Apparently we are going to see a monster springer run on the columbia and a good return of springers on the willamette system. According to some experts I have spoken with a run near 800 thousand is going to return next spring. I personally feel like now is a better time than ever to fund the CCA heavily, even if your already a member we need to toss them serious coin to get these netters off the Columbia. Sounds like we may even see a return to a two fish a day season, spilling water is lining up with a healthy ocean, now is the time to show the state sportfishing is worth more to the economy. Support the CCA, it will pay off!

SalmonBake, you need to read through this thread, which is now down on page 6:

http://www.piscatorialpursuits.com/forum...tive_fishi.html

Like you, many people are under the impression that CCA is going to get rid of the nets and as a consequence, your angling opportunity will improve. (That's why I joined)

Please carefully consider what the consequences of replacing gillnets with a more efficient, lower mortality, method that increases the commercial harvest ACTUALLY means to sportfishing.

Getting the commercials off the mainstem Columbia is the real solution.

Unrelated to CCA, I don't know how many times I've seen the "The Run Forecast is Amazing" threads over the years. They almost never turn out to be correct. I've gotten to the point where I think strong predictions are a detriment to the fish.

I'm not buying it,but will beleive it when I see it.Been stroked to many times with this fishery and early season predictions.Good luck,
STRIKE ZONE

the state is always wrong on springer forecast, usually by a bunch

the commercials are going to catch every hatchery fish below Bonny? You have got to be kidding me...I have heard the same people who use this argument say the traditional methods fish wheels, weirs, beach seining are no longer effective in a dammed river. The reality is no one really knows for sure, but we do know the staus quo is garbage and something has to change.

Our beloved WDFW have become masters at over predicting fish runs and letting the lower river get out of control before the first few fish have been counted for over Bonny. Most people view this as the WDFW making an error, when the reality is the WDFW first priority is maximum harvest. These folks would rather risk over harvesting ESA listed fish then over escapeing the run.

not every hatchery fish but alot more than they do now.

I am starting to get the impression all the experts on computer websites are seriously mental about salmon science and so negative that they wish to spread their dismal outlook on everyone. My post said get rid of the netters. Help the CCA help us, I read the posts/ argument a few weeks ago telling about ESA impacts and allocations if alternative harvest and I GET IT. Read it. The 2001 run of springers was 440 Thousand fish, a year of good ocean conditions. Like now, look at the summer steelhead and coho fishing on the columbia. Good ocean conditions in 01' and dams weren't being mandated to spill for the smolts. Now we have spill and a productive ocean. AWSOME! Those are the key factors! We will see a big run, the predictions I have heard are not state made, they were told to me by people who know far more about the columbia than state predictions. I don't trust state predictions any more than you all do. I know who the state serves and it aint sporties. I was there in 2001 and saw how it fished. Even doughballs were limiting out daily. Where were you naysayers then? Did u just learn how to fish? Been at this fishin biz since I was a little boy, and my opinion is with the jack counts and all the mini salmon I caught and seen caught below bonneville last year, we WILL see more springers than ever before. Stay home and bitch about bad fishing and do nothing why don't Ya?

After scanning through through that thread, I have a question. Did any of those posters vote in the Washington state legislature last year? The laws that allowed commercial fishing in this state can be changed. The commercial lobby tried to get rid of the commission under false pretenses and were over run with opposition from hunters and fishermen. Yet you seem to believe they are more powerful then sportfishing license holders and business owners. Do any of the posters have a finance or economics degree and do they provide consult to the commerce department of the state or federal government. How many legislators have commercial fishermen in their district? So, why do you think, those same legislators would favor the elimination of sportfishing jobs in this state? Im sure similar arguements were used by the commercial lobby in 15 other states. They still lost.

If you sincerely believe the use of selective commercial gear will affect the allocation of hatchery fish, then you have to write to the commission and your representatives. I fully expect the commercials will get an equal split of the hatchery harvest with sportfishing, IF and WHEN they switch to selective gear. WHY are you worried about it in 2010, when no law has been created to use selective harvest gear? If I was a commercial and decided to use selective gear, I would demand to fish longer than gillnetters, because the test fisheries have shown the seine nets dont kill the wild fish. That would motivate more commercials to accept selective gear. If we pass a selective gear law in this state, they will have no choice. We only had a weighted average of 60/40 or 55/45 because the commercials kill wild fish at a faster rate and they would exceed the 2% limit and the fishing is shut down. Its not automatic that they will be allowed to keep fishing until they kill two percent of wild fish. Thats rediculous. What law says the commercial fisherman can keep fishing until he meets the 2% limit. If one exists, we need to change that law. What law says the 2% limit cannot be changed? Isnt it obvious that 2% is either too high or not enforceable, thus we have further regulations to reduce wild fish kills. Again, since they arent using selective gear, the fear is unrealized.

You have to believe that a majority of legislators will sacrifice sportfishing dollar revenue to the state, in favor of commercial fishing revenue. Sportfishing contribute more jobs and more tax revenue to the state by a wide margin. We out number them just in total fishermen, let alone the jobs market. We probably contribute more money to the hatcheries, although the money comes out of the general fund.

What is preventing an immediate victory for sportfishing and wild fish, is the same reason two net ban initiatives failed. We dont have enough people engaged in the process. The majority of fisherman in this state dont know, we have a large organized group of sportfishers, that are engaged in the fight. We have a problem in that many members are either unwilling or unable to reach over to a guy in the sporting good store, or boat launch and ask them, if they have heard of CCA. Im sure most of the members of TU and RFA and WSC do the same thing. We certainly dont have the market saturation that the NRA has. I admit, that walking up to a snagger and speaking about any organization is not going to make a LARGE difference. Those people do not make up the bulk of sportfisherman. Some of those people may just believe, that since the tribes fish, commercial fish and the sportsman IS NOT ORGANIZED, that he is going to take what he wants, regardless of the consequences to the resource. They are the equivalent of looters in New Orleans.

One of the reason that non profits are successful, is that people who dont even fish, will donate to protect them. How may people hunt bear with bait or dogs. Yet the law was changed. Same thing for commercial duck hunting. Yet, the gov still sends money to create habitat for ducks, feed deer and elk and their is no commercial harvest.

Coho ocean conditions are not the same as ocean conditions for springers, they are thousands of miles apart.
Ocean conditions in the Gulf of Alaska are not the same as ocean conditions off the Calif. Ore. and Wash. coast.

Ocean conditions are favorable from what I saw in the form of the HIGHEST PRECOCIOUS JACK CHINOOK COUNTS EVER SEEN since dams were built. SUPPORT our only well organized salmon conservation organization. SUPPORT CCA. Send em all the $ you can afford to. Now is the time to take on the fight. All this dismal b.s. I read on here can be solved! There is hope dismal dudes on here.

that may be a problem, especially on years us above Bonneville guys get a season, 09 was not one of them...

The tribe up near Okanogan is building a BIG hatchery. Fear not.

I do agree, it does suck. Im 3.5 hours away. I dont go.

i dont veiw the commercials going to a new selective method as a victory for sportfishing, can you explain why you do ?

Ya' know, if these two sides of us would unite, and recruit even more members, we could steer CCA in the direction that serves recreational fishing best, and CHANGE the state law that gives all this deference to commercial fishing. We don't need ANY non-treaty commercial fishing of spring chinook. We already have a treaty fishery on them that catches 13 of the 15% ESA impact that is presently allowed. We ought to be supporting extinction of LCR commercial fishing instead of re-igniting this counter-productive debate between recreational salmon anglers every few weeks.

Sg

It will be interesting to see how the new Director talks at the next Commission meeting.
Last year the below I-5 fishery indicated lots of jacks in the brief season. IMHO indicating the middle of the run. Yet, the I-5 to Bonnie was allowed to continue eating up the impacts. Steelhead season was delayed due to no headroom.

The jack counts the last couple of years can be partialy atributed to the change in hatchery feed IMHO. The dry feed is hotter than the former moist pellets. Thus we are seeing more and more jacks. Basicly throwing the projected numbers of paper fish off. My guess, at least doubling the projections for the two main year classes over observed returns.

This last year there was no long term agreement because the two States could not agree. I've asked for years at these meetings for a conservational approach in the season setting.

Thanks to the members of our WDFW Commission.
We basicly squeaked under the ESA guideline given thier' direction to Staff.

It would be nice to see how many chinook were caught as bycatch in the hake/pollock trawls. This would indicate the commercial take, so far, along our coast. Nobody knows where they go is what I hear from Staff. Discarded overboard or given to local food banks as per PFMC but not sampled for CWT or DNA data?

It's time for 1800's mindset at DFW to go.
Time to reflect a population change, and perhaps the land use limitations should be reflected in the most harmful, least sustainable methods of commercial harvest.

its a pretty simple question.

Oh, by the way steelhead are a gamefish. Yet Region Five Staff manages for food fish? They view each species in isolation to continue getting all worked up over impact numbers.

Shouldn't our state be attempting to minimize impact rather than maximizing? Why is this a goal to reach? Rather than something to avoid?
Also, given the extrapolated impacts up towards the dam, why burn through allowable take and delay any sportfish opportunity for the second year?

As far as I'm concerned some heads should roll at Region Five. These outlaws should serve time to show them the error of thier' ways.