Who is going to fight off the MPA's? You? You gonna drag your boat down and try to get an appointment with two legislators and a senator who in most cases dont know you exist?

WDFW needs to get the hatchery fish off the spawning grounds or loose fed hatchery funding seems to be the problem.
So you must prefer hatchery cuts? and then fishing over those shrunken numbers of fish.

There seems to be a catch 22 involved like I said 12+ pages ago.
Hatcheries= damned if you do and damned if you don't.

Nobody...the sporties, the commercials, the tribes, or the States, actually want to recover wild stocks in the Columbia River.

If overharvest and too many hatchery fish on the spawning grounds are significant problems, then the solution to those problems takes one sentence, a couple of strokes of a pen, and not only is cost-effective, but actually would save millions of dollars...

Don't put in so many hatchery fish, and don't kill so many wild fish.

You won't find any of those four groups supporting either one of those goals.

They all start with the premise that we must have high amounts of hatchery fish (which is the cause of the problems, both overharvest and spawning hatchery fish)...they intentionally and vehemently support the policies that cause the problems, then they intentionally create halfass "solutions" to the problems, solutions that don't solve $hit...

...and due to all parties having an addiction to hatchery fish that makes meth-heads and heroin junkies look like casual users, everyone seems to happily accept the fact that they are the problem, not the solution, and just ignore it.

Fish on...

Todd

i`d like to see them get into testing more weirs out, that is the only true way they can control the amount of hatchery fish on the spawning grounds unless you believe they came up with some new formula to predict fish numbers ??, how can they harvest hatchery fish down to a number that would make a diference on the spawning grounds when they cant predict how many are comming back in the first place ?, to me this is all status quo junk science that they are using and nothing will get any better than it is now.

MPA's on the CR? So your saying we should be thankful of CCA's efforts to completely fuk up sportfishing on the CR? Because after their done "fixing sportanglers opportunities" on the CR, they are going to fix the MPA issue?

I think, Ive got paint on me. Its painful. But at 55, I dont have the right to exterminate a fish, and throw everyone behind me under the bus. Im irritated that many of our fathers did not take on the issue or the groups. But many of those people were saved by social programs etc and they had a different view of govt. I could tell, it bothered him. In the old days beginning in January, they fished the skagit with Bud Meyers every two weeks. It was a six fish limit. For a while, there was no limit. Hatchery fish were so common, the boat hooked 17 fish in ONE hole. Then Boldt came along. The fish were gone. By 1979 the tribal fishers were so rich, that one of them bought over 22,000 dollars of jewelry from a local store.


Doing what is necessary takes too long given the structure of the govt and the various user groups. Both Condit and Gold Ray had lawsuits over the loss of lake habitat, including the critters that really didnt flourish in the cold fast rivers. Well, it sucks but if they expected the lake to be there forever then they set themselves up for disappointment, just like those who thought we would have wild fish or hatchery fish forever.

Our addiction, is a dependency created by bad mgt solutions of wild fish, while expanding the business of fishing.
The govt made choices between business groups. Commercial over Tribes > commercial vs fish sustainability, then Electricity vs Fish. Had hatcherys never been possible govt would have made better decisions. Eat all you want-we'll make more is not a long term plan.

I actually think you will push the process along faster with your current position, rather than taking issue with one organization. From a scientific standpoint, Ive not seen much about the ramifications of extinction. We are lucky Alaska is so remote. .02

LB,

Sooner than later you're going to realize that all this you are pushing for and pounding your chest about is out of your league as well as CCA's league regarding CR issues...

The states and Federal Gvmt have their agendas and will fulfill them.....

Keith

You are such a dumbass. This objective had been in the works long before cca showed up. Just because you bought into safe for salmon to protect your back yard gives you no guarantee, you would be able to fish it forever. Shutting down the river to all fishing is just as easy as creating an MPA. You forget about NSIA and Our Oceans- a subsidiary of the Pew Trust, who got some folks to agree to some things and then stabbed them in the back. So dont lecture me about cca. They have fought MPA on the east, south and now the pacific coast. But financially sports are out gunned. But their members showed up to oppose an MPA last year that would have restricted kayakers but allowed commercial fishing. You start shutting down areas on the coast and the CR is going to get real crowded. Ignorance is bliss. From the same guy who thought tribes only fished ONE percent of Washington state. The same guy thought he was going to live off the govt fish nipple his entire life.

Perhaps you'd be better suited driving the short bus, or perhaps riding in one of the open seats.
Fisheries issues seem to be way over your head.
Thanks for being a CCA poster child.

You'll never really know what has been done, since you either dont want to believe you got the help, someone made a difference, or have the capacity to give them credit. Like SG said, govt doesnt lead. So whether its those who propose MPA or locking up the forest or those financial interests who benefit from one policy or another, at least a few organization are showing up to these meetings to keep the other interests from completely shutting us down or taking the allocation for themselves. The fight never ends.

You have a common theme about cca and the fact is, you dont know who is helping out. You still think its run out a a vacant bathroom. Thanks for the pep talk Dad.

When fuel shortages and pollution from cars were a problem, did we make less cars? Did we stop driving? Did we close off roads to save fuel?




It's not so simple, not cut and dry like your example.

I like the idea of testing weirs and hope that they use that experiment on the White Salmon when the dam comes down. I would be curious on the results in coming years.

Dont get caught up in Todds big picture explanation. He isnt talking to other fish heads. They already KNOW.

A fine example of your ignorance and your bigotry of people. Those you cannot find agreement with in debate are compared to those, who are the most challenged from birth. I guess if you continue to waste your time with individuals like myself, expecting different results then you should seek an evaluation.

Yes, it is...if we want to do what we say, which is reduce the problems of overfishing and too many hatchery fish on the spawning grounds.

It would be refreshing if everyone involved would at least say the truth...fishing comes first, fish come second...instead of paying lipservice to the fish and then forming every single policy around the premise that first we will not stop or reduce our fishing, and then we'll see what we can do to tread water with the rest.

There's no reason to be so dishonest about it...anyone with half a brain can see it...may as well get it out in the open.

Fish on...

Todd

What happened to the initiative that was going to outlaw gillnetting on the CR? CCA still working on that?

Keith

Never could understand why someone having a different opinion makes them a dumbass, or having your opinion makes you smarter.

As you know, it doesnt take forever to change the lanaguage. They can bring it back at their discretion. So can Washington.
Oregon is a very job protection oriented state. They have very liberal strip club policies, gas station attendants and if you head to the your other stomping grounds, they have a post, that shows the commercial fishing industry is all about keeping active permits by law. I get the feeling these people would pave over Yellowstone if they could put people to work.

You spend a lot of time complaining about something that has many hurdles to jump.

Some people on here must not be aware that CCA didn’t:

1)establish the 2% ESA mortality rate

2) if you believe the post above about getting hatchery fish off the spawning beds to preserve hatcheries

3)subsequently CCA didn’t cause the problem of having to rid the salmon off the spawning beds either

4)CCA didn’t allow gill nets with their 40 % mortality, by catch, and drop outs Etc..to be allowed on the river.

5)There is a solution to the possible protecting hatchery funding problem and that would be to commercially fish selectively ridding the CR of 40% gill net mortality along with the other aspects of gill netting noted above, and getting more hatchery fish off the river to try to protect hatchery funding or --just cut funding to hatcheries and forget about it.

Beautiful day out, so ---

I'm not complaining. I'm just stating the point that the CR is too big for CCA and before they screw it up even more than we already have it perhaps they should take a step back and realize what we have left....

Oh and what's the next idea for the CCA and the Big C? You seem to be on the up and up, have you got a clue?

Keith