Tribal netting

Discussion in 'Fly Fishing Forum' started by MasterAnglerTaylor, Jan 23, 2009.

  1. Spaz
    I don't know about the ripe part but I do feel that now is the closest to good things happening in a long time. We can only hope. With everyone feeling the numbers crunch and the reality that if something doesn't change fast,its over and the people who are responsible because of unimpecable deals,ignorance and greed and those that turned their heads to the truth don't want to be caught holding the bag. Time will tell. I do know CCA is right in there trying to make the transition happen without doing a bunch of name calling and finger pointing which is how change for the better will happen if it can.I hope their numbers continue to grow and more people get behind them so it can happen sooner than later.I know theres other groups and individuals involved that are also accomplishing great things but they aren't building big numbers of supporters. Everything helps.At some point we'll all come together and be glad we got involved.Imagine if sportsman,tribal and non-tribal netters and government got together how much could be accomplished! I'm dreaming but maybe someday.
  2. I hear that, RiverElf
    even though there's money at stake, some values have to come into play.

    how about same money with less effort? that's traps.
    Low overhead, no boats to maintain, no hauling/setting, they work while you rest.
    a few hours of sorting each day, you're done.

    "Meanwhile, the tribal fisheries culture center and fly tying shop will be doing a brisk business. I hear they have a killer lox omelette at the snack bar :) ...and did you see their new line of Shelm switchers? awesome"

    after a few years of selective trapping, the wild fish could conceivably recover to the point where they start getting spawned and the eggs put in river boxes, where they could hatch out naturally in their home environment and spawn more successfully on their return. recovery could be exponential.

    JohnnyRock, don't even get me started on high seas interception!!!!LOL

    sorry to be such a blowhard guys, I'm going to bed. being hopeful is tiring business.
  3. Mike-

    I seriously had that dream--the virtual reality stream. It was a "man-made" stream, landscaped with trees and shrubs, rocks and gravels, and a huge pump that moved water, pools and riffles, and planted with trout! The artificial stream was routed into a meandering mile or so circle. I woke up thinking, "Now there is an entreprneural idea!" I can't believe that no one has constructed one yet! Any investors out there?!!! I wonder if they have one in Dubois yet! :)
  4. truly funny stuff... keep it coming.

    as for turning tribal fishers into guides... do yourself a favor and read the guide tipping threads and ask yourself if the tribal fishers would seriously put up with the bullshit of being a guide (hard work, low pay, long hours) and if many of them would even be capable of guiding skill wise (and i would say the same about the majority of commercial fishermen... so it's not about race).

    so the goal is the make tribal members guides and fly shop owners/employees... sounds like a sure way to create wealth. i don't know why they would even think of casinos :rofl:
  5. Interesting point topwater-
    'course the guiding thing wasn't my idea, you have me confused with someone else. But there are some opportunities besides a snack bar or fly shop available...They could be heroes to the whole culture if they wanted to and had the right PR.

    several of the dissenting justices on Boldt and SCOTUS mentioned that the 50% take should be contingent on the tribe's actual need for income from fishing.

    with every member of the Puyallups getting a 2000$/month payout from the casino fund, and a 20,000$ plus check when they each turn 18 years old, doesn't the argument of fishing to make ends meet start sounding a little hollow?
  6. yes, the indians have built their very own welfare existence. as was the case with 'welfare moms', there is huge resistence to moving beyond that situation. the more progressive tribes work pretty hard at providing incentives, including full rides to colleges, but just as was the case with the 'moms', it's a very difficult cycle to break.

    locally, there are very few s'kallam actually fishing, maybe a dozen or less. but if you were to broach any of these ideas with the tribal chairman, fish traps, guiding,...., what you would most likely hear is: ''s our tradition to fish and we have a right do do so whenever and however we choose...' that is the end of the tune. there is also the strong sense of being 'owed' and never having been paid. i have encountered this and have asked for clarification but the response typically is ' don't understand...', well of course i don't but there is never any explaination put forward, interesting.

    having worked inside and outside of state level government, let me say one last time, shuffling your feet, standing on the sidelines, and attempting to 'lobby' from a new comer on the block vs major power players is folly. unless you have a really big stick you will have lip service from lots of folks and a pat on the back. i am glad that so many of you have put your faith in CCA, more power to you and them, but at the end of the day they will have accomplished about as much as those they follow. there is only one stick that government agencies attend too, litigation, that is what saved the blue fish and the red fish.
  7. speaking of big sticks...:)

    here's a list of CCA's accomplishments and successful litigation, plucked from their national website:

    PROHIBITED TRAWLING FOR TROUT (Texas 1978). Defined major-minor bait-producing bays, nursery areas (Texas 1979). Outlawed single-strand monofilament nets (Texas 1980). Protected billfish, except swordfish, from commercial harvest (Texas 1980). Outlawed gill, trammel nets (Texas 1990). Obtained game fish status for redfish, speckled trout (Texas 1981). John Wilson Hatchery completed (Texas 1982). Texas Parks and Wildlife Department (Maine) given authority to set limits on fish (Texas 1983). Obtained game fish status for redfish, speckled trout (Alabama 1984). Established saltwater stamp for anglers (Texas 1985). Halted commercial harvest of adult redfish in Gulf of Mexico (National 1986). Won game fish status for redfish, speckled trout (South Carolina 1986). Closed Apalachee, Blakeley rivers to shrimping; placed restrictions on gill nets (Alabama 1987). Obtained game fish status for marlin, sailfish (National 1988). Banned gill netting of flounder during spawning run (Alabama 1988). Won game fish status for redfish (Florida 1988). Banned possession of illegal fishing devices on or near Texas waters (Texas 1989). Prohibited sale of naturally raised, wild redfish (Texas 1989). Banned drift gill nets in South Atlantic (National 1990). Federal District Court upholds game fish status for billfish (National 1990). Intervened in lawsuit to uphold bans on fish traps, drift gill nets in South Atlantic (National 1991). Won approval of saltwater fishing license (Alabama 1991). Amendment to Louisiana Constitution approved, guaranteeing funds to preserve wetlands (Louisiana 1991). Won management of speckled trout (Louisiana 1991). Obtained permanent game fish status for redfish (Louisiana 1991). Won approval of saltwater fishing stamp (South Carolina 1991). Adopted no-harvest regulation for tarpon (Texas 1991). Minimum size, bag limits placed on cobia, amberjack, Spanish mackerel, king mackerel, for commercial and recreational fishermen (Virginia 1991). Federal District Court upholds ban on drift nets in South Atlantic (National 1992). Formed Save Our Sealife Committee to get state constitutional amendment to limit marine net fishing in Florida waters (Florida 1992). Obtained game fish status for tarpon (Alabama 1993). Broke ground for SeaCenter Texas fish hatchery (Texas 1993). Established saltwater license (Virginia 1993). Created limited-entry plan for commercial fishing of black drum (Virginia 1993). Florida constitutional amendment limiting marine net fishing (Florida 1994). Stopped proposal to open sounds to shrimp trawling (Georgia 1994). Banned use of gill nets, purse seines in Presumpscot River (Maine 1994). Protected eel grass beds by prohibiting near-beach squid and scup dragging in Vineyard and Nantucket Sounds (Massachusetts 1994). Federal District Court approves ban on flynets in North Carolina (National 1995). Restricted use of gill nets (Alabama 1995). Outlawed most gill nets (Louisiana 1995). Intervened in Louisiana lawsuit challenging new gill net law (Louisiana 1995). Restricted use of gill nets in Kennebec River (Maine 1995). Placed minimum size, bag limit, commercial quota on speckled trout (Virginia 1995). Approved regulations requiring all commercial shrimpers operating in EEZ to use bycatch reduction devices (National 1996). Banned commercial gill nets in Old River (Alabama 1996). Banned use of tarp nets statewide (Florida 1996). Mandated bycatch reduction devices on all shrimp boats in northeast region (Florida 1996). Intervened in federal, state lawsuits to uphold Louisiana gill net ban (Louisiana 1996). Banned all non-biodegradable gill nets (Mississippi 1996). SeaCenter Texas opened, establishing world’s largest redfish hatchery (Texas 1996). Won commercial quota for bluefish (Virginia 1996). Mandated use of bycatch reduction devices on shrimp vessels (National 1997). Won adoption of bycatch reduction devices on shrimp boats (Georgia 1997). Obtained game fish status for cobia (Mississippi 1997). Secured $2.5 million from Bath Iron Works to remove Edwards Dam on Kennebec River (Maine 1997). Banned commercial fishing within one mile of barrier islands (Mississippi 1997). Restricted purse seining of menhaden in state waters (New York 1997). Outlawed use of gill, trammel nets for black fish (New York 1997). Won passage of Fisheries Reform Act, first comprehensive state fishery reform (North Carolina 1997). Passed first comprehensive state water plan (Texas 1997). Limited number of commercial crab licenses (Texas 1997). Won seat for recreational fishermen on Marine Resources Commission (Virginia 1997). Granted petition by National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) establishing blue, white marlin as overfished; 10-year recovery plan mandated (National 1998). Eliminated striped bass fishing in EEZ through striped Bass Act reauthorization (National 1998). Helped establish new state Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (Florida 1998). Mandated use of bycatch reduction devices on shrimp trawls in all state waters (Florida 1998). Created "Universal Fishing License," which includes saltwater as well as freshwater fishing (Georgia 1998). Obtained game fish status for shad (Maine 1998). Won no-sale regulation on black drum (Maryland 1998). Helped establish pro-conservation state Marine Fisheries Commission (North Carolina 1998). Intervened in federal lawsuit challenging NMFS requirement that shrimp trawlers pull bycatch reduction devices in Gulf of Mexico (Texas 1998). Won federal, state lawsuits upholding Louisiana’s gill net law (Louisiana 1999). Reduced number of commercial licenses sold to elver fishermen by 70 percent; shortened eel season by three weeks, removed 3,000 nets from Maine waters (Maine 1999). Created Marine Recreational Fishing Advisory Committee to advise state Department of Marine Resources (Maine 1999). Established limited-entry license management program for all finfish not under a management plan (Texas 1999). Eliminated kill citations for black, red drum (Virginia 1999). Stopped attempts to allow gill netting of striped bass along Chesapeake Bay Bridge Tunnel (Virginia 1999). Federal Court upholds requirement that Gulf shrimp trawlers pull bycatch reduction devices (National 1999). Helped draft and introduce the first comprehensive longline management bill in the 106th Congress (National 2000). Helped draft legislation that tightened regulations on the possession of illegal fishing gear (Mississippi 2000). Helped initiate the Freedom to Fish campaign to stop the arbitrary implementation of no-fishing zones (National 2000). Bycatch reduction devices become mandatory on shrimp trawls in Texas bays (Texas 2000). Sued NMFS to stop an arbitrary no-fishing zone off the Florida coast (National 2000). Played a critical role in the development and adoption of the first federal fishery management plan for mahi-mahi and wahoo (Florida 2000). Won federal court battle to maintain bycatch reduction devices in Gulf waters (National 2000). Sued NMFS in federal court to reduce excessive billfish, shark and turtle bycatch in Gulf and Atlantic longline operations (National 2000). Provided LDWF enforcement agents with navigation, global positioning and sonar equipment (Louisiana 2000). Raised grassroots funds to protect angler access along the New Hampshire coast (New Hampshire 2000). Successfully worked in establishing regulations to protect spawning groundfish (Maine 2000). Helped fund the creation of near-shore reefs along the Georgia coast (Georgia 2000). Successfully led opposition to closing Gray’s Reef to recreational fishing (Georgia 2000). U. S. Supreme Court issues final ruling upholding Louisiana’s 1995 gill-net ban (Louisiana 2001). Led efforts to set recreational size, creel limits for flounder; new licensing requirements for commercial gigging, commercial size limit, and annual commercial quota for flounder (Mississippi 2001). Reached favorable settlement in NMFS no-fishing zone suit, allowing recreational trolling in previously restricted area (National 2001). Successfully raised $450,000 in cash and in-kind donations to purchase and remove the Smelt Hill Dam (Maine 2001). Reorganization of Menhaden Management Board ends commercial-fishing industry control (National 2001). Texas’ most comprehensive water bill passes Texas legislature (Texas 2001). Helped retool a bill that would have allowed destructive hydraulic dredging of clams in Virginia waters (Virginia 2001). Launched Gulf-wide phone number – 866-WE ENFORCE – to report coastal game violations (Louisiana 2001). Worked through state legislature and private foundations to continue critical funding for Florida’s state saltwater hatchery, resulting in the 1,000,000th redfish fingerling released in Florida waters (Florida 2001). Opposed Texas Shrimp Association petition to close recreation red snapper season (National 2001). Successfully worked for passage of new redfish conservation regulations (South Carolina 2001). Launched first ever Texas crab trap removal (Texas 2002). Helped ensure areas around Mississippi’s barrier islands are included in Department of Marine Resources’ definition of areas closed to commercial fishing (Mississippi (2002). Mobilized to oppose expansion of commercial shrimp trawling in St. Johns River; commercial request was withdrawn (Florida 2002). Provided TPWD game wardens with night vision equipment (Texas 2002). Constructed Bird Island Artificial Reef (Louisiana 2002). Helped pass first major amendments to state manatee legislation in last 10 years, establishing measurable biological goals for manatees (Florida 2002). Convinced Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission to begin rule-making process on use of multiple seine nets tied together and "toy boats" used to circumvent net restrictions (Florida 2002). Defeated initiative by commercial interests to allow commercial harvest of Cobia in Mississippi waters (Mississippi 2003). Funded an expanded TAMU study on spotted seatrout catch-and-release mortality (Texas 2003). Launched first-ever derelict crab trap removal program in the state (Louisiana 2004). Broke the $2 million mark in college and graduate scholarships awarded (Texas 2004). Won passage of the Coastal Recreational Fishing License (North Carolina 2004). Banned trawling in the Upper Mobile Bay shallows (Alabama 2004). Funded more than $530,000 in enforcement equipment and research needs for TPWD over past four years (Texas 2004). Secured grant money for oyster reefs in the Bay of St. Louis & Biloxi Bay (Mississippi 2004). Championed efforts to restore southern flounder stocks through harvest reductions, size and bag limits, license requirements and seasonal closures (North Carolina 2004). Bay Debris Clean-up Project surpasses the 1,150 tons of harmful debris removed from Texas bay systems (Texas 2004). Worked through its representative on the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas to implement measures outlawing the practice of shark finning in the Atlantic (CCA National 2004). Instrumental in the effort to secure tideland funds for speckled trout hatchery (Mississippi 2004). One of four members of a cooperative effort called Menhaden Matter formed to investigate the status of menhaden in the Chesapeake Bay to ensure adequate populations for its role as forage base and filter feeder. (CCA National 2004). Intervened successfully in a case before the First District Court of Appeals attempting to circumvent the net ban and bring back gill nets (Florida 2005). Helped establish the first-ever hatchery for southern flounder (North Carolina 2005). Achieved stronger protection for large permit (Florida 2005). Defeated legislative initiative to reduce minimum size of speckled trout (Mississippi 2005). Successful passage of legislation to increase criminal penalties to a third degree felony for flagrant illegal gillnetting (Florida 2005). Worked with the Biscayne National Park Fishery Working Group to curtail and modify proposed no-entry and no-fishing zones (Florida 2005). Sued in U.S. District Court to end overfishing of red snapper by the Gulf of Mexico shrimp fleet (National 2005). Constructed an inshore reef in Perdido Bay with tons of clean concrete rubble (Alabama 2006). Won lawsuit in federal district court to block federal attempt to close all recreational fishing for all species of grouper for three months (Florida 2006). Donated enforcement equipment to Law Enforcement Division of the Department of Environmental Conservation (New York 2007). Integrally involved in the Oyster Shell Recycling Program to improve water quality and create habitat for fish (North Carolina 2007). Led successful national effort to keep open-loop LNG terminals out of Gulf of Mexico (National 2006). Won first-ever harvest cap on the industrial harvest of menhaden in Chesapeake Bay (Virginia & Maryland 2006). Constructed Redfish Point Artificial Reef (Louisiana 2006). Funded $700,000 for construction of a state-of-the-art marine larviculture research lab (Texas 2007). Won a moratorium on river herring, allowing near-collapsed stocks chance to recover (North Carolina 2007). Launched chapters in Washington and Oregon to address marine conservation issues (National 2007). Partnered with Texas Parks & Wildlife Department to retire $200,000 worth of commercial shrimping licenses (Texas 2007). Announced creation of the Building Conservation / Habitat Program (National 2007). Served integral role in the Maryland Artificial Reef Initiative to develop marine habitat enhancement projects (Maryland 2007). Won lawsuit in federal district court forcing NMFS to address shrimp trawl bycatch in the management of Gulf red snapper (National 2007).
  8. if they follow through, locally, with litigation, they will have my bucks for sure.
  9. bet on it, gt

    we need to get behind these guys. they have to build the warchest.
  10. sorry spaz, '...fool me once......................' CCA will have to show me the beef, first.
  11. Some great stuff here.
    With 8,000+ CCA members in Oregon & Wa. in such a short time there must be somebody that has confidence in them. There is power in numbers like that!
  12. I think it may be up to 12,000 in WA alone now, Dan, but don't quote me on that.
    enough of a voting bloc that Dino Rossi was calling my house (not a recording) and asking for me three days in a row prior to the election...must have got a list off of Loomis or something, cuz I'm a total nobody.
  13. I would back them wholeheartedly except for their stated and chartered desire to increase hatchery production. Let's be clear here, they aren't a conservation group, they are a sports fishermans group. For some that's enough, but for others not so much. If you feel good about them go for it, but until they decide to manage the fisheries for better long term survival of wild fish, I'll put my money into other organizations.
  14. I think it's interesting how many authorities there are that don't(as salmo g put it)do their research but know it all.
    James,their whole push (CCA) is selective fisheries.End of story. Do you think this mess can change over night? What better way to get rid of hatcheries than to get the natives back? Do you think they should just close 'em down? Ya,right. I bet this forum would be a buzzin if they did! It will be interesting when they really get the ball rolling how many will jump on the band wagon kind of like our sports teams. If they don't win,
    they loss support which is what lets them win. If I had a magic wand I'd use it but I don't so I'll do it the old fashioned way. Head down,ass up and push.I'd also like to know where all the people who have made their livings and reputations on washington rivers when it was great and those that still do,where are they in this time of great need? I'd love to hear some real ideas that are doable if anyone has any!!!
    I'm outta here
  15. well, guys, read it for yourself- here's another tidbit from the CCAPNW website: please take note their opinion is informed by the HSRG, (Hatchery Scientific Review Group), a 20 million dollar study that was conducted by the Feds to TRY to get an objective opinion here. And CCA wants to implement their recommendations. Everybody should read up on HSRG, because that's where we're headed. Although hatchery funding is addressed, if hatcheries are trashing steelhead populations in a particular river they'll be on that like stank. The whole idea is starting to make sensible policy decisions.
    BTW, WDFW took a 163 million dollar funding cut this year...I think that's the number.

    Washington CCA Position Statements
    As Approved by the Board on April 12, 2008
    Selective Fishing
    Ongoing hatchery review and salmon recovery efforts in Washington waters and the
    Columbia Basin have made it clear that if we are to restore depleted and ESA-listed
    stocks of wild salmon and steelhead, we must reform fishing practices so investments in
    hatcheries, habitat improvements, and hydro operations can be fully realized. This will
    require widespread use of commercial and recreational fishing methods capable of
    targeting stocks strong enough for harvest while minimizing impacts on others. In most
    cases this will require live sorting of fish essential to recovery from those that are not – a
    process ill-suited to most existing commercial fishing methods. Washington CCA urges
    state and federal fisheries management agencies and elected officials to accelerate the
    implementation of harvest reform as a critical component of salmon and steelhead
    recovery efforts.
    Derelict Fishing Gear
    The Puget Sound Derelict Fishing Gear Program, conducted by the federally funded
    Northwest Straits Commission (NWSC), estimates that there are nearly 4,000 derelict
    fishing nets remaining in the waters of Puget Sound. These nets continually ensnare
    untold thousands of fish, seabirds, marine mammals and other organisms throughout the
    extended life of rot-resistant synthetic mesh. In addition to nets, the bottom of the Sound
    is littered with an estimated 14,000 derelict recreational and commercial crab pots
    estimated to be killing as many a half a million crabs per year.
    The NWSC surveys and gear removal efforts are a valuable contribution to restoring the
    ecology of Puget Sound but its efforts, due to the limited size of the program, fall far
    short of completing the job. To make matters worse, more derelict gear is continually
    added to the accumulations. These problems are not limited to Puget Sound and
    doubtlessly exist elsewhere in Washington and in the Columbia River. No state agency is
    solely responsible for the removal of the derelict gear nor are there any lost gear reporting
    Washington CCA supports developing a comprehensive program designed to remove the
    vast majority of the offending gear, limit its ongoing joss, assigning a responsible agency,
    and creating a logical and adequate funding source to the job.
    Hatchery Funding and Reform
    Hatcheries have an important role to play in aiding the conservation and recovery of
    natural populations of salmon and steelhead while also contributing to sustainable
    fisheries. There are hundreds of hatchery programs operating throughout coastal
    Washington and the Columbia basin. In recent years, important hatchery review efforts,
    including the Hatchery Scientific Review Group (HSRG), have illustrated the need for
    better funding and operation of state, federal and tribal hatcheries. Washington CCA
    supports the important role hatcheries have to play in conserving and sustaining salmon
    stocks as well as efforts underway to improve the efficacy of these programs.
    Unfortunately, many hatcheries are woefully under funded and have not implemented key
    hatchery reforms, including mass marking. The federally-funded Mitchell Act hatcheries
    are struggling under inadequate budgets to meet their statutory obligation to mitigate for
    the impact of Columbia River dams to salmon and steelhead stocks. Funding has
    remained flat for over a decade without increases to address inflation, inadequate
    maintenance budgets, or newly required programs such as mass marking. This has
    resulted in reduced smolt production from over 110 million migrants per year in 1993 to
    less than 65 million currently. Washington CCA urges the federal government to fulfill
    its Mitchell Act commitments.
    Catch Monitoring and Evaluation
    Large-scale fisheries targeting abundant species utilized for industrial purposes or direct
    human consumption have a history of detrimentally impacting other important stocks
    through by-catch. Although the proportion of the non-target species comprising the bycatch
    may be low in comparison to the fishery as a whole, this can have a serious effect
    on depleted and ESA-listed stocks. In addition, massive removals of forage fishes can
    have a direct impact on the health of non-target stocks, including depleted and ESA-listed
    stocks. CCA Washington supports systematic and vigilant programs of professional
    catch monitoring and evaluation capable of identifying and correcting any such problems
    at an early stage. State and federal fisheries management officials should also take
    management action to minimize impacts to depleted and ESA listed stocks.
    Harvest Management
    Harvests of Pacific Northwest fish stocks often occur at the expense of conservation.
    Managers tend to plan harvest to the last fish based largely on pre-season estimates of
    abundance that may be higher than reality. Washington CCA believes that management
    errors, if they are to occur, should favor conservation. Furthermore, since the fisheries
    resources of Washington are the property of present and future generations, harvestable
    surpluses should be distributed in a manner that maximizes conservation and the
    economic benefits to all citizens of the state.
    The Importance of Hatchery Salmon Carcasses for Nutriment
    of Freshwater Ecosystems
    The importance of marine nutrients and energy-rich carbon delivered to freshwater
    ecosystems from adult salmon carcasses is well established. Research has shown that
    intentional distribution of hatchery salmon carcasses or manufactured salmon carcass
    analogs results in higher juvenile salmon growth rates and abundance.
    Reduced wild salmon adult returns to freshwater systems has resulted in significantly less
    marine nutrients and energy-rich carbon comprising wild juvenile salmon growth and
    abundance as well as the entire ecosystem. Washington CCA recognizes the impact of
    this nutrient loss and supports efforts to increase the deliberate distribution of hatchery
    salmon carcasses and/or analogs.
    Independent scientific reviews have also recognized the positive ecological benefit to
    natural salmon stocks from the distribution of salmon carcasses and have recommended
    steps to reduce any possible negative impacts to salmon stocks. Washington CCA
    supports these findings and recommendations.
  16. Well, well, I guess that the specific charter document I read didn't specifically state that increased hatchery production was a stated goal. Please don't assume that people don't read. I read it, and was horrified, mostly because the current plight of native fish is specifically related to the current hatchery practices. I think it's great that the impetus to remove commercial for the net fisheries on the Columbia one of their other stated goals too. But until they show a significantly higher value on native fish, it's an organization I can't get behind. There's lots of good they can do; but let's be real.

    1) Boldt ain't getting rolled back with the same tired arguments we've made before

    2) Unless hatcheries are significantly altered in the management scheme, the plight of wild fish will remain as dire as ever. No amount of harvest curtailment can fix the ills of the other 3 H's....

  17. I need to read the reform groups recommendations, but in general funding the hatcheries with more dollars is probably the *worst* thing we can do. Seriously, have you ever calculated the $$$ associated with failed hatchery programs like the Puyallup? 250k Steelhead smolt to only have 100-200 return? That's good money after bad....
  18. james,

    i'm with you on the hatchery issue but i did join cca anyways. they are wrong on hatchery production, but i was willing to give them the minimum to see if they could push through other items i agree with (luckily i was able to have them move me to a nw chapter instead of the texas chapter :eek: after i joined). but just to be on the safe side (and to keep my conscience feeling good, i donated twice as much each to 3 other org's who actually are wild fish advocates).

    i will say one of my biggest criticisms of the cca in the northwest is the tone when you question their positions. i still have a bad taste in my mouth, and those at the top levels should realize that you will lose possible members on the margins such as james and myself when you don't answer legitimate questions about your positions.... but i guess calling those who question cca uneducated is easier than answering why you call for increased funding and planting of hatchery fish.
  19. I think they've got most of the bases covered in terms of policy. I don't think there's a position that could be crafted that would be either perfect or please everybody. I'm all for wild fish, especially steelhead, and I think viable spawning populations of wild fish should be a top priority.
    Salmo _G knows way more about Dams/hatchery issues than I do, but it seems to me the problems with the rivers affected by the Mitchell act are the presence of the dams, themselves, which have altered the environment. Hatcheries are an unfortunate consequence. Read the HSRG stuff...they really didn't pull any punches.

    I too would prefer it if CCA would put ESA listed Steelhead stocks at the top of their action list. I don't need 2$ a lb salmon to be a happy guy. But most organizations that actually effect change (rather than sell t-shirts) will take a series of interim positions, moving lawmakers towards a goal. They aren't pushing for the dams to come if it's the right thing to do we'll get there. Same with the hatcheries. The more they study hatcheries the uglier they become.

    sorry, don't mean to monopolize the thread.
    Mr Mello, I live in Roy and would love to have a cup of coffee with you sometime.
  20. the CCA positions are not the most important issue i have with the organization. mr loomis is a wonderful speaker and has a great stump speech. he seems intent on non-indian nets, not ALL nets; focuses on the columbia, obviously a major producer of salmon, to the exclusion of the already ESA listed fishes in puget sound; ignores questions asking for clarification; and as an organization, they seem intent on pulling the covers up, working in the dark and not talking to the public.

    these are all, to me anyway, indications of a new organization looking for a direction and not finding one. the numbers of paying members varies but amounts to a ton of money. so far, there is no public display of position or of action.

    all this smells to me like every other group out there who CLAIMS they are going to stem the tide but do nothing more than solicit funds. hope i am wrong, could live with their uncomfortable agends if they stop the depletion of wild stocks, my one and only objective, but i ain't'a'holdin'my breath.

Share This Page