Pay Natives a Subsidy to Not Harvest Fish?

[JayDubP]

This is one of those fleeting thoughts that fly through my mind- just view it as food for thought!

Seems that Native Americians are harvesting fish that were paid for by the State of California-- and that the US Government gave the NA's the rights to commerically harvest fish. So the State of California spends millions every year to create studies and programs to try to restore and preserve the salmon and steelhead on the Klamath & Trinty Rivers. US Government recently gave $4.8million in stimulus $ for more studies.

Since the few who are commercially harvesting fish do so to make $$$- it would seem to make sense for the US Government to negotiate an annual subsidy to not commercially fish the Klamath or Trinity. This subsidy would be split among the 3 tribes (Yurok, Karok, Hoopa) who live along the Klamath.

From limited online searching I found that aqnnual runs are about 27,000 salmon and 10,000 steelhead- call it 40,000 fish. At 10lbs each and $3 a pound, the total the Native Americans could earn if the sold all the 40,000 fish would be $1.2 million- seems to me that giving the tribes $600,000 a year would be the cheapest and quickest way to impact the fishery.

If the tribes voted to accept the subsidy, would all the tribal members be bound by it? Or are any Native Americans, regardless of tribal affliation allowed to commercially fish the Klamath?


US Government just authorized $4.8million in more studies (stimulus $) and a quick search looks like CA and the US spend over $3 million a year on studies and other such baloney.

[Dustin Revel]

thats why the native culture is the way it is right now... we give them everything. in the case of casinos some are worth half a million dollars by the time they're 18 without having to work a day in their lives. giving them more money without having to work for it will just make things worse.

[huntindog]

how about give em the tools to make a spear and tell them if they want salmon they have to do it they way their great great grandpa did it

[590Mike]

So we can fish with $1000.00 spey outfits and complain about how someone else lives. And talk about cleaning up a mess on rivers we made with dams and water diversion. Sounds great!

[stevie steelhead]

I recently became aware that some members of the Hoopa Tribe are selling thousands of fish that are beeing gill netted at the entrance to the Hoopa valley. Hence, the counts of salmon and steelhead in the Willow Creek weir are way down to almost nothing!
Even some more informed tribal members realize that they could decimate the stocks of fish this year, and for many years in the future.
These disturbing facts are just coming forward because of the discussions on the internet.
A friend of mine and I discussed the situation, and concluded that a bunch of well intended fisherman on blogs or other sites, can't do much. However, what if an organized protest went to the Hoopa Tribal government building and protested? News coverage for a peacefull protest would expose the situation before it is not reversible!
Anyone interested????

[Scott V]

They have been selling fish for years. I have a friend that has lived up in that area for 30+ years and the locals selling fish is nothing new. It has been going on longer than most people on this board have been fishing there.

[590Mike]

Scott that's right. "Fishermen" buy fish from the natives rather than go home empty handed,or even fish at all and it keeps the wives believing they were actually fishing.

[JayDubP]

I started this because it seemed to me that it would be cheaper for all us taxpayers to use the "farm subsidy" method and pay the 3 Indian tribes for not commercially harvesting fish-- the same way US Govt pays tobacco famers for not growing tobacco or wheat farmers for not growing wheat.

The more we can do to limit the take (from all sources) of salmon and steelhead, the better chance the fishery has.

The reality is that there are a few Hoopa-Yurok-Karok who are commercialy fishing and selling the fish. Courts have given them that right.

So is it practical to buy those commercial fishing rights back?

And maybe US Govt would then stop spending so much $ on studies of the rivers and the CA DFG could spend less and maybe even eliminate the stocking program.

[Jgoding]

I think it's all about making a practical management decision on all sides...... I mean what's the point of conserving and stocking if you're going to allow the river to be completely blocked with nets during peak returns??? Pretty freaking stupid but it seems to be the govermental trend for so long... At the same time I know the native americans have their traditions and we took a lot from them but maybe it's time to move on and for the sake of conservation or a very small quota for take needs to be established until populations and returns are recovered.

In my humble and un-educated opinion if you're going to manage a fishery, manage it as a goddamn fishery and you can't be making any exceptions. Create a management plan, establish guidelines, allowable take and enforce it. It's the 21st century for gods sake and resources and populations of our fisheries are already strained as it is and it seems no one truly gives a rats ass we're going to eat some fairly magnificent animals into extinction because we can't control ourselves, our greed, or change our bulls#$@% ways and assbackwards thinking on certain things.

Sorry, rant over.

[pgw]

Find a copy of Ted Williams' (the writer, not the Splendid Splinter) book, "Don't Blame the Indians" and read it to obtain another perspective.

The people who elected the government (which enacts laws and then appoints the judges) are responsible for the conditions on the Klamath. Until a government is elected that will change the conditions, accept the fact that the natives have been given the ability to take fish in a manner of their choosing, and they don't have to use historical/cultural methods.

Paul

[ycflyfisher]

This thread like many others on this forum is getting out of hand. If anyone should see any individuals or untended nets that are in violation I’d suggest calling the tribal police rather than taking it to the internet and whining like a drama queen, all the while exclaiming that the Hupa should be forced back to hunting and gathering with spears in between collecting welfare checks. The Tribe revises its net fishing ordinance from time to time, but what was legal last time I reported an incident of abuse was:

One 100’ or less net not spanning more than half the river or 2 nets not totaling more than 100’ neither or which span more than half the river.
All nets must be attended and legal fishing hours for tribal members are anytime day or night until it’s declared the take quota has been met.

If anyone has any questions about the current tribal net ordinance or sees a net or fisherman they think are in violation I’d suggest you call the tribal police:

Hoopa Valley Tribal Police: 530-625-4202

If you call the tribe about any fishing abuses, they’ll be extremely quick to respond and they’ll likely have an officer on scene pulling a violating net out of the water by the time you make it back to the river, or several officers on scene if an individual(s) and not just a net is reported. The Hupa ordinance allows for sustenance and ceremonial take, but the tribe, does not encourage its members to fish for profit. They certainly don’t allow their own net ordinance or the quota to be willfully violated. There are certainly some net fisherman that abuse the resource and the regs for profit and the impact they can have is considerable compared to a hook and line violator, but most Hupa net fisherman are smoking and canning their catch for family and freinds, not selling it for profit. It does however happen, and as ScottV mentions is certainly not a new development.

As far as buying fishing rights from the tribe, it would not stop those who feel inclined to abuse the resource for profit and would be to most Hupa and Yurok akin to selling the rights to celebrate Thanksgiving or the 4th of July away. It’s part of their culture and society.

[Scott V]

Can you post the area code number for the Hoopa Valley Tribal Police. Just want to make sure I have the correct full number.

Thanks

[ycflyfisher]

Scott,

I added the area code above.

[Darian]

Getting back to the original question, direct payment cash subsidies haven't been very successful in accomplishing behavioral change among the recipients. If I recall correctly, Soil Bank subsidies were abolished as they were abused by "gentleman farmers"; many of whom were elected members of the US Administration and Congress. One other reason was that as farms increased in size, the size of the cash subsidy increased proportionately. Much of the land claimed as being idled was really not usable as farm land.

Subsidies do work for maintaining low prices for competitiveness in the international market place. However, even there problems arise as subsidized low product prices create claims of protectionism in the world market.

Many of these direct payment cash subsidies were modified or eliminated in the Farm Act of 2008. Not sure what took their place but somethin's happenin'....

Also, I agree with ycflyfisher that none of the measures suggested would stop anyone who is fishing illegally. They would probably see a subsidy as supplemental income.

Soooo, Cash subsidies probably wouldn't accomplish the goal of reducing fishing pressure on reservations.

Incidently, I'm wondering how the suggestor would reconcile why we should pay a cash subsidy for reducing fishing pressure to one stakeholder group (e.g. Native Americans) and not another stakeholder group (e.g. commercial fisherman, recreational fisherman, etc.) :?: :?: This idea seems like a black hole to me.... :confused:

[norcal tom]

Hearing rumors of gill nets on the Smith river anybody Know anything ?

[Darian]

Don't you live up there :question: :-s Take a drive along the river and see for yourself. Not sure we need anyone contributing any more rumors to this. :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

[East Bay Ed]

It seems to me paying Native Americans to not catch salmon is not the point. That was and is their traditional food source. It's like saying the government will pay you so much per pound to not eat beef or whatever your favorite food is. The real point is wee have some people in our culture that shoot game and catch fish out of season, or beyond the limit. It''s up to us to police the rivers, streams and environment to make sure people don't break the laws, just as it's the responsibility of the tribal elders/government to police their people. That's my opinion.
East Bay Ed

[shawn kempkes]

This thread like many others on this forum is getting out of hand. If anyone should see any individuals or untended nets that are in violation I’d suggest calling the tribal police rather than taking it to the internet and whining like a drama queen, all the while exclaiming that the Hupa should be forced back to hunting and gathering with spears in between collecting welfare checks. The Tribe revises its net fishing ordinance from time to time, but what was legal last time I reported an incident of abuse was:

One 100’ or less net not spanning more than half the river or 2 nets not totaling more than 100’ neither or which span more than half the river.
All nets must be attended and legal fishing hours for tribal members are anytime day or night until it’s declared the take quota has been met.

If anyone has any questions about the current tribal net ordinance or sees a net or fisherman they think are in violation I’d suggest you call the tribal police:

Hoopa Valley Tribal Police: 530-625-4202

If you call the tribe about any fishing abuses, they’ll be extremely quick to respond and they’ll likely have an officer on scene pulling a violating net out of the water by the time you make it back to the river, or several officers on scene if an individual(s) and not just a net is reported. The Hupa ordinance allows for sustenance and ceremonial take, but the tribe, does not encourage its members to fish for profit. They certainly don’t allow their own net ordinance or the quota to be willfully violated. There are certainly some net fisherman that abuse the resource and the regs for profit and the impact they can have is considerable compared to a hook and line violator, but most Hupa net fisherman are smoking and canning their catch for family and freinds, not selling it for profit. It does however happen, and as ScottV mentions is certainly not a new development.

As far as buying fishing rights from the tribe, it would not stop those who feel inclined to abuse the resource for profit and would be to most Hupa and Yurok akin to selling the rights to celebrate Thanksgiving or the 4th of July away. It’s part of their culture and society.

They have selective enforcement. I say this because I was down at red rock about three years ago and the local high school kids were snagging with trinity river flies and a tribal enforcement guy was watching them do it and he didn't do anything about it. I told the fish checker about it and he said he would take care of it.

[stevie steelhead]

I have lived in the Trinity River valley for over 25 years.
The Hoopa Tribal Police or Fisheries departments for the Tribes, will not arrest friends or family members who are netting illegally. They also have no free time to chase down the culprits, they are battling the overwhelming methamphetamine problem, and other related crimes.
The illegal netting problem must be solved by a larger, non-aligned agency.
I think that the feds must step in, or the future of the wild steelhead and salmon populations will be decimated within the next few years FOREVER.

[Darian]

You've just defined the problem. The tribal police have set their priorities to deal with "....the overwhelming methamphetamine problem,...." If the problem is as bad as you describe it (I have no reason to doubt your word) the tribal police have no choice. A felony drug crime is a higher priority and a larger problem than fish & game violations. Seems like they're stuck in the same rut as the rest of us while natural resources pay the ultimate price for lack of protections. :(

[fishwater]

Greetings, for those of you looking to learn...I am the Hoopa Valley Tribal Fisheries Department Senior Hydrologist. I am an avid flyfisher (this morning, for instance) and stay on the Reservation during the work week. I don't often fish beyond Willow Creek or Weitchpec. I am very familiar with the subjects under discussion on this post; I would be delighted to share what I know, based on 20 years of working here.

The fish harvested as an exercise of this Tribe's sovereign rights are well accounted for through a statistically-valid sampling design on par with any used in management of Klamath-Trinity fisheries. Same thing on Yurok Reservation.

Nobody here wants to be paid not to fish; its not about money, although some individuals do sometimes sell surplus.

Native people of the Klamath-Trinity are like humans everywhere...most of them are perfectly nice, some of them are fabulous, there's a few exceptions too. Here, there is a strong cultural inclination toward generosity and a profound sense of reverence for the River and its fish. With an open mind, you would find a lot of wonderful friends.

In 30 years of fishing the Reservation, and 20 years working for the Tribal Fisheries Department I have never once had a negative interaction with Indian fishermen....wish I could say the same for my upriver experience.

Best Wishes to All

Robert Franklin
530-625-4267 ext14

[ycflyfisher]

They have selective enforcement. I say this because I was down at red rock about three years ago and the local high school kids were snagging with trinity river flies and a tribal enforcement guy was watching them do it and he didn't do anything about it. I told the fish checker about it and he said he would take care of it.

Interesting. Did the person you reported it to do anything?

[ycflyfisher]

I have lived in the Trinity River valley for over 25 years.
The Hoopa Tribal Police or Fisheries departments for the Tribes, will not arrest friends or family members who are netting illegally. They also have no free time to chase down the culprits, they are battling the overwhelming methamphetamine problem, and other related crimes.
The illegal netting problem must be solved by a larger, non-aligned agency.
I think that the feds must step in, or the future of the wild steelhead and salmon populations will be decimated within the next few years FOREVER.

N,

Don't know what your experience is that makes you feel that way but they are a professional law enforcement agency. Per capita they've got (or did have at one time) more staff than most major metro area police departments do several times over. I've called 'em three times over the decades and they've always responded, twice suprisingly quickly. In two of the cases they took the nets and the fish. Never witnessed an incident where the violator was present. Regardless of how much you think the feds need to get involved, there's no instance anywhere that I'm aware where the tribal sovern rights to net have ever been taken away or regulated.

[shawn kempkes]

Interesting. Did the person you reported it to do anything?


I dont think so they were still there the next day snagging.

[wjorg]

The Smith River is gill netted at night. The off duty word from the DFG is that if they pursue legal action, and lose the court case, that may establish a precedent that allows outright gillnetting at all hours on the Smith.

Something must be done to challenge the Bolt decision....

[Darian]

Walter,.... Is gill netting done in the lower river near the Rancheria (at the mouth) or further up river :?:

Interesting, the timidity on the part of DFG. By failing to address the situation in court in order to avoid a negative outcome, they allow what they could regulate.... :confused: I don't see anyone challenging the Boldt Decision anytime soon. It was handed down in the late 70's as I recall and impacts all western states hosting anadromous Salmon/Steelhead. :-|

How about negotiating in order to reach some type of accommodation that's good for all.... A good settlement is better than a bad law suit. :D :D

[shawn kempkes]

The Smith River is gill netted at night. The off duty word from the DFG is that if they pursue legal action, and lose the court case, that may establish a precedent that allows outright gillnetting at all hours on the Smith.

Something must be done to challenge the Bolt decision....


The Boldt decision only applies to washington state. The case is U.S v Washington the governing case in oregon is. US v Oregon. The BIA and the nmfs apply it to other states because they feel it applies. I dont believe they have been challenged by other states on this. There is rumored to be legal challenge to the boldt decision brewing in washington by another non treaty tribe.


The Smith river rancheria can try to gill net the river all they want they dont have legal precedent on their side. IE: a treaty such as the point no point or other treaties that granted them fishing rights. It wouldnt take much to get it to stop. I think some organized protests outside their casino would be pretty effective. The tribe relies heavily on its casino to provide revenue for it.

[JayDubP]

Robert, thanks for posting. There are several posts here that seem to be fact-based.

I have fished the Klamath and Trinty for 36 years and IMHO the gill netting in 2009 is less of a problem than it was in the past. I have found the tribal authorities to be normal governmental people, with all the same priorities and limitations-- as good as any city in California.

But that said, gill netting is still an easy target to blame for the state of the fishery. And although tribal authorities do a good job they do not seem to have the fund (and people) properly control gill netting. That is why I started this post-- if the tribes got $$$ to outlaw gill netting only, would that not be a win for everyone?

Can you post numbers on what # of fish come into the Klamath, how many are taken by Natives and how many make it upriver?

I think some real $#'s would quantify this and maybe prove the gill netting is a preceived problem, but not a real problem as to the decline of the fishery.

[Darian]

Jdub,.... If as Robert (fishwater) pointed out, "Nobody here wants to be paid not to fish; its not about money,...." cash subsidies wouldn't be acceptable to Native American fisherman. :cool:

"outlawing" net fishing by Native Americans is something that is offensive to us, non-tribal peoples (....spell that commercial/recreational fisherman). Once again, Native Americans tribes who signed the treaties to end war are considered sovereign nations/peoples. Modification of their treaty rights requires voluntary agreement on their part and acceptance by the feds. Other than on this BB I see no movement on the part of any level of government or group to accomplish that end. :confused:

Management of Salmon/Steelhead fisheries in California fresh water is based on principles stated in the Boldt Decision (e.g. quotas on take by tribal and non-tribal fisherman in the Klamath drainage). I believe that the State of Washington is part of the 9th Circuit USDC and the Boldt Decision was reported. Therefore, the decision influences law throughout the 9th circuit, which includes California. :cool:

As to a potential suit by non-treaty Native Americans, frankly, I'm not sure what they'd see as a cause of action or where the money would come from to pay for such an action. Non-treaty tribes are basically unrecognized by the Feds and are historically poor in this state. They might have an easier time petitioning for recognition from the Feds to bring themselves under the treaty umbrella or to join a recognized, neighboring tribe. Even a non-treaty tribe might get some benefit from the current situation. Besides, the outcome of a suit could result in something more draconian or regulatory than they/we would want. :confused:

Anyway, all of this is purely speculation.... ;-)

[Speedy_Mitch]

I have been following this thread with great interest.


The fish harvested ... are well accounted for...
... a profound sense of reverence for the River and its fish

Robert, thank you for speaking up with both facts and experience. I hope my response does not come across in any sort of personal way. However, I find myself stymied by the disconnect between my experience at Hoopa and the information in these posts regarding the state of the Trinity.


One 100’ or less net not spanning more than half the river or 2 nets not totaling more than 100’ neither or which span more than half the river.
All nets must be attended and legal fishing hours for tribal members are anytime day or night until it’s declared the take quota has been met.

On Sept 12th two friends and I drifted from Hoopa (Red Rock?) down to the junction with the Klamath. We were off to an early pre-dawn start.

We had not drifted very far before we encountered three unattended gill nets strung so completely across the river that was difficult to get our raft past. This was the first of many sets of unattended nets we encountered that day - all the way down to the Klamath.

However, the most disconcerting encounter(s) was with three young adult bears that had been shot, apparently from the road, and left along the bank and in the river to rot. One bear kill was very fresh and still bleading from the hole in its head.

Is the tribes idea of reverence for the river and it's environment?

By what method are these netted fish 'well accounted for'?

This may well be the behavior of a few. But my (thankfully limited) experiences, the reputation of theft from parked cars at Tish Tang, and the posts from others on this message board would lead one to conclude that there is more going on at Hoopa than a few 'bad' individuals.

The disregard we encountered for the 'rules' as a whole (not just the reservation laws) will continue to create disrespect and distrust for the tribes of the area and, at some point, outside government agencies will become involved, rules will be enforced by outside agencies, and tribal freedoms will be lost.

In your opinion, will reporting incidents to the Tribal Police do anything to sway the long term 'reverence' for the Trinity River? If not the Tribal Police, what other agency should be alerted to this misconduct?

[Dabalone]

This argument, battle has been going on for a long time. Sports Illustrated article dated 1979.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1095010/1/index.htm

[Darian]

SM,.... I'm not condoning any of the acts you observed up there but unless you saw the acts in progress, all of the incidents of lawlessness you cite may've been committed by non-tribal persons from on or off the reservation. There're non-tribal people who live, work and/or recreate on the reservation. Why should you/we automatically attribute these acts to tribal peoples :question:

This is precisely why the tribe has a police force. They try investigate problems and enforce tribal laws against all lawbreakers. 8)