Grandpa,

You know how much I hate being argumentative but I'm still not convinced that the law specifies that observers may be required. I doubt that we would be seing this situation if they were.

Here is the title of the law cfm posted above:

--- --- ---
TITLE 50--WILDLIFE AND FISHERIES

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

PART 660--FISHERIES OFF WEST COAST STATES AND IN THE WESTERN PACIFIC--Table of Contents

Subpart C--Western Pacific Pelagic Fisheries
--- --- ---

The NMFS or NOAA Fisheries or whatever name they go by these days seems to recognise several types of fisheries including:

Groundfish
Salmon
Pacific Halibut
(and) Pelagic (coastal and high sea)

The pelagic fisheries include sardines and herring and further out fish like tuna.

I don't think anything in the above law applies to netting salmon inthe columbia.

I still haven't thoroughly looked for an observer requirement that does apply and would still enjoy seeing such a law.

If the CRC or NOAA Fisheries has reason to believe that the ESA impacts are moving beyond the allocations they certainly can and should shut the netting down.