Yakutat Petition
kingquota
2009-01-14 22:48:27
First my name is Walter Johnson and I am from Yakutat. I am not going to hide behind my forum name of kingquota.
I take exception to the one that say's the petition is a joke. What is called a joke by you that hides behind "dogfish", is signed by the people of Yakutat to the tune of 126 of them. To those that signed, it is not a joke. Almost all the Yakutat Advisory Committee signed it and as far as I know the three representatives going to the Fishery meeting signed it. Here is the petition that was signed by 126 Yakutat people:
I, a resident of Yakutat, hereby sign this petition to request the State of Alaska to stop the illegal practice of
using the State of Alaska Department of Fisheries regulations to forbid certain areas and user groups from
catching their fair share of the Spring Quota King Salmon (Between May 1, though June 30), which is in the
agreement between the Canadian /United States Unilateral King Salmon Quota agreement. The King Salmon
Quota is to be caught and shared by all user groups, not just the hatchery areas.
I am afraid you miss the point or thrust of our effort to re-open the Spring Troll season in Yakutat. We are not trying to get any hatchery fish, we trollers are trying to get our fair share of the King Salmon Quota that is allotted to all user groups. Of which we have been exempt from since the start of the Quota. Not only are we exempt from the King Salmon, we trollers are also exempt from catching the other species of money making fish that the rest of southeast enjoys. It sounds like you are from Yakutat since you were at the meeting when the rep's were chosen. Dogfish, who are you?
As far as the ATA is concerned, everyone knows that Yakutat and ATA do not see eye to eye. Yakutat because of their stand against us in the past and ATA because we don't join. It is a stand off that may break one day when the ATA stands or backs up Yakutat proposal (s). One note, I was at the organizational meeting of ATA and was their first parlimetarian during their first meeting. As far as Yakutat trollers are concerned , maybe not all of them, the hatchery fishery is an exclusive club for the hatchery spring season for it excludes a whole lot of trollers in Southeast.
yak2you2
2009-02-03 16:12:58
I am a Yakutat area fisherman. Gillnetter, troller, used to be a crab fisherman, back when we had crab. I've been a Yakutat resident for 40 years. Advisory committee member for 15 years, give or take.I didn't sign this petition, here is why.
First, take note that we already have a 1000 king allocation designated for a "spring test fishery," have we ever gotten to actually fish it ??? No, and we never will until we sit down and rework the Situk River Management plan. Under the current plan we have to have a projected run strength of more than 800 kings, and certain escapement levels that will never be met at the current rate that sport caught kings and personal use fish are removed from the Situk system, to say nothing of the fact that trollers are allotted exactly '0' share of the Situk river king run.Our test fishery will simply remain closed by emergency order, year after year.
So, asking for more fish to be taken from someone who could use them this year and allocated to us, when we can't even fish what we've got is kind of pointless.
Second, the whole process has to be done in small steps. Once we get to where we can actually go fishing, the first step would be to harvest our 1000 fish test fishery and get some hatchery fish percentage data documented on fish that were harvested in a spring fishery so we have the factual data backing any request for more fish.
Then we would have to actually write and pass a proposal for any future fishery at the Yakutat Advisory Committee level, and have it properly submitted for the 2012 Board of Fish to consider, which is something we haven't ever done yet.
Lastly, were going to have to have a realistic number in mind when we do get around to putting in a properly formatted proposal considering that the entire west coast king salmon stocks are in dire straits right now, and all the other fishermen need to get a share too. California didn't even get to fish last year, and probably not this year either. Not sport, not commercial, not anything. Our fellow fishermen in Canada are facing a forced buy out in some areas. Alaska's quota took a 60% hit last year, and who knows what were going to end up with in the future.
I am a fisherman, I want to fish too, but there is a right way and a wrong way of doing things. Do any of us have the right to feel any more frustrated than anybody else??? Getting angry and demanding that a fishery be opened for us immediately, even though it would be a violation of the treaty, without any scientific data to back it up, or any of the initial ground work having been done, cannot be our way.
Consider this, we don't own the rights to troll in the Yakutat area exclusively. All of the other permit holders in the state have as much right to troll here as we do, and, they also have a say in whether or not it should be opened. There's a few thousand of them so the sooner we learn to work with them, the better off will all be.
This is just my personal opinion, sorry for not being a good member of the hive, but I have to call them like I see them.
Casey Mapes
Salty
2009-02-03 20:26:56
Hello Walter,
I am sure you remember me, Eric Jordan. I have a long record of being interested in Yakutat issues since I was almost hired to teach health and PE and coach boys basketball by John Antonen in 1974. I ended up taking a job teaching with my wife at a middle school in Juneau.
I am a supporter of Yakutat being given an opportunity to participate in the May and June troll fisheries. I authored several proposals to improve the winter troll opportunity and to harvest to the guideline harvest range of 43-47,000 over the years. I greatly appreciated Yakutat's proposal to extend the winter season until May 1 or until we had caught the guideline harvest range. But, it would not have passed without ATA support. Which surprised me because they had rejected several similar proposals of mine over the years. So, thanks to Yakutat, I have been doing quite well in late April and would like to return the favor if I could.
Note that my friend, Fred Fayette, has a proposal, # 320, to transfer uncaught winter quota to the spring fisheries. I recommend you support this and ask for some of those kings to go to an experimental fishery in Yakutat.
I think Casey makes several good points about the process and the details. You will absolutely have to deal with the problem of perhaps catching Situk Chinook during that time period. I have no doubt that using some Situk Chinook in the troll fishery would greatly benefit Yakutat as I am sure each one you invest in the troll fishery is likely to return at least one or perhaps several treaty kings. But, the guides and the setnetters would have to be willing to give some up, or at least the community and the AC would have to supportive of some going to the troll fishery.
Which brings up an avenue to discuss. Do you have a guided sport fishery going on in Salt water in May and June? Why should that be allowed while a troll fishery is not?
Anyway, without knowing the details of your situation like you do, but having the benefit of quite a few years working with the Board of Fisheries I think there are possibilities to get something opened up if you deal with the Situk problem and are both creative and persistent. I also strongly recommend doing the best you can to work with ATA on this.
kingquota
2009-02-05 03:57:10
Hi Salty (Eric),
I appreciate your willingness to help Yakutat end the discrimination taking place at the Trolling level. There is no place for discrimination anywhere and it should be corrected immediately. Not in 2012, like some one who calls it as he sees it; even if it enhances the economic downward spiral of the community he works a steady job at. It seems like he doesn't care what happens to the full time trollers who are out of any income during May and June. He has a steady job and doesn't have to tighten his belt during May and June, He doesn't have to make up the loss of income after the summer season opens. We are not even able to fish for cohos or hunpies nor chums sockeye salmon that all of you trollers in SE are enjoying during MAy and June.
If ATA would sometimes sit on the Yakutat side of the table instead of sitting up with the Department at every meeting that I have attended and chasing me down to tell me why it is like it is and why we shouldn't try to upset the apple cart, we might be more willing to join them. Although we realize the ATA is a strong organization, we have to face the fact that they are always seeming to fight the Yakutat proposals that would improve our living in Yakutat. How can we hold the feeling of injustice we feel toward the ATA when all we can expect is trouble from them?? Change has to come from them first, for we have done not one thing to the ATA. Whether or not we are members, we are trollers, All 87 of us. Yes, even the one out of the hive. He is a member of our community.
Our gas last winter was $5.67 a gallon and in order to go fishing for one day, a skiff fisherman would shell out $100 each day he went fishing just to untie his skiff. It has eased a little right now. The price of gas has come down. What is the price of gas in Juneau right now? Our has come down a whopping 67 cents. It is now $5 a gallon($4.999). It would take approximately 80 gallons (Conservatively)to run to the nearest fishing ground during the King Salmon Quota Spring Season ($400) and then we would have to return. Plus live somewhere while fishing and try to send money home to keep our families going. Fair and reasonable??? I think not, Eric. This is just an outline of our problems we face because of the closure. Compile that with 87 trollers with families to support and you can see our side of the issue.
If things go my way, I will look forward to meeting you in the Sitka meeting. Otherwise somewhere else would be OK too. I read your posts and it seems like I would remember you from down the line. I was at the first ATA organizational meeting and was appointed their parlimatarian. I was also at the first regional organizational meeting. I was the first Chairman of the Yakutat Advisory Committee for many years. I came out of retirement just for re-openning the Pacific Salmon Treaty Quota that should be open for ALL trollers in Alaska. Not just a favorable group who use hatcheries as an excuse to excude many trollers, Yakutat most of all.
What ever guise is used to prevent us from fishing the May and June open King season, it will not reveal the real reason. Ah, enough for now. I will post this and hopefully some others will respond to me. No one amswers my posts to tell me why I am wrong. If no one corrects my posts, then I am right in my assumptions and posts. WAJ
Salty
2009-02-05 06:56:38
See my comments on 320.
Hi All:
I have hesitated to weigh in on this one, because back and forth fleet in-fighting makes very little sense to me - particularly in on online forum where so much is left out - lots of lines to read between. It''s impossible to get folks up to speed on decades of history, with tons of backstory. In fact, you don't want all that online for many reasons.
However, I simply must correct for the record a couple of inaccuracies that Walter has laid out.
First, I work for ALL trollers - I don't care where you live or how you pull your gear. Obviously, when pressed for time, I attend to the members requests first. That's how it's been for over 20 years for me personally. I have never been directed by the ATA board to work against Yakutat - or anywhere/one else. We support opportunity across the region, which to us, includes Yakutat. As proof, the ATA board has already worked on this very issue on behalf of folks in Yakutat.
In 2006, there was a proposal out of Yakutat for a spring hatchery access fishery. Since Yakutat landings are not assessed the hatchery tax, nor does Yakutat have any local hatcheries, the proposal was misdirected. What did ATA do? They worked with the Yakutat reps on the scene and the Board of Fish and ADFG to get that 1000 fish fishery that's being discussed here. Unfortunately, the Situk Management Plan wasn't open for discussion - because no one put a proposal in to do so - and that left a glitch in years of lower abundance. Please recall until just recently, much of the policy in Yakuat has been more supportive of the setnet fleet than trollers. I'm glad folks are diversifying and there is broader interest in a blend of fisheries, but those who know the history can attest to the fact this has not always been the case.
The 1000 fish spring fishery would have been open in all but 3 of the last 11 years!!! Please read that again. It's unfortunate that abundance has been down, but we can't do anything about that. And, ATA will never endorse something that doesn't FIRST protect local salmon stocks. What we can do is work on the Situk plan, but there is no proposal to do so.
I offered - in three different public sessions - to assist the folks in Yakutat develop a proposal. This was my offer as an individual. From there, I planned to ask for ATA support. No one took me up on it. Walter... I made this offer to you, personally. I have also talked to the ATA board about this and they have been quite open to seeing how we might ensure that the 1000 fish fishery THAT THEY HELPED GET can actually be open, while also safeguarding the Situk and sharing with other users. Without a proposal, that's been impossible to do. Individuals, or the Yakutat AC, had plenty of time - 3 years - to get something developed to discuss at the upcoming meeting and I'm sorry they did not. Now we have to make a plan for 2012. My offer is still open to help get a proper proposal put together.
You might also go easy on the ATA board if you're hoping they support. All this bashing of the guys who actually tried to help in 2006 is not likely to help their moods...more flies with honey??? Oh, at that same meeting? They helped re-work the definition of HT gear, at the request of an HT member.
Finally, yes, I sit with ADFG at the spring meetings... because they are JOINT ATA/ADFG meetings. We do this for two reasons. To save the fleet an extra meeting during a busy time of year, and to save the association money - that's important, because as you know, all trollers are not members and our budget is very tight. I don't even have staff anymore.
This will be my only post, so I hope the above reads clear....did it quick as I'm seriously under the gun today. Tomorrow I'm headed for a week of Treaty and then right into two weeks of Board of Fish meetings. I hope if you didn't already send comments to the BOF that you'll do a late filing. They just go in a separate book.
g'Day!
Dale, ATA
Salty
2009-02-07 20:26:57
Good to have the history laid out so well. Look forward to seeing you in Sitka.
kingquota
2009-02-09 00:00:08
Hi ATA ()Dale,
If there wasn't any vinigar, there would be no kiss and make up or honey for consideration.
I also view the in-fighting as a way to clear the air before we go public at the fisheries meetings and to get all of us an the same page during the fishery meeting to show unity for strength.
I still appreciate your post even though I have a slightly different view or maybe the "Other side of the coin". Your post still echos the departments view of the Situk River, while we are saying the Pacific Salmon Treaty King Salmon Quota. There is a huge difference. Although we all support the Situk River resourses , we also realize the department using the Situk River as an unjustifiable excuse to save the King Salmon resourse for the sports fishermen. The Pacific Salmon Treaty gives the amount of KIngs to be caught and allows trollers a certain percentage for us to catch. Only the Stae of Alaska fishery system is flawed that excludes certain areas and certain troll permit holders from catching their fair share of those limited King Salmon that is their right by treaty to catch. The Pacific Salmon Treaty does not restrict a fisherman from fishing for their fair shair. The State of Alaska system does that. Enough of that for now.
The 1000 fish that was mentioned, if I remember correctly was submitted by ATA. I could be wrong. There are some of us trying to repeal that in favor of becoming part of the Pacific Salmon Treaty Quota King Salmon system of which we are presently exempt. As stated before The State must make their rules and regulations to be "Fair and reasonable" to all. It is not fair and reasonable to have Yakutat trollers to travel 200 miles to the nearest fishing area in our small skiffs and boats. Our Area is within the Migratory route of the hatchery and wild kings which under the regulation allows us to catch Kings. The State of Alaska system is the one that forbids us from fishing our own backyard. If the ATA echos the department, then you know where I am coming from and hence the vinigar.
Just to remind you of your help on drafting a proposal offer, it was too late for the next three years, so we had to go the petition and emergency route. I personally appreciate the offer.
Thank you, Dale, for your post and hopefully, there is nothing personal in my post. If there is it is truly unintentional. I am trying to get us fishing for our suffering community. We lost 25 % plus 5 families since 2000. WAJ
farmed fish eater
2009-03-05 12:21:52
yea we are helping to by lowering our bag limits maybe they will go to sitka. Sounds like a little sarcasim on your part. But thats what I liked about this site we can air it out a little, as a matter of fact I dont even know who Im writing this to the readers can assume if they choose.