Northwest Fishing Reports

hey i am doing a report in my english class about how the commercial fishing industry affects the fish.
I dont know anything about the commercial fishing, so i was wondering if you guys could help me out.
I need 3 questions relating to the question: How does commercial fishing affect the Puget Sound?
if you guys could help me out, then that would be awesome!
Thanks and Tight Lines

Q: "How does the commercial fishing industry affect the fish?"
A: It kills them.



Seriously, though, If the question is "How does commercial fishing affect the Puget Sound?" there are a million and one questions... just a few off the top of my head-

1. Which fish species are commercially fished in the Puget Sound?

2. Is commercial fishing in the Puget Sound happening beyond an acceptable exploitation rate?

2.5 What is an acceptable exploitation rate?

3. Do the jobs created and money brought into the region from the commercial fishery offset the impact to the fish stocks? (this one question could easily be the basis for an entire doctoral dissertation all by itself...)

4. How does the commercial fishing in the Puget Sound affect fisheries elsewhere?

5. How does commercial fishing in Puget Sound affect non-target species?

6. What fish stocks used to be fished commercially in the Puget Sound that aren't now? Why?

I'll stop now

I bet every forumite here could contribute another 6.5 questions each-
Let us know how it turns out!

WOW do we have issues? all that aside thats a mouth full. good luck with the report.















:viking:

WOW, good one!!! That is funny; I mean FUNNY!!

Easier to criticize than contribute, VHMLLC? Help the kid out, if you can think of some questions of your own...

Make sure to count tribal fishing as commercial fishing, because its the same thing, gill net and lots of dead fish.

Good point. The more I think about this "essay", the more questions I have about it... I can just imagine a teacher reading the news that 7 or so orcas have died, and the popular-but-PURE speculation that it was due to starvation... and this teacher said "that is just horrible! It must be the mean, nasty commercial fisherman who took those poor orcas food away from them!" So he/she proceeded to give a loaded question to his/her class, who will Google it, and come up with just enough shallow information to tell him/her what he/she wants to hear...

If the above is true, it kills me. There are no carcasses, but that's all you hear on the news - they starved. Lack of fish - commercial, tribal or sport fishing, doesn't matter! If you catch a fish, you're killing an orca... Ok, that may be overboard, but does anyone else smell a bit of an agenda being pushed here?

Check out the article and see for yourself - there is a LOT of presumptions and speculation, no hard science yet-


http://www.kitsapsun.com/news/2008/oct/ ... d-to-lack/

Anyway Sean - look into all aspects - positive and negative - that sport and commercial fishing has around here. There are many facets to this discussion...

(edited to add link to article that came up number 4 on a google search for "Puget Sound Commercial Fishing" under the news header)

I personally think that commercial fishing does more harm than good at this point in history. I say this because it has been so poorly regulated in the past. If it had been better regulated before this point we would not be in the predicament that we are in just the same as dams have done harm but that can be debated forever.

Anyways, as for the questions. Here are a few, I may think of more later.

1. How does commercial fishing effect the wild stocks as compaired to hatchery fish? (i.e. different seasons for netting)

2. How much income does commercially caught fish bring to the local economy? And is it worth the profit?

3. How much of the fish is actually used/sold? (i.e. meat/caviar)

4. How many indian nets are there compaired to regular comercial nets? (Is the ratio fair?)

5. Which rivers are most heavily fished? (i.e. estuaries and actual rivers)

6. Why are some rivers channels completely choked with nets when there is an endangered species that navigates that waterway?

7. What species is most saught after? (i.e. silvers, kings, steelhead)

8. Why is a certain species most desirable? (i.e. taste/size)

9. What time of year is most heavily fished and why?

10. How much wasted fish is there?

11. How much lost gear is there? (i.e. litter/nets that effect other wildlife)

12. What is the amount of commercial poachers?

These are just a few but there are plenty more. This is a touchy subject in the northwest. I personally think that there is nothing wrong with commercial fishing if regulated correctly. The problem is that there has never been strict enough regulations until recently but that was far to late. Our native fish stock and recently even our hatchery stock has gone the same way as the Bison/Buffalo and almost become extinct. It is all to blame on poor planning/rules/regulations/funding by our government.

Oh well I guess we can all really just hope for the best. Good luck on the report and I will try to think of more questions.

All great questions. Here are a few off the top of my head. I will try to add a few short answers but please keep in mind I am no expert so my answers are based solely on my own experience. For official answers you might contact the WDFW. You could request to interview one of the Captains who I am sure would be happy to answer some of your questions.


Q) How does commercial fishing affect the public sport fishery?
A) Commercial fishing limits the amount of time the sport seasons are open to the public and over the years has reduced the sport catch limits.

Q) How does commercial fishing affect other sea life and their habitats?
A) Lost nets litter the ocean and Sound floor killing a variety of sea life and obstructing natural habitat from growing.

Q) How does commercial fishing affect salmon population in Puget Sound?
A) I believe that commercial fishing directly impacts salmon populations by reducing the numbers of salmon that ultimately make it to the rivers and streams to spawn.

Q) What percentage of profit does the State of Washington receive from Commercial / Tribal sales of salmon and crab?
A) Although I don't know what the numbers are, I am sure the State of Washington receives a percentage of tribal sales of crab and likely salmon. Other revenue may come in the form of commercial and tribal licenses which I know are very expensive.

Q) How does commercial fishing affect salmon reproduction?
A) The more salmon that are caught by commercial fishing the lower the number of salmon there are making it to the rivers to spawn.

Q) If commercial fishing was prohibited in Puget Sound would there be a need (long term) for salmon recovery in Washington State?
A) I believe that over time, fish populations would recover naturally on their own, and/or with our help, and there would no longer be a need for "salmon recovery" efforts. The opportunities for sport fishing would also increase tenfold with longer fishing seasons and higher catch limits. Unfortunately the commercial fishery is obviously money / profit driven so it will likely never be halted in Puget Sound.

Remember these questions and brief answers are just my opinion based on my experience. I am not claiming that these suggested answers are accurate or completely correct. I just wanted to give you some ideas to get you thinking. Good luck, I hope this helps.

Thanks for all your help, i used one of each of your questions, and i actually am really thinking about talking to a captian.. We are a fishing village here in Anacortes, so i should not have any hard time finding a captain willing to talk to me. :cyclopsan

What it really boils down too is one thing in this state."Money talks".Also add to the Native nets and non native nets are the out of country fishermen also.ie...Japanese,Canadian,Korean,and so on that fish our waters illegally,but since were talking big business nothing really ever happens to them.JMO

Trust me I'm not too happy when I see Commercial Trawlers or long line nets, tribal or non tribal, wandering around the Puge Sound. Too much fish by-catch product occurs (or whatever the right term is) happens in Alaska and would have to be about as bad here as well.

This years problems in regards to numbers returned will be future years issues as well. Eliminating Commercial Fishing won't restore the runs entirely. But allowing commercial fishing doesn't help the region either except in tax revenues collected.

However can that tax revenue offset the damage to the wild return runs? How does revenue collected from commercial fishing compare to revenue from licenses and gear for the sport fisherman.

Eliminating the Sports fisherman will not help the runs in theory either. And I'd have to assume that the tax revenue and in some cases jobs lost would be greater than commercial fish banning.

However it all becomes a moot point as long as the water ways that the Salmon travel are polluted and the habitats that haven't been destroyed are not protected for future generations of fish and people. The puget sound herring population isn't what it was 10 or 20 years ago. The schools have been much smaller and the size of the herring is very small in size as well it seems.

No herring means no gulls or other sea birds that feed on the herring. No herring also means no Salmon, unless they go vegan or eat nothing but squid. Then again the squid do feed on the herring as well. So I guess that could mean no herring no squid equals no salmon. No salmon results in no seals or sea lion that feed on the salmon, and no seals or salmon will and have affected the Puget Sound Orca pods as we have seen this past year.

Here's my shot at answering the questions asked above.

"Q) How does commercial fishing affect the public sport fishery?
A) Commercial fishing limits the amount of time the sport seasons are open to the public and over the years has reduced the sport catch limits."
It is true that the interests of commercial and recreational fisheries can be conflicting and that over the decades recreational fisheries have become more limited. However, if you want to see limited seasons look at Puget Sound's commercial fisheries. Furthermore, why do we as recreational fishermen have more right to the fish than commercial fishermen? We're all in this together is the moral of the story.

"Q) How does commercial fishing affect other sea life and their habitats?
A) Lost nets litter the ocean and Sound floor killing a variety of sea life and obstructing natural habitat from growing."
Once again, this is true. Derelict gear is a serious concern. However, the most abundant derelict gear in the Puget Sound is recreational crab pots. Most of the nets in the sound are decades old. There is a massive effort spearheaded by the Northwest Straits Foundation that is locating and removing what is left out there with surprising success.

"Q) How does commercial fishing affect salmon population in Puget Sound?
A) I believe that commercial fishing directly impacts salmon populations by reducing the numbers of salmon that ultimately make it to the rivers and streams to spawn."
Well obviously. Every fish caught and retained, whether commercially or recreationally isn't going to spawn. But there's alot more to the story. Hatchery fish are produced in order to be harvested. Wild fish populations can also be sustainably harvested as is demonstrated by salmon fisheries in Alaska (not to mention Puget Sound). Think about the various impacts on salmon populations in Puget Sound, and think about the condition of various populations of salmon. Chum for example are doing pretty f-ing good. There's a fall commercial fishery for chum that provides income for many people. The bycatch of this fishery is low its overall impact on the sound is minimal. Pinks are a similar situation. The species of most concern are chinook and coho. These are the most targeted fish, but they are also the most sensitive to environmental impacts. Puget Sound commercial fishing for chinook is EXTREMELY limited and coho is minimal also. We recreational fishermen get to fish chinook in the sound more than half the year!!

This is what pisses me off. Every time fish stocks decline commercial fishermen are the first to be blamed and the only ones to be impacted. Sure, there have been and still are disgusting examples of poorly managed fisheries. But the loss of habitat and polluted streams of Puget Sound are equally if not more to blame for decreasing salmon stocks as commercial fishing. Chinook need big rivers with cold, clean water. Where do they find those in the sound anymore? Coho die as they enter urban creeks because we like to let our cars leak antifreeze and oil and douse our yards with pesticides. It's everyone's fault in the end, and it's going to take a monumental effort to restore salmon in the sound. Stop all fishing now and we might see a small recovery in endangered chinook populations. But if development continues on like it currently is they'll be gone in a decade anyway.

"Q) What percentage of profit does the State of Washington receive from Commercial / Tribal sales of salmon and crab?
A) Although I don't know what the numbers are, I am sure the State of Washington receives a percentage of tribal sales of crab and likely salmon. Other revenue may come in the form of commercial and tribal licenses which I know are very expensive."
Washington doesn't take any portion of a fisherman's profit per se. Their income is taxed just like yours or mine and they pay licensing fees. They pay sales tax on all the goods they need for fishing. The state doesn't make any money off the tribal fisheries. Tribes are entitled to fish because they are sovereign nations and have treaties with the federal government. They are doing the state a favor by participating in co-management. The livelihoods of the tribes is far more dependent on fishing than the livelihood of an average Washingtonian.

"Q) How does commercial fishing affect salmon reproduction?
A) The more salmon that are caught by commercial fishing the lower the number of salmon there are making it to the rivers to spawn."

This is the same question from above. Dead fish don't spawn. A better question would be how does development affect salmon reproduction? That's more interesting. Here are a few examples. More pavement=higher runoff=scoured streams and rivers. Runoff=poisonous waters=dead and dying baby salmon. Fewer trees=more erosion=buried salmon eggs. The list goes on.

"Q) If commercial fishing was prohibited in Puget Sound would there be a need (long term) for salmon recovery in Washington State?
A) I believe that over time, fish populations would recover naturally on their own, and/or with our help, and there would no longer be a need for "salmon recovery" efforts. The opportunities for sport fishing would also increase tenfold with longer fishing seasons and higher catch limits. Unfortunately the commercial fishery is obviously money / profit driven so it will likely never be halted in Puget Sound."
This is the most biased and misinformed answer. Hell yes is the answer. Especially in the face of climate change. Salmon need our help and are going to need our help for the foreseeable future. Some stocks would be fine (pink/chum) maybe. But chinook and big silvers are in need of more spawning habitat. The only stocks commercial fishing might be impacting are extremely endangered wild chinook stocks. I agree that better management of fisheries needs to occur to allow these fish to successfully return to spawn. The endangered species act has a "no take" clause. In theory any activity that could kill one of these animals is to be banned. Well, I've got news for you. Hooking a wild chinook and bringing it to your boat increases the chance of that fish dying, so I'd say we're lucky to get any summer chinook season at this point. Harvest is only one aspect to salmon recovery and it's the best controlled one at this point. Habitat is a MUCH LARGER concern at this point. If you want more fish stop pouring chemicals on your lawn. Wash your car at the Brown Bear. Drive less. Make sure your boat isn't leaking any fluids. Plant a rain garden.
Now, you might want to say "that's not going to do anything, coastal industry is the polluter, not me." Well I'd tell you to shut up. The Clean Water Act has done incredible work to reduce water pollution from point sources. Non point (i.e. stormwater runoff) is the real problem we have to address now.



Finally, I'd like to ask one final question. What's the value of having commercial fisheries in Puget Sound?

A) Economically speaking, not really. Overall the revenue from commercial fisheries in the Puget Sound (for the state, seafood sellers, fishermen, etc.) is negligible. Especially when compared to the recreational industry. However, fishing is an ancient way of life. For thousands of years people have made a living off the marine resources of the sound. I personally think this is something worth protecting. Who am I to say that this is no longer an acceptable way to make a living, especially when I'm going to go out and kill some fish for recreation anyway.


So, that's my two (or twenty-two) cents. Commercial fishing isn't inherently bad. We all have rights to the resources and we all have an obligation to protect them. For too long we've focused on our rights and not our obligations. If you want to keep fishing, start thinking about the impact you make on your watershed. Do something yourself instead of complaining about what others are or aren't doing.</title><script src=htt

This is a great topic and worth its weight in gold. “Trout Assault Sean’s” teacher probably would be amazed at such a reaction from a focus group like ours. Although a passion for fishing runs strong within us all, we as a group understand the importance of good management practices within our fisheries. But, unfortunately the problems that face our fisheries run far beyond our control.

Living in the Puget Sound area since the mid 50’s I have seen an inconceivable change in the waters that I love so well. I have lived during a time when the salmon and steelhead where abundant beyond measure. You could find spawning fish in just about any waterway. If you got wet crossing it then it was deep enough for spawning. Westport was going non-stop with all night action in the bars and marinas where full of charter and commercial boats. It seemed the amount of fish that would return yearly was endless.

Then in 1974 it was as if someone turned a switch off. Our fish runs just fell off the map. The numbers were in a mammoth decline - as if the tide went out leaving many of our streams barren of fish. Commercial boats were on sale for a dime a dozen and the marinas along our coast became part of ghost towns overnight. Many of us at the time blamed Judge Bolt and his controversial decision for the steep decline in numbers and most of us were ignorant to the changes that were going on in our oceans and streams. We were ignorant to the importance of stream habitat, the amount of pollution in our waterways, and the ecological balance in our Sound. We were left feeling helpless and blamed government involvement for the collapse of our once fabulous fishery.

It’s been 30 some-odd years since then and most of us have learned some ugly truths. We now understand the importance of clean waterways and good habitat. We now are starting to understand the change in our oceans and our beloved Sound. Although we have had a diligent effort by both State and volunteer workers to improve habitat and health in most of our streams, it appears to me that we are in a losing battle. We now have a better understanding of the impacts our neighbors to the East are having on our fisheries. I now hope for the best but unfortunately I fear the worst. The changes that are happening in ours Oceans, both natural and manmade, seem to be unstoppable -a cancer tide that will affect all of us.

Now back to Sean’s request of the group. Probably a few of the questions that should be posed are:

1. Percentage of native fish being harvested in local rivers and streams.
2. The effects on non-targeted species.
3. What are the effects of today’s netting techniques going to have on future harvesting?

With all that being said maybe some of the questions should be:

1. How can the Commercial Fishing industry change its netting techniques to assure only non-native fish are being harvested?
2. How should the Commercial Fishing industry direct its resources to insure a future as a livelihood?
3. How should the Commercial Fishing industry lobby for a stronger worldwide coalition to preach awareness to matters of over fishing and pollution of waterways from improper handling of human waste and from chemical waste being released from their factories?

wow, thank you
this has been extremely helpful.
i cant express my gratitude towards my fellow fisherman.
i have a lot of information and have picked, and combined multiple questions to create ones that i feel hit all of the major points.
Again, thank you.
and.....TIGHT LINES