IT'S TIME TO WRITE LETTERS NOW !

Please read Ifish Special Guest's thread "For those who care", with a disturbing update on the likely allocation of next spring's 300,000+ Columbia R. spring chinook salmon run. As it stands now the sportfishers and non-Indian gillnetters combined would get a paltry 0.5% ESA impact allocation!

That's a grim outlook, but not totally unexpected; particularly on the part of the Columbia Tribal Commission. It is unfortunate that the Fed. government, via the NMFS, sides with such a radical one sided interpretation! I hope that the state's lawsuit against the "Unfair Pair" gets us a least a 2% impact. Because it will be litigated under federal jurisdiction I think you could be right about a bleak outcome for sportsmen.

THIS IS GROSSLY UNFAIR! I also completely agree with you that we need lots of letters sent to our Congressmen! Jennie has a link from the Ifish mainpage to a page of State Senators and Representatives.

I have written letters. I have made several public internet posts protesting this rediculous 0.5% allocation for fish that we pay for via taxes, fishing licenses, and tax on fishing related good and services. I tried to organize a protest rally last spring at Cascade Locks. If apathetic sportfishers won't make a small sacrifice to attend a rally for your deserved rights, then at least give back with a small amount of your time and write your Congressmen, telling them that the Col. Tribal Comm. and NMFS Col. fall and spring salmon allocation agendas and mandates are very unfair. That we have paid for these fish. That Indian gillnets kill all Fed. ESA protected native fish that swim into them. That sportfishers can fish selectively by releasing all native fish with adipose fins intact so that over 90% of them can successfully spawn. That even a 2% allocation to non-Indian fishers is not enough to be fair to us, but 0.5% is unacceptable and enough to cause a significant voter backlash in future elections!

Good numbers of letters mean something to our Congressmen. Great numbers of letters move them to action on our behalf! They can and will influence the Fed. factions that are in control of the NMFS. Very IMPORTANTLY, the Col. allocation issues aren't the only thing a letter campaign will affect. It can and will affect some Congressmen's input and voting on federal budgets for NW hatcheries! So please get going on this right away people. The decisions are being made in the near future, not next spring.

* I also make a call for someone with the time and leadership, perhaps from such as one of the Chapter Presidents of the Association of NW Steelheaders, to put together another attempt at a protest rally. It needs to be at the appropriate place and time, and given enough time and publicity to draw big numbers of fishermen. Liz Hamilton and Buzz Ramsey of NISA would be great to contact at Luhr Jensen in Hood River for info on the most effective way to go about this. They were enthusiastically helpful in suggestions they made to me last spring; it was just too short of notice for many and very unfortunately apathetic for many others. Let's take the opportunity and get after this one! - Steve Hanson (RT)

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

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

[Jennie@ifish]

http://www.ifish.net/write.html

This is my where to write page.

Steve, can you help me know who is most important to write to?
Should I write one letter and copy it off, and fill in the appropriate names, or should they be all original?
Should we put ifish.net on them so they know we are a big group who will not let them get away with this, or does that matter?
We all know it is better to snail mail these letters, as many peoples e mail gets so full they pay less attention.

Thanks,

J

Thanks for the URL Jen. I don't think it would be significantly more effective to write original letters to Congressmen and the 2 Govenors. Using the same base letter and changing the appropriate names and addresses is fine. The important thing is getting a lot of them, and letting them know how strongly we feel and how we will vote. A type written letter sent in the regular mail is best, but if you just can't find the time, at least e-mail in your views to these 'representatives of the people'.

The 3 most helpful in Oregon would be Sen. Ron Wyden, Rep Peter DeFazio, and Gov. John Kitzhaber. It may be just as important to write less fish/enviro friendly ones, such as Sen. Gordon Smith, because they care how we think and thus vote.

As for the Ifish letterhead you should include that, and even let them know how the many people who access the web feel about this. Everyone shouldn't ue it though, because we want them to think it comes from a variety of sources; and it will. Also, feel free to use my ideas for content, put into your own words. Thanks much! - RT

[Scarecrow]

Jennie, if you get time to draft a sample letter to these guys, I would appreciate and use it. I'm really not all that lazy, just want to keep the facts straight and credible.
Thanks again for all you do for us!

------------------
Bob G.

Hi Bob. An example letter by Jen and my suggestions from above are good things to use; but put into your own words. We don't want them to all look like a form letter, which won't be as effective. The important things are to let politicians know you want fair fish allocations for sportsmen and that votes are at stake. It doesn't matter how simple or intricate the letters are. It matters that they arrive in big numbers! Thanks for getting involved Bob. - Steve


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

[Shannon]

If your numbers are correct and us sportsfisherman and non-indian gillnetters are only allocated .5% out of an estimated 300,000 fish, that would leave all of us 1500 fish. If this is going to really occur it will only hurt the states potential income. After all, year after year hard working people who do not have the time to chase fish hire a fishing guide. This will not only affect the state, but the hard working people as well. What few people can get a crack at a fish before the quota is reached could pay a bit more for the guided service.

I have written Gov. K. before and sometimes it just seems hopeless. We will try again thou.
Shannon

Shannon,

Actually it is 0.5% impact of ESA fish. That means we will be allocated a quota that will kill less than that of the Federally protected (via the Fed. Endangered Species Act) native springers. That would likely be closer to 10,000 fish than 1500. But that is still paltry compared to the Treaty impact allowance of 9%! And paltry when well over 300,000 hatchery springers are expected (some biologists think the run could be close to half a million!). We should be given at least a 30,000 finclipped fish quota! There are plenty of fishermen to fish for that, and it would be a big positive impact on the economy. If a large amount of letters get to these politicians, all it would take is convincing a couple of the right ones to simply send a memo to the NMFS and the powers in Wash. D.C. that they better get it more fair and we would get several times more fish! They also need to address the Dept. of the Interior directive No. 3206 that directs the Treaty Indians are to be the last to have their quotas reduced to protect the ESA fish; despite the indescriminate killing gillnets they use! They wrangled that out of the Fed.s by being the "sqeaky wheel". We need to be the 'screaching wheel' with an avalanch of letters. 9% to0.5% and No. 3206 are NOT consistent with the Fed. Court interpretations of the 50/50 split of fish!!! Get those letters going. Thanks. - RT

[This message has been edited by RT (edited 11-13-2000).]

[Jennie@ifish]

RT,

Could you please outline a letter and tell us who is most important to write to?

Like

Dear (Who who and who who who...)

Greeting

Point 1
Point 2
Point 3

Thank you for taking the time to read... blah blah..

Respectfully,

Your signature

Remember, don't use insulting language or profanity. Try to sound informed.

Jen

[finclipped]

Okay, Washington reps know how I feel. I thought I would paste my letter on here if anyone wants to see it. It was soooo easy. Thanks for the links.

"Dear Mr. Brian Baird;

I wait all year for the opportunity to try my skill at fishing in the Columbia River during the Spring Chinook Run. My voice and thousands just like me are not being heard. The NMFS (National Marine Fishery Service) will soon set limits and seasons in coordination with Tribal, and commercial interests. I would like to make a few points as to why I need your help in representing me and my fellow sports anglers.

1.) Currently the NMFS is looking at allowing 9% of the endangered snake river king salmon to me killed from "incidental catch" in tribal and non tribal fishery's.

2.) NMFS is looking at allowing 8.5% of these to be harvested by tribal gillnets while allowing 0.5% to be taken by sportsmen and non indian commercial fisherman.

3.) Under the tribal treaty, non tribal fisherman are allowed half of the excess salmon. WE ARE NOT GETTING ANYWHERE NEAR OUR SHARE!!!!! How can 0.5% equal 8.5%. It is the interpretation of the NMFS that has lead to this outragious allocation and the states have been held hostage by the NMFS to abide by these rulings.

4.) Tribes refuse to alter their fishing techniques. Sports anglers such as my self have been releasing wild steelhead, and coho for years. Thus reducing our impact and helping the endangered species live. We are now moving into releasing wild chinook as well. WE ARE DOING OUR PART!!!!

5.) I need your help in voicing my opinion and forcing the NMFS to hear my voice. Please fight for a 4.5% non tribal allocation for sportman.

Thank you,"

Jen, you mean I have to remove my vulgar insults before I mail in my cr*p? ... Sorry, couldn't resist. - I will put up an example letter, but please make your letters altered into your own words while still making the main points. It would likely be better to make most letters shorter in consideration of rep.s time availability? (I'll try a condensed version also, soon - Finclipped's version above is good).

My example letter:

November 2000

Dear Senator Ron Wyden:

I have lived in Oregon for 44 years. Like so many in the Northwest region, much of the reason I choose to continue to live here is the opportunity to enjoy the outdoors while fishing for salmon and steelhead.

It's well known by most people, and politicians representing the people, that these runs of fish have dwindled greatly over the time I've lived here. You are very aware of the Federal Endangered Species Act (Fed. ESA) and it's profound affect on the lifestyle of those of us that live and play in this region. This legislation is on the threshold of causing major changes and sacrifices we all must endure for the betterment of our resourses.

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 except 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 absolutely 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, possibly going as high as half a million fish. 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 keep hatchery fish that usually 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 website Discussion Board)

-------------
We shouldn't all write such long letters in consideration of politician time constraints. ... See post below. - RT




[This message has been edited by RT (edited 11-22-2000).]

Bringing this back near the top to co-incide with the Biologist's released springers predictions. Please use some of the points made in this thread and take a few moments to write a shorter letter to your state Senators and Rep.s.

While directly mailed letters may be somewhat more effective, e-mail is also good for those with limited time. Here is an easy way to write your 2 Senators and your Rperesentative:
http://www.senate.gov/~wyden/mail.htm http://www.senate.gov/~gsmith/webform.htm http://www.house.gov/writerep/


Thanks much. - RT

[This message has been edited by RT (edited 11-22-2000).]

[Moby Catcher]

Well that's potentially the most coherent post I've ever seen on this board. Well done RT!

[plugged in]

Hey RT I don't know what all that talk of % and stuff is but let me know in the laymans terms what the letter needs to contain and you can count on me. If it is important to other fisherman it's got to be important to me.

Thanks for your support Plugged-in. This is not only a good cause for likely getting a bigger season on Col. springers next year but also in getting more attention and support for many sportfishing causes from the powers to be in Washington. They need to know that we will bw a voting force to be dealt with; not only for fair allocations but for proper Government budget allocations toward our fisheries rehabilitation. So we need all the letters we can get; the sooner the better! .....

For a letter concerning the next spring's Columbia River chinook fishing allocation issue the main points to put into your own words to send to our Senators and Rep.s' are:

- NW state fishing biologist's predict over 300,000 spring chinook salmon to go up the mainstem Columbia River next spring. They have recommended an after dam impact fishing harvest be limited to a 9% impact on native fish.

- The states are losing a fish allocation negotiation process to divide the chinook deemed harvestable between the Col. Tribes and non-Indian fishers. The NMFS, which is now in control of allocation, is going along with unfair demands by the Col. Tribal Commission for the Indians to get 8.5% of this impact and only 0.5% impact for non-Indians; as unfairly occured last spring.

- The decisions for next spring are going to be decided soon, and we need fair representation. Please do what you can to help us get fair consideration and allocation of these fish that we paid for, and that the Col. Tribal treaties call for a 50/50 split of.

- Please also look into the unfair documents sent by the Dept. of the Interior to the NMFS that unfairly directed that the Indians would be the last to have their fishing curtailed by the Fed. ESA protection actions. this is not fair or consistent with Federal Court Treaty interpretations.

- We would also like you to know that all of us thousands of fishermen vote. We are going to vote for those who represent our rights in the above regards.

- Thank you. Sincerely. Etc. .....

Some addresses are above and many are in Jen's mainpage link to writing our Conrressmen. Thanks so much people. - Steve (RT)