R.T. at White Water Boaters of Oregon Meeting.

[whitewaterbill]

Yes...R.T. Came out for a meeting tonight and Mingled with the club and addressed our speaker for the evening from N.M.F.S.. RT and the speeker had a very healthy and professional exchange and The members of the club enjoyed RT and the well informed person from N.M.F.S. Once again R.T. showed his loyalty to the sport fishers and I believe the speaker had the same interest in keeping our sport fishery on the up swing as well.
Thanks for being a part of the meeting R.T. and keep up the great work!

Thanks for the invite Bill. My friend and fishing buddy Bill Heater is the President of this good organization. They are active in representing the interests of whitewater boaters of the NW, and also get involved in volunteer efforts, such as taking underprilaged people fishing in their boats. Thanks from all of us you guys! -- The NMFS rep was a mid-Columbia hatchery specialist. And a nice fellow. After speaking at length with him I can understand better the tough Gov. mandates those guys work under. However, he could not defend the NMFS position regarding Col. salmon allocation between Col. Tribal netters and non-Indian user groups. In response to my question of how negotiations are going for next year's huge springer run he said, as it's stands now, it's likely to fall at 9.2% ESA impact to the Indians and 2.5% to non-Indians. While this is better than last spring's fiasco of 8% to Indians and 0.5% to non-Indians, it still falls way short of what we feel is fair! Apparently the States of Oregon and Washington feel that way too and are expected to proceed with their lawsuit with the "Unfair Pair". He did give some specific insight to why these allocations don't follow the 50/50 Treaty splits called for; the U.S. government has taken the Indian position that since the dams have reduced the runs so significantly that the Col. tribes deserve more of the allocation. I do understand that reasoning, but do the Indians use electricity from BPA and other dams? Yes. When I brought up that, unlike Indian gillnetters, sportfishers can fish selectively by C&R of non-clipped fish he said that some of the clipped fish we will harvest are broodstock fish propogated from native fish stock that they want a good return from; thus a limiting factor to a sportfish allocatioin. He agreed with my position that they should have clipped those broodstock fish on the ventral fin, so that with the vast majority of the 300,000+ fish returning being regular hatchery springers with most being adipose finclipped would be available for a big sportfish allocation. Hopefully the NW State's lawsuit will help bring about these proper changes, and will help get us more than a 2.5% ESA impact allocation on next spring's huge run. - Edit: Since we can't edit topic lines I think I will also put the NMFS portion up under it's own thread.

------------------
Know fish or no fish. - RT



[This message has been edited by RT (edited 11-09-2000).]

[Bait O' Eggs]

RT
I have never fished for a Columbia Springer so your efforts dont affect me much (yet).

It is good to know somebody is out fighting for more fishing opportunities. I have followed your arguements on the BB for the last several months and kind of understand how the springer allocations work, but not completely. I am sure if you know of a way the BB members can help with this issue people would respond positively.

Keep up the good work. Opportunity is all we can ask for. (and maybe a little rain for the coast fish)

[smilesforu]

RT
Good job. Did you get to discuss any of the other NMFS allocations that the non indians would get in return for the lower percentages? He did say negotiations...right?
Was the discussions strictly about the Columbia returns?
Tight Lines

------------------
Marty M
Steelheader.net

Marty, the discussion was about the Columbia allocations. All we had time for. Check out the letter campaign post. If your NW Wash. readers fsih the Col. you can copy and paste it to your board. Thanks. - RT