Another hit for Wild Fish: Steelheader.net- Steelhead, Salmon and trout fishing

Well

That was a fair enough answer, but does the CCA really believe that they can wait that long and actually increase it's membership while doing nothing of importance in the PNW?

If we look at the history of our state, if an organization doesn't do as it was expected to, it almost always losses about 50% of its momentum within the first two years and then its membership is right behind that figure. You know, I really do wish that the CCA could actually do something here in the PNW, but there "track record" really doesn't show many that they have any real record of successes in the "issues" that face the PNW. The average fishermen have no real idea just how completed these issues are and what it would take to resolve them.

I guess that many of us would have a little more faith in what the CCA can actually do for our fisheries issues if they really did have a track record of success on issues such as "joint interstate fishing agreements", "shared fisheries with tribes", "ESA", "tribes", and a host of others.

Maybe if the PNWCCA members could actually show us what the CCA has actuall done in the way of the above successes, it just might help some of us believe that they can actually do something here.

Other then to just point out to a ridiculous drummed up list of claimed sucesses for show purposes only; no one has really showed us any real specific cases that address the problems that we have here. Other then using the standard "fall back" words like "Nets", what have they actually done that's "similar" to our problems here? Please be very specific when you give us any comparisons.

As an example of what may happen; let's say that the CCA lobbies successfully to get the net fisheries out of the Columbia River. Do the CCA members actually believe that it will bring more fish back to the river? Will it bring more fish back to the spawning beds? Or will it simply mean more fish back for the tribes and less hatchery fish for us to catch and harvest?

You know, there is an age old saying… for every action there is always a reaction! Here is the way that I see things coming down if the CCA was successful in getting the white mens nets out of the Columbia River

1) The allocations for harvest on hatchery stocks will simply be re allocated to another area and commercial fishery outside of the Columbia River.

2) There will likely be more "take" in the Columbia by sport fishers on the ESA listed stocks and the sport fishing opportunely will likely be shorten instead of increased because the tribes will not decrease its allowable take.

3) The tribes "take" or harvest will increase on both hatchery and wild stocks in the Columbia while the sport fishers will not. (Boldt ruling)

4) Hatchery production will be cut back even further.

5) There will be more C&R fisheries and less harvest

Moreover, I don't believe that the courts will allow the gill net fishery to be ended.

As long as the tribes can continue to net in the Columbia, so will the gill netters be allowed to do so.

If any of the CCA supports do not believe that these things will occur, please explain why you believe that won't?

Let's start with #1 first!

--------------------
CCA Your Best Bet For The Fish