Any News on Springer allocation??

[Jim]

Having been out of commission for the last 5 days at the Puyallup Sportsmans Show I am wondering if I have missed anything regarding this issue.

JB

Hi Jim. I hear it's getting a little more fishy in your neck o' tha woods lately . ... There hasn't been any major anouncements. I haven't made any calls lately trying to find out waz up. I figure they are still meeting to argue and wave lawsuit papers at each other as we write. The allocation negotiation settlement should come down pretty soon I would think. Get ready for some fireworks, eh? . - Steve

[SureSet]

The response I got this week from congressman Wu stated

"The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife will soon be in negotiations, at the request of Governor Kitzhaber, working with the columbia River Intertribal fish Commission to review the 8.5/.5% percentage allocations of harvestable fish. This is being done with the intention of increasing both the non-tribal share and the total percentage, presently set at nine percent."

Read into that what you wish.......


SureSet

[This message has been edited by SureSet (edited 01-29-2001).]

What I read into that is the Col. Tribal Comm. and netters don't seem to care about the native fish resourses. I had recently posted that the latest word from within this process was that the Col. Tribal Comm. would go along with uping the non-Indian allocation from 0.5% ESA impact to 2% as long as they were upped from 8.5% to 13%. The total mortality impact on native fish would then jump from 9% to 15% under that scenario. That tells me that the Indian not only aren't interested at all in what's fair for sportfishers, they also don't care much about the native fish runs! Another person posted that if the native fish become extinct and the hatchery plants deminish (they already are) that the Indians will be paid an annual fishing income replacement without having to work catching fish for it. What does this tell you and others? - RT

[Clamman]

Not to rehash what others have said, but the tribes and the states have gone together and asked NMFS to indeed up the total take of ESA LISTED fish (not all the wild stocks) to 15%. The two groups would also like to see a sliding harvest scale set into place so that on big return years, such as this for both listed and hatchery, the user groups can access more fish. In turn, low returns would yield smaller or no harvest depending upon run strength. The governor (and I believe NMFS would too) want it based on listed fish abundance not hatchery. That overall means less fish to harvest but it would not further endanger the listed runs.

NMFS has stated that they will have a decision ready prior to the next compact which is on Feb. 20.


ISG