IFish Fishing Forum banner

Ballot Initiative for Nov 6 Election

66K views 434 replies 64 participants last post by  freespool 
#1 ·
Please pass along the following to your friends and contacts by PM or e-mail so that they have an idea about the upcoming ballot initiative. Feel free to copy/paste the text or send them a link to this thread.

Knowledge is POWER.
Change starts with awareness.
Everyone from OR on this board should make the pledge to educate your circle of friends and loved ones on this important issue.

Let's gitter dun, folks!

Immediate Release:
April 3, 2012


Contact: Lydia Plukchi
Elections Division
(503) 986-1518


The Office of the Secretary of State received a judgment from the Supreme Court on April 3, 2012, for initiative petition #21, proposing a statutory amendment, for the General Election of November 6, 2012. The judgment from the Supreme Court included a copy of the modified ballot title submitted to the court by the Attorney General’s office. The modified ballot title is as follows:

Prohibits commercial non-tribal fishing with gillnets in Oregon "inland waters,"
allows use of seine nets



Result of “Yes” Vote: “Yes” vote changes commercial non-tribal fishing in Oregon “inland waters” (defined) by banning gillnets, adopting other regulatory changes; recreational salmon fishers ensured their recent share.


Result of “No” Vote: “No” vote continues current commercial fishing practices, retains laws allowing gillnets, leaves other current regulations in place; continues annual adjustment of recreational salmon harvest share.


Summary:
Current law allows commercial salmon fishing in Columbia River only with gillnets; requires recreational salmon fishers’ percentage share of overall salmon catch to be readjusted annually; allows issuing of gillnet permits within limit of 200; recognizes gillnet licenses as valid in Columbia River in both Oregon and Washington waters. Measure bans commercial gillnet fishing by non-tribal fishers in Oregon “inland waters” (defined); requires Oregon Fish and Wildlife Commission to permit use of “seine nets” (defined) instead; ensures that recreational salmon fishers’ percentage of overall salmon catch remains at 2007-2011 levels; prohibits purchase of salmon caught by gillnet by non-tribal fishers in Oregon inland waters; prohibits issuing of additional gillnet permits; repeals statute recognizing validity of gillnet licenses in Oregon and Washington waters. Other provisions.


Chief Petitioner(s): Fred Girod, 1006 W 11th St, Vancouver, WA 98660, Rod Monroe, 1006 W 11th St,
Vancouver, WA 98660 and David Schamp, 1006 W 11th St, Vancouver, WA 98660
 
See less See more
#240 ·
once the purse is closed and the net collapses as it is hauled toward the boat, the area the fish occupy is reduced in size to the point of the fish damaging themselves. a seine net is never lifted and dumped on the boat, they use a brailer, sort of a huge dip net, to get the fish out.

i understand in the test fishery, all looks nice and easy. once this goes into commercial production, the technique which is more common to purse seining will rule the day. this is all about getting the fish out of the net and the net back fishing. time is money and nothing else will matter.

anyone thinking that purse seining is going to go easy on wild fish has never been on one of these boats or even talked with folks who work on them.

VOTE NO!
 
#242 ·
once the purse is closed and the net collapses as it is hauled toward the boat, the area the fish occupy is reduced in size to the point of the fish damaging themselves. a seine net is never lifted and dumped on the boat, they use a brailer, sort of a huge dip net, to get the fish out.

i understand in the test fishery, all looks nice and easy. once this goes into commercial production, the technique which is more common to purse seining will rule the day. this is all about getting the fish out of the net and the net back fishing. time is money and nothing else will matter.

anyone thinking that purse seining is going to go easy on wild fish has never been on one of these boats or even talked with folks who work on them.

VOTE NO!



When I worked for the USFS in Alaska out of Sitka, NSRAA used to hire commercial fishermen to supply live broodstock salmon for spawning to a local fish hatchery (Hidden Falls) located on USFS property on the back side of Baranoff Island. They would take their standard everyday commercial purse seine nets out into Chatam Streight, seine up a school of mixed Kings and Coho, close the purse, and tow the net many miles over to the hatchery, where there was a small inlet closed off with nets.

Staff would use a screw/augar device (or a simple dipnet) to move the live adult salmon from the seine net over the hatchery net into the inlet where the broodstock would be held untill ripe for spawning. Despite handeling thousands of fish with the purse seine there was almost no mortality, very little scale loss (despite the fact that this was happening to fresh fish in salt water), and the fish were in very good shape for eventual spawning, even after being held in net enclosures for months. Non-target species were released back into Chatam Straight with no appearent harm. I never observed any seal or sea lion perditation from the netting operation.

Above is a picture of the sorting operation at that location moving a live, healthy, wild, Coho from the commercial purse seine net to the Coho broodstock enclosure (all in saltwater). So your assertion is completely false, I have been there and done that, and it can be done just fine and dandy. Even in large scale commercial operations if necessary, and even with relativly fragile saltwater coho.
 
#245 ·
Anyone caught using a seine to dump unsorted fish on deck should get some jail time, just like any other criminal. You can bet they will be well schooled in approved operation and closely monitored.
Seines were outlawed in the past because gillnetters could not compete with them, what chance will sports have when the little bit of gillnetting done now days shuts the bite down for days after? Gillnets were in the Columbia for 2 days this year, there`s no way a seiner would be happy with that season with the additional crew and monies invested.
I really don't care if the seiner is happy with a short season. Their catch will be limited by their impact on ESA fish and catch balancing.

Breathe in and out...the sport catch will not be effected. Just look at the Columbia right now, the fish are finally in and the sports are done done done. The fish will be there for us to harvest regardless of the method of commercial catch.
 
#246 ·
Anyone caught using a seine to dump unsorted fish on deck should get some jail time, just like any other criminal. You can bet they will be well schooled in approved operation and closely monitored.
OK, so you don`t want to bet, too bad I was looking forward to taking your money, precedence has been set, rules WILL be broken.
I really don't care if the seiner is happy with a short season.Too bad that your not in charge, telling a new business operation that you don`t care if they lose money sounds like a "winning" strategy. Their catch will be limited by their impact on ESA fish and catch balancing. So where could they catch more fish, that is the goal no matter how the initiative proponents like to deny it. Oh wait, there`s other rivers below Bonneville that receive salmon runs, hardly any native fish spawn in them, and it`s wide open, wild west style, for the taking of these fish. Come to think of it, several hatcheries around here{NFL and Cowlitz} have just recently had multi-million dollar make overs, then there`s the Willamette fish. None of these would count as any catch balancing, and with very few ESA fish mixed in, open season, all season long.

Breathe in and out...the sport catch will not be effected.How many times have I heard this, crazy. You cannot subtract 2 from 3 and expect to end up with 3, just crazy. Just look at the Columbia right now, the fish are finally in and the sports are done done done. The fish will be there for us to harvest regardless of the method of commercial catch.So you think we could be fishing today if seines would have been in use this springer season? I`d like to hear more of this, I think some upriver folks would like to hear how we`re going to be fishing the bulk of the run too, please enlighten us on how this would work.
 
#247 ·
Certainly. If seines are used that have a lower impact rate then more of the hatchery fish can be caught within their allocation. Remeber, they are fishing on 1% of the ESA impact and catch balancing. One or the other will end their season with thousand and thousands of hatchery fish still left in the system.

So, if they continue to fish the front of the run, it may take sports a little longer to hit their impacts/catch balancing because there will be fewer hatchery fish available early. What that means for the average Joe sportsfisher is that the season may be open a little longer, into the bulk of the run instead of closing before the majority of fish get here.

Remember, it isn't lack of hatchery fish that closes our season and theirs, it is the impact on ESA fish. We need to take more hatchery fish out of the run while limiting the impact on ESA fish. Seine nets can help do that.

Fear mongering aside, reducing the impact on ESA fish while harvesting as many hatchery fish as possible is in everyone's best interest. Commercial and sports have hit the wall already this year. Do you think they caught the majority of hatchery fish? No where near...
 
#248 ·
Certainly. If seines are used that have a lower impact rate then more of the hatchery fish can be caught within their allocation. Remeber, they are fishing on 1% of the ESA impact and catch balancing. One or the other will end their season with thousand and thousands of hatchery fish still left in the system.

So, if they continue to fish the front of the run, it may take sports a little longer to hit their impacts/catch balancing because there will be fewer hatchery fish available early. What that means for the average Joe sportsfisher is that'll the season may be open a little longer, into the bulk of the run instead of closing before the majority of fish get here.

Remember, it isn't lack of hatchery fish that closes our season and theirs, it is the impact on ESA fish. We need to take more hatchery fish out of the run while limiting the impact on ESA fish. Seine nets can help do that.

Fear mongering aside, reducing the impact on ESA fish while harvesting as many hatchery fish as possible is in everyone's best interest. Commercial and sports have hit the wall already this year. Do you think they caught the majority of hatchery fish? No where near...
Actually sports hit the wall. Not the commercials we held off because of the lack of fish. But the greedy sports cried there way into more days and then went over there quota!
 
#251 ·
Bill, when you say things like this you must be prepared to be accused of fear mongering:
Oh wait, there`s other rivers below Bonneville that receive salmon runs, hardly any native fish spawn in them, and it`s wide open, wild west style, for the taking of these fish. Come to think of it, several hatcheries around here{NFL and Cowlitz} have just recently had multi-million dollar make overs, then there`s the Willamette fish. None of these would count as any catch balancing, and with very few ESA fish mixed in, open season, all season long.
Just not gunna happen. They are still fishing on mixed stocks.
 
#252 ·
Bill, when you say things like this you must be prepared to be accused of fear mongering: I`d like folks to consider the consequences of a new commercial fishing method implemented by initiative. Would you rather have it pass without giving thought to the possible scenario? Another poster recently said we should shut this thread down after a pro initiative post, this is America right?

Just not gunna happen. They are still fishing on mixed stocks. The whole point of using a selective harvest method right? These {lower river trib fish{{Willamette, Cowlitz, Lewis}}would become bonus fish for the commercials, not counted as any quota. Soon they would learn to target them, easy money as I have shown in the past on this thread.
48 degrees and raining here crabbait, how`s the weather there? Next year I`ll take a late spring vacation to some warmer blue water, maybe down your way. Bill
 
#253 ·
It's been a frog-drowner here today! The temp was up to around 75 this morning but a big t-storm came through and dropped a couple inches of rain. Temperature dropped to 70, cloudy. Of course, we are at nearly 4000'. Jaco is 45 minutes away on the Pacific and it is in the nineties. Come on down! (And bring me a salmon.... :excited:).

Look at the videos. Seines are a big improvement over gill/tangle nets.
 
#254 ·
Come on down! (And bring me a salmon.... :excited:).
Tough year for sure here for sports, I managed to put 4 springers on my card, mostly through blind luck. I`m still trying for a trib springer when work and conditions allow it, I fished above the Dalles last weekend with no luck. Headed off shortly to try my hand at shrimping for the first time in the morning.

I hope that readers think about the "what if" before they vote to allow seine netting in the Columbia river, IMO this should be the title of the initiative as gillnetting is nearly outlawed now. Ask yourself, and research "why" seines were outlawed in the past. Bill
 
#259 · (Edited)
(Original post by gpt)
once the purse is closed and the net collapses as it is hauled toward the boat, the area the fish occupy is reduced in size to the point of the fish damaging themselves. a seine net is never lifted and dumped on the boat, they use a brailer, sort of a huge dip net, to get the fish out.

And its just as easy to lift out the hatchery fish in a KNOTFREE NET and never touch any of the wild fish. Open the net and release the wild fish.

i understand in the test fishery, all looks nice and easy. once this goes into commercial production, the technique which is more common to purse seining will rule the day. this is all about getting the fish out of the net and the net back fishing. time is money and nothing else will matter.

Once the law is passed, the dept has the authority to regulate how the nets are used and make adjustments to ensure the gear is used in a manner the fish will be protected. Just like, the dept has the authority to demand barbless hooks and no bait, if they desire. Just like the dept has the authority to allow the hangback method and reduce sport fish mortality, thereby increasing the length of the season.

anyone thinking that purse seining is going to go easy on wild fish has never been on one of these boats or even talked with folks who work on them.

Gee, the guys who did the testing and testified in front of Brian Blakes Committee in the Wa. Legislature never had anything negative to say about it. If it was THAT bad, you would think they would have at least spoken up, on the record.
 
#261 ·
IMO All this ballot initiative does is trade on bad situation for another. I find it funny when CCA was pushing to get membership the big thing was get gillnets out of the columbia, not hey lets trade the gillnets for Purse Seines. I would have to bet most people took this as no netting in the columbia besides the indians. Not to trade one bad thing for another. IMO save your yes vote tell it will actually do some good, not what a few are trying to persude you to think is so great.
 
#274 ·
IMO All this ballot initiative does is trade on bad situation for another. I find it funny when CCA was pushing to get membership the big thing was get gillnets out of the columbia, not hey lets trade the gillnets for Purse Seines. I would have to bet most people took this as no netting in the columbia besides the indians. Not to trade one bad thing for another. IMO save your yes vote tell it will actually do some good, not what a few are trying to persude you to think is so great.
The original goal had to be amended. End of story. Reality in a complex issue with a bad economy and no money. Too bad CCA could not accommodate every agenda.
 
#262 ·
Hotrods, if the action were intended to remove gill nets for the benefit of sportsmen then you may be right. However, this action is intended to decrease the impact on non-target by-catch and ESA listed fish, not to grab more fish for sports fishermen.

If we take care of the fish there will be fish for everyone.
 
#267 ·
Not only was the floor unnecessary but it ruins the intent of the initiative. The fear that sport fishers will not get theirs eliminates any benefite that a low mortality live sorting commercial method could have. No additional hatchery fish will ever be produced because no additonal hatchery fish can be removed due to the mandated sport take. This initiative will either produce the same or less fish for everyone. It is either the status quo or less.
 
#266 ·
There is no mortality factor yet associated with the use of seine nets yet they are the one and only answer to save non-targeted and ESA listed fish? Seine nets are mandated in this initiative but with an unknown mortality factor - how is that doing what is best for the fish and getting "more fish for everyone"?

As I have said before the intent of this initiative to "ensure" the sport catch is the limiting factor in catching more fish for everyone. The commercial fleet will always be limited to the number of fish they can take - even with a zero release mortality method - because the sport fleet will always be ensured a "mandated at the ballot box and not by science" share. If the sport and commercial take are equal, then the commercial fleet will always be limited to the amount of fish the sport fleet can take. No additional hatchery fish can ever be removed by the commercial fleet under this initiative.
 
#269 ·
There is no mortality factor yet associated with the use of seine nets yet they are the one and only answer to save non-targeted and ESA listed fish? Seine nets are mandated in this initiative but with an unknown mortality factor - how is that doing what is best for the fish and getting "more fish for everyone"?
Did you look at the videos? They are pretty self-evident even if they represent best case scenarios.

As I have said before the intent of this initiative to "ensure" the sport catch is the limiting factor in catching more fish for everyone. The commercial fleet will always be limited to the number of fish they can take - even with a zero release mortality method - because the sport fleet will always be ensured a "mandated at the ballot box and not by science" share. If the sport and commercial take are equal, then the commercial fleet will always be limited to the amount of fish the sport fleet can take. No additional hatchery fish can ever be removed by the commercial fleet under this initiative.
Obviously you don't understand the way that fish are allocated or you don't understand the initiative.
 
#272 ·
Removing commercial fishing from the Columbia isn't the goal.
I realize it is not the goal of CCA and some people on this site but it is the ultimate goal of a very large number of sport fishermen in this area. Passing a law like this basically assures that I will never see an end to commercial fishing on the mainstream Columbia in my lifetime. All the more reason why I really need to move south someday like you.
 
#275 · (Edited)
builder;[/B said:
4111538]This is not in the best interest of those of us the primarily fish the Willamette or other tributaries. Just as many ESA springers will be killed by commercial fisherman the difference is that they will remove substantially more hatchery fish before they reach their allowable impact of ESA fish.

How do you know what the future allowable impact will be for commercial fishermen, with reduced mortality rates? Why would they need the higher amounts?

A lot of those fish are going to be Willamette river hatchery fish that were never going to compete with the ESA fish on the spawning grounds. If this passes it is likely to very bad for the quality of springer fishing on the Willamette.

How do you know who will fish first?

If what people are saying is true about Washington moving toward banning gillnets in favor of seine nets then why are people pushing for the initiative to pass?

Because there is no guarantee it will happen next year. One state has to make the first move. Being the passive second State, would also eliminate the PRECONDITIONS that the initiative provides to protect sport fisheries. This way, Washington is more likely to go along with the election results of Oregon than making new grounds and rules, that we may not like. Washington legislators are not going to dump commercial fishing in the LCR. Take it to the bank. For ALL the sportsmen who dont like the initiative, it gets no better waiting for this state.

It seems that it would be better for sport fishermen if Washington and the compact adopt a rule banning gillnets in favor of seine nets while seine nets are still illegal in Oregon.

We could then lobby to prevent Oregon from passing a law allowing seine nets and keep Oregon commercial fishermen out of the river. If we support a measure now that specifically makes seine nets legal how could we ever be taken seriously as a group down the road if we say that they are bad. I see this as essentially abandoning all hope of ever getting commercial fishermen off the Columbia. This initiative is flawed at best and the timing seems horrible.[/quote]

They both have the same law and they essentially need to make the same changes. Washington tried to pass legislation legalizing other gear, before the testing began in the lower river. Consider that it took TWO years to pass a bill that required commercial fishermen in washington waters to report a lost net in 24 hours, because the issue was so new to legislators, it took time for them to understand the entire issue. Now its passed and signed, we can build on that.

You have an unusual idea that would separate Oregon and washington on a major issue. Frankly, I doubt it would hold up in the long run.
 
#277 ·
'regulating commercial take'

interesting concept, how well has that been working to this point given the powerful commercial fishing lobby??? does anyone really believe WDFW or ODFW is going to err on the side of conserving stocks? or are these 'managment' groups simply going to continue doing what they have always done, open the gates to commercial harvest.

the other arguement i find nieve is, '...the purse is not going to be closed, the fish will not be harmed...'

now that thinking totally ignores the intent of commercial fishing, make as much as you can with the least amount of effort in the shortest time possible. it is clear that none of the posters defending purse seine fishing have ever been on a seine boat or even talked with those who work these boats.

purse seine fishing is perhaps THE most deadly and efficient means of harvest ever devised. perhaps that is why it was made illegal in OR some decades ago. it may also be the reason that power block seine boats are not allowed in vast stretches of SE AK. wonder why the herring stock are collapsing?

i don't know what the goal of CCA might happen to be, but i do know the laser focus on gill nets, to the exclusion of a great number of real environmental threats to our wild fish, was enough for me to walk away.

vote NO, pure seine boats are a truly bad idea.
 
#280 ·
the other arguement i find nieve is, '...the purse is not going to be closed, the fish will not be harmed...'

now that thinking totally ignores the intent of commercial fishing, make as much as you can with the least amount of effort in the shortest time possible. it is clear that none of the posters defending purse seine fishing have ever been on a seine boat or even talked with those who work these boats.

purse seine fishing is perhaps THE most deadly and efficient means of harvest ever devised. perhaps that is why it was made illegal in OR some decades ago. it may also be the reason that power block seine boats are not allowed in vast stretches of SE AK. wonder why the herring stock are collapsing?

i don't know what the goal of CCA might happen to be, but i do know the laser focus on gill nets, to the exclusion of a great number of real environmental threats to our wild fish, was enough for me to walk away.

vote NO, pure seine boats are a truly bad idea.
This has been refuted numerous times (with real evidence posted in this thread) both here on the Columbia and elsewhere in the western United States, Canada, and Alaska. Seines can be deadly or seines can be used for low mortality live capture and release. That you keep posting it is simply untruthful fear-mongering. And, as I have told you earlier in the thread, I lived in Southeast Alaska and have a lot of experience with live capture seining of Coho and Chinook salmon (and have the pictures to prove it). So why don't ya quit with the lies and move on to something else.
 
#294 ·
Wrong... actually the vast majority of money going into the SAFE areas is funded by BPA. The second largest funding is from ODFW and it gets much more of it's budget from sport fishing and sport hunting license dollars than from commercial fishing license and landing fees. So it's primarily electric rate payers, sports, and personal income tax payers that provide your SAFE area fish. The latest numbers I have are from 2006* where the gillnet fleet direct share of the 2.4 million dollar SAFE area annual operating cost was around $25,000 that the gillnetters paid in landing fees. That is 1% of the cost.

Dump SAFE and the $1.6 million BPA spends and the $800K the states spend could be put into habitat restoration, defferred hatchery maintance, better fish and wildlife law enforcement, or a whole laundry list of other things.

Oh, and BTW, the net economic value of SAFE in 2006 (the ex-vessle value of fish caught minus SAFE operating costs) was only $49,000! So the whole SAFE concept is an complete economic farce. It's little more than a scam to send BPA and ODFW/WDFW dollars to gillnetters.

*Data from the 2006 [FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman][FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman]Select Area Fishery Evaluation Project, Economic Analysis Study, Final Report (prepared by ODFW and WDFW), and the Independent Economic Analysis Board (IAEB) peer review of the same economic analysis study.[/FONT][/FONT]
 
#304 ·
Someone please enlighten me on these purse seines. Which method of commercial harvest is the best overall for the health of all fish stocks on the columbia (steelhead, stugeon, etc)? Does a purse seine incidentally catch more stugeon than a gillnet? How about steelhead?

There are other fish in the river beside salmon. I don't know which way I would vote yet but I know I'd vote yes if the initiative was to ban all non-tribal commercial fishing on the Columbia. Don't we have enough commercial harvest out on the ocean to supply the market?
 
#307 ·
I'd vote yes if the initiative was to ban all non-tribal commercial fishing on the Columbia. Don't we have enough commercial harvest out on the ocean to supply the market?
My thoughts as well, I think we could come to an agreement with the tribes, rod and reel only below Bonneville dam, come on down, build your platforms, tribal members could fish the spillway even, rod and reel only. Bill
 
#331 ·
Correct. FIRST, you have to buy the nets, put them on, get trained and obtain a new permit first.

Nice try but the general public wont tune in for another 4 months and then... they wont understand impacts, nor care. Do you have impacts in a non selective mixed fishery?
 
#335 ·
Repeat yourself all you like, it won't make what you are saying any more true. What about all the fish that are killed in gill nets that never make it to the reports? The drop-outs, the sea lion take, the "oops, better dump these quick" moments? None of that ever makes it to the "impacts" but the fish are still quite dead.

With the lower impact of seine nets, it is quite possible that the commercial fleet will harvest their percentage of the run without reaching the impact ceiling (catch balancing, initiative ceiling, etc.). That means more wild fish on the spawning beds.
 
#336 ·
Repeat yourself all you like, it won't make what you are saying any more true. What about all the fish that are killed in gill nets that never make it to the reports? The drop-outs, the sea lion take, the "oops, better dump these quick" moments? None of that ever makes it to the "impacts" but the fish are still quite dead.

With the lower impact of seine nets, it is quite possible that the commercial fleet will harvest their percentage of the run without reaching the impact ceiling (catch balancing, initiative ceiling, etc.). That means more wild fish on the spawning beds.
CB,

Do you honestly believe for one second that commercial harvest will be halted because they hit their allocation? Personally, I don't believe that will ever happen. I would put money down that year after year commercials will far exceed their allocation simply because their impact won't be reached before they hit their ESA quota.

You know as well as I do that the state DFWs wrongfully cater to the commercial interest.
 
#339 ·
The entire Oregon commercial fishing industry collectively contributes 1% of ODFW's operating budget.
 
#340 · (Edited)
In hindsight, I have to wonder if that had been pounded home, what the results would have been. Undertaxed is one issue. How many people would lose their jobs if the cowboys were banned would offset the complaints, as politicians like keynsian economics, where ever it exists.

How much do the sports contribute?
 
#342 ·
So, for the sake of argument, by those figures, the combined federal and state taxpayers foot about 60 percent of the tab (liberally subtracting those who actually angle for the fish)...so hypothetically, do they not deserve that percentage of those fish? Which, it then logically follows, are not supplied by sport angling...:twocents: In that vein, it makes little difference what commercials pay into it...
 
#345 ·
Well if you combined all off-shore commercial harvest, all CR harvest (including SAFE areas) and the overall percentage of tribal harvest that goes to market I would assume that is already happening.

But, please don't ask me to research all the numbers....it's mainly food for thought.
 
#350 ·
I'm curious to know how the allocation floor works exactly. What happens on years like this when the run could be 75% below what was predicted? What kind of allocation do people upriver of Bonneville get, or is this only directed at people below Bonneville?
 
#352 ·
You seem to have very strong opinions about a process you know very little about.
You could improve your position by doing a little research before typing.
LCR quotes are set by bureaucrats, commercial and sport then battle to see who gets what percentage of the quota.
Oregon, Washington, feds and the Tribes all get a input, I think Idaho is even represented now.
Your beef seems to be with the system, but you keep blaming LCR anglers.
 
#361 ·
Uglygreen
King Salmon
POST 348


According to Post 348 Uglygreen never posted 5 cents. He posted 5%
Adjust your panties.




Quote:
Originally Posted by Fishy Monger
Well good then. I guess all those checks that are sent into ODFW every month from processors for SAFE Enhancement can be halted immediately. Since the money isn't spent on anything. The Commercial guys and the Fish Markets will be happy.

If you're talking about the 5% 'voluntary assessment' paid by the gillnetters and processeors to ODFW specific to SAFE, it's a drop in the bucket. The 'voluntary assessment' is supposed to cover the cost of producing fish at Clatsop County Fisheries South Fork Klaskanie Hatchery. In recent years it's totaled around $70-100K. And even that is a farce because it doesn't even cover the $200K ODFW pays Clatsop County Fisheries annually to produce those fish.

According to Post 348 UG never posted 5 cents. He posted 5%
 
#363 · (Edited)
Uglygreen
King Salmon
POST 348


According to Post 348 Uglygreen never posted 5 cents. He posted 5%
Adjust your panties.




Quote:
Originally Posted by Fishy Monger
Well good then. I guess all those checks that are sent into ODFW every month from processors for SAFE Enhancement can be halted immediately. Since the money isn't spent on anything. The Commercial guys and the Fish Markets will be happy.

If you're talking about the 5% 'voluntary assessment' paid by the gillnetters and processeors to ODFW specific to SAFE, it's a drop in the bucket. The 'voluntary assessment' is supposed to cover the cost of producing fish at Clatsop County Fisheries South Fork Klaskanie Hatchery. In recent years it's totaled around $70-100K. And even that is a farce because it doesn't even cover the $200K ODFW pays Clatsop County Fisheries annually to produce those fish.

According to Post 348 UG never posted 5 cents. He posted 5%
Yeah it's just dodging and weaving all over the place. In post 355 UG tosses the 5% Enhancement out the window and switches it to 5 cents. I post true and honest information and Ugly quickly changes the subject and/or takes bits a pieces of information and mixes them together to justify a position that Gillnetters are the only freeloaders on the river.

Fact is that Commercials pay more than 25,000 toward SAFE Hatchery Programs. (which UG originally posted) And all Fishing on the Columbia is heavily subsidized by Electric rate-payers and tax payers. (which we all are)

I give UG props for trying to defend his original statement, but the truth is not on his/her side.
 
#366 ·
ttt:applause::applause::applause:

Come on guys......don't give up now and let this thread die! Surely you guys have something else to fight about or some more chippy comments.:pray:

This has been my best source of entertainment for the last few days. Surely somebody has another attack for BillJr......or something:anyone:


Where are those great ifish icons like Sgt Slaughter, 5 cents, or Kalama Geo to help rescue this thread?


I need more entertainment, PLEASE:pray:
 
#369 ·
this thread seemed to get way over into the weeds...So how about those seine nets eh?

I'll tell ya what I think will happen to the SAFE areas if this ballot passes. They go away for the netters.. and so does a big part of the buoy 10 fishery for the sports

There were 3 ballot measures proposed in the beginning.

Anyone know why the CCA decided to go with their reintroduce the seine net proposal instead one of the other two? Must have put it to a vote within the membership.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top