Did I just hear "Terminal Fisheries?"

I have interest in making good ideas work, and I have interest in sending bad ideas to an early grave before they catch hold...

Fish on...

Todd

The only ones who can't lower their release mortality rate is us...so we're the only ones who won't get more than we do now, based on our allowable ESA take.

We'll be fishing behind at least one of those fisheries with the low release mortality, the Cowboys. Without changing their allowable ESA impacts one whit, they will remove many, many more hatchery fish from the available pool...before we get to fish for them, both in time and in space.

It doesn't matter one bit to us what the tribes do...their 13% impact comes after our fishery...unless you are an Idaho or E.Wa fisher, in which case not only will you get screwed by the Cowboys taking so many more fish in the LCR, you'll get quadruply screwed by the tribes taking many, many more before they get to you.

The only way that we get more is if everyone says "Hey, commercial guys...you've done so well to lower your mortality rate that we've decided to give some of your allowable impacts to the sporties. Yeah, we know, you've invested in this gear, bigger crews, and all, and yeah, even though we've been telling you all along you'll get more hatchery fish for doing so, I think we can all agree that it would be better if we just gave some of your impacts to the sporties. I'm sure we can count on your support in this!"...

...and then Bigfoot and Santa will stomp out of the meeting, because even they can't believe this.

The most likely scenario is that the 60/40 or 55/45 non-tribal impact split doesn't change at all, the Cowboys catch ten times as many fish as they do now (downstream and before us), we have $hitty fishing, the tribes mop up the rest and use up their impact rate, the same amount of wild fish die, and the Idaho and E.Wa. guys have to drive to Portland to have crappy springer fishing, because they'll get absolutely none on their home waters.

Yippee...sounds like a great idea to me.

Think those hatchery escapement numbers look like garbage on the Kalama and Lewis now? Just wait until another large chunk of those already small hatchery runs are in plastic totes before they even get to their home rivers...double yippee, now the tributary fishing will suck even more, too.

After all the years of having to fight tooth and nail for everything we get on the Columbia, it amazes me to see that sportfishermen actually think that we won't do jackshit to reduce our own mortalities, won't even agree to use barbless hooks, and that the group who does the most to reduce theirs will end up giving theirs to us because....well, because we want them.

For real? Really? I mean, I know it's the Christmas season and all, but I don't think the State or the Cowboys are in that giving of a mood...especially when every single press release on the subject says flat out that they are doing this specifically to give the Cowboys access to more hatchery fish.

It's dreaming...and the problem with it is that it was proposed and supported by some sporties who clearly have no idea how it works on the LCR, and now that it's shown to be a total loser, they would rather cling to their clearly wrong ideology than just say "whoops, perhaps we should figure out what the hell we're doing before we go ahead and just make it worse".

What ever happened to "First, do no harm"..?

Fish on...

Todd

The most likely scenario is that the 60/40 or 55/45 non-tribal impact split doesn't change at all, the Cowboys catch ten times as many fish as they do now

Repeat after me...

Equitable catch-sharing.

NON-treaty users will NOT be allowed to harvest more springers than our native brothers.

NOT gonna happen.....

NOT until the tribal fishery goes selective.

not true, when the non-tribal commercials reduce there release mortality rate they will get more fish and those fish will come from sports and the catch sharing with the tribes will remain the same

Yes / No As Francis pointed out the impact % will probably stay the same. So no to coming from the sports share. That the increased numbers harvested will come from the pool of fish available to harvest and will impact the success rate of the average fisher, yes as sport fishing success is determined by the abundance in the pool. The commercial harvest could reduce it but the " silly little rule " thing is interesting.

I can not see major impact unless the tribal fisheries go selective. Now not being a ass I would have thought that when the push for selective fisheries started that folks would have recognized that fact. That the primary beneficiary would be the remnant stocks of natural spawners is obvious. That the sport fishery would take a hit was also obvious. Is not that the purpose of the selective fishery bit, to save the ESA listed stocks and maintain harvest.