Originally posted by ramon vb:
No government official, local, state, or federal, is particularly committed to salmon preservation or recovery. Salmon are their biggest headache! They would all be happy to see the wild fish extinct, replaced entirely by enough hatchery fish to keep tribal, commercial, and sport harvest interests happy.
Perhaps in that statement you very well express the symptomatic problem in the attitude that you and Washington Trout propose.
Every indication is that you depend upon "salmon in crisis" for your bread and butter and that your primary goal is not recovery but to promote the idea that recovery is needed and that you and your organization will work to accomplish that goal in the face of adversity from all others concerned... with the exception of other environmentally oriented extremist groups of course.
Wasn't WT instrumental in the listing of Puget Sound chinook and other species?
Are salmon not disposed to both long and short cycles in their numbers?
The listings seem to have come at the bottom of a long cycle of low numbers primarily due to ocean conditions which was compounded by excessive harvest.
We have been experiencing record returns of many stocks of salmon of late and every indication is that these record numbers are the harbinger of another long cycle of good returns.
Could it be that Washington Trout is the problem?
Previous Topic
Index
