Bob Mottram; The News Tribune

Initiative 696 would reduce non-Indian net fishing in all of Puget Sound, in the Washington portions of
the Gulf of Georgia and the Strait of Juan de Fuca, and in the Pacific Ocean at least to a point three
miles off the Washington coast.

The initiative, which has been dwarfed in preelection debate by I-695, the proposal to eliminate
Washington's motor vehicle excise tax, also would prohibit commercial salmon-trolling on the ocean
within three miles of shore, but would not affect it in federal waters farther out.Ê Net fishing for salmon
already is prohibited anywhere on the ocean around Washington.

The initiative would have no effect on American Indians, who fish under treaties signed by their tribes
and the federal government, and whose fishing does not come under state jurisdiction.Ê Federal courts
have ruled that treaty Indian fishermen are entitled to half the harvestable fish in most of Western
Washington, and the initiative would not change that.

In addition to non-Indian purse seine and gillnet fishing for salmon, and commercial trolling for salmon in
state waters, the initiative would prohibit non-Indian:

* Trawling, beach seining, gillnetting and trolling for bottom fish;

* Trawling for shrimp;

* Purse seining, beach seining and trawling for herring, anchovies and sardines, and commercial
smelt-dipping in the Columbia River;

It would allow non-Indian fishing with reef nets for salmon, and with herring lampara nets, herring dip
bag nets and shellfish pots.

Most of the public's attention and most of the argument have centered around the provisions affecting
salmon. How would they impact catches?

Non-Indian net catches of salmon in recent years have consisted overwhelmingly of chum, pink and
sockeye. Commercial catches of coho, which totaled about 917,000 fish in 1980 and far outstripped
sport catches until 1990, totaled about 28,000 in 1998, according to preliminary 1998 figures.
Commercial chinook catches, which totaled about 296,000 fish in 1980, amounted to about 27,000 in
1998, preliminary tallies indicate.

Preliminary figures put the 1998 chum salmon net harvest, on the other hand, at 514,000 and the
sockeye harvest at 798,000. Nearly all of the sockeye taken in Washington are Canadian fish bound
for the Fraser River at Vancouver, B.C.

Washington's pink salmon return to spawn primarily in odd-numbered years. The 1997 non-Indian net
catch of pinks was 865,000.

Sport fishermen take relatively few pinks, chum or sockeye.

© The News Tribune

09/29/1999

Mr. Mottram forgot to mention ten thousand dead seabirds, tons of bycatch, ghost nets endlessly fishing, and the destruction of nearshore and deepwater habitat. Then there's the hatchet job done by our net- loving commissioners on Director Shanks. I'm going out to build my BAN yard signs as soon as I finish this post. How many more shopping days do we have 'til we get to vote Yes on I-696!

One negative aspect of passing I-696 is the loss of $438,750 in commercial license revenue for WDFW. Along with that will be some money lost for the local salmon enhancement groups. However, since it all goes to the general state fund and then divided up, it is but a drop in the barrel.
Also, since recreational fishers cannot possibly catch 50% of the harvestable fish, we must allow the rest to reach the spawning grounds. Hopfully the tribes will not use the so called "forgone opportunity" and harvest the excess fish that the commercials will not have harvested. Makes me wonder what the tribal motives are for not wanting BAN to pass.