Quote:
The options adopted under this federal fisheries process give us a management framework that ensures weak salmon stocks get the conservation protection they need as we shape biologically sound fishing opportunities on healthy stocks,” said Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) Director Jeff Koenings.


The council’s proposed ocean recreational fishing options for 2004 are:


1) 58,000 chinook and 206,250 coho;
2) 45,000 chinook and 168,750 coho; and
3) 30,000 chinook and 131,250 coho.

If all of these options are "biologically sound", why is there such a BIG discrepancy between options 1) and 3)? Does it make any sense that we get to kill twice as many in one scenario and yet they can say weak stocks are still "protected"? Or is presenting the available options in this manner just one more way of sticking it to the sports if the fish czars choose option 3)?
_________________________
"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!