Originally Posted By: Carcassman
For that amount of money are they going actually quantify, by species, the number of additional spawners, the number of additional adults produced (again by species), and a timeline for when all the wondrous improvement will occur?


You know, I am 100% in favor of functional fish passage wherever the fish are being blocked.

But there ought to be a couple of fundamental ground rules as to how they go about it... a new paradigm for ALL of these multi-million dollar projects funded by we the taxpayers.

1) Prioritize fish passage projects to fix the ones most likely to realize the most bang for the buck.

2) Show us exactly how much bang they expect for each project... for example, an extra 75 chinook, 200 coho, 500 chum gaining access to the newly accessible/reclaimed habitat... then add that to the damn escapement goal... and manage for it!

It's pointless to create passage and free up "new" habitat if you never let enough fish escape past fisheries to actually use it.


Edited by eyeFISH (07/09/25 12:30 PM)
_________________________
"Let every angler who loves to fish think what it would mean to him to find the fish were gone." (Zane Grey)

"If you don't kill them, they will spawn." (Carcassman)


The Keen Eye MD
Long Live the Kings!