Thanks for posting the letter Todd.

It's good to see the WSC involved in what might be a productive endeaver for protecting these fish.

I have some questions and suggestions.

--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---

Quote from the letter:
"The BA does not model or predict recovery times for the listed stocks."

What is a "BA"?
I assume that it must be an acronym.

--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---

Quote from the letter:
"It is our firm belief that there are much more sensible and profitable approaches for both increasing the commercial harvest of surplus hatchery spring Chinook and increasing the protection of ESA listed salmonids in the lower Columbia River. Specifically, selective fisheries utilizing such existing technology as the fish ladders at Bonneville Dam, fish traps or fish wheels offer a proven means for commercial fishers to obtain their full allocation of surplus hatchery fish while having minimal impact on ESA listed species. Surely the agencies and industry can see the broad suite of benefits that will come from adopting fully selective fisheries in the Lower Columbia River, and the broad suite of problems that come with clinging onto the non-selective fisheries of the past."

The trap idea raises several questions:
1) Would that yield 50% each for the tribal and non-tribals?
2) Would the tribal members trade fishing for fish?
3) What is the division non-tribal commercial versus recreational?
4) How would the commercial interests divide the booty?
5) Would the recreational interests trade fishing for fish?

My thought is that the trap idea is simply unfeasible because of concerns including those listed above.

A better remedy for the bycatch issue is to commercially fish only with hook and line. I'm surprised that the WSC hasn't promoted that idea.

--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---

Quote from the letter:
"In the past this tangle net fishery has greatly exceeded its allotted impacts, even overshooting the allocation by 700% in 2002. While the only way to assure that this doesn't happen again is to have reliable observation and reporting on the commercial fisheries,.."

In the more recent past, the modified commercial fishery in 2003 exceeded the ESA allocation guidelines by a small enough margin to allow a significant but reduced recreational fishery. The combined commercial and recreational fisheries resulted in an impact substantially below the total allowable impact.

Handpicking facts to make an argument does little to promote credibility.

--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---

Quote from the letter:
"This fishery utilizes one technique, that of gillnets and recovery boxes."

Have the smaller mesh tangle nets been abandoned as a harvest method for the foreseeable future?