Deleted User
11-14-2000, 12:26 AM
I moved this below sample letter requested of me for those that will unite with us in a much needed letter campaign. I will put in a followup post with a condensed version, since all letters should be in your own words, along with addresses to suggested Congressmen and others to send these to. Thanks. ..... Edit: changed beggining and some of the text (11/21/00). -
November 2000
Dear Senator Ron Wyden:
A large part of why many Oregonians choose to live in the Northwest is the opportunity to enjoy the outdoors fishing for salmon. As the Moderator of the Northwest's most well read fishing website bulletin board, at www.ifish.net (http://www.ifish.net) , I know this to be true. And I know they are more than just upset with salmon allocation issues.
You are also aware of the Federal takeover of N.W. regional fishery decisions from the N.W. States by the Federal Government and turned over to the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). Undoubtedly they have a tough job to do. However, many thousands of regional sportfishers are fed up with the unfair unbalanced sacrifices that have been forced upon us by the NMFS. I know this by reading all of the northwest fishing website discussion boards accessed by thousands of fishermen.
This is most exemplified by the astonishingly unfair fall and spring Chinook salmon allocation mandates on the mainstem Columbia River by the NMFS on behalf of the Columbia Inter-Tribal Fisheries Commission. Under the recommendations of regional fish biologists, NMFS restricted non dam impacts on native (non-hatchery) Chinook salmon last spring, this fall, and again next spring at a 9% impact on ESA protected Chinooks. Of this 9%, 8.5% is given to the Col. Treaty Indians for primary gillnet and ceremonial dipnet seasons, while 0.5% is given to non-Indian commercial gillnetters and sportfishers combined!
N.W. sportsmen have paid more than our fair share for hatchery propegated salmon thru federal and state taxes, tax on sporting goods purchased, and fishing license fees. We have also greatly contributed to the region's economy via purchases of expensive fishing equipment, boats with trailers, trucks to pull these boats, tackle, bait, gas, food, charter and guide's fees, and lodging. Yet we are to accept a paltry 0.5% of the ESA impact compared to the 8.5% ESA impact to the Col. Tribal fishers? No. And we will not.
A reminder; in 1974 Federal Courts reviewed the 1968 Fed. Judge Belloni interpretations of Treaties with the Columbia Region Native Americans. The interpretation upheld that there would be an equal split of fish deemed harvestable between Treaty Indians and non-Indians. Furthermore, it was directed that if one of the two groups got a larger harvest of these runs in a calendar year that the other group would be allowed a larger harvest the following year. In no fathomable way are these allocation decisions by the NMFS, pressured upon by the Col. Tribal Comm., anywhere close to the Treaty rulings, or fairness.
From reliable sources (verifiable), this great discrepancy was born out of idealism sympathetic to the Indian's loss of fish caused primarily by the Columbia and Snake River dams. This was manifested from within the Dept. of the Interior and mandated to the NMFS by Dept. Secretarial order No. 3206, which essentially states that the Treaty Tribes will be the last user group to lose harvest potential due to ESA impact guidelines set forth by the NMFS. This is NOT right! It not only likely illegally overides the Fed. Court Treaty interpretations, but does not ethically take into account that most of today's sportfishers had no more to do with building dams with insufficient fish passage than the Indians; and that the Indians also use electric power from these dams! They have also been compensated in many other ways, including very profitable gambling casinos which ironically use a whole lot of electricity generated by those dams.
This situation is so unfair that the N.W. States have filed a lawsit against the NMFS and Col. Tribal Comm. However, several legal experts have said the States/sportsmen are not likely to get near a fair settlement out of this action due to much stronger representation for the NMFS/Col. Tribes.
We are asking you to investigate this matter and try to reverse the unfair and illegal mandate brought down by Secretarial order No. 3206. And to send a clear message to the NMFS upper management that a fair settlement to this dispute must be reached. By all measure of legallity and fairness sportsmen should get our rightful 50% share of the 9% ESA impact on Columbia R. salmon. Trying to again restrict us to anywhere near an 0.5% ESA impact to share with commercial gillnetters is unacceptable. This is the case regardless of the size of the runs. You should note though that next spring's run is reliably predicted to be well over 300,000 spring chinook. Last spring, with half this many fish, there was a terribly high waste of hatchery fish so that the Indians could have their over-impact on ESA protected native fish. Since we recently found out that these decisions will be made in the weeks to come rather than just before next spring, we respectfully request this receive the attention it deserves expiditiously.
Furthermore, please keep in mind that Indian gillnets (in which they harvest a vast majority of their fish; to sell) are indescriminate killers of the ESA native fish, while sportfishers can fish selectively by releasing unclipped native fish, which ODFW studies prove will allow over a 90% survival rate for those fish to go on and spawn successfully. And we only take hatchery fish that often go to waste in these situations.
Importantly, there is a growing groundswell of major discontent from the hundreds of thousands of N.W. sportsmen, gaining more strength via the power of internet communication, that will be placing their future votes for Congressmen and other politicians who fairly and strongly represent our rights!
Thank you very much for your time and consideration.
Sincerely,
Steve Hanson (moderator of www.ifish.net (http://www.ifish.net) website Discussion Board)
[This message has been edited by RT (edited 11-22-2000).]
November 2000
Dear Senator Ron Wyden:
A large part of why many Oregonians choose to live in the Northwest is the opportunity to enjoy the outdoors fishing for salmon. As the Moderator of the Northwest's most well read fishing website bulletin board, at www.ifish.net (http://www.ifish.net) , I know this to be true. And I know they are more than just upset with salmon allocation issues.
You are also aware of the Federal takeover of N.W. regional fishery decisions from the N.W. States by the Federal Government and turned over to the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). Undoubtedly they have a tough job to do. However, many thousands of regional sportfishers are fed up with the unfair unbalanced sacrifices that have been forced upon us by the NMFS. I know this by reading all of the northwest fishing website discussion boards accessed by thousands of fishermen.
This is most exemplified by the astonishingly unfair fall and spring Chinook salmon allocation mandates on the mainstem Columbia River by the NMFS on behalf of the Columbia Inter-Tribal Fisheries Commission. Under the recommendations of regional fish biologists, NMFS restricted non dam impacts on native (non-hatchery) Chinook salmon last spring, this fall, and again next spring at a 9% impact on ESA protected Chinooks. Of this 9%, 8.5% is given to the Col. Treaty Indians for primary gillnet and ceremonial dipnet seasons, while 0.5% is given to non-Indian commercial gillnetters and sportfishers combined!
N.W. sportsmen have paid more than our fair share for hatchery propegated salmon thru federal and state taxes, tax on sporting goods purchased, and fishing license fees. We have also greatly contributed to the region's economy via purchases of expensive fishing equipment, boats with trailers, trucks to pull these boats, tackle, bait, gas, food, charter and guide's fees, and lodging. Yet we are to accept a paltry 0.5% of the ESA impact compared to the 8.5% ESA impact to the Col. Tribal fishers? No. And we will not.
A reminder; in 1974 Federal Courts reviewed the 1968 Fed. Judge Belloni interpretations of Treaties with the Columbia Region Native Americans. The interpretation upheld that there would be an equal split of fish deemed harvestable between Treaty Indians and non-Indians. Furthermore, it was directed that if one of the two groups got a larger harvest of these runs in a calendar year that the other group would be allowed a larger harvest the following year. In no fathomable way are these allocation decisions by the NMFS, pressured upon by the Col. Tribal Comm., anywhere close to the Treaty rulings, or fairness.
From reliable sources (verifiable), this great discrepancy was born out of idealism sympathetic to the Indian's loss of fish caused primarily by the Columbia and Snake River dams. This was manifested from within the Dept. of the Interior and mandated to the NMFS by Dept. Secretarial order No. 3206, which essentially states that the Treaty Tribes will be the last user group to lose harvest potential due to ESA impact guidelines set forth by the NMFS. This is NOT right! It not only likely illegally overides the Fed. Court Treaty interpretations, but does not ethically take into account that most of today's sportfishers had no more to do with building dams with insufficient fish passage than the Indians; and that the Indians also use electric power from these dams! They have also been compensated in many other ways, including very profitable gambling casinos which ironically use a whole lot of electricity generated by those dams.
This situation is so unfair that the N.W. States have filed a lawsit against the NMFS and Col. Tribal Comm. However, several legal experts have said the States/sportsmen are not likely to get near a fair settlement out of this action due to much stronger representation for the NMFS/Col. Tribes.
We are asking you to investigate this matter and try to reverse the unfair and illegal mandate brought down by Secretarial order No. 3206. And to send a clear message to the NMFS upper management that a fair settlement to this dispute must be reached. By all measure of legallity and fairness sportsmen should get our rightful 50% share of the 9% ESA impact on Columbia R. salmon. Trying to again restrict us to anywhere near an 0.5% ESA impact to share with commercial gillnetters is unacceptable. This is the case regardless of the size of the runs. You should note though that next spring's run is reliably predicted to be well over 300,000 spring chinook. Last spring, with half this many fish, there was a terribly high waste of hatchery fish so that the Indians could have their over-impact on ESA protected native fish. Since we recently found out that these decisions will be made in the weeks to come rather than just before next spring, we respectfully request this receive the attention it deserves expiditiously.
Furthermore, please keep in mind that Indian gillnets (in which they harvest a vast majority of their fish; to sell) are indescriminate killers of the ESA native fish, while sportfishers can fish selectively by releasing unclipped native fish, which ODFW studies prove will allow over a 90% survival rate for those fish to go on and spawn successfully. And we only take hatchery fish that often go to waste in these situations.
Importantly, there is a growing groundswell of major discontent from the hundreds of thousands of N.W. sportsmen, gaining more strength via the power of internet communication, that will be placing their future votes for Congressmen and other politicians who fairly and strongly represent our rights!
Thank you very much for your time and consideration.
Sincerely,
Steve Hanson (moderator of www.ifish.net (http://www.ifish.net) website Discussion Board)
[This message has been edited by RT (edited 11-22-2000).]