Columbia Spring Chinook allocation

Pete · 01-09-2004, 01:33 PM

The gillnetters showed up in force and did a wonderful job of stating their case ... you should have been there! Phil Donovan from NSIA testified very well for the sportfishing industry. I spoke on behalf of sports fishers. The Commission made two recommendations to staff which will be presented at the Columbia River Compact hearing on February 5th for adoption by the Joint State group. The first direction was to seek a 45/55 allocation of the impact on ESA listed spring salmon, with 5% wiggle room. That means the final allocation will be somewhere between 50/50 and 40/60. The consequence of that is that we will probably see closed days during the season to extend the fishery through April. The second recommendation was to favor adoption of a regulation requiring that all fish to be released be kept in the water at all times.

On a personal note, I know there were a couple sports fishers in the audience. When 200 gillnetters can get 10% of their membership to attend a meeting, it seems very sad that fewer than a half dozen sport fishers would show up for such an important hearing.

uboatcdr · 01-09-2004, 01:48 PM

Thanks for the update. I hope this will be the year that I can catch one.

CATCH AND EAT · 01-09-2004, 01:51 PM

Pete, I thought they cancelled that meeting. I would have gone. This sucks!!!

TheRogue · 01-09-2004, 01:55 PM

I agree, more sporties should have showed. Thank you Pete for your tireless efforts.

I assume that representatives from Fisherman's Marine & Outdoor, GI Joes, Sportsman's Warehouse, Stevens Marine, Motion Marine, Willie Boats, North River Boats, etc., etc., were there? Since from a dollar standpoint, they have the most to loose from sporties being closed down for any period of time.

Or, do all of these businesses pay the NSIA to lobby on their behalf?

TR

slabhunter · 01-09-2004, 02:23 PM

Hey Pete, Does this leave the wild fish in the water apply to everyone? Or does it apply only to sportfishers? Also, will the impact percetage be reduced for us as a result? I plan to attend the WDFW meeting in Olympia!

timinthegorge · 01-09-2004, 02:31 PM

Pete.... thanks for lookin' after us!

But frankly, the sportsmen are at a distinct disadvantage in terms of showin' up. It's the Gillnetter's livelihood and we have other jobs/families/responsibilities which makes it difficult to show up for these meetings, especially in these conditions.....

I live in the gorge so my attending would have been a non-starter.... given the fact that I-84 and Hwy. 14 have been closed on and off for several days....

Just a thought.... Suggest that these "conversations" start earlier or later.... but not in January! I know why they are. I just feel this feeds into why we have such a small voice... Decisions are made based on what they see in the room and the comments they receive.... Send comments!! Just my .02... Tim

Jennie@ifish · 01-09-2004, 02:36 PM

Lots of the reps were stuck in Las Vegas, because of the PDX closure.

This is truly sad.

Thing is, the Gillnetters mostly have jobs, too, from what I've heard.

Jen

GutshotApe · 01-09-2004, 02:49 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by timinthegorge:
Decisions are made based on what they see in the room and the comments they receive.... Send comments!! Just my .02... Tim

I've sat thru quite a few commission meeetings in the past...and there's no denying that a well-prepared, clear & concise in-person presentation in front of the commission...with a reasonable and reasoned recommendation...carries a lot of weight...and might actually influence the commissioner's decision. On the other hand, it does little good to sit there and mumble, ramble all over the range of one's differences & beefs with ODFW/WDFW.

But sheer numbers of bodies present in the room doesn't always mean that much.

I'm convinced a well-thought-out, clear & concise, original letter either hand-written or typed/printed and signed with a legible signature & return address/phone number (commissioners have been known to call back for more details), sent to the commissioners at their home or work addresses 7 to 10 days prior to a decision meeting, can also be very influential...just as effective as an in-person appearance. So you don't necessarily have to go to Salem or Olympia to make a difference.

In my opinion, emails, form letters, or late-arriving letters don't carry a lot of weight.

Pete · 01-09-2004, 03:50 PM

Tim, I've been posting information on this process since early summer.

Slabhunter, the "remain in the water" applies only to sports and charters. The netters use revival boxes because fish that may have been in a net for up to 45 minutes require more attention for successful release than a fish that's released from a hook and line.

GSA, thanks once again for sage advice. The netters presented their case clearly and graciously. They expressed gratitude and willingness to work together in a cooperative process. Their presentation was very effective. On the sport side, Phil Donovan also presented a strong, concise case for the sport allocation, supported by Jim Martin.

The process is a complex one, involving politics, science, history, economics, culture, impressions and feelings. There is no compelling case to support any one perspective. Even after all the months of testimony, science and evidence, the commissioners were called on to reduce their decision to a number. Imagine going home and telling your spouse or child that they mean "6" to you. There's just no way to do it! Management requires some hard choices and I'm thankful we have a considerate process for arriving at the decision ... and that I'm not the one called on to make that decision!

GutshotApe · 01-09-2004, 04:01 PM

Pete - I haven't been following the issue as closely as you have...what are the latest estimates of run size and if there is a 50:50 split, what does that translate into re: allocation for sport:commercial? I did hear the other day the run is expected to be "huge" this year.

Edit: Oh, never mind...I see you answered my questions on the other thread.

[ 01-09-2004, 05:05 PM: Message edited by: GutshotApe ]

Pete · 01-09-2004, 04:06 PM

The run is expected to be 96,300 Willamette fish and 390,700 Columbia upriver fish. The Columbia run is expected to be 70% marked fish. If the allocation is 50/50, given the mortality rates attributed to each group, netters should get 19,986 fish and sport fishers should get 29,288 fish. If the allocation is 40/60, netters would get 17,666 and sports 33,580.

Flatfish · 01-09-2004, 04:55 PM

Pete,

thank you for keeping us up to date on these items. You put in a lot of effort for us. It is appreciated.

Mark and the dog.

01-09-2004, 05:00 PM

Second the appreciation. You are one intelligent
representative.

crabbait · 01-09-2004, 05:27 PM

Thanks, Pete. I appreciate the time and effort. [img]graemlins/applause.gif[/img]

TheRogue · 01-09-2004, 05:33 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by TheRogue:
I agree, more sporties should have showed. Thank you Pete for your tireless efforts.

I assume that representatives from Fisherman's Marine & Outdoor, GI Joes, Sportsman's Warehouse, Stevens Marine, Motion Marine, Willie Boats, North River Boats, etc., etc., were there? Since from a dollar standpoint, they have the most to loose from sporties being closed down for any period of time.

Or, do all of these businesses pay the NSIA to lobby on their behalf?

TR

Pete · 01-09-2004, 05:39 PM

Rogue, that's a good question to ask those businesses. I know most tackle dealers were stuck at their annual trade show in Las Vegas today.

Thumper · 01-09-2004, 06:15 PM

Super job, Pete!

Gun Rod Bow · 01-09-2004, 06:41 PM

Pete,

Dittos on the gratitude. We are blessed to have you. I wish I could've been there.

Is there an avenue for write in comments?

I think as much as "we all" like to type, we could send a good supply of well reasoned, individually written letters to comment.

Thanks again for your efforts. Hope it's not too late for us to do something.

GutshotApe · 01-09-2004, 07:03 PM

GunRodBow - According to the ODFW news release:

Quote:

The Oregon Fish and Wildlife Commission Friday supported
splitting the allowable impacts to wild fish during this year's
Columbia River spring chinook fisheries 40-50 percent to the commercial
fishery and 50-60 percent to the sport fishery.

Decisions on the 2004 Columbia spring chinook sport and commercial
fisheries will be made Feb. 5 in Oregon City by the states of Oregon and
Washington meeting as the Columbia River Compact. The first harvest is
expected to begin later in February.

At this point the ball, so to speak, is in ODFW Director Lindsay Ball's court...along with his counterpart at WDFW. They'll meet Feb. 5th to set the actual sport/commercial split. So, if you were in a letter writing mood, it might not hurt to send one to Director Ball at ODFW HQ in Salem, with a copy of same to your state representative and state senator. I wouldn't wait too long to do it...just in case your letter might prompt your state rep. or state senator to check in with Director Ball before the Feb. 5 meeting.

[ 01-09-2004, 08:04 PM: Message edited by: GutshotApe ]

Flatfish · 01-09-2004, 08:40 PM

Sounds like the boat makers are at the boat show. And the tackle reps are in Vegas. Maybe they could reschedule. Maybe it is not profitable to do so.

Politics is a strange game. But it is clear to me, that if sporties want anything for themselves, they need to play the game.

I know this is off subject, but it matters anyway. Instead of trying to get a bigger piece of the pie( larger percentage of the allocation). Which seems like a battle that will cost a lot of money with much resistance from the commercials( who appear to be very good at playing the game).

Why do we not spend our money trying to tell the Government that 10% mortality is too high. And without bait, or treble hooks, or netting fish that must be released our impact is only 5 or 6 %. With half the impact, we double our opportunity. Right?

Now I may be just a hayseed here, but it seems like it would be much easier to make headway where nobody is trying to stop us.

Mark and the dog who figures it is easier to go around the fire rather than thru it.

Gun Rod Bow · 01-09-2004, 09:34 PM

Hayseed

Gun Rod Bow · 01-09-2004, 09:40 PM

Thanks GSA,

I'll do just that.

I know it is hard for all us sporties to organize and drive to Salem for a meeting, especially with the weather this week.

I also know if we light a fire on this board we should be able to generate a few hundred letters.

I personally would like to encourage this board to get behind a letter writing campaign. I hope it's not too little too late, and would like to think it's not. If we could make our voices heard, for even the 5% in the balance, maybe it could be the begining of sporties having some success in shaping our destinies. (crazy dream)

Perhaps a moral victory would show us the way to organizing more of a unified concern. (way crazy)

Would the mods/Jennie consider trying to drum up a letter writing campaign on this issue?

Slade · 01-09-2004, 10:01 PM

Kudos to Pete for sure.

I must admit that I am not as active on issues as I should be; however, I do write letters to agencies and representatives. As an attorney, though, I can say that it is my experience that judges and panels typically make their decisions based upon the information presented to them before the hearing. Unless "new" factual information is presented then a panel's decision making is not likely to be changed by the turn-out. Considering that most, if not all of us, do not have much hard factual information to add, I don't think our absence was missed.

My point is not to say that we should not attend (which does still show support); rather, my point is to say that we should all write letters to the appropriate agency at the appropriate time because such input is required to be part of the record. Just imagine 20,000 letters from a bunch of nobody's like us.

Pete, thanks for your help in giving us the information we need to make an impact.

Straydog · 01-09-2004, 10:10 PM

Pete,

Thanks for your efforts.

Many, many people in the industry were stuck in Vegas or enroute home, plus the boat show is going on.

I phoned the Commissioner that represents my district on Tuesday and had a long, productive conversation.

Perfect Drift · 01-09-2004, 10:47 PM

[ 01-10-2004, 08:37 AM: Message edited by: Perfect Drift ]

Bill Monroe · 01-10-2004, 02:06 AM

Straydog,
If Don Denman was the commissioner you spoke with, he's one of two that were holding out for a 60-40 split. The other was Carter Kearns from Pendleton, but he couldn't make it to the meeting for the same weather reasons. They were counter balanced by a couple of 50-50s, which led to the 45-55, or, more correctly, the 40 to 50 commercial and 50 to 60 sport.
I talked with Lindsay Ball during a break well after Pete left and he said he believes it's critical to continued support of the salmon for commercial fishing to continue in the Columbia. My read is that it's highly unlikely he'll back away from the commission's direction.
And Steve King told Steve Fick during another break that a 50-50 split might mean five to 10 days of sport closures in April. However, King is committed to doing all he can to keep anglers on the Columbia through the end of that month.
My hunch is the allocation will end up closer to the 40-60 or even the 45-55, so it's going be very close when it comes to April fishing.
As with last year, everything could be out the door if we get another early surprise showing of Columbia fish.

Denman, btw, is hunting today and tomorrow with GSA...

Straydog · 01-10-2004, 10:16 AM

Bill,
Yes, Don Denman was who I chatted with........
Are you saying he was holding out for 60 to the commercials and 40 to sport??

I was told he was our swing vote and our conversation led me to believe he was going to vote in favor of sports although, as he pointed out, he is required to consider all interests.

We talked a bit about commercial opportunities beyond the nets and how that should be considered as well as overall benefits of the respective fisheries to all citizens of the state... ie. economics.

I am a bit confused by his vote if indeed he held out for 60 to commercial inteterests. Of course, as he mentioned, he had not completed reading his packet when I spoke with him.

Maybe GSA will get him into some shooting and twist his arm in the process! [img]graemlins/idea.gif[/img] :grin:

Pete · 01-10-2004, 10:46 AM

Denman was most favorable for sport fishers. Carter Kearns voted 70/30 for the sports, but wasn't there for the vote. Denman was the strongest supporter for sports, effectively arguing that to give the gill netters a large measure was to reward their inefficient protection of ESA fish. McCracken and Feldner were most supportive of the netters and McCracken forced the decision in favor of the ultimate recommendation by refusing to support anything more than 55/45 until the final moment when he agreed to a 5% margin of latitude.

Straydog · 01-10-2004, 12:35 PM

Pete,

Thanks for clarifying.......... I asked for 70 for sport and 30 for commercial. It sounds like he got close. I apprecaite his support very much!

I am assuming you know why Liz did not make it....

boater · 01-10-2004, 01:18 PM

pete, what would it take to get these meetings changed to a saturday ?

slabhunter · 01-10-2004, 01:24 PM

boater, the meeting in Olympia is next Saturday! Hope to see you there!

boater · 01-10-2004, 02:00 PM

thanks slabhunter

GutshotApe · 01-10-2004, 06:41 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Bill Monroe:
My read is that it's highly unlikely he'll back away from the commission's direction.

I agree with that...the commission's direction to Director Ball was to aim for a sport allocation of from 50% to 60% of the allowable impact. And, based on Pete's numbers, that means a sport catch of from 29,288 to 33,580 hatchery fish...a spread of 4,292 fish.

If I were to write a letter to Director Ball, I'd ask him to aim for the 60% allocation for sport, 40% for commercial. I'd justify that request by pointing out that a sport-caught fish is "worth" more to the Oregon economy than a commercial-caught fish. And since sport anglers are able to release a higher percentage of wild fish unharmed than are gillnetters, the mortality impact goes a lot farther with sport fishing. Therefore, sport anglers are better able to make use of the abundant hatchery component of the run than are gillnetters.

Because of the political nature of the issue, it might be useful to send a copy of you letter to your state representative and/or senator...maybe even attach a note to the letter, or make a phone call to the legislator's office... Fish & Wildlife directors sit up and pay attention when they receive phone calls from legislators. But don't expect the Director to deviate from the range the Commission gave him.

Is it worth the effort to write a letter for a possible 4,292 fish... :whazzup: ...only you can answer that.

slabhunter · 01-10-2004, 11:22 PM

I still believe that the net fisheries are no longer viable in the mainstem. I contend that the rights end when they impact anyone else who wishes to participate in the fishing. "Buffering" or closing of the season due to overage of impacts of "wild" stocks should bring diciplinary action to those who caused the impact. I feel that last year the commercials were "sold a bum steer" by WDFW. In the modern world they were still impacting steelhead and given another tide to kill. Ethics gave way to greed. I can't remeber who said it but " Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it!"

Pete · 01-10-2004, 11:47 PM

I'm glad to hear opinions. They don't do any good if you don't share them with the commissions, though. Will you be in Olympia next week? I will be.

slabhunter · 01-17-2004, 05:28 AM

ttt [img]graemlins/lurk.gif[/img]

fish-bones · 01-18-2004, 09:36 AM

Pete, it seems to me you have a lot of knowledge how the system works in regards to the fishing issue. sportsmen versus gillnetters.You might even know people who can guide us in getting a new initiative on the ballot to end this process of who the fisheries BOYS favor in this SALMON game.Its clear to me the gillnet lobbyests wine and dine these BOYS to GUARANTEE a favorable decision.
We have a great tool at hand,the internet,to get the message out to succeed ,where the iniative failed last time.We can get the message out through IFISH,and reach lots of people.
I know the gillnetters will always show up in big numbers to these meetings.lets end it where we don,t have to have them .I don,t like the fact that the FISHERIES BOY,S have these meetings so far from the issue,which is the COLUMBIA RIVER FISHERY.Why not have it in Vancouver or PORTLAND???? I think it,s obviose that they know how many sportsmen will drive that far.If there worried about numbers of sportsmen to deal with,that solves that problem.

FISH-BONES [img]graemlins/icon_argue.gif[/img]

Quote:

Originally posted by Pete:
Tim, I've been posting information on this process since early summer.

Slabhunter, the "remain in the water" applies only to sports and charters. The netters use revival boxes because fish that may have been in a net for up to 45 minutes require more attention for successful release than a fish that's released from a hook and line.

GSA, thanks once again for sage advice. The netters presented their case clearly and graciously. They expressed gratitude and willingness to work together in a cooperative process. Their presentation was very effective. On the sport side, Phil Donovan also presented a strong, concise case for the sport allocation, supported by Jim Martin.

The process is a complex one, involving politics, science, history, economics, culture, impressions and feelings. There is no compelling case to support any one perspective. Even after all the months of testimony, science and evidence, the commissioners were called on to reduce their decision to a number. Imagine going home and telling your spouse or child that they mean "6" to you. There's just no way to do it! Management requires some hard choices and I'm thankful we have a considerate process for arriving at the decision ... and that I'm not the one called on to make that decision!