Oregoian..........If you are a commercial fisherman, face the fact, YOU ARE NOT NEEDED, our native fishermen can supply all the needs of Washingtonians. Now turn us sporties loose on the other fifty percent and watch..........

Nice troll Oregonian:

Let me ask you a question. When there was no commercial harvest of Columbia River springers did those high end restaurants (of which few are in Washington or Oregon) go out of business? If in 2011 there is no commercial fishery on that resource what would happen to those restaurants? I suggest that they would simply modify their menus accordingly and their patrons would select another high end offering. In short, little impact to their overall revenues.

Making broad statements is an invitation for attack but I will risk it here. Where there is a limited resource that has both a commercial and sport activity the sport fishery has the greater value to the economy on a per pound basis. It is true on the Columbia River springer fishery, on halibut off the coast of Washington and Oregon, and on Dungeness crab in Puget Sound (and I am sure there are many others I have not mentioned).

As for outside money versus local money the best situation is a strong recreational fishery that retains as much local money as possible while providing a strong incentive for outside money to flow into the local economy.

There is undeniably a strong pent up demand for close-in recreational fisheries. One only needs to look at the recreational boats on the Columbia when there is a springer season or at Buoy 10 in the fall. Or 2009 when there was a strong run of pinks into Puget Sound, or when there is a Lake Washington fishery for reds. Pretty obvious reality!

So, what was your point?

One point was that it seems pretty ironic to hear a group complain that greedy and corrupt polititions are ruining them...and at the same time this group claims to hold incredible economic power ! So, which is it, can the sporties simply get mad and shut down the economy of the N.W. ? If sporties really bring the most money, then wouldn't the greedy polititions befriend them the most ?

Another point is that if fish are going to be managed strictly by economics, then the fish will surely lose.

Main point, sporties need a better argument.

Some people here are quick to point out the obvious...that a lot of economic gain comes from sportfishing..........................I'm not disputing that, in fact it seems pretty obvious. I mentioned that we are largely talking about a lot of people spending discretionary cash...and the point there is that they who have that discretionary cash are still going to be spending it even if there was no fishing season at all. That in no way implies that I want to see less sportfishing opportunities. When the sporties spend less, then a large percent of that cash will just enter a different sector...the same day !

Thank you.

What is the economic impact of a sport caught spring chinook? Good question, here are some very interesting points.
Sportfishing supports over 31,000 jobs in our region.
There were approximately 117,000 sport angler spring chinook trips on the CR in 2008, the average boat angler expenditure per trip was $175, on average it takes 8 angler trips per fish landed, that's $1400 per fish landed.

Another "Fine Point" on the discussion is where each (sports & commercials) spend thier cash. Sports Fishers typically spend that cash across a wider more diverse geographic area, espescially in non Metro areas. Again where it is most appreciated and valued. Cannot say the same for commercials (and I am excluding the Tribes here). As an example, prior to the Winds of Crabbing Change here in Washington, most of the Non Tribal Commercially caught crabs found their way into a very limited buyer, and the bulk of that was sold Out Of The Region, i.e., Japan, California, Gulf Coast (YES!!!! Crab Shack), and back east. That is how Larry and some of us traveling back there could have Dungeness at a Restuarant in Florida. And I agree with someone above regarding BC Trips & Licenses/Fees, if it does not improve here, I will continue to spend my CASH on the northern end of Vancouver Island. Then examine a WDFW program itself and how it is supported/funded, i.e., the Crab Program. Two Hundred Thousand Plus CRC's @ $3.00 a pop versus 150 Commercial Licenses @ $50 a pop, do the math, why should I in any way, shape, form, or fashion subsidized Commercial Crabbers in Washington when they demand more of the allocation each year from me a sports crabber? That is just plain stupid and very unfair.

Besides, there is more than an adequate and affordable supply of Dungeness in Safeways/Albertsons/Costco's with the Tribal Crabbers. They are in effect and by treaty the ONLY local game in the region for supply.

License sales have fallen in Wa since the economic report was written. Compare 824,000 to 714,000 in 2009. (a humpy year) in 2008 631,0000 and in 2007 651,000 total fishing licenses. Boycotting license sales wont do much for sporties. Its the long term advocacy that can often take a couple years to convince managers, its the right path.
Last year I saw a video of the history of sport fishing in Wa. They apparently sold more licenses in the 50's than they do today. The economy was not nearly as diverse. What has also been lost is the tourism aspect of a healthy sport fishery. There are millions of people who have never even seen the Pacific Ocean. There are businesses, tax revenues and jobs associated with fishing that are probably not included in the analysis. If you want to pick out a sportfisherman out of the traffic, just look for a truck with a trailer hitch. Compare the job multiplier in fishing and hunting compared to bowling, golf, hiking, tennis. Anyone own 20 bowling balls or 20 tennis rackets? Skiing is one of the few comparisons, but vacations are taken out of state. Its a 5 month sport at best unless you travel a lot. Anyone ever contact the washington department of skiing?

Overharvest of chum is better than an overharvest of kings or silvers. I dont like and it will probably become another allocation debate. If the cowboys are not making a living now, then the permits should be sold back to the state in order to split up the allocation between fewer permits. Its no different in the business world. Any product or service you like. The markets grow and decline. Its one of the reasons reels, cars and clothing keeps changing. Market saturation and offering something new enhances or protects market share.

So, I guess you guys are saying that the sporties could just buy out the entire commercial fishing industry if they wanted to. Just buy up the processing plants, the boats, the permits, all of it. Sounds great, now all you need is a non greedy, non corrupt leader to pass the hat.

Oregonian:

Do you truly believe that politicians are immune from the cash flow from commercial interests? Or that the interests of the local commercial fishers are not seen as the interests of the larger, more affluent commercial fishers (read that as the big guys help fund the little guys' battles as they perceive a loss here as a threat to other bigger, fisheries)?

That is why the citizens of Washington created the current Fish and Wildlife Commission to at least try and take management of our resources out of the hands of the politicians.

By the way, you failed to respond to my question about what would happen to those high end restaurants if CR springers were not to be available to them. Is your failure to respond an acknowledgment that I was correct???

And where are most of those discretionary dollars? I opine that they are in the more affluent communities. And, yes, some of those discretionary dollars, if not spent on fishing, will be spent on something else either the same day or on another day. But as JohnQ has suggested discretionary dollars potentially spent fishing in Ilwaco, Westport, Neah Bay or Sekiu simply don't get spent there in some form of alternate activity. So while the State may see that as a discretionary wash those depressed economy communities really do suffer.

You might want to check with Grays Harbor County's Chamber of Commerce as to the value of the fall and spring razor clam seasons that draw thousands to the beach. Or do you already know the answer to that too?

On one side of their mouth the sporties say the have economic might but they can't seem to focus that money at anyone with power...they're all too greedy and corrupt (sounds fishy). On the other side of their mouth the sporties just want what's right, you know what's best for the rivers and the fish...as nature intended. Hmmm, which is it ?

I really doubt the restaurants would notice an item or two missing from their menu. I know I would never buy salmon when bottom fish are on the same menu !

Still haven't answered my questions but prefer to simply rant.

O'K, Oregonian, time to officially come clean on where you fit into the issues. Do you own a commercial boat? Commercial license, and, if so, for what activity? Or do you own a fish processing plant or wholesale operation, or high end restaurant dependent up CR springers? Or do you work for one of those? Or used to? Confess, its good for the soul.

Oh, and you seem to have missed the recent decision by WDFW Commission to prioritize recreational interests over those of non-tribal commercial fishers in the Puget Sound Dungeness crab fishery.

I do not know that, in fact there is much that I don't know. I have mostly been asking a question, and pointing out holes in an often repeated story. Holes that some of the repeaters will never admit...ever.

AGAIN, if the sporties have such a huge economic advantage over the commercial, then why don't they get their way ? It's not like the sporties are wanting to exploit something beyond the point of no return and that the govt and commercials are ganging up on the sporties to keep them from ruining the World.

What is the objective ?

Are we looking for a ban on the sale of any Game fish...much like the ban on the sale of Game animals ?

Are there fish species that can be managed as a renewable resource and maintain the seafood industry ?

IF the commercial fleet loses their King and Coho market, are the sporties going to give up bottom fish and tuna ?

Why do sporties have to give up anything? There used to be commercial hunting; that was prohibited and the harvest given over to recreational.

WA has an effective commercial fleet with the treaty Indians. The way the treaties have been interpreted, if one side can't get it's share of the harvest the other side is allowed to. The markets can be supplied by them.

So then you're pretty happy with the status quo...if it wore a different label ?

It was a hypothetical question where two opposing sides negotiate toward a better end for both...