Northwest Fishing Reports

I have been catching and releasing wild coho in area 6. Why is it ok to keep wild coho in area 9 and 10? If it is wild and you can't keep in many area why is it ok in other areas? It just dose not make much since to me.

calico68 wrote: I have been catching and releasing wild coho in area 6. Why is it ok to keep wild coho in area 9 and 10? If it is wild and you can't keep in many area why is it ok in other areas? It just dose not make much since to me.

It has to do with certain stocks of coho runs in North sound/OP/Canada rivers versus south sound rivers.

Not to start a complaint session but I would love to know why the heck the State of Washington allows commercial & tribal salmon netting in Puget Sound and in our rivers??? Maybe if this wasn't allowed, WA wouldn't be in the "save the salmon" mode which we have been in since I can remember and we the sport angler wouldn't have so many restrictions on salmon fishing such as barbless hooks, and the pathetic 1 or 2 fish daily limit. Abundant amounts of salmon might actually be in our inland salt waters & rivers in a more similar fashion to places like Alaska. Imagine how great that would be. I believe that salmon netting should only be allowed in ocean waters period! sucks!!! JMO!

Dave wrote:Not to start a complaint session but I would love to know why the heck the State of Washington allows commercial & tribal salmon netting in Puget Sound and in our rivers??? Maybe if this wasn't allowed, WA wouldn't be in the "save the salmon" mode which we have been in since I can remember and we the sport angler wouldn't have so many restrictions on salmon fishing such as barbless hooks, and the pathetic 1 or 2 fish daily limit. Abundant amounts of salmon might actually be in our inland salt waters & rivers in a more similar fashion to places like Alaska. Imagine how great that would be. I believe that salmon netting should only be allowed in ocean waters period! sucks!!! JMO!

Sorry Dave but it's our own fault for not getting involved. When all the rules were drawn up there was no cohesive and or funded group to represent the "Sport Fishermen".
So with the clout of the Bolt Decision, the money from the "Commercial Fishermens Associations", the Tribes, and various well funded Eco groups ( they're still around) the little guy didn't stand a chance. Politicians only speak one language, money, money, money. The dynamic may have changed slightly but the outcome is the same. Now the Tribes have an unlimited amount of money so you can just guess what rules are going to change in the near future.

If anyone here would like to start affecting real change, stop gambling in the tribal casinos and convince everyone you know to do the same.

Casinos or nets. I think a choice should be made, this is way out of hand.

some areas have a small return of wild coho so they are trying to boost up the run

Dave wrote:Not to start a complaint session but I would love to know why the heck the State of Washington allows commercial & tribal salmon netting in Puget Sound and in our rivers??? Maybe if this wasn't allowed, WA wouldn't be in the "save the salmon" mode which we have been in since I can remember and we the sport angler wouldn't have so many restrictions on salmon fishing such as barbless hooks, and the pathetic 1 or 2 fish daily limit. Abundant amounts of salmon might actually be in our inland salt waters & rivers in a more similar fashion to places like Alaska. Imagine how great that would be. I believe that salmon netting should only be allowed in ocean waters period! sucks!!! JMO!

Yup same thing I believe, I think they should only be allowed to commercially net fish out in the ocean and not allowed to be in the Puget Sound or Rivers. But the state would probably never do it, too much money in it to do it. Over the last 10 years I've seen the increasing amounts of nets going into areas around where I live more and more every year. Over by Chico Creek with the chum run they pretty much put nets in all across the bay a few hundred yards out in front of the river. They did it in Sinclair Inlet also but I guess this year hasn't been as bad with the nets, so either they already ruined the fishery and not many kings are going into the bay there now or the state did something with it.

Funny thing here is the "save the salmon campaign" that has been going on forever in WA is a direct result of the State of Washington’s greed for money. They don't tell you in the save the salmon commercials or on the news when they are talking about low salmon numbers that the reason for these low salmon numbers in WA is because of the stinkin netters thanks to the States greed. How easy it would be to "save the salmon" if WA State would just put an end to the netting in the Sound and in our rivers. What a joke!

Actually as far a netting goes, it should only be allowed in rivers. Yes, this may sound odd but then at least you know what run of fish you are catching. Netting in the open seas is a crap shoot as you have no idea of the fish stocks that are being caught. Out there, a few commercial netters could theoretically wipe out an entire run of fish from river "x" and then we are left wondering why the returns are so poor for that river. The way to get this fixed is to support a group like CCA whose goal is to get all nets banned. We had a net ban initiative on the ballot a few years ago, but you already know how that turned out. Also be on the lookout for fish being sold that shouldn't be and report this to the State. An example of this would be if you saw "Lake Washington Sockeye" for sale at your local super market this year. The tribe was only allowed to take a few hundred fish for tribal ceremonies and biological study. With enough of these "anomalies" documented I hope one day an official will grow a set of balls and do something about it. Come election time get out and visit with the folks running for office. Be sure to let them know your feelings on sport fishing and other environmental issues and that your vote hinges on their commitment to improve the situation.

the sad part is ive never met an indian and Im sorry to say i HATE them just because of the netting. It is a joke, how they can do it. Get outta the casino's people. We need just one extreme activist, badgering the media and polticians, maybe i'l email Mr Moore.?!!

Netting in rivers means gill netting which means kill everything unless it is small enough to escape through a net. There is no way you can tell me this does not cause fish to be bred smaller over time by constantly taking the largest fish out of the gene pool. That is the worst type of netting.
As previously mentioned you can't keep the wild ones way out there because we don't know what river they are going to. Puget sound stocks are fairly healthy.

Jake Dogfish wrote: There is no way you can tell me this does not cause fish to be bred smaller over time by constantly taking the largest fish out of the gene pool. That is the worst type of netting.

The nets take all adult fish so they will not affect the size of the salmon unless there are adult salmon that can fit through a 5" hole.:bball:

fishaholictaz wrote:

Jake Dogfish wrote: There is no way you can tell me this does not cause fish to be bred smaller over time by constantly taking the largest fish out of the gene pool. That is the worst type of netting.

The nets take all adult fish so they will not affect the size of the salmon unless there are adult salmon that can fit through a 5" hole.:bball:

And that is the biggest problem. Salmon only spawn once so it is important that the biggest and strongest fish have a chance to spawn in order to keep their genes in the gene pool. No one wants rivers full of dink hatchery genes.

I'm all for commercial FISHING. Not netting. Let the commercials catch em the same way you and I do. Hook and line.

I find it very interesting that pink and chum salmon stocks in the puget sound are very plentiful. They don't get netted or just have started to recently. Whereas coho and kings, which have been targeted by indian and commercial netters for years, aren't doing so hot...See a trend? If you want to see the effects of netting on one particular run, go look at the Snohomish system Chum runs. By November that system was FULL every year with chum. The last two years that river has been empty. Commercials net the he!! outta them in 8-2 and out front of the Snohomish...

Stop the netting before all our wild stocks are gone.

Blackmouth wrote: I find it very interesting that pink and chum salmon stocks in the puget sound are very plentiful.

I read somewhere that one of the reasons the pinks do so well because the fry stay longer in fresh water before heading out to the salt. Which gives them a better chance at surviving once they are there (in the salt).

Not arguing your point, just what I read...

Gringo Pescador wrote:

Blackmouth wrote: I find it very interesting that pink and chum salmon stocks in the puget sound are very plentiful.

I read somewhere that one of the reasons the pinks do so well because the fry stay longer in fresh water before heading out to the salt. Which gives them a better chance at surviving once they are there (in the salt).

Not arguing your point, just what I read...

Well the pinks are the first fry in the estuary areas in the salt/freshwater parts of the sound. That's part of the reason why they say silver runs are always lower during pink years is because they get out into the estuaries later then the pinks and kings, giving them less food to eat. Not sure how accurate this is but I've read it a month or two ago somewhere.

Sure it sounds like netting would hurt the gene pool but the truth is the nets are indiscriminate they catch ALL adult salmon. This leaves the distribution of genes the same.......

Fishaholictaz, that is the same argument the natives/commercial fisherman make. It is not true, as jacks and small adults do make it through the nets.

Earth to fishaholictaz, WE DON'T WANT INDISCRIMINATE FISHING PRACTICES. Nets RAPE our runs. Bycatch is involved. How many steelhead, chinook and coho make it into those "Pink salmon" nets?????

Let em be selective in their harvesting. Let em collect hatchery surplus...

What they are currently doing sure ain't working..

The LAST thing netting does is leave the distribution of genes unchanged.

Calm down people I never said I was for the nets...... I am not a fan of the commercial or tribal fisheries at all so just let that be known.... I just don't think these "facts" that are being stated are 100% correct. But that is just my opinion just like every one else has. No body here has any HARD data to share so it is all opinion..........

Thats true fishaholictaz.
As far as species nets are indiscriminate. They kill Salmon, Sturgeon, Birds, Seals, Steelhead etc. But they always kill the Largest fish, regardless of what mesh size they use. I believe this is a factor as to why Salmon over 100 pounds were once common and now a 40 pounder is a big one for fish around here.