Sheriff Wrong or New Restriction?

Mark Vickers · 04-11-2003, 05:10 AM

Yesterday afternoon, my father and I were trolling for springers below the I-5 bridge and above Kelly Point. (I'll be vague here as we limited out on Saturday in this hole).

The sheriff patrol boat pulled up next to us with lights blinking and asked what we were fishing for. I told him salmon. He said no. That the Columbia River was closed to salmon fishing above Kelly Point. I disagreed and said that it was open Wed-Sat below the I-5 bridge. He threatened to give us $500 tickets if we didn't leave. So, we pulled in our lines and moved down to the Willamette.

Thinking I was still right, I checked the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife and the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife websites. Here's what they have to say:
Oregon's News Release
Washington's News Release

From what it looks like to me, he was wrong. Or am I missing something here?

KingFisher85 · 04-11-2003, 05:15 AM

Well how many other boats were out there?

Mark Vickers · 04-11-2003, 05:20 AM

None. They were all below the mouth of the Willamette. Which would indicate he was right (or that he had chased everyone off.) Not there were that many people out late yesterday afternoon though...

Regardless of how many people were out there though, the question is, were we breaking the law? I still don't think so according to ODFW and WDFW's posted rules.

love2fish · 04-11-2003, 05:24 AM

Looks like the Sheriff made a mistake on this one. I'd print out a copy of the updated rules and carry it with me.

love2fish

jr sherwood · 04-11-2003, 05:26 AM

Did the law man stop anyone else? Ihad thought about doing a trip on Sat. in that area. Hmmmmmm, $500 dollars, that doesn't fit into my budget.

jr

Firedog · 04-11-2003, 05:29 AM

Sheriff was wrong.

Columbia River between I-5 and Bonneville Dam to close to spring chinook fishing after Saturday

PORTLAND — Oregon and Washington fishery managers decided Tuesday to close the Columbia River to spring chinook fishing from the Interstate 5 Bridge to Bonneville Dam effective Sunday, April 6. The fishery below the I-5 Bridge was reduced to four days per week beginning April 6.

Anglers may fish for spring chinook below the I-5 Bridge Wednesdays through Saturdays until further notice. The fishery is scheduled to close May 15.

Anglers have made 50 percent more angler trips this year compared to this time last year and landed 9,500 hatchery and wild spring chinook compared to last year’s 3,800. As a result, they have used half of the allowed "impact" to upriver wild spring chinook listed as threatened under the federal Endangered Species Act.

"If we didn’t take this action today, we would have had to close the fishery entirely by mid-April," said Steve King, salmon fishery manager for the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, on Tuesday. "We want to keep the fishery going until we get a run update later this month."

The following rules were adopted Tuesday afternoon:

Effective Sunday, April 6, the Columbia River is open to the retention of adipose fin-clipped chinook, adipose fin-clipped steelhead and shad Wednesdays through Saturdays from the mouth at Buoy 10 upstream to the I-5 Bridge. The Columbia River is closed to chinook, steelhead and shad retention from I-5 to Bonneville Dam. All other permanent and temporary rules related to catch limits and gear restrictions remain in place.

The absence of an adipose fin, a small fleshy fin located between the tail and the dorsal fin, marks the fish as hatchery bred and available to take home.

Fishery managers will meet again Tuesday, April 15, at 2 p.m. to reassess the Columbia River spring chinook sport fishery. At that time, they also will review the number of fish that have passed Bonneville Dam. So far, the dam counts are strong and exceeding expectations. According to King, the preseason forecast of 145,400 may be increased which could lead to additional fishing days.

Fish managers set the Columbia River spring chinook fishery based on the number of fish expected to return from the ocean and the allowable impact to wild stocks. "Impacts" are the unintended mortalities associated with handling and releasing wild fish. A 2001 spring chinook management agreement between the states of Washington and Oregon, NOAA Fisheries and the tribes set the allowable impact levels on the upriver wild fish. The allowed sport fishery impact is 1.11 percent of the total wild run. The sport fishery impacts to date total 0.55 percent.

Much of the fishing effort has been centered in the Columbia River gorge because of higher success rates and clearer water. However, by fishing upstream of the Willamette River mouth, anglers increase the likelihood of handling a upriver wild spring chinook. Biologists estimated that 109,800 spring chinook destined for the Willamette River will enter the Columbia. With muddy water conditions in the Willamette and in the Columbia below the Willamette, anglers moved upstream the past few weeks.

As of March 31, anglers made 77,600 fishing trips to target spring chinook in the Columbia. In those trips, anglers landed 9,500 spring chinook and retained 6,000 hatchery-bred fish. In 2002, anglers made 40,800 trips by this time, landed 3,800 spring chinook and retained 2,100 "keepers."

Editor’s Note:

Additional information about the decision can be found posted to the ODFW Web site: http://www.dfw.state.or.us/ODFWhtml/...portnotice.pdf

Background information that fishery managers used to make their decision also is posted to the Web site. Option 4 was chosen. http://www.dfw.state.or.us/ODFWhtml/...april1fact.pdf

O'City Fisherman · 04-11-2003, 05:40 AM

You can contact the Sheriffs office and inform them if you feel that it is needed. This might help out your other Ifishers out there in that area. [img]graemlins/icon_argue.gif[/img]

I agree with carring the new release with you maybe in a water tight baggy..

Personally I would go ahead and take the fine. Then go to court and fight it. This would be an easy one to defend. [img]graemlins/icon_argue.gif[/img]

TheRogue · 04-11-2003, 05:40 AM

"Spirit" of the rule....protecting Columbia River fish as much as possible, forcing the sportsfishers to concentrate on the Willamette run, which is predominately hatchery.

Enforcement of the rule....I-5 bridge is a very definable landmark to enforce fishery regulations, unlike "above the mouth of the Willamette" or "imaginary line from Kelly Point to the North".

To me, fishing in that zone between Kelly Point and I-5, while apparently perfectly LEGAL, violates the "spirit" of the rule.

My .02

TR

ampersat · 04-11-2003, 05:51 AM

i have to disagree with ya' rogue. the law is the law. if they wanted to shut down the columbia above the mouth of the willamette, they would've done so. after all, how hard would it be to drag a couple of buoys out into the river to establish a deadline? besides, there are lots of columbia river miles downstream of the willamette where anglers can intercept non-willamette bound fish and impact the fishery that is being protected.

River Kid · 04-11-2003, 06:13 AM

I live on the Columbia River in one of the moorages. Last year I observed the river patrol allowing obvious law breakers. This does a couple of things, lets the law breaker get away with something, and secondly portrays the wrong messages to legal boaters, creating confussion on what is right and wrong. I spoke with one of the officers about this (who happen to be a veteran), and his comment was, "This last year the patrol office was forced to rotate the officers, and this put out a lot of rookies officers on the water, that just don't know all the rules out there". I would suggest calling the river patrol and mentioning this to them. The guy I talked with said he would bring the errant enforcement of the infraction up in his staff meeting and help educate the new officers. He was very genuine about that.

jokester · 04-11-2003, 06:59 AM

The sheriff was definitely in the wrong here. It specifically states

Quote:

Effective Sunday, April 6, the Columbia River is open to the retention of adipose fin-clipped chinook, adipose fin-clipped steelhead and shad Wednesdays through Saturdays from the mouth at Buoy 10 upstream to the I-5 Bridge. The Columbia River is closed to chinook, steelhead and shad retention from I-5 to Bonneville Dam. All other permanent and temporary rules related to catch limits and gear restrictions remain in place.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">If there had been any deviation from this post, they would have updated it on the rules/reg change webpage. I don't think you're missing anything here. He WAS wrong IMHO!

-jokester

Troller · 04-11-2003, 07:02 AM

I am not sure I understand this spirit of the law thing. The rules state below I-5 is okay but the spirit says the mouth of willamette and below. I guess rknh2o's spirit is saying something different than rogue's spirit. I sounds like this spirit is up to each individuals own interpretation. Rknh20 was correct that he can fish that area.

Mark Vickers · 04-11-2003, 07:12 AM

We have made the assumption that the school that we were trolling over were holding in the less turbid water of the Columbia waiting for the Willamette to clear up.

All I'll say is that I can see Kelly Point from where we hooked all of them.

All the fish we hooked (and got to the boat) were hatchery fish less than 21 lbs. Don't the upriver fish run bigger than that usually?

Killertraylor · 04-11-2003, 07:27 AM

Sheriff was wrong, you were right, send me an email if you get a ticket and you'll win.

Gus Orviston · 04-11-2003, 08:30 AM

Mmmm, I wonder if the sherrif is going fish there later?

Spiritual Enforcement? :whazzup: My wife would love that one.. Man would I get busted at home all the time for not being spiritual enough [img]graemlins/berry.gif[/img]

..oh,, I guess that is for counseling...nevermind.

gus

Bill Monroe · 04-11-2003, 09:42 AM

Curiously enough, fish managers from both states are in the Red Lion Inn at the Quay this week and on Wednesday and Thursday remarked that they were seeing anglers catch salmon beneath the restaurant window...that's below I-5, but above Kelley Point...

Sturgeon King · 04-11-2003, 09:56 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Bill Monroe:
Curiously enough, fish managers from both states are in the Red Lion Inn at the Quay this week and on Wednesday and Thursday remarked that they were seeing anglers catch salmon beneath the restaurant window...that's below I-5, but above Kelley Point...

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">Now it's starting to make a little sense! Although everyone needs to be clear on the regulations, not just the Sherrif's Department. I feel the officer had misunderstood the regs.... therefore he was wrong!!! ~SK~

TheRogue · 04-11-2003, 10:03 AM

My point was.....

The main reason for closure above Willamette is to protect Columbia fish, but still allow fishing on the CR for the large run of Willamette hatchery fish. Anyone wanna argue about that?? :grin: The mouth of the Willamette is a tough place to define exactly (arguments??), so they went to the easiest place to enforce which was still very close to the mouth. Sorry, why waste money on setting out bouys when the last thing needed is more stuff bobbing around in the area.(not to mention the cost).

I guess instead of "spirit", I should have said "general intent" of the rule. Boy you guys take things literally!!

TR

Troller · 04-11-2003, 10:15 AM

I understand your point was just having a little fun. They need to be exact or people will fish up to the bridge. A lack of perfection of the part of the WDFW and ODFW in my opinion. I personally would be fishing below the willamette to target the majority of fish headed to the river. But maybe their is a nice little honey hole the fish mill around in before heading back down the up the river. When ever they leave it up to interpetation of the anler they are asking for trouble.

Finn-icky · 04-11-2003, 10:35 AM

Rogue...it sounds to me you are the one taking things literally. Not sure what you meant by the I-5 bridge being very close to the Willamette, but to me going past a dead line means within at least 100 yards or so, and not what I would estimate to be well over a mile. The ODF has defined boundries for years and been able to stay relatively close to what they intend that boundry to be. This all of course is just MHO.

Gus Orviston · 04-11-2003, 10:44 AM

Nope , no fun being had here :grin:

They could easily bring the barrier down to the train bridge if there was a realy issue. It is a as clear of a demarkation as the I-5 bridge.

Break out the Ouiji board....oh spirits will I catch a a fish today.....N.....O......

I think I need a magic 8 Ball!

:smile: gus

[ 04-11-2003, 11:44 AM: Message edited by: Gus Orviston ]

Miss B Haven · 04-11-2003, 12:12 PM

Gus/jokester - It's not the weeniej board, it's them negative vibes man, you gotta get rid of them. Think positive! Now, repeat after me:

I will positivley absolutely without a doubt NOT catch a fish today! :whazzup:

Mark Vickers · 04-11-2003, 12:35 PM

UPDATE:

I talked with the folks at the River Patrol office at the Gleason Boat Ramp.

They accepted that the officer was incorrect in their assessment of the situation and that they would pass on to their officers that it is indeed legal to fish between the I-5 bridge and Kelly Point from Wed-Sat.

I'll say this, while it was a little annoying, I was treated nicely and with respect both times.

wallyw · 04-11-2003, 01:26 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by TheRogue:
I guess instead of "spirit", I should have said "general intent" of the rule. Boy you guys take things literally!!

TR [/QB]

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">Laws and Rules must not be ambiquous. "General intent" should be express3ed in a recommendation.

Wally

Gus Orviston · 04-11-2003, 03:47 PM

Since I kept the economy going today by working, and my wife has my evening planned for , I can honestly say...

I will positivley absolutely without a doubt NOT catch a fish today!

fungus

jokester · 04-11-2003, 04:42 PM

I will positivley absolutely without a doubt NOT catch a fish today! I will positivley absolutely without a doubt NOT catch a fish today! I don't think it worked, but i'll give it a try come Thursday! I'll keep ya posted on the situation!

-jokester

1pump · 04-11-2003, 11:38 PM

I have a very low opinion of the Multnomah County river patrol, so I wouldn't believe anything they said. They seem to have an inexhaustible supply of laws that don't exist or they have a unique ability to instantly enact laws on the spot to suit whatever situation they're confronted with. I wish I had that kind of power. I bet Governor Kulongoski wishes he had that much power.
It amazes me that the "floating fedayeen" have no regard for the laws they're sworn to enforce.

jokester · 04-11-2003, 11:54 PM

Quote:

Break out the Ouiji board....oh spirits will I catch a a fish today.....N.....O......

Mine always says the same thing too!! I think I need a new one. Or maybe I should try the magic 8-ball :whazzup: Yeah, then my answer would be "Sources point to NO, now quit asking!" :grin:

-jokester

crabbait · 04-12-2003, 06:37 AM

Rogue - Unless I have completely lost it (possible) you still only have to obey the "letter of the law", not the intent (see "flossing", long previous thread). If you can't fish above a point they have to name that point in the regulation.

As for the "floating fedayeen" (good one), about the best you can do is be civil, try to point out the actual law (nice to have it with you), and obey the friendly law officer.

If they decide to cite you anyway, know that it is vastly satisfying to watch the nasty look the Judge gives the mistaken militia when he finds you not guilty and throws the case out (been there, loved that). [img]graemlins/applause.gif[/img]

You gotta know somebody is going to get their hinney chewed for wasting the courts time and money dragging you into court for doing something that is perfectly legal! [img]graemlins/dork.gif[/img] :blush: