ACT NOW to save sportfishing rights

[Mark Mc]

This is a MUST READ!! This is the plan we have been working on. Please read it and join us!

TO: All Ifishers

FROM: Your Ifish Political Activists, including
Janice Green (aka RFA Janice),
John Wells (aka Pilar),
Jennifer Johnston (aka Pilar's Mate),
Mark McCulloch,
and all the others who are actively supporting this cause

Sportfishing is Threatened by Nearshore Commercial Fishing and Deepwater
Restrictions

Want to continue fishing the ocean? How about bottomfish and halibut? What if salmon mooching were banned? Or areas like Stonewall Bank & Heceta /
Perpetua Bank being off-limits? Then go to at least one of these four meetings that occur in the first half of August: Newport (8/5), Astoria
(8/7), Brookings (8/14), and Coos Bay (8/15). See

<http://www.dfw.state.or.us/public/Ne...2anews.htm>,

or "Preserve Our Coastal Waters" on Ifish.net for exact times and places.

In addition to one of the above, please try to make the ODFW Commission meeting in Corvallis on August 9th. The commission really needs to hear from sportfishers as often as possible if they are to shift their decision-making more in favor of sportfishers.

At these meetings, get up and say that you want ODFW to protect sportfishing
as much as possible, and that we sportfishers want to participate in the process. That's the short message. Some of the key requests for us to make include:
1. Put a nearshore plan in place;
2. Support the Marine Resource program (i.e., state & ODFW must continue funding);
3. Nearshore management decisions must be based on actual landings, from year 2000, not "artificial" optimum yield numbers
4. Oregon nearshore management must be independent & managed by Oregon, not influenced by California interests / PFMC "majority";
5. For deepwater fisheries & protecting yelloweye & canary, we urge the PFMC & ODFW to adopt options for sportfishers that are not yet listed in the proposals, such as:
* Allowable bycatch used to satisfy halibut sport fishery (current proposal allots the bycatch very disproportionately
to commercial);
* Adopt sport gear restrictions for drift fishing (non-troll) in 20 - 50 fathoms, such as 8 ounce maximum weight &
maximum hook size; * Set up observer program on participating sportfishing vessels to validate the bycatch of yelloweye & canary, &
effectiveness of gear restrictions.

The details are mind-numbing, but the situation is very clear. Because some
fish have been commercially overfished, large swaths of the ocean are going
to be shut down. The displaced fishermen will be heading right to the commercial nearshore livefish fishery, which has already wiped out
California's nearshore fishery, and has seriously impacted our fishing along the southern Oregon coast. NOW is the time for you to communicate to ODFW that you want our fishing for lingcod and blacks and blues and china rockfish and all the rest PROTECTED from commercial fishing, so that we can continue to have a good sport fishery. The nearshore is what we sportsfishers mostly
access. It should be preserved for the 285,000 marine sportsfishers who
use it. (The commercials paid little attention to the nearshore until the livefish fishery got started.)

So go to at least one of the meetings. Ask for the nearshore to be protected as much as possible, AND for more sportfishing considerations for the deep water. Get on the signup sheet. If we don't, we may not have an
abundant sport fishery in as little as two or three years! Now is the time to put a cork in it and pound it. If you know someone who fishes in Brookings, for instance, call him or her and ask that they attend the meeting in their town, asking to have the nearshore fisheries protected as much as possible. [Study the wording given. It covers you in a roomful of
angry commercial fishermen. They don't really want the fisheries wiped out either.]

The results of the 8/5 & 8/7 coastal meetings, and the proposals for 2003, will be discussed at the August 9 Fish and Wildlife Commission meeting in Corvallis. We are asking that the Fish and Wildlife Commission take action
to get a nearshore management plan in place so that the nearshore fisheries are permanently protected. We need your support at this meeting as well.

Washington has already outlawed commercial rockfishing in its nearshore waters. It does not have the livefish fishery at all. California is
putting together a plan now to control its waters. We have only the rules that the federal Council puts in place, and that is what these meetings are about: namely, what the PFMC will allow next year in Oregon's waters.
Pleeeese go to at least one meeting and ask for protection of Oregon's
nearshore fish.

We'll start a thread on carpools to each meeting, to make participation easier.

Thank you all!

[Pilar]

I'm down for the 8/5 in Newport and the 8/9 commisioners meeting. Maybe the 8/7 in Astoria also.

Thanks Mark, Jen and Janice for your hard work.

[sturgn]

Im in for Newport and Corvallis, but cant make it to Astoria.

[Point-of-Sale Clerk]

I'm in for Corvallis, can not make the others...

*** Clerk

[fish assassin]

Hi Everybody,

This is a really long post, and I'm sorry about
that, but I think this is pretty important stuff
and felt a few things needed to be said.

Before everybody goes to these meetings there is
some more info that I think you should be armed
with so you don't say the wrong things ...
I've quoted Mark McCulloch and added my comments
below ...

Please remember a couple of things as you read this:
1) I'm NOT trying to start any arguments here ...
2) Knowlege is power and if you go to these meetings
armed with as much knowlege as you can gather, you'll
do a lot better than not.
3) Just your presence at these meetings is important.
You don't need to speak! Applaud when
a good point is made. Try not to get emotional.
Don't speak out of turn. Try not to play one fishery
against another (sport/commercial/charter/live fish) as this tends to turn the panel off.

Now, on to the show ...

*** text deleted ***

"1. Put a nearshore plan in place;"

Adtually there is presently a nearshore plan in place
and what they are doing this year is amending that
plan to restrict the commercial guys even more than
what they are restricted to now.

"2. Support the Marine Resource program (i.e., state & ODFW must continue funding);"

Absolutly a must (IMHO).

"3. Nearshore management decisions must be based on actual landings, from year 2000, not "artificial" optimum yield numbers"

All bottom fish landing are down this year from the
year 2000 landings. This is not caused by the
species being exterminated or decimated, but by
state and federal regulations that were more restrictive
in the 2001/2002 seasons than in any other previous
season. As examples, DID YOU KNOW that there is
a daily and monthly quota on black rock fish taken
by commercial fishermen? In all but two ports in
Oregon (Pacific City and one other down South ...
can't recall which one), The daily bag limit for
black rock is 200lbs. The monthly limit is now set
at 2200 lbs. The monthly limit on Ling Cod is
now set at 300 lbs./month for 6 months a year and
closed for the rest of the year. There is absolutly
Zero quota for bocaccio(SP), Canary or Yellow Eye
Rockfish.

These reduced harvests were obtained from the OY
(optimum yeild) numbers and not from the actual
catches of any previous year. Be careful what we
ask for ... we just might get it!!! If the commercial
guys go back to year 2000 catches, they will be
taking a lot more fish than they are this year!!

"4. Oregon nearshore management must be independent & managed by Oregon, not influenced by California interests / PFMC "majority";"

Roger that!! I totally agree!

"5. For deepwater fisheries & protecting yelloweye & canary, we urge the PFMC & ODFW to adopt options for sportfishers that are not yet listed in the proposals, such as:
* Allowable bycatch used to satisfy halibut sport fishery (current proposal allots the bycatch very disproportionately
to commercial);"

As stated above, there is a ZERO bycatch allotment
for yelloweye & canary for the commercial guys.
The proposals for next year will shut down all deep
water fishing beyond either 20 fathoms or 28 fathoms
out to the continental shelf to protect those two
species (any way, that's what I interpreted
the proposals to say)

"* Adopt sport gear restrictions for drift fishing (non-troll) in 20 - 50 fathoms, such as 8 ounce maximum weight &
maximum hook size; * Set up observer program on participating sportfishing vessels to validate the bycatch of yelloweye & canary, &
effectiveness of gear restrictions."

Not sure what the hook and weight size restrictions
would do for you, but the observer program is another
of those double edged swords kind of thing. Sure,
they would help to ensure that we don't catch too
many of the endangered species', but do *you* carry
a big enough insurance policy on your boat to cover
an accident where an observer gets hurt, or (God
forbid) drowns? Besides the fact that I personally
don't want people on my boat that I don't know and
who may or may not obey "Captains Orders".

"The details are mind-numbing, but the situation is very clear. Because some
fish have been commercially overfished, large swaths of the ocean are going
to be shut down. The displaced fishermen will be heading right to the commercial nearshore livefish fishery, which has already wiped out
California's nearshore fishery, and has seriously impacted our fishing along the southern Oregon coast. "

Two items here ... One: DID YOU KNOW - Charter boats can actually take more bottom fish a day than
a commercial boat can in some instances?? As an
example, if a charter boat out on a bottom fish trip
has 20 passangers (not uncommon) he is considered a
"sport fishing" boat. Those 20 fishermen are each
allowed to catch 5 bottom fish. At a 2.5 lb. average,
that's 250# whereas the commercial fisherman is only
allowed 200# a day and has a monthly quota (charter
boats have no monthly quota so could TRIPLE the
monthly quota of a commercial boat if they have a
good month ... plus, I believe that this year sport
fishermen are still allowed to take one canary and one
yelloweye a day where commercial guys get ZERO).

Number Two: The inshore live fishery ... DID YOU KNOW - The inshore commercial live fishery is about
to go "limited entry". What that means is that any
commercial fisherman that did not have "X"lbs. of
live fish landed in 2001 will be excluded from the
fishery unless he can buy a live fish permit from
another boat. I don't think that the live fish
commercial fishery is going to develope into anything
more than it is now ... as a matter of fact, several
of the guys that are doing it in 2002 will not even
qualify for a limited entry permit for 2003 and
beyond.

" NOW is the time for you to communicate to ODFW that you want our fishing for lingcod and blacks and blues and china rockfish and all the rest PROTECTED from commercial fishing, so that we can continue to have a good sport fishery. The nearshore is what we sportsfishers mostly
access. It should be preserved for the 285,000 marine sportsfishers who
use it. (The commercials paid little attention to the nearshore until the livefish fishery got started.) "

Be careful when you are talking to the ODFW about
"them vs. us". When you start talking that way
the ODFW tends to think of it as an *emotional"
argument intead of one based on facts and dismisses
the argument out of hand. Just a freindly warning
on how those guys work ...

"So go to at least one of the meetings. Ask for the nearshore to be protected as much as possible, AND for more sportfishing considerations for the deep water. Get on the signup sheet. If we don't, we may not have an
abundant sport fishery in as little as two or three years! Now is the time to put a cork in it and pound it. If you know someone who fishes in Brookings, for instance, call him or her and ask that they attend the meeting in their town, asking to have the nearshore fisheries protected as much as possible. [Study the wording given. It covers you in a roomful of
angry commercial fishermen. They don't really want the fisheries wiped out either.]"

YES! I agree! If you can make one of the meetings,
by all means show up!! It's important! But remember
two things here ... There has been a nearshore commercial
fishery in many ports since quotas for Silvers were
first put in place in the late '80s/early '90s and
that all of the commercial fishermen are not "angry". Some are there simply trying to protect
their livelyhood/way of life. No commercial fisherman
that I know of is willing to have a species decimated
to the point that it has no chance to return!

*** text deleted ***

Thanks for reading!

-assAssin-

[Pilar]

Veeewwwy intewesting......

You make some interesting points, Fish assassin. Are there any others willing to speak their minds?

[seasquid]

Seasquid is in Monday, and probably Friday.

ss

[Mark Mc]

Dear Assassin: Thank you, thank you, and thank you again for your thoughtful input! Yours is exactly the kind of response & conversation that we have been dying to get!

You know the saying, the devil is in the details, well most the technical points you bring up are in the details, and should be discussed for our mutual understanding.

So a few things: (1) the "nearshore plan" that we refer to is the one by the ODFW Developmental Fisheries Board, seen at: web page and at this time it is still a draft; it has not been approved by ODFW, it has not been funded yet.

(2) The point about using year 2000 landings is not so much the year (98 vs 99 vs 00 vs 01) but rather to use actual landings vs OPTIMUM YIELD (OY) numbers. OY #'s are artificial, marginally researched, and represent the whole west coast (even though Washington is off limits in the nearshore) so the OY for a species on the entire W coast really gets applied to CA and OR. So using OY numbers are a bad thing. they need to choose the actual catch numbers from some chosen year instead. However I agree with you that we would like to see a year with lower catches chosen!

(3) About "allowable bycatch": good point, you may be right but it's not real clear to me right now. If you look at proposal:
PFMC and open the PDF file link in the first paragraph.

in table 2-3 they do indeed mention catching up to the OY, for "nearshore groundfish", and also for"slope rockfish", but they do not mention yelloweye or canary specifically. Janice Green tells us that a certain researcher will be presenting findings on the latest stock assessment for these two, fairly soon. And until then, we will not know for sure what effect it will have on deepwater sportfishing. BTW, one thing that really burns my behind is that all options for open access hook & line and black cod longliners include harvests of yellowtail rockfish, up to 15,000 lbs/ month, yet only the least conservative option for sportfishers will allow us to target these same fish.

(4) The suggested sport gear restrictions would be something we could offer to allow us to continue to fish between 20 & 50 fathoms, and avoid / reduce yelloweye & canary take, versus no drift fishing allowed at all.

And yes I agree about potential liability for observers. But it doesn't hurt to investigate it. A system is in place between commercials and the agencies, so they have obviously worked out this issue before. That's what insurance agents and attorneys are for, right?

Several high-ranking ODFW & PFMC staff have said that they want the public to know that if an option is not listed in the PFMC material, the public may suggest alternatives. In fact, they WANT us to speak up about our desires & suggested alternatives.

(5) Regarding limited entry for commercial live-fishers, ODFW is right now deliberating on what formula to use. There is a matrix with many different criteria that includes, years fished, pounds of live fish delivered, pounds of black rockfish delivered, etc. This is really contentious within the commercial community, because everyone wants "in" but they won't all be allowed "in."

(6) Thanks for all your other points, especially about behavior / protocols during public testimony. It is just as effective, by ODFW policy, to just say "I agree 100% with the statements by Mr XYZ" if you don't feel like giving a speech.

See you in Newport & Corvallis! - Mark

[fish assassin]

Thanks for the reply Mark. You make a lot of good
points, but I think you may be incorrect about a few
of them.

I am (unfortunatly) unable to open the PDF files
from my computer (please don't ask) so I am unable
to look at the pointers that you gave me to them.

I just want to warn you to make *real* sure of your
numbers before you use them in an ODFW meeting!
If you look at the ODFW page:
http://www.hmsc.orst.edu/odfw/regs/gflefg07252002.html
and take a look at any of the titles with 2002 in
them you will note that yelloweye and canary rockfish
are closed year around. As far as I have been able
to tell (talking to fish buyers and fishermen), there
is no allowable bycatch on these two species (at least
in the open access fisheries. I'm
not sure where the 15,000 lbs/month number comes
from. Is that per boat or total for ALL fisheries
per month??

Another thing that everybody wants to be aware of
when going to these meetings. All commercial fishing
and fisheries are NOT created equal!! Longliners
are much more destructive to fish stocks than Jig
boats or "trollers", and Draggers are MUCH more
destructive to the environment AND to fish numbers
than either of the aforementioned.

Jig/troll boats can pretty much target the species
of fish they want to take with little to no bycatch.
Longliners have pretty high rates of bycatch but are
not destructive to the reefs for the most part.
Draggers have a *very* high bycatch rate and tear the
snot out of the reefs ... although they will be less
so next year when they are not allowed to drag the
nets with the big wheels on them across the reefs
anymore.

Please note that above "draggers" and "trawlers"
are basicly the same thing, but fished at different
depths (from what I understand). At least both of
these fisheries drag nets through the water ...

I'd love to stay and cuss and discuss this further
with you, but I'm leaving in a few minutes to hit
Englund Marine in Newport to gear up for fishing
on Friday (and Saturday, Sunday and Monday).

Sea ya,
-assAssin-

[OceanBlue]

Assassin! Where have you been? I hope you'll join our core group of contributors in this issue...

ALL:

We sure welcome any and all knowledgeable input and experience!

First let me say that no one wishes to imply that all commercial fishers are "angry" - Good point - Poor choice of words on our part. It is an emotional issue due to the potential for affecting livelihoods... therefore, it is understandable that some of these folks would seem 'angry'. Perhaps "Passionate" is a better word?

Yes, there are a million technical details and although they are important, it is unlikely that every one of them could be covered in a 3 hour meeting. These meetings are to gather feedback. My opinion is that we approach it simply and let the experts sort out the details in the back rooms.

I also think that we should be careful to present solutions, not the problem.

Lastly, it is best if we try to avoid statements that sound like it is "us vs. them"... whether we're talking sportfishers, commercials or charters.

What we're asking for in a nutshell:
Quotas based on actual landings vs. Optimum Yield.
Commercials be restricted to use only non-destructive gear that allows for targeting non-threatened species.
That studies be performed and limits imposed on all species that are likely to be affected due to increased commercial pressure on the nearshore.
That sportfishing be allowed to continue beyond 20-27 fathoms due to our ability to target desired species without disturbing habitat or affecting threatened species.
To recognize that saltwater sport-fishers (of which there are close to 300,000 in Oregon) pump over half a BILLION dollars into the Oregon economy each year.

Thoughts?

[ 08-01-2002, 02:03 PM: Message edited by: Pilar's Mate ]

[Mark Mc]

Don't forget these meetings, folks! Newport & Astoria are coming up real quick, then Corvallis. These haibut & ling cod stories might be "historical tales" if we don't show up & insist for sportfishers' rights.

[OceanBlue]

To the top...

Hope to see some of you there this evening!

South coast guys/gals: REALLY important you make it to your area meetings... REALLY... Please?

Thanks everyone!

[Salmonator]

Not gonna make it tonight, sorry guys. :depressed: I'm gonna try like heck to make it for the corvallis meeting...

[black magic]

Hello all on this subject,

Thank you for the good input especially on the 'details'. I am going to attend Astoria on Wed. and Corvallis on Fri.

John

[Lepper]

i'll try to make the coos bay one.
dave

[Stoyjun Princess]

We are in for the Corvallis meeting.

Thank you all for the great info, very interesting points made.

[Stoyjun Princess]

We are in for the Corvallis meeting.

Thank you all for the great info, very interesting points made.