salmon bake, you are the perfect example of why lots of very qualified advocates don't go anywhere near the CCA...and since you asked, I'll tell you what I've done for the LCR fishery, just one example.

I spent nine months traveling to Salem, Troutdale, and Olympia testifying at every meeting regarding the States' attempt to triple the allowable ESA impacts on wild steelhead in order to allow the commercial industry to increase their take of hatchery spring Chinook.

I wrote numerous papers for a few different groups...I represented six when I was at the last Troutdale meeting...I also participated with a few other groups in filing a 60 NOI if the States went forward with it, and helped gather several groups together who were going to sue the feds if they allowed it.

We were successful in stopping it from happening, and that not only preserved thousands of wild ESA steelhead from dying in the "tangle nets", it also preserved better fishing for us in both the LCR springer fishery, the LCR tribs fisheries for springers, and the steelhead fishing in the LCR, middle Columbia, upper Columbia, and all the tribs.

Somehow we managed it without the CCA, and there were many, many groups and advocates who participated in a very meaningful way in that successful campaign.

You think things are a mess as they stand now? You can't even imagine what it would be like if it weren't for the advocates and advocacy groups who have been fighting these battles for many decades.

This is the kind of thing I'm talking about...guys who have never participated in these battles drop $25 and all of a sudden think they are experts, and that the CCA is the only thing going, and that no one has been doing anything until they dropped their check and "started" the fight.

The usual tactic of the CCA's internet ambassadors to attack the messenger, especially when they have no intellectual grasp of the message, is probably the single worse thing the CCA has going for it.

Fish on...

Todd

Todd, so you want tangle nets to remain in place versus getting rid of them for a far less harmful method of commercial fishing? So your "camp" is for the current gillnet plan in place? Oh and by the way I have supported other groups besides the one you feel "overlooked" by, and these "other" groups continue to receive my support. Your truly "lost" for wanting to keep the gillnets around, sorry for your ignorance. I'm done arguing with a guy who thinks the current plan Is somehow a good one.

Done

SB Can you read?

We were successful in stopping it from happening, and that not only preserved thousands of wild ESA steelhead from dying in the "tangle nets", it also preserved better fishing for us in both the LCR springer fishery, the LCR tribs fisheries for springers, and the steelhead fishing in the LCR, middle Columbia, upper Columbia, and all the tribs.

Where do you see Todd advocating tangle nets?

Todd clearly sates he is against the CCA, and their proposal to replace tangle nets with a far less harmful method of fishing. I believe we need to get rid of these tangle nets ASAP

What kind of candy does he pass out? The kind that's sweet on the outside but contains Tangle nets in the chewy center? Sugar coated gillnets! Ha ha!

Yup this is the whisper number that the states leak out just prior to sending out license renewal forms, not to be confused with the actual number which you would need to divide by six to obtain.

aint going to happen using hsrg recommendations mr. 25 dollar expert.

salmon bake, the more you talk, the more you prove my point for me...which is that you don't know what you are talking about, again.

I advocate for the complete removal of non-tribal commercial fishing from the entire Columbia River, the only thing that will ensure recovery of wild fish continues in the right direction, and the only thing that will improve sportfishing at the same time.

Try the "search" function before spouting off...you can find out most all you'd like to about my advocacy and my stances on certain issues...if, of course, you'd like to not talk out your ass any more.

If you'd like to continue talking out your ass...well, just keep posting.

I like the "Todd loves tangle nets, based on the fact that he fought against them"...that's some serious logic.

Fish on...

Todd

With the CR dams killing @ 80% of any runs potential, and then the majority of what does make it out to sea is then harvested by commercials, how is in river selective harvest reform going to make any difference?
If any harvest reform needs to be addressed then it's open ocean commercial harvest.
Not addressing the dams and the at sea harvesters is nothing more than fish dithering.

Sooo...... Todd, my advocacy of a group that has chosen battles that can be won In incremental victories to achieve the ultimate goal of removal of industrial gill netters from the columbia is not sitting well with you? You clearly have a stick up your pipe for certain organizations who will achieve what we all ultimately want. Your lost in your own ego trip and its sad to see you try and SPIN this topic out of control, and out of it we all lose. Seems like your campaign of mis-imformation has lost its scope, you should know by now being a lawyer and politician type that there is no way these netters are going to be tossed off the river completely, it is going to take momentum and incremental victories to do so. s

Dude,
There predictions will fall flat on there face like they always do!! Mark my words, we will be lucky to get 150-200 K back !!!

Peace
Fly

salmon bake, I'm all for incremental victories..."incremental" being defined to my mind as "moving in the right direction"...

Removing more hatchery fish downstream from the sportfishery while adding zero spawning ESA springers to the spawning grounds doesn't even pass the straight face test as a "move in the right direction"...and I'd be against it no matter who proposed or supported it.

Fish on...

Todd

And tangle nets continue to kill thousands of ESA-listed wild winter steelhead each time Region 5 deems there are too many ESA-listed wild spring chinook encountered in the commercial test fishery. If the proportion of wild springers encountered is too high, chinook gillnet mesh is replaced with steelhead gillnet mesh (euphemistically called "selective" tooth or tangle gear).

The only reason to triple the steelhead impact is to accomodate the "tangle" mesh.

No tangle mesh?

No steelhead impact. PERIOD! (OK statistically indistinguishable from ZERO impact)

The push toward selective live-capture gear will be the salvation of the HUGE late-timed wild winter steelhead as well as the giant early timed 3-salt summers that we used to able to count on in SW WA tribs before Mothers Day.



Thanks to those gillnets (that CCA strongly opposes) those fish have been virtually wiped out.

Why would a staunch advocate of wild steelhead look upon the CCA agenda for selective live capture as anything but a Godsend for the Columbia's wild steelhead resource?

As I've said repeatedly, and to you, too, Francis, if I were just wearing my steelhead advocate hat, I'd be all for it, salmon and salmon fishermen be damned...but it's being sold as good for spring Chinook, and good for spring Chinook fishing, which it most assuredly is not, on either count.

I do like to fish for springers on the LCR tribs, and that will also be greatly impacted by this action, not to mention all of our E.Wa. and Idaho neighbors.

Now if the CCA was selling this as "we know it will not help springers, and will lessen opportunity for springer fishing, but we feel it's important enough to support it anyway because of the threat to wild steelhead"...well, then they'd at least be making a valid argument.

Fish on...

Todd

where do you get that data from ?

One more thing to ponder for those who continue to embrace the "gillnets are better than live capture" mantra.

It's the feds that determine what the white impact is for ESA springers.

It's 2%.

They WILL be expended. PERIOD. Take it or leave it.

It's not the CCA's call.... it's the fed's.

CCA is merely advocating for the highest and best use of that available impact, and to prosecute that fishery in the most responsible way possible.

If it means the commercials get to take more hatchery fish, BFD! There's plenty of those non-biting turds to go around. The commercials will still be constrained by a measurable impact. They CAN'T physically get 'em all.

You'll still be investing your 30-50 rod-hrs trying to get one to bite, regardless. Sporties will still be allocated an impact to consume. We'll probably even have a full season in which to do it, because it's much less likely that the gillnet mortalities would put the commies over their impact and into ours.

And there's nothing written in stone that says the commies automatically cork us off. The fisheries can be structured to allow a priority for a full recreational season BEFORE the net fleet is unleashed to mop up BEHIND us. They would certainly be equipped to fish BALLS OUT to consume their impact, 24/7 if need be, AFTER the sport season is over.

Here's another thing. Even though the white impact on paper fish is "fixed" at 2%, it's more than clear to me that we are actually expending at least an order of magnitude GREATER impact on real live free-swimming fish.... the lion's share of it at the hands of NON-selective gillnets. Who among you does not doubt the horribly understated chinook release mortality of these curtains of death? 40% on chinook mesh and 18% on tangle mesh? YGTBFK right?

What about the dead dropouts? I'm pretty certain they're 100% dead.

What about the sea lion mortality on fish ripped out of the mesh and the weakened releasee's. I'm pretty sure those are damned near 100% dead.

And what about the mortality of repeat capture? De-slimed and de-scaled and stressed from one net to the next.... waiting just a few hundred yards upriver. You got it.... virtually all dead.

Naysayers please take note if the immediate direct benefit to wild ESA springers is still NOT obvious to you.

MORE wild springers will hit the gravel.

LESS hatchery turds will hit the gravel.

Anyone implying that selective live capture is going to be MORE harmful to the resource than gillnets is farting out of their mouth. The only rationale I see these folks putting forth is scare tactics arguing that somehow the sport share of the pie will somehow be diminished. Selective gear is bad because it leaves fewer fish for sports. That's just greed, pure and simple... with ZERO regard for the wild resource. And as I painted in the scenario above for ESA spingers, it is ENTIRELY without basis.

Think outside of the box, folks.... or at least outside of the gillnet. The seasons can be structured to maximize recreational opportunity while extracting as many of the hatchery fish from the river as possible.

Misrepresenting the CCA agenda only harms the cause of the recreational community and the wild resource so many of us advocate for.

if your talking about hatchery spring chinook you are 100 percent wrong

How about changing the commercial fishery to selectively harvest wild fish only so they can reach there impacts faster? Oh wait, the problem IS selective fishing!
We need more status quo, Go gillnets!!!

Fishing selectively behind the sport fleet shouldn't be so horribly unpalatable a carrot to swallow if it were dangled in exchange for access to 5-10 times their current take of hatchery fish.

Not sure about you, but if I were a commie, I'd bite.