Area 7 going to one fish limit

J.C.

Run what ya Brung
May 20, 2012
998
598
93
Wa
Name
Justin
Boat
18' aluminum
I don't think any of us are against a responsibly managed fishery. Lets not forget fisheries management in the northwest was started by fisherman not because the state said so and not because of concern for tribal fishing. Somewhere along the way our bloated broken government decided the tribes take is paramount. Must have something to do with the political influence they have gained and when I say political influence I mean a shitload of casino money and more grants than they know what to do with.

Get the Fucking nets out of the river and all this animosity goes away. They say they would rather fish anyway so let em get out and H&L with the rest of us and lets see what their take is then. At least then they earned it. Some of the tribal members truly love to fish but if you give them the option to net they'll net.
 

blackmouther

10%er during Salmon Season
Jun 29, 2009
2,606
389
83
Mount Vernon Washington
Name
Fowlmotuher
Boat
Shopping
I don't think any of us are against a responsibly managed fishery. Lets not forget fisheries management in the northwest was started by fisherman not because the state said so and not because of concern for tribal fishing. Somewhere along the way our bloated broken government decided the tribes take is paramount. Must have something to do with the political influence they have gained and when I say political influence I mean a shitload of casino money and more grants than they know what to do with.

Get the Fucking nets out of the river and all this animosity goes away. They say they would rather fish anyway so let em get out and H&L with the rest of us and lets see what their take is then. At least then they earned it. Some of the tribal members truly love to fish but if you give them the option to net they'll net.
Time to rewrite the treaty. What makes them so special anyways.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rellis

MarkFromSea

Piscatologist
Jun 10, 2012
1,766
516
113
Name
Mark
Boat
"Solo"
Here's an article from 1987, it's long, but includes how the more prosperous or better funded Natives intercepted fish long before they hit the rivers. In essence, at that time, the traditional or ceremonial salmon fishing was harmed by an essentially unregulated growth of the Native vessel fishing fleet. The article has just a touch of the Boldt decision and the Supreme Court ruling on it. I think Boldt got it wrong but the Supreme Court didn't change it dramatically if at all. The Supreme Court did leave a door open, according to this article.
http://www.culturalsurvival.org/pub...states/unintended-consequences-boldt-decision
 

J.C.

Run what ya Brung
May 20, 2012
998
598
93
Wa
Name
Justin
Boat
18' aluminum
Great articles Mark. I wonder if anyone has ever propsed a 1/3 of the take all around. Sporties, Tribes, and commies. Seems like the only truly fair solution with the amount sporties contribute to the economy let alone the fact that we are citizens whose families have fought and died for these resources and built this country. The article from 87 actually makes this sound doable if the state actually had the balls. The interesting thing about that article to me was that it was written by proponents of the tribes.

From the 87 write up,

In 1979, the Supreme Court upheld this decision. However, the Supreme Court altered Boldt's interpretation, holding that the 50 percent treaty tribe share was an upper limit which could be adjusted downward as the treaty tribe's "moderate living needs were met. Although it did not dispute the essence of Boldt's interpretation that the tribes possessed a "class right to a share of the fish" (Law Week 4983), it gave the tribes a variable property right to the fish rather than a fixed percentage - See more at: http://www.culturalsurvival.org/pub...sequences-boldt-decision#sthash.ATUZ14MB.dpuf
 

MarkFromSea

Piscatologist
Jun 10, 2012
1,766
516
113
Name
Mark
Boat
"Solo"
That's the door that the Supreme Court left open... that native foot is in it so far though, I just don't see that fight ever occurring and the win, impossible. Due to the political climate at the time, chaos, the Supreme Court didn't out right overturn Boldt. Had that fight just occurred 10 years earlier or later, it may have been interpreted as it is written, "in common". That's how it had been read for decades. Boldt must've been French instead of what he claimed. It's that Supreme Court test, it's already been done... Really hard to change.. Not impossible on some issues... but...
 

J.C.

Run what ya Brung
May 20, 2012
998
598
93
Wa
Name
Justin
Boat
18' aluminum
 

rrenick65

Member
May 23, 2010
141
69
28
Kodiak, AK
Name
Ross
Boat
20' trophy
Im not trying to defend the tribes.... but the decline in our fisheries is more attributed to the government screwing up in the first place and not putting fish ladders in the dams when they were originally built. The loss of fish runs to the tributaries on the upper columbia is the major reason why we dont have numbers we used to
 

blackvelvet

old and gray
Jun 19, 2010
2,849
228
83
slug and duck country
Name
BV
Boat
One that works for me
Lack of fish ladders had nothing to do with the demise of wild salmon stocks in Puget sound rivers and streams.

To understand the whole story, a person need only to hear from those enforcement officers that saw first hand what the tribes did to every river, stream and creek in Puget sound from mid 70's thru early '80s......that's right, if it was a stream 12" deep and 3' across with salmon in it, the nets would go in and nobody could stop them as there was no way of gauging what the tribal share was, and enforcement was left up to the tribes.....and to this day the tribes decide when to fish, where to fish, and when they consider their 50% has been harvested, which never happens.

Jim Tuggle, or "Tug" wrote a very eye opening article in last months reel news from his days in the '70s as a WDFW employee.

Then this months reel news had an even more eye opening article from a guy who actually worked for the tribes just after the boldt decision running beach sein nets........If you haven't read these articles, you should........the things the tribes did back then were just plain stupid, netting spawning beds and now they blame the salmon demise on over development and habitat destruction from bad logging practices.

Bad logging practices my ass......over 100 years ago every major river in the state was plugged with logs, as it was the easiest way to transport them down to the mills, and 99% of the old growth lowland forests were flattened and land left stripped and baron, yet salmon populations were still plenty healthy and viable. Then along came judge Boldt, and just coincidentally the stocks of wild Chinook simply disappeared in the following 5 years

Our WDFW has stood up to the tribes and their wreckless disreguard for overharvesting salmon, but everytime the state takes the tribes to court, the state not only loses, but the tribes come out with more, not less, and that has discouraged the WDFW from wasting their time and money taking the tribes to court anymore. Its a lose lose situation for us and a win win for the tribes, but the biggest loser is the wild salmon stocks.

And icing on the cake is judge Boldt was married to a full blown indian woman..........and more icing is that judge boldt had alzheimers before he completed his decision, and 9 months after he signed it into law he did not even know his own name.....true story
 
Last edited:

rrenick65

Member
May 23, 2010
141
69
28
Kodiak, AK
Name
Ross
Boat
20' trophy
Well I disagree with that..... I do my research on the upper Columbia and 90% of it is about habitat restoration to the Spokane, Colville, Kettle, and Pend Oreille. All of which use to have thriving salmon populations. They are all under restoration efforts to re-introduce salmon populations with the hopeful introduction of salmon ladders on several of the dams blocking passage to these tributaries. My professor, Dr. Allen Scholz, that I do a majority of my research under has been around for awhile and has published several papers on the subject and is a world class expert in salmon populations and homing effects. Saying dams had nothing to do with salmon populations on the Columbia is like saying the Elwha dam had no effect on fish. In fact, Native Americans had little effect on the salmon populations back then, as it was a subsistence fishery. It's not that way anymore, but the Tribe's were around for however many hundreds of years and the salmon populations still thrived. Now that it is a commercial fishery for profit, we are having problems. The genetics from these upper reaches were those of some of the largest Chinook salmon in the Columbia river system, now they are lost and can't be returned. You can look up countless articles on any reliable database (not google) and find hundreds of published papers on dam effects on migratory fish and see the evidence. Below is a link for a simple outline by Bill Bakke a very respectable scientist.

The stocks can never be returned but the only way to return our fisheries to an optimal level is through by restructuring the treaties to subsistence fisheries, through selective fisheries and through limited entry fisheries.

But hey what do I know, I'm just a pencil pusher....
 

rrenick65

Member
May 23, 2010
141
69
28
Kodiak, AK
Name
Ross
Boat
20' trophy
Well I disagree with that..... I do my research on the upper Columbia and 90% of it is about habitat restoration to the Spokane, Colville, Kettle, and Pend Oreille. All of which use to have thriving salmon populations. They are all under restoration efforts to re-introduce salmon populations with the hopeful introduction of salmon ladders on several of the dams blocking passage to these tributaries. My professor, Dr. Allen Scholz, that I do a majority of my research under has been around for awhile and has published several papers on the subject and is a world class expert in salmon populations and homing effects. Saying dams had nothing to do with salmon populations on the Columbia is like saying the Elwha dam had no effect on fish. In fact, Native Americans had little effect on the salmon populations back then, as it was a subsistence fishery. It's not that way anymore, but the Tribe's were around for however many hundreds of years and the salmon populations still thrived. Now that it is a commercial fishery for profit, we are having problems. The genetics from these upper reaches were those of some of the largest Chinook salmon in the Columbia river system, now they are lost and can't be returned. You can look up countless articles on any reliable database (not google) and find hundreds of published papers on dam effects on migratory fish and see the evidence. Below is a link for a simple outline by Bill Bakke a very respectable scientist.

The stocks can never be returned but the only way to return our fisheries to an optimal level is through by restructuring the treaties to subsistence fisheries, through selective fisheries and through limited entry fisheries.

But hey what do I know, I'm just a pencil pusher....
http://www.nativefishsociety.org/conservation/documents/CHRONCR-NWSALMONDECLINE3-12-09.pdf
 

MarkFromSea

Piscatologist
Jun 10, 2012
1,766
516
113
Name
Mark
Boat
"Solo"
BV specified Puget Sound....

All agree the dams effed up the Columbia runs... that's a given....

PS we pay the Colvilles $15 million a year for the Grand Coulee.... But that power is pretty good stuff, the agricultural benefits are just a bonus.
 
  • Like
Reactions: blackvelvet

J.C.

Run what ya Brung
May 20, 2012
998
598
93
Wa
Name
Justin
Boat
18' aluminum
Well I disagree with that..... I do my research on the upper Columbia and 90% of it is about habitat restoration to the Spokane, Colville, Kettle, and Pend Oreille. All of which use to have thriving salmon populations. They are all under restoration efforts to re-introduce salmon populations with the hopeful introduction of salmon ladders on several of the dams blocking passage to these tributaries. My professor, Dr. Allen Scholz, that I do a majority of my research under has been around for awhile and has published several papers on the subject and is a world class expert in salmon populations and homing effects. Saying dams had nothing to do with salmon populations on the Columbia is like saying the Elwha dam had no effect on fish. In fact, Native Americans had little effect on the salmon populations back then, as it was a subsistence fishery. It's not that way anymore, but the Tribe's were around for however many hundreds of years and the salmon populations still thrived. Now that it is a commercial fishery for profit, we are having problems. The genetics from these upper reaches were those of some of the largest Chinook salmon in the Columbia river system, now they are lost and can't be returned. You can look up countless articles on any reliable database (not google) and find hundreds of published papers on dam effects on migratory fish and see the evidence. Below is a link for a simple outline by Bill Bakke a very respectable scientist.

The stocks can never be returned but the only way to return our fisheries to an optimal level is through by restructuring the treaties to subsistence fisheries, through selective fisheries and through limited entry fisheries.

But hey what do I know, I'm just a pencil pusher....
Heavy on the pencil pusher, Dams on the Columbia certainly have nothing to do with fish getting up the Skagit, Stilly and Snohomish, a7 happens to be on their way to these rivers. Hopefully you can look at a map and figure that out. Unless your professor grew up in a town attached to a reservation and went to school with them from sixth grade on I'll consider myself more educated on the subject than your idealistic professor. If you didn't grow up seeing piles of fish dumped in the blackberry bushes from the trunk of an impala because they weren't put on ice and a few sold so they got too drunk to even sell the rest then you probably don't know the real deal. Next day wake up and repeat,get more fish than you need sell a few to get drunk and waste the rest, repeat. This went on for a couple decades. I grew up with many tribal members and even though I don't associate with them still consider some friends. This is the way it was on the res.

As much as I hate what we did to the Columbia, truly the death of the June hog. It also was a fortunate asset to have in place as we were involved in several wars following construction. We looked like geniuses for having it in place down the road. The power that Coulee created made it possible to run huge aluminum plants necessary to build planes and other war machines on the west coast. Had we not been able to do this we might all be speaking Japanese. Kinda like the tribes speak English, ya the sad truth is that in war there are winners and losers.

So tell your professor to shove his false reality up his ass and quit teaching our youths false truths. Those of us that were here and lived through it are not going to let them rewrite history that we witnessed.

But hey what do I know I'm just an uneducated ditch digger. :finger:
 

blackvelvet

old and gray
Jun 19, 2010
2,849
228
83
slug and duck country
Name
BV
Boat
One that works for me
Thanks for the link J.C....that article by Jim Tuggle is an eye opener

Any chance you could post a link for the article by Earl Sandy in this months reel news from the guy who actually worked with the tribes beach seining in the '70's, and witnessed their unsustainable harvesting practices........ I believe his article is titled "The judge Boldt decision.......40 years old"

And yes, I'm glad people noticed I mentioned "Puget Sound", not the Columbia, which is forecasted to have the biggest run in 80 years........can't say that about any Puget sound river.......in fact for Puget sound rivers it's the exact opposite, less returning Chinook every year.

P.S. rrenick65, has "your" professor ever wet a line, likely not, and from the sounds of it, you are on the tribal side of the discussion......and most know all too well the tribes are as much or more so to blame than any other individual entity, and if more fish ladders are installed in Columbia dams, it will only benefit those with a feather sticking out of their head, likely a feather from a bald eagle, but it's their ancestoral rights to kill them for a head-dress. Where does it end ???
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Eddy C and Jermz

J.C.

Run what ya Brung
May 20, 2012
998
598
93
Wa
Name
Justin
Boat
18' aluminum
Thanks for the link J.C....that article by Jim Tuggle is an eye opener

Any chance you could post a link for the article by Earl Sandy in this months reel news from the guy who actually worked with the tribes beach seining in the '70's, and witnessed their unsustainable harvesting practices........ I believe his article is titled "The judge Boldt decision.......40 years old"

And yes, I'm glad people noticed I mentioned "Puget Sound", not the Columbia, which is forecasted to have the biggest run in 80 years........can't say that about any Puget sound river.......in fact for Puget sound rivers it's the exact opposite, less returning Chinook every year.

P.S. rrenick65, has "your" professor ever wet a line, likely not, and from the sounds of it, you are on the tribal side of the discussion......and most know all too well the tribes are as much or more so to blame than any other individual entity, and if more fish ladders are installed in Columbia dams, it will only benefit those with a feather sticking out of their head, likely a feather from a bald eagle, but it's their ancestoral rights to kill them for a head-dress. Where does it end ???
It doesn't appear to be available online yet.

Funny I could post links of unethical behavior that I personally witnessed through the late eighties and early nineties all day. Of course people would say I'm racist, which I am truly not. I just consider myself a realist.

Yet the tribes can paddle their canoes into a state park where I'm camping in the islands hop out with 100 people backed by a power fleet and start strippng bark off of the trees in the campsites to take to their get together. Then circle up the clan on the beach in front of my camp and preach to the children how this is their land and white people are evil. That's not racist, it's only racist if your white. Heaven forbid you walk a 1/4 mile into the woods so you don't strip the trees where everyone is told to camp. I better not pick up that eagle feather I found on the beach. Where does it end?
 

rrenick65

Member
May 23, 2010
141
69
28
Kodiak, AK
Name
Ross
Boat
20' trophy
Well I think in my first post I said I wasn't trying to defend the tribes and I specifically referenced the Columbia. The only reason I bring up the Columbia was because this post was originally about area 7 blackmouth, correct? And I believe it was you BV that brought to light the connection between blackmouth in area 7 and the Columbia river in a previous post. Just trying to say our overall numbers of salmon in Washington have declined due to that, but I guess i'm looking at big picture.

You draw whatever conclusions you want, but I was one of the few who volunteered to float down the nooksack river a few years ago and pull out the 40 some nets that a particular tribe had abandoned. So I've been there to, I'm not agreeing with all of them and their actions. But we all know we are never going to get be able to fully restrict the tribes rights and put them on a level playing field with the rest of the commercial fleet. We need to try and limit them, we know that's a stretch to, but hey we have to start somewhere and try and do something, otherwise we might as well give up.

I understand the energy side of it, also the data and knowledge weren't available at the time to know the effects on migratory fish. But I've worked on the Grand Coulee also and been there for some of the early outlines of placing a fish ladder in. I really don't see how it could be a bad thing? Some of the rivers above the dam have the most pristine spawning habitat I've personally seen on a tributary. The tribes above the grand coulee I work with a lot, and I feel as if they are much different than the Puget sound tribes. Very educated, and most of them really enjoy sport angling as well. They are also very respectful of the environment. In fact, the Colville and Kalispel are trying like hell to save the sturgeon and burbot populations above the grand coulee. Which are probably a year away from being listed as extinct. But these are individuals who want to help and improve the fishery and came to get a degree to learn about how to do that.

And just to answer your question, yes my professor fishes quite a bit. He worked for WDFW for a number of years before teaching, he's getting up their in age, so he doesn't move real well. But when he does come out fishing with a few of us he usually sits patiently, ends up catching the most, and the biggest fish. Then just sits in the back of the boat with a shit eating grin on his face for the rest of the day....
 

J.C.

Run what ya Brung
May 20, 2012
998
598
93
Wa
Name
Justin
Boat
18' aluminum
I hate to come off as a know it all... but I have also spent my share of time on Roosevelt. I don't know that I would go so far as to call it the most pristine waters available to focus on.It's toxic, I no longer eat fish out of the lake, which sucks as I'm a fan of the area. For one that would be one hell of a fish ladder at what cost and then I,m sure the lakes draw downs would be regulated to get fish into toxic waters.

The Snake river seems like a more realistic stretch of river to get up and running with steady returns first and keep the power until things get figured out. IMO

http://crosscut.com/2013/02/06/environment/112713/teck-cominco-run-off-toxic/

Roosevelt to me is one of the most beautiful sad situations I have seen and that one is on us and by us I mean Canada. LOL and us.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rrenick65

rrenick65

Member
May 23, 2010
141
69
28
Kodiak, AK
Name
Ross
Boat
20' trophy
I hate to come off as a know it all... but I have also spent my share of time on Roosevelt. I don't know that I would go so far as to call it the most pristine waters available to focus on.It's toxic, I no longer eat fish out of the lake, which sucks as I'm a fan of the area. For one that would be one hell of a fish ladder at what cost and then I,m sure the lakes draw downs would be regulated to get fish into toxic waters.

The Snake river seems like a more realistic stretch of river to get up and running with steady returns first and keep the power until things get figured out. IMO

http://crosscut.com/2013/02/06/environment/112713/teck-cominco-run-off-toxic/

Roosevelt to me is one of the most beautiful sad situations I have seen and that one is on us and by us I mean Canada. LOL and us.
I agree with you, Roosevelt is a mess. The sturgeon population is gone, which is really unfortunate. The kokanee stocks are doing alright, with the most successful strain coming from lake Whatcom, probably fit for the conditions.

I was mainly referring to sections coming off the upper Spokane, such as Latah creek, marshall creek and several others. Also, the stretches that come of the pend Oreille and Colville, those areas extend into the national park and would be excellent areas for salmon re-introduction. The Spokane river is pretty bad in itself, but still supports healthy populations of trout and macro invertebrates. Only downfall is this is the only region that does not support a local RFEG which would help really get things going, myself and a few others are currently in talking about getting one going