Giving more to the commercial fleet sure was a BFD when sports angler were packing the hearings in Olympia and Salem to fight against that happening.

Nobody is stupid enough to say the commercials will 'get them all'. Of course they won't. They will just get more than they are. And with the Tribal Catch Balancing policy setting the overall cap - which we've been hitting -- every extra fish gillnetters take comes out of the sports angler column. That is the only way it can be.

As far as ESA impacts:

1. Without legislation that constrains the commercial take, CCA is handing the commercials the PERFECT argument as to why they should get a full 50% or even more of the impacts.

2. WA media has already reported the commercials setting out the case for a share of the impacts allocated to the 'selective harvesters' to reward them for their investment.

Nobody's misrepresenting CCA position, just pointing out the very likely outcomes of their policy as proposed.

There is a difference between Position and Strategy. The first strategy is to WIN. Those of you who support a third party are comfortable with losing. The Fish cannot afford to lose. No nets will be banned, next january. You have three options. SFS, selective harvest or maintain the status quo. SFS only affects the columbia and will not do anything about any other part of the state. No launch pad for getting the tribes to change gear. No launch pad for any other changes in commercial harvest.

What will you do, if the state says we cant afford to mark select future runs of hatchery fish. The season will close until further notice. You have no guarantees.

This is a large state. I havent fished the columbia in four years. I know other guys, who have never fished it. Yet, your precious hatchery season should take precedent over the rest of the state?

BS, you failed to mention the 4th option........ CCA should keep their nose out of the WDFW's business and let them run the show as they have, they do manage for escapement and in the year 2009 we've had banner returns of hatchery fish and even good #'s of wild fish showing.....

Keith

Good one Ketih, Lets call up Ken Jacobsen and tell him we were wrong. Just shut down the commission and HIRE Jeff Koenings back. We want to go back to side deals behind closed doors. We want to roll back all the progress made in Grays Harbor. Lets see, Senate Bill Title, Americans against representation This legislation will neuter sportsmen. It shall be enacted, they sit down and shut up.

One year of Good returns. When all the wild fish are dead and the river is now closed down. Whats your plan?

Guess what, 5000 people want that representation. Sorry, you are outnumbered.

I beg to differ! WDFW went for maximum take of salmon IMHO. Escapement my a$$!
Only looking at harvest of foodfish, delaying gamefish for the second year in a row!

CR steelhead was delayed 'cause there were no more paper salmon impacts available for sportfishing encounters.

Two strikes against Region Five Harvest Management. Let's not make it a third by encouraging Guy, Cindy, or Bill.

Escapement meaning they manage towards maximum harvest...... What's wrong with that?

I don't get it there's one of two ways to go. Maximize hatchery harvest and wilds meet minimum escapements or we start cutting hatchery plants and try and recover the wild #'s.... The game plan CCA has does little to nothing for wild fish. Sure we might see a few more wild winter natives hit the gravel but wouldn't it be a novel idea to not gillnet in March or April?? That could solve the problem with the winter native steelhead....

Keith

I'm just saying my uncle from Kansas didn't fly out this springtime to fish for steelhead. I did not rent a slip on the lower CR. Didn't buy sandshrimp or fuel for my tow rig.

The State lost out on a lot of revenue at my end.

They will lose more revenue if CCA keeps pushing in the direction of gillnets being more selective and chances are we'll have less time on the water as we'll eventually have smaller allocations and less fish to fish for...... IF CCA can push for more fish to be planted to get us sportsman back the fish they're about to give to the gillnetters then we'd be ok.....

I honestly don't beleive how badly we're going to be blind sided by what CCA is about to do.... Sickening really....

Keith

thats whats happening on the grays river, do you ever read anything about whats going on ??

Keith.

You want to change the definition of escapement, and then tell us CCA doesnt know what they are doing? Dude, they didnt recruit people from the local bar. Everybodys favorite fall guy is running his own business and isnt making policy or position or determining strategy. He isnt afraid to delegate authority.

I would sure like to read all the research youve done to come to this conclusion.

It's not about research, its just common sense...................................................

I mean, if someone from CCA got on here that had a clue and said "We know we're gonna screw some shiaat up for a bit but within 2-3 to 5 years we'll have the white-man nets completely off the Columbia river" then I can see taking a step backward to take steps forward...

But with CCA's game plan with the Columbia River Gillnets we're going to take some steps backward and then what?

Keith

i think we already played that inning with slade gorton pitching and judge boldt hitting a homer

I wont return the insult on behalf of the guys who run the organization. There was a time, about two years, a lot of the regular rocket scientists around here and other sites had a lot to say about the HSRG. Im not personally into all the dry reading. Ive been told that HSRG is being adopted by the state, and it appears that the organization is also using it. Its about wild fish. There is one hatchery, Im told, that may meet HSRG recommendations.

Perhaps some of the fishheads will explain it to you. Its not likely the people you insult will waste their time.

Im still trying to figure out how swimming into a net is escaping.

Boater you are clueless. I think it might be you that doesn't read up on what's happening. My point was that once the wild chinook genes are lost on the columbia, the whole entire fishery will collapse. Simple point boater. This discussion is about the columbia. BOATER, start a grays harbor thread if that's what you want to talk about, otherwise go back to mending your gillnets.

Keith, trying to say gillnets haven't devastated wild winter steelhead is way off base. Tell me of a lower CR tributary that has a wild run over a few thousand. Also you stated that we catch one in eight hatchery spring chinook. You have contradicted yourself and I will explain why. When discussing run prediction numbers made by the state you said returns always fall below the pre season forecast. I agree with you on that point. If you don't believe state fish math, which I don't either, then why would you use the states estimated sport catch statistics to come up with your 1 in 8 are caught by us? Dude we all know by now that the way state agencies count our catch is a seriously skewed formula that screws us every year. Have you ever seen the formula for estimating sport catch? It is a bad joke. Sounds like eyefish should have rolled out with you rather than LUND below bonnie last year.

i said the grays river in my post not grays harbor and i didnt edit it you can ask one of the moderators to check, this following is the hsrg recommendation for that river and its a perfect example of what happens when you pull all the hatchery fish out of a river, the natural spawning population falls on its face,

http://www.hatcheryreform.us/hrp_downloa...ok_01-31-09.pdf

Depressed in 2002 because of a long-term negative trend and a short-term severe decline in escapements in 1997, 1998 and 2000. Generally, lower Columbia tule fall Chinook stocks, including Grays fall Chinook, experienced poor survival in the 1990s.

Hatchery closed in 98.
I didnt catch what the spawning age of these fish are, but since the last year was 2000 which suffered from escapement, your remark about hatchery closure, affecting spawning wild fish is a red herring. You cant blame hatchery reduction for the poor escapement. You can blame WDFW harvest policy. Commercial fishing should have been Banned. Poor escapement three years in a row would easily affect the next ten years of recovery. Thats assuming that escapement isnt reduced during those ten years. If those same fish spend time in Alaska and Canadian waters, I would not expect a quick recovery. If the seal poplulation is heavy, then they should be culled. If the area is in line for habitat improvements, its a prime candidate for pro wild fish organizations to organize a habitat project.

if the offspring of hatchery fish spawning in the wild are driving the native spawning population you sure can, some of the puget sound rivers have spawning populations that have 70 percent hatchery fish in them, do you think you can pull that 70 percent out and the 30 percent of wild fish will act like those 70 percent was never there ??

and they just put an electric trap there on the grays last year, it will not be void of hatchery influence for a few more years because of the strays.

Thats a rediculous question. Im not going to compare the PS river numbers to this river.
The offspring of hatchery fish are WILD and they would not be culled from the river. If the hatchery fish were spawning in the river and their offspring continue to spawn in the river, then recovery is only being jeopardiized by overharvest. I keep hearing and reading that hatchery fish are inferior and dont produce well in the wild. Obviously the HSRG believe the hatchery fish are detrimental to the wild fish population. Has the commercial netting been stopped?