet fishery would be "an excellent place to start" in taking action to protect Kenai's beaches and fish habitat.

Butler was responding to Councilman Mike Boyle, who asked point blank: "Are you saying shut down dipnetting?"

Butler, who said he is representing most local processors and small commercial fish harvesters, told the council action is being formulated to "correct the problem and prevent future damage to our beaches."

"We're going to become more aggressive," Butler said.

He said Alaska Board of Fisheries action in February to curb hydrocarbon pollution from outboard boat engines below the Warren Ames bridge "will put 70 percent of those dipnetters back on your beaches."

"Southcentral Alaska uses our beaches as a doormat," Butler said.

 

Akbrownsfan

New member
Joined
Nov 17, 2006
Messages
1,294
Reaction score
87
Location
Anchorage
Wow is that stupid. Please just remeber this is one guy who represents some processor and SOME small harvesters.

I usually defend the commercial side in many issues as I like to talk facts, but this is very shortsighted, stupid, meanspirited, and did I say stupid?

greed pure and simple for some people is what is going on.
 

Big Dipper

New member
Joined
Mar 7, 2008
Messages
168
Reaction score
6
Habitat

Habitat

I'm always amazed at the disregard dipnetters seem to have for property rights and the environment when I go dipping. My friends who live in the area constantly complain about dippers wanting to camp on or cross their property to access the river.

Maybe a time-out is in order. I've always wondered how a resident only dipnet fishery that impacts a commercial fishery passes muster under the US Constitution. Thoughts?

I duck hunt on the flats at Kenai and Kasilof - the banks are caving in from the foot traffic causing fractures in the bank. It just seems like the habitat has been disregarded in the frenzy. Some mitigation measures seem appropriate. I don't want to see the Kenai and Kasilof rivers go the way of other west coast salmon rivers - loved to death and urbanized.

I hope that this gets resolved before this summer, otherwise there could be some serious implications. It isn't hard to imagine how a federal judge might see this. Katie John? Zoebels? ANILCA?
 

Akbrownsfan

New member
Joined
Nov 17, 2006
Messages
1,294
Reaction score
87
Location
Anchorage
I agree with your thoughts on habitat. However they can be mitagated without stopping dipnetting. What about no camping (that would suck) or no motorized use? Or more toilets? I didn't know there WERE residents on the mouth of the Kasilof or Kenai? In all my years of dipneting I have never seen a house there? I do sometimes see a NIMBY attitude from some. Someone who lives 20 miles from the mouth of the Kenai has no more or less right to use that area than I do.

Also I don't see banks caving in? I see sand moving. I dipped Kasilof by the bouy last year and a day dip in Kenai. While I saw to much trash, feces, and people driving where they shouldn't be allowed to ( dunes) . I did not see massive unregular erosion. Maybe I missed it?
 

Big Dipper

New member
Joined
Mar 7, 2008
Messages
168
Reaction score
6
Habitat

Habitat

Well, my friends who live in VIP subdivision on the South bank of the Kenai River sure have to deal with the problem. I know of several instances when the police had to be called because dippers insisted on crossing private property and got beligerant when asked not to trespass.

As you cross the Warren Ames bridge, look downstream and you will see hard-packed trails along the riverbank. These cause fractures that slough-off when the big fall tides come in. The next year, another path is created, resulting in a cycle of bank fractures and subsequent erosion.

Yes, the human feces and trash component is pretty disgusting. I spoke with some friends in Kenai today, and the reaction is mixed, but at least half favor some restrictions and all of them think that there should be some discussion. There is concern over who is going to pay for the mitigation/remediation that might be needed.

It's definitely a delicate subject, but one worthy of discussion. There is no doubt that human waste, trash, and illegal vehicle traffic is enough to get people at least asking questions...
 

Nerka

New member
Joined
Jul 4, 2006
Messages
5,901
Reaction score
325
not the whole story

not the whole story

Marcus has fired a cannon shot here without the full story - it is very complicated legal issue involving the federal government and how fisheries are created. The personal use fishery may be in violation of federal law (it is limited to residents), it may have violated NEPA because the Board of Fish did not follow federal law, and it may have been created against federal law with the reallocation of fish from sport and commercial users.

So the comment on closure is one that is seeped in legal issues. Also I know from taling with the city representatives they have a significant liability with the personal use fishery. The city has trouble with police powers (they add 7 officers in summer just for the PU fishery), they have waste issues and may be violating the clean water act to clean up the junk left over from the fishery (fish parts just bulldozed into the water), they are losing the dunes which is threatening the bluff area, and the list goes on. It is costing the city between 20-50K per year to continue this fishery. The city may want to restrict the fishery just to keep from losing money.

So this is a complicated case and do not jump off the cliff on one newspaper article. What it does point out is that you cannot put thousands of people in a small area and not destroy things.
 
M

Mark

Guest
......"We're going to become more aggressive," Butler said......

So who's surprised?

Those people think the resource belongs to them, and they have no qualms using any excuse that presents itself to block others from utilizing it.
 

Marcus

New member
Joined
Feb 25, 2004
Messages
7,320
Reaction score
209
Location
Soldotna
Not true. . .

Not true. . .

Marcus has fired a cannon shot here without the full story -

Correction:

I have fired no "cannon shot" — somebody else did that! All I did was post a newspaper story about the "cannon shot."

Thanks, Nerka. . . :mad:

 

Big Dipper

New member
Joined
Mar 7, 2008
Messages
168
Reaction score
6
Polarization

Polarization

Here we go... it seems like there will only be two sides to this issue. Each side thinking they are right, the other side wrong. Ready, fire, aim.

Wow. This is why salmon disappear everywhere there is urbanization.

Hopefully, reasonable voices and heads will prevail and reasonable mitigation measures will come about - protect the habitat and provide reasonable opportunity for consumptive harvest.

I'm afraid this is going to get Civil War ugly...
 

Akbrownsfan

New member
Joined
Nov 17, 2006
Messages
1,294
Reaction score
87
Location
Anchorage
What two sides? So far it seems like we're on the same side?

Can see what you are talking about on the trails. Otherwise I agreed with you:confused:

Nerka simply pointed out the complexities in this. Marcus simply put up an article that generated disussion.
 
M

Mark

Guest
Here we go... it seems like there will only be two sides to this issue. Each side thinking they are right, the other side wrong. Ready, fire, aim.

Wow. This is why salmon disappear everywhere there is urbanization....

No, it's not.

It is well recognized that major and long lasting environmental damage and damming is what kills salmon runs altogether, not conflicts over who has what right to harvest how much salmon within sustained yield principles.
 

Big Dipper

New member
Joined
Mar 7, 2008
Messages
168
Reaction score
6
Wow

Wow

Well, I certainly didn't intend to point fingers at anyone in particular here, I was thinking more globally.

First, environmental damage seems to follow urbanization and the adverse effects at the mouths of the Kenai and Kasilof rivers due to dipnetting are probably the result of road accessibility and popularity - urbanization.

As for the polarization issue - the reference to the cannon shot and the resulting umbrage seemed like an indicator.... I imagine discussion in the global context will be similar to convincing someone to change political or religous beliefs. I wasn't pointing to anyone in particular here, just thinkin out loud (in written form).

I was just suggesting that we hold a mirror up and take a hard look at what we see, not suggesting that anyone here disagreed with me or that I had a problem with any individual post.

I'm a newbie to this forum thing. I'll figure out the etiquette...
 

Latest posts

Top