boater
Offline
Chromer
Profile Status:
Reged: 05/03/01
Posts: 693
Loc: seattle
|
|
http://www.nsiafishing.org/action%20alerts.htm
|
Todd R
Offline
Chromer
Profile Status:
Reged: 10/29/01
Posts: 892
Loc: Seattle, Washington
|
|
It's good for wild steelhead bycatch in the spring Chinook fishery, since the sportfishery for springers doesn't hardly catch any.
Probably not a net gain for ESA Chinook, since the allowable impacts on them won't go away, they will just be used by other stakeholders, namely the sporties.
It would definitely increase sportfishing opportunities for hatchery spring Chinook...longer seasons and more landings.
It remains to be seen what difference it may or not make for the upriver tribal fisheries, but if the sporties are fully utilizing the non-tribal ESA spring Chinook impacts in their fishery, then it shouldn't change anything for them...though they may be able to fish harder and use up the savings for wild steelhead.
Fish on...
Todd
--------------------
http://www.rvrfshr.com
For all your fishing hardware needs!
"Correct in Design"
|
Gooose
Offline
Ancient Mod
Profile Status:
Reged: 09/14/01
Posts: 11066
Loc: Area 12
|
|
Pretty much my analysis of it also. I really don't see license sales increasing. I am not that confident that this proposal is that sturgeon friendly.
--------------------
Independent Advocate For The Fish
Not Represented By Any Organization
Simple Solutions to Simple Problems
Simple Solutions to Complex Problems
There's lies, damned lies and then there are statistics......Mark Twain
|
Todd R
Offline
Chromer
Profile Status:
Reged: 10/29/01
Posts: 892
Loc: Seattle, Washington
|
|
I guess it depends on how many sturgeon are going to be caught in the SAFE areas...Youngs Bay is certainly full of sturgeon, but they're fishing there already...I have no idea what the increase in sturgeon encounters would be there, especially compared to the reduction in encounters out in the river proper.
Fish on...
Todd
--------------------
http://www.rvrfshr.com
For all your fishing hardware needs!
"Correct in Design"
|
Mojo
Offline
Instigator
Profile Status:
Reged: 09/10/03
Posts: 7496
Loc: Bootsville, Idaho
|
|
Well, I'm sure there are ways of reducing bycatch mortality like constantly monitoring the nets, changing size of the mesh etc. I have to believe that getting the nets out of the mainstem is a great first step. I also believe netting areas where the fish are almost all of hatchery origin is a good thing. Once the fishing is confined to the SAFE areas, then we can start working on getting them to switch methods of harvest that are less damaging to other species, and more selective.
I'm no expert, but I did stay at the Holiday Inn once... 
--------------------
Tight Lines,
Mojo
TEAM MOOSE DROOL
TEAM SMOKIN' MERC
TEAM JACKSON BALDWIN
Alaksa Nitro Baits Pro Staff
|
Todd R
Offline
Chromer
Profile Status:
Reged: 10/29/01
Posts: 892
Loc: Seattle, Washington
|
|
Quote:
Mojo said:
I have to believe that getting the nets out of the mainstem is a great first step.
I think that's true, too...but you have to be realistic about what the benefits are, and what the consequences are.
Swapping the ESA impacts to the sport fleet is good for the sport fleet, and the $$ that depend upon the sport fleet, but that in no way translates into being good for the resource.
Like I've said many times before...so long as the seasons are set by ESA limits on wild Chinook, no plan will do the Chinook any good whatsoever.
In this case, the ESA impacts will just be transferred over to the sport fleet. Zero gain for wild Chinook...just as many will die, they will just die via CnR mortality rather than by Net and Release mortality.
This comes with an entire host of benefits...but Chinook productivity is not one of them.
On the whole, if the same amount are going to die either way, I'd rather they are killed by the sport fleet, allowing much longer sport seasons and less steelhead bycatch.
Fish on...
Todd
--------------------
http://www.rvrfshr.com
For all your fishing hardware needs!
"Correct in Design"
|
Mojo
Offline
Instigator
Profile Status:
Reged: 09/10/03
Posts: 7496
Loc: Bootsville, Idaho
|
|
Todd, the mortality on wild steelhead is a huge issue, in my mind. We've all seen the pictures.
Also what is the no kidding net release mortality? How does that compare to the C&R mortality rates? Wouldn't it actuall be possibel that us sporties make it through an entire springer season without busting the ESA "magic number"?
I could also see (as a sign of good faith) reducing the ESA impacts (like splitting the difference with current regs - give half of the Commercial ESA impacts to the sports). Works out better for the fish and the fishermen.
--------------------
Tight Lines,
Mojo
TEAM MOOSE DROOL
TEAM SMOKIN' MERC
TEAM JACKSON BALDWIN
Alaksa Nitro Baits Pro Staff
|
Gooose
Offline
Ancient Mod
Profile Status:
Reged: 09/14/01
Posts: 11066
Loc: Area 12
|
|
Giving up some of the LCR springer ESA take would benefit the fish but only if the upriver take didn't absorb what we didn't take.
--------------------
Independent Advocate For The Fish
Not Represented By Any Organization
Simple Solutions to Simple Problems
Simple Solutions to Complex Problems
There's lies, damned lies and then there are statistics......Mark Twain
|
Todd R
Offline
Chromer
Profile Status:
Reged: 10/29/01
Posts: 892
Loc: Seattle, Washington
|
|
The "Net and Release" mortality on steelhead is horrendous...that's my favorite part of this plan, reducing that mortality.
No, the sporties won't make it through the season without using up the Chinook mortality rates...we'll fish right up to it...that's how the seasons are set. This is another variation of how 'selective fishing' won't benefit the resource, because the season is set by how many of the non-target fish die.
The release mortality on spring Chinook is reduced by 75%? Cool...we'll just fish until we catch four times as many of them, and kill the same amount.
The difference is that we will be able to keep the sport season open four times as long, and capture four times as many hatchery fish...and spend four times as much money doing it 
If we reduce the non-tribal share of ESA impacts on spring Chinook voluntarily, then look too see the upriver fisheries taking up the slack on it...the tribes, first, but especially the upriver sporties who usually don't get to fish because we all (sport, commercial, and tribes) use up all the allowable impacts down in the lower river.
Fish on...
Todd
--------------------
http://www.rvrfshr.com
For all your fishing hardware needs!
"Correct in Design"
|
Mojo
Offline
Instigator
Profile Status:
Reged: 09/10/03
Posts: 7496
Loc: Bootsville, Idaho
|
|
From wht I have been told repeatedly by IDF&G bils, and all the self appointed experts on the internet (I'm not talking about you guys)is that the lower Columbia and the Snake River ESA impacts are set differently. I smell a shell gam here. If the upriver ESA mortality remains the same, and more fish are available, it sounds to me it would ensure better seasons anyhow...
--------------------
Tight Lines,
Mojo
TEAM MOOSE DROOL
TEAM SMOKIN' MERC
TEAM JACKSON BALDWIN
Alaksa Nitro Baits Pro Staff
|
Gooose
Offline
Ancient Mod
Profile Status:
Reged: 09/14/01
Posts: 11066
Loc: Area 12
|
|
It's a shell game. Each stock has a maximum total allowable take built into it's recovery plan. Take from each source such as the various fisheries, dams, water withdrawals, ad nauseum are all identified and a portion of that total portioned out to them. If a portion of take is available it can be and often is given to another source. An example being Puget Sound chinook... if we were to ask for an increase in the length of our winter blackmouth season in Hood Canal that increase would require shifting take from somewhere else. If take is not being used then it is available for increasing that season. If we reduce take of Idaho bound Chinook it is plausible that a dam operator or other water user could ask for that unused take. Essentially the Fed's don't care a whit how the total is apportioned....all they care about or have to care about is not exceeding that total. In a nutshell that is the game. The high ground for any single user group within that legal/political framework is akin to being a gopher flipping off a hawk in regards to actually helping out the fish.
--------------------
Independent Advocate For The Fish
Not Represented By Any Organization
Simple Solutions to Simple Problems
Simple Solutions to Complex Problems
There's lies, damned lies and then there are statistics......Mark Twain
|
AuntyM
Offline
Looking for a few good fish!
Profile Status:
Reged: 05/07/01
Posts: 10193
Loc: Harstine Island
|
|
Good plan? I think it's designed to sell more licenses, gear and boats. All I have to do is look at who is pushing/selling the plan and I know it's not going to be a good thing.
Quote:
The Select Areas have become an important tool for management to provide high value fish for commercial fishermen to supply to the general public. But the SAFE program is no panacea, and offers very little real opportunity to provide for a commercial fishery completely relegated to areas off the mainstem. Existing Select Areas all are bound within constraints that limit the number of fishers who can participate, and each has an array of management and practicality issues that limit the times of year when it can afford a viable fishery. Though some of the additional areas studied during the evaluation period offer some chance for expanded fisheries farther upriver, each comes with a complex mix of limiting factors that would have to be overcome before such fisheries could become reality.
In conclusion, the theory recently expounded by sport fishing advocates that the needs of the commercial fishery can be met adequately in the Select Area fisheries alone, thus opening an avenue to get the non-Treaty drift gillnet fleet off the Columbia River mainstem completely, simply fails to match up with the facts.
http://www.dfw.state.or.us/fish/LCRSFSG/docs/SAFE%20Overview,%20a%20Salmon%20For%20All%20white%20paper.pdf
--------------------
Landslide: Stevie Nicks greatest song!
http://www.ccapnw.org
The Monster Breathes!
"Don't fall in!" Doug Richert Sr. 10/18/2008
|
boater
Offline
Chromer
Profile Status:
Reged: 05/03/01
Posts: 693
Loc: seattle
|
|
Quote:
AuntyM said:
*** You are ignoring this user ***
|
AuntyM
Offline
Looking for a few good fish!
Profile Status:
Reged: 05/07/01
Posts: 10193
Loc: Harstine Island
|
|
I was responding to the thread in general and to Gooose specifically.
Since NSIA and the good old boy network is behind this, there is no way I would want anything to do with it. They are making assumptions they can't support with fact IMO.
--------------------
Landslide: Stevie Nicks greatest song!
http://www.ccapnw.org
The Monster Breathes!
"Don't fall in!" Doug Richert Sr. 10/18/2008
|
Gooose
Offline
Ancient Mod
Profile Status:
Reged: 09/14/01
Posts: 11066
Loc: Area 12
|
|
Now that I have had time to think it over I have the following comments. The SAFE proposal won't do a thing for restoration or conservation of ESA listed fish. It is simply a shell game. What isn't killed in the LCR will be killed before it gets to the LCR or after it migrates upstream. This is no better for wild fish than the Treaty agreement with Alaska and Canada. Quite simply it is a Paper Fish Joke......sad one at that. I really hope that the CCA leadership is truly interested in conservation? 
--------------------
Independent Advocate For The Fish
Not Represented By Any Organization
Simple Solutions to Simple Problems
Simple Solutions to Complex Problems
There's lies, damned lies and then there are statistics......Mark Twain
|
Gooose
Offline
Ancient Mod
Profile Status:
Reged: 09/14/01
Posts: 11066
Loc: Area 12
|
|
Because the NSIA certainly isn't and someone should be. 
--------------------
Independent Advocate For The Fish
Not Represented By Any Organization
Simple Solutions to Simple Problems
Simple Solutions to Complex Problems
There's lies, damned lies and then there are statistics......Mark Twain
|
boater
Offline
Chromer
Profile Status:
Reged: 05/03/01
Posts: 693
Loc: seattle
|
|
Quote:
Todd R said:
It would definitely increase sportfishing opportunities for hatchery spring Chinook...longer seasons and more landings.
but, how many fish from upriver hatcherys will they move down river and how will that effect sport fishing up the river 
its like they are taking lessons from the wdfw, more opportunities to fish where there are less fish around.
|
AuntyM
Offline
Looking for a few good fish!
Profile Status:
Reged: 05/07/01
Posts: 10193
Loc: Harstine Island
|
|
Bill Monroe posted this little piece in one of his responses.
Quote:
Look, and I say again...This proposal is a concept. The agencies will decide the details after the policies are adopted. Our speculation is just as accurate as yours but remains simply speculation...educated speculation, but speculation nonetheless.
You have to be nucking futs to support this so called concept. I smell a rat or two.
--------------------
Landslide: Stevie Nicks greatest song!
http://www.ccapnw.org
The Monster Breathes!
"Don't fall in!" Doug Richert Sr. 10/18/2008
|
boater
Offline
Chromer
Profile Status:
Reged: 05/03/01
Posts: 693
Loc: seattle
|
|
Quote:
AuntyM said:
You have to be nucking futs to support this so called concept.
i agree with you, these people are nuts to want a wide open deal like this
|
Salmo_g
Offline
silver
Profile Status:
Reged: 12/29/04
Posts: 103
Loc: south Sound
|
|
I wonder if this plan figures somehow in the sport/commercial allocation discussions by the OR/WA committee that I read is meeting again, or maybe has.
|
Gooose
Offline
Ancient Mod
Profile Status:
Reged: 09/14/01
Posts: 11066
Loc: Area 12
|
|
Salmo I believe portions of the plan are already being implemented or planned irregardless of this plan being approved.
--------------------
Independent Advocate For The Fish
Not Represented By Any Organization
Simple Solutions to Simple Problems
Simple Solutions to Complex Problems
There's lies, damned lies and then there are statistics......Mark Twain
|
Mojo
Offline
Instigator
Profile Status:
Reged: 09/10/03
Posts: 7496
Loc: Bootsville, Idaho
|
|
IMO, Idaho Fish and Game should set policy for the lower Columbia. At least some fish would make it past Bonne that way...
Sorry, I'm at Southfork's house, which means beer drinking became more important than politics for once... 
In reality limiting the commercials is a good idea, but the kinks need to be worked out. Also, having independent oversight would be a good plan. I'll volunteer Mojo, AuntyM Gooose, Boater, ToddR, and Lead Bouncer to be the oversight committee. If we all agree on the outcome, it should be regarded as a universal truth... 
--------------------
Tight Lines,
Mojo
TEAM MOOSE DROOL
TEAM SMOKIN' MERC
TEAM JACKSON BALDWIN
Alaksa Nitro Baits Pro Staff
|
Mojo
Offline
Instigator
Profile Status:
Reged: 09/10/03
Posts: 7496
Loc: Bootsville, Idaho
|
|
Awww SHINOLA! I forgot military rule number 1, never volunteer for anything...
--------------------
Tight Lines,
Mojo
TEAM MOOSE DROOL
TEAM SMOKIN' MERC
TEAM JACKSON BALDWIN
Alaksa Nitro Baits Pro Staff
|
AuntyM
Offline
Looking for a few good fish!
Profile Status:
Reged: 05/07/01
Posts: 10193
Loc: Harstine Island
|
|
Go Navy?
Never
Again
Volunteer
Yourself
--------------------
Landslide: Stevie Nicks greatest song!
http://www.ccapnw.org
The Monster Breathes!
"Don't fall in!" Doug Richert Sr. 10/18/2008
|
boater
Offline
Chromer
Profile Status:
Reged: 05/03/01
Posts: 693
Loc: seattle
|
|
Quote:
Mojo said:
Also, having independent oversight would be a good plan. I'll volunteer Mojo, AuntyM Gooose, Boater, ToddR, and Lead Bouncer to be the oversight committee. If we all agree on the outcome, it should be regarded as a universal truth...
we probly could all agree that this is the theme song for this "safe for salmon" group
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7_nwbTeIN4Y&feature=related
|
boater
Offline
Chromer
Profile Status:
Reged: 05/03/01
Posts: 693
Loc: seattle
|
|
the thing about this whole stupid thing is that it calls for the elimination of gillnets out of the columbia but not tangle nets, they are 2 different nets with 2 different release mortality rates, they could realistically still fish tangle nets if gillnets are banned
|
Todd R
Offline
Chromer
Profile Status:
Reged: 10/29/01
Posts: 892
Loc: Seattle, Washington
|
|
Tangle nets are gillnets.
Fish on...
Todd
--------------------
http://www.rvrfshr.com
For all your fishing hardware needs!
"Correct in Design"
|
boater
Offline
Chromer
Profile Status:
Reged: 05/03/01
Posts: 693
Loc: seattle
|
Re: good plan ??
[Re: | |
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Edit
Reply
Quote
