Initiative would ban gillnets

The Coastal Conservation Association will attempt to place an initiative on the November ballot to ban gillnets and tangle nets in Oregon waters.

The initiative was filed on Christmas eve with the Secretary of State's office. The agency has 10 work days to determine whether the required 1,000 sponsorship signatures are valid.
Dave Schamp, chairman of CCA's Oregon board of directors, said the Protect Our Salmon Act would ban the nets in Oregon waters, including the Columbia River. The act calls for the use of commercial fishing methods that allow selective harvest of hatchery fish, while allowing wild fish to be released.

“Oregon's failure to protect and enhance our wild salmon runs threatens the state's credibility as a leader in sustainability,” Schamp said.

“Each year taxpayers, electric utility rate payers and others collectively contribute about $1 billion to recovery efforts, yet wild salmon, an important natural and economic resource for our state, remain on the brink of extinction.”

The act also establishes a fund and oversight to compensate commercial fishermen for the transition to alternative, selective gear. It does not affect any tribal fishing rights or tribal members' fishing gear.

While the Columbia River is managed jointly between Washington and Oregon, changing commercial fishing methods does not have to happen concurrently, said Angela Hult of CCA.
“It is worth noting that every substantive change in commercial fishing in the Columbia started with one state taking action before the other, and we are hopeful that this initiative will have a positive impact for the region as a whole,” she said.

If the Secretary of State's office qualifies the sponsorship signatures, the measure would go to the state attorney general's office, which would write a title and text. The title and text are made public, and comments sought. The comments then are reviewed and a certified ballot title issued.

CCA will need 82,769 valid signatures by July 2 to make the November ballot.
The Coastal Conservation Association is nonprofit organization with 200 chapters in 17 states. It expanded into the Northwest in 2007 and has more than 9,000 members in chapters in Washington and Oregon.

Jim Wells of Astoria, president of Salmon For All, a commercial fishing group, said sport-fishing interests tried to eliminate the commercials via the Washington and Oregon fishing and wildlife commissions, then the state legislatures, but failed.

“Their strategy is going to be to get an uneducated public to approve a ban,” Wells said.
Sport fishing hook-and-release mortality is 20 percent in the ocean and at Buoy 10, while release mortality in a tangle net is just 14.7 percent, he said.

“They can't sell it as a conservation measure,” Wells added.

Most gillnet boats on the Columbia River are too small to be converted to the more selective purse seines. It would cost about $150,000 to $200,000 for a purse seine vessel, he said.
http://www.mailtribune.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20100121/LIFE/100129993&template=printart

I'm biting my tongue and not adding anything else at this time to the previous 30+ page discussion we had last time on this topic.
All rights reserved though.

Let it rip there Lucky Louie, personely I would prefer to see them back up to the fish ladder and dip out their fish, native fishermen also.........benefits...no boat or net maintenace.......yah I know, just to easy

The argument made by Wells in which he uses percentages to mask the actual gross mortality numbers assumes that the uneducated public can't do algebra.

Wells only hope is to mess up Oregon. Even then, he cant get around NMFS, who already said, switch or lose the hatchery fish. Some of the oregon folks are optimistic about the governors race. The commission chair is retiring, and someone mentioned they could end up with Englund. I would not be surprised if both candidates have a short list of names for a new commission.

He cant delay washington forever. 2696 was a threat, but it also gave them cover, to not deal with the other legislation. They continue testing and go into negotiations with fewer mandates and rules to justify or work around. It wont be fun to watch... maybe.

do you have that in writing ?

Heard a rumor the tribe's might just ask for there mainstem impacts back too..They are just a gift from what Ive heard, but there's always the trib's..

+1

LB,

Care to define that a little further??

Keith

Todd,

What do you know about this? Aunty?

Keith

I've heard the same thing..Use them or lose them but I think it applies to below Bonneville hatchery fish not upriver. Every fish that crosses the ladders is a big adaboy for the BPA and if they can't be caught then the Mitchell Act Funding would be redirected to the hatcheries up above. Of course then you have catch sharing issues with the tribes when you close the terminal fisheries and tributary hatcheries and throw it all out into the mainstem. Something that seems to escape the authors of this legislation.

Curious to which currently illegal method CCA will endorse at a later date and no the statues have not run out on seining and traps like some are claiming.

http://www.sos.state.or.us/elections/irr/2010/074dbt.pdf



CCA has updated the summary portion of this..Notice where it says they don't know what effect this will have on any other fisheries. Which include Columbia Zone salt, NoF, Bouy 10, what to do with all the returning hatch fish into the terminals for the next 5 years, catch sharing with the tribes, etc.. My only guess is that the people who are in charge of making sure B@#lls#%t initiatives don't go before the voters called them up and asked them these questions. Which they had no answer, sure been keeping it quiet though.

how will sportfishing be above these new commercial methods as compared to below them ?

Monroe uses a particular website for his research. Like this little gem.



http://www.ifish.net/board/showthread.php?t=283576&page=5
post # 243

errors-
http://www.ifish.net/board/showthread.php?t=283576&page=7
Page 7 post # 376

Reading the stuff CCA's goverment committee is posting on Ifsih, they support closing the terminal areas. DOn't know why, but thats what their position seems to be.

The terminal areas are on both sides of the columbia so its not just an Oregon thing.

Terminal Fisheries..Youngs Bay.. Deep river..Tounge Point and Blind Slough are where the majority of the coho releases come from for Bouy 10 and Ocean Salt..Better question might be why would the gang from Texas want to shut down these fisheries and move the releases sites upriver.

anyone want to take a shot at this question ??

does anyone care ?