Columbia Update

[Nanook]

ODFW News Release
For Immediate Release
Date: June 26, 2000

Columbia River Sockeye Salmon Run Larger than Expected

Limited Commercial and Sport Fisheries to Open Wednesday

PORTLAND — Oregon and Washington fishery managers established a limited non-Indian sport and commercial fishery for sockeye salmon in the lower Columbia River starting Wednesday because fish are returning in levels not seen since 1987.

The 2000 Columbia River sockeye run will be about 150,000 fish compared to a pre-season prediction of 31,000 fish. The run is nearly all wild fish that return to several lake systems in eastern Washington in the Wenatchee and Okanagon basins. The Snake River sockeye run is listed as endangered under the federal Endangered Species Act and expected to number less than 200 this year.

"The improved sockeye run continues a trend this year of salmon returns being larger than forecast," said Steve King, salmon fishery manager.

Sockeye are the smallest of all the Columbia’s salmon, averaging four pounds in weight. They have no spots, a blue back, silvery sides and a forked tail. Sport anglers usually catch very few sockeye because they do not take lures well.

The fishing seasons were established Monday at a meeting of the Columbia River Compact, a body of decision-makers from the Oregon and Washington Departments of Fish and Wildlife. The commercial fishery is limited to 1 percent or less of the run or 1,500 fish. Commercial fishing seasons have been closed since 1989 because of run sizes that were less than the desired goal of 75,000 fish. The Compact established the following seasons:

Non-Indian Commercial Sockeye Fishery: Commercial boats may harvest sockeye, jack chinook, shad and sturgeon using gillnets in the Columbia River from Beacon Rock downstream to Light 50 near the Sandy River mouth. The fishery opens at 6 p.m. on June 28, June 29 and June 30 and lasts until 6 a.m. the following day.

Sport Fishery: Summer steelhead anglers in the Columbia River from the Astoria-Megler Bridge to the Oregon-Washington border above McNary Dam will be allowed to retain sockeye salmon and jack chinook salmon from June 28 —July 31, 2000. (Jack chinook are 24 inches or less in length.) Angling for adult chinook remains closed until August 1, 2000. Catch limits are listed in the 2000 Oregon Sport Fishing Regulations: two adult salmon and/or steelhead per day in the aggregate and five jacks per day.

ODFW News Release
For Immediate Release

Date: June 23, 2000

Washington, Oregon to file legal action
over Columbia fishery allocation

PORTLAND— The states of Washington and Oregon plan to file papers in federal court here today in an attempt to prevent the federal government from using endangered species protection provisions to allocate Columbia River fish between tribal and non-tribal fishers.

The two states are seeking an injunction from U.S. District Court Judge Malcolm Marsh to bar the U.S. Secretary of Commerce – who directs activities of the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) – from using incidental-take provisions of the federal Endangered Species Act (ESA) as a tool to divide fishing opportunity between the states and Indian tribes.

The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) and the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) contend that state and tribal fish managers must be allowed to determine how ESA harvest provisions, developed to protect dwindling fish stocks, should be divided between tribal and non-tribal fishers.

The states believe that the authority of NMFS should be limited to determining the levels of protection for ESA-listed fish when conducting fisheries on other healthy fish stocks.

"Our concern is ensuring wild fish are protected before we set fisheries and that the federal government role is clear in establishing that protection standard for fish listed under the ESA," said Jim Greer, director of ODFW. "The lawsuit is not about achieving a higher level of fishing but simply a fair way of allocating what fishing does occur."

In recent months, NMFS applied separate procedural requirements of the ESA to the tribes and the states, as each sought permission to conduct spring salmon fisheries on the Columbia River. This action resulted in a delay that forced Washington and Oregon to close all recreational and commercial non-tribal salmon fisheries in the mainstem Columbia River last March. Those closures remain in effect.

NMFS ruled that tribal and state fishers together could take no more than 9 percent of endangered upper Columbia River spring chinook incidentally in the course of winter and spring fisheries. The NMFS permit allowed the tribes to use 8.5 percent of that impact, and the states were allowed 0.5 percent.

The two state agencies are taking today’s legal step after federal officials failed to provide the states with assurance that they would not repeat their spring action for the upcoming fall fisheries.

With fall Columbia River fisheries scheduled to open in early August, and little progress made in resolving the issue, the states decided to proceed with legal action.

"The incidental-take provisions drive harvest opportunity," said Larry Peck, deputy director of the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. "We feel that this provision of the ESA should be placed in the hands of state and tribal managers to determine the most appropriate division of the incidental take."

[Deleted User]

Thanks much Rick for posting those news releases. Important and interesting http://www.ifish.net/forum/images/graemlins/shocked.gif . The thing that really sticks out is who is looking out for us sportsfishers; the ODFW & WDFW! The obvious bad guys all along were the "Unfair Pair" http://www.ifish.net/forum/images/graemlins/tongue.gif ; the NMFS & the Col. Tribal Comm., particularly the latter because they mysteriouly have the NMFS by the "corkies" [pick your own cliche'- in their pocket, over a barrel, in cahoots, ...., etc.]. I just absolutely want to know how and why! The Feds gave the Indians 8.5 to 0.5 percent (0.5 sportfishing & comm. nets combined) of this year's abundance of Col. springers, which was a rediculous fiasco, and are following that up by trying to close off the Col. fall chinook sport season as well. This despite the fact that nets take ESA fish and sportfishers can release them and keep the fin-clipped hatchery springers. As WDFW director Larry Peck said "the incidental take provisions (of ESA fish) drives harvest opportunity". That will be one of the keys to their lawsuit. However, why didn't they give this factor stronger consideration when they allowed incidental take of both sturgeon and ESA wild steelhead in the gillnets of comm. sockeye fishermen? Despite that, I'm so glad the States are taking it to the Feds & Indians! I just hope that Judge Marsh has more sense than the infamous Judge Boldt http://www.ifish.net/forum/images/graemlins/mad.gif (pretty good chances for that I would hope). - I did notice in the sockeye anouncement they made mention this is a non-Indian net event. Fine. However, don't let any tootsyroll from the the Unfair Pair try to include this as a factor in future allocation negotiations!!! There is simply no comparison of catching 20 lb. springers to non-biting 4 lb. socks for sportfishers! Watch them try it though. We may have to demonstrate that we aren't stupid, or satisfied with anything unfair (except the lazy appathetic guys that won't stand up for their fishing rights when opportunity arises - sorry, had to put in that deserved dig). Go States! And fishers, write to your Senators and Reps. Jen has a snail and e-mail address list posted a ways back. - Steve


[This message has been edited by RT (edited 07-01-2000).]

[Slider]

I don't know that the tribes have them as deep in their pockets as you might think. I don't think the Fed's have as much power as you think. As I have stated before, the Treaty rights supercede the ESA in darn near every facet.

Also, the states had to get permission from the Feds and prove that they would not exceed their impacts for ESA listed fish. One last thing, all Snake river sockeye are fin marked, the commercial fishers must through those back. From what I heard, there were 2-3 boats fishing and they caught about 250 fish. ODFW monitoring noted 2 hatchery steelhead, both of which were released alive. Not near the mortality of wild steelies that say your sport bank fishery produces. The commercial fishery also has an allotment of sturgeon they are allowed to catch, just as the sports do, so I don't quite understand your point there.

Lastly, and you and I have circled this bush before, comparing fall chinook and spring chinook is like comparing apples and oranges. Both are fruits but have a different tree. Spring chinook are primarily hatchery fish, up to 85%, while fall fish are only 60% hatchery. This makes it tough to have a fin-clip only chinook fishery in the fall. Also I think your numbers you stated for percent allocation refer to fall fish and not spring chinook.

In any case, it shall be interesting to see where this court deal goes. I am not the most oppornistic when it comes to states vs. U.S.


Slider

P.S. Did extremely well for sturgeon this past week in the Astoria area, limits for three days. The fish were fat and fiesty!!

[Deleted User]

Excuse my oversight on the sturgeon issue Slider. There is a deserved comm. season for sturgeon. But to suggest that Col. bankfishers, that release the very few nates they hook, cause more nate mortality than comm. gillnets ....comeon! http://www.ifish.net/forum/images/graemlins/rolleyes.gif And you based this on what you heard about one guy's net on one day??? Hmmm. I would think that just the number of gillnetters hitting this 2 day sockeye fishery would have a greater native steelhead mortality than all sportsmen put together for a season. A certainty on a per capita basis. Any other opinions on that one?



[This message has been edited by RT (edited 06-30-2000).]

[Deleted User]

Trick posting test. http://www.ifish.net/forum/images/graemlins/smile.gif

[Slider]

Talked to Clackamas ODFW office today. Two gillnets fished on Wed. night and the same two fished on Thur. night. They only landed 350 sockeye and handled less than 5 steelhead all of which were released alive. The Fri. season was cancelled due to no participants. Not the booming fishery you expected is it.

One last note, treaty tribes get July 1-10 for sockeye!

Slider

[Deleted User]

Heading out for a strugeon and sockeye double. ... I think we have enough ammo to get somewhere with this legal test. Sure would be good to get our share of Columbia fish! Slider you likey don't know how long steelhead released live from gill nets survive. Probably not for long because they are trapped thrashing their sensative gills much too long. Sport jaw hooked steelhead are played in quickly and carefully released if they are wild. They have a tested high survival rate. SO give us a break.

[Slider]

Fished for Steelhead/Sockeye off the bank around pillar rock. The couple above us caught two wild steelhead. Both were handled with extreme care. They never left the water, never were in a net, and guess what..... both were bleeding out their gills and floating belly up. Not all steelhead are jaw hooked. This was one day and on one beach. I'm sure other anglers on the bank have released natives that were dying or dead. So give me a break.

My party had two on and landed one. No sockeye heard of caught.

Slider

[Deleted User]

Just to clarify this - Irregardless of what a person reports seeing of a released fish or two, much more reliable science than that has been applied. For the cause of C&R fishing in our future, the ODWF has done extensive testing by having thousands of Willamette springers hooked and released by boatfulls of anglers in guide's sleds (including the Toman bros) below the fish ladders at Willamette falls. Many of the deep bait hooked and landed hatchery fish were purposely mishandled to get the worst case scenario survival rate to satisfy the Fed observers on scene that these studies would be credible. In 2 years of study on these caught, tagged, and released fish over 93% made it on up thru the ladders and way up river in good shape at the hatcheries; including up above Eugene to the Middle Fork hatchery! That's less than a 7% mortality rate. Former ODFW leader and currently recognized foremost expert salmonid fish biologist in the region, Jim Martin (with other studies for a basis), says that the hardier native steelhead (which are more commonly released properly after shorter fights) release survival rate is likely better than the 93% springer study. That's science and credibility! Please don't insult our collective intelligence on here Slider by thinking that any of us would take the story of a comm. netter biased isolated observation as credible, let alone science! Same with the gillnets won't harm native steelhead bullsh*t!! I agree, give us a break. - RT

[This message has been edited by RT (edited 07-03-2000).]

[Slider]

It is ODFW not ODWF. I know plenty of fish bio's who think the latter as fighting words. I am aware of the Will. study (might have even been involved, though I won't divulge on this board) I know that it also has its scientific flaws. The most glaring is that the study didn't hold the fish overnight (unlike the ODFW tangle net study) after the initial hookup and the study had no control group. PFMC and NMFS with ODFW and WDFW have performed mortality studies along the PNW and they got mortalities ranging from 10% to 40%. Don't be suuprised if you see the agreed upon mortality rate to increase in the next year or two.

As far as the ignorance that permiates this board in regards to commercial fishing.....I give up! My father always said it was useless to fight a barn door and this certainly fits. I seriously doubt that anyone on this board actually has fished on a Columbia river gillnet boat nor do they even know the intracacies in netting fish.

Steve, the reason the tribes and gillnetters seem to get what they want is because they have a concentric voice. They have focus for their needs. The sports have to many needs and very little focus and that will not change. The complacency you observed will be the sport fishers continued downfall. The ignorance you and others displayed about gillnetting and in showing the inability to learn of another method of fishing or way of life is all together sad. The stereotypes that you foster in some of your remarks do nothing to stop the spread of ignorance.

I will no longer respond to these worthless debates because it is apparent that the only oppinion that you accept is the one that compliments your own. From now on I will just sit back and laugh at the incredible ignorance.


Slider

[Deleted User]

Imagine my suprise to find in your profile that you are a lawyer Slider. None. -- For this case, here is the minutes taken at the Judge's pre-trial inquistion to see if it has merit: Slider, "Your honor. We, the defensive, find that the ODFW study of mortality rates on released salmonids to be flawed". Judge, "In what way counsler?". Slide, "Well, they did not hold the caught and released fish overnight for observation your honor. They just released them to swim up thru a fish ladder and 70 miles up the Willamette into hatchery ponds. And they didn't have a control group." Judge, "But I noticed in the discovery briefs you filed that you apparently thought a few steelhead recently released alive from commercial netting, and not held for observation, was somehow credible evidence of survival likelyhood. Counsler?" Sliding, "Oh, ah...er...I don't remember that your honor." Judge, "And a control group?". Sliding, "Yes your honor. They didn't release a group of unhooked fish for a comparison base." Judge, " Hmmm. So, what would you suggest as a more credible study of mortality rate counsler?". Slid (all the way off the rock), "Well your honor. I think a better study would be to have a commercial netting advocate observe a couple people sportfish off a rock somewhere to see if any fish float by." Judge, "Hmmmmmmm. Does the prosecution have any questions of this counsler?" Pros, "No your honor. http://www.ifish.net/forum/images/graemlins/grin.gif We rest our case".



[This message has been edited by RT (edited 07-03-2000).]

[Nanook]

Seven steelhead caught above the Fishery.
Four wild and three keepers. Two 10's and
a 12. Wild ones were two 10's and a 5. The
wild ones swam off healthy. Were caught
with spinners sitting on the achor. All
fish were hooked in the corner of the
mouth with no blood.

What is Slider really? A Commercial
Fisherman or River Lawyer. No offense
Slider, really.



------------------
******

[Slider]

I actually am neither but I figured a few of you actually would check the profile for some hint. I am actually Steve's twin brother seperated at birth and raised in a totally ignorant free environment.

Slider

P.S. Call up any biology professor and he will tell you that the study is flawed. Call PDX or Clackamas ODFW and you will get similar answers. But I guess if the study fits your method of thinking then anything like that will keep your head in the sand.

[Nanook]

Well I was trying to be nice, but now
I can see your real nature, so, bite me.

Grin (Just Kidding Slider)

------------------
******

[Deleted User]

Awesome Rt! You just smoked a commercial fishing lawyer but good, And he lit the match.

[Pirate]

He must have confused ifish.net with inet.net
http://www.ifish.net/forum/images/graemlins/rolleyes.gif

------------------
B

[Deleted User]

This non-reply is to get this thread up near the top of the board for some new readers coming in from vacation to read the important anouncements. This trick is reserved for the Administrator and Moderator http://www.ifish.net/forum/images/graemlins/smile.gif. Thanks.

[Backlash2]

Not to change the subject, as I always enjoy a good debate about what's worse, indian or commercial fishing, but I have a question. With almost all of this huge(by comparison to recent times) run of sockeye returning to lakes above Wenatchee, how many people still think dams kill all the fish??? Kinda interesting this post turned into an indian vs. commercial fishing slaughter debate, with no mention of the giant milfoil grinders up and down the river.

[Slider]

Backlash2,

I will admit that this thread has certainly had its share of debating, it is also a good thing that niether RT or myself are litigators http://www.ifish.net/forum/images/graemlins/grin.gif (I am a tax research attorney, no court for me!).

You make a great point in regards to the dams, one that I have mentioned before but was met with less than positive posts.

The dams still have a higher mortality rate of any salmonid species than any kind of fishing. Why else would the Feds give them such a huge impact?? These hydropower goliaths have been running at status quo with minimal mitigation (the money spent by them for fish enhancement projects is a drop in the bucket).

Yes this year fish runs above the dams appear to have rebounded. We must also remember that this is only one year. For healthy fish populations you need multiple years of good runs to ensure stable genetics. The fish counts are certainly a catch-22 situation. They provide a quantitative way to monitor a fish run (counting), but they also create barriers for adult in-migration and juvenile out-migration.

I am glad to see that at least one of the viewers posted a thread that showed some inovative thought. Ignorance is not bliss.


Slider

[Nanook]

Slider - dang it! My property taxes
are too high and there are TOO many
people moving here - grin.

Rick

[Deleted User]

http://www.ifish.net/forum/images/graemlins/grin.gif:

[Jennie@ifish]

Hey....... we could sling mud.... or pay taxes.....
But I want to fish!
Jen

[Deleted User]

Hey, all-
VERY interesting thread here touching on some of the core issues concerning fish in the PNW.
Maybe the right topic might be "How the hell do we (sportfishers of all stripes) unite and address these issues?" Commercials are backed by HUGE fishbuyers with DEEP pockets, Tribes have iron-clad treaties, and dams- well, dams green up the whole of the eastern side of both WA and OR and provide cheap power (often touted by said power companies to keep the general public in line).
Could the answer be to get some commonsense conservation efforts on the part of Tribes and sportfishers ( the two groups MOST concerned about the fish) and work together to influence policy and restoration of these precious fish? Why tangle with each other when we can spank the dams and commercials and work with Tribal memebers who are interested in the continuation of these fish? We seem to be arguing about who forgot to turn the gas stove off as the house burns down around us. That's a shame in my book. I honestly believe that cooperation and understanding between Tribes and sportfishers is the answer to the question of where to get the power to effect real change in the way we, as PNW residents, view salmon and steelhead and their management.

[garyk]

Glen --

Thanks for your rational post. NW fisherman never seem to get it, that as long as they're arguing, fighting, screaming, over who's going to get the last fish that's all they'll ever be doing.

I've lived on the Columbia River now for 12 years and it's one sick river - I don't even wade in it, let alone catch and eat some bio-accumulator of toxins; otherwise known as sturgeon.

Declining North Coast salmonid populations are not caused by seals, cormorants, terns, or Indian fisheries. Only by our collective use-it-all-up mentality and society.

[Deleted User]

Yup, squabbling gives us nothing but reduced runs, but it gives the commercials time to keep on fishin'.

On the pollution deal-As a Native Oregonian, I was surprised to learn people are claiming that fish from the Snake and Owyhee systems have high mercury levels and suggest limiting intake of fish from said systems.

I think sportfisher's attitudes are close to being dead on the money as far as concervation goes. It's a matter of consensus among us, and taking what we know to be true to the masses.