I'll take swing at it....

The SAFE-for-Salmon plan as introduced in the 2009 Oregon Legislature, isn't the perfect solution of eliminating lower Columbia commercial competition and all it's various impacts, however, it is a legislatively doable plan. It has broad legislative support.

Restricting the commercials to the off-channel areas, and using selective gear, achieves all the objectives of the CCA Oregon initiative.

PLUS

a) less impact on sportfishing.

b) better economics for lower river communities

c) resolves the allocation fight

d) a HUGE increase in sportfishing opportunity throughout the Columbia basin

To SalmoG's objection to smolt transfers, numerically the largest reprogramming is due to implementing HSRG changes. I don't see that changing. CCA embraces the HSRG changes.

I don't see the political will to walk away from the Select Area infrastructure that is in place, and the hefty annual subsidy coming from BPA that supports operations.

In the Oregon Legislature there is bipartisan support for moving the commercials off the mainstem as envisioned by NOAA when the build out of the Select Areas was promoted in the 1990's. The political reality is, all that stood in the way this past 2009 session was one, single, powerful state senator who's devoted to gillnetters.

Didn't Washington have a couple state senators who stalled progress (Dumis? Jacobson?) ? They're gone and the whole situation in WA has shifted for the better.

Getting the commercials off the main river involves compromises - like accepting the BPA subsidy to the Select Areas - but sport fishers give up LESS and in return get a lot MORE, a lot MORE than this initiative promises.