GBL,

I don't presume to know what fuels your apparent emotional responses. You're way off base if you think the haul of a single trawler wipes out an individual chinook run with its bycatch. There is far too much variability in ocean distribution - tho it certainly is not random - to be accounted for that way. I'm not defending bycatch, but the total coastwide catch, ranging from 37 to 62K chinook, is worth noting, but it's also worth noting that bycatch isn't wiping out any chinook runs, including the Stilly.

Since your brother-in-law is a biologist, and I'm a biologist, shall we take a vote of all the fish biologists as to the proximate cause of declining Stillaguamish chinook runs? Yeah, that's real scientific, altho maybe more scientific than taking an opinion poll of sport fishermen.

Bycatch and netting are only the single worst event to a run of fish if those actions are responsible for limiting the production and productivity of the population in question. Sorry, but blanket statements like that are an indicator of ignorance, not of being informed. I'd estimate that more Stilly chinook are taken along the coast of BC on sport and commercial hook and line than are taken as bycatch in trawl fisheries. It seems like you're using the trawl fishery as a handy scapegoat because the chinook taken therein are not allocated among specific rivers of origin. It's easy, but pointless, to debate that which cannot be verified. The allegation that Stilly chinook may be taken as trawl bycatch is offset by the equal and opposite allegation that Stilly chinook are not taken as trawl bycatch.

If the habitat in the Stilly basin were suited to chinook production, the issue of bycatch would be less relevant than it already is. However, I expect that you'd be complaining that the Stilly Tribe was exercising its fishing right be netting chinook because they were abundant enough to support a fishery. I say that only because you've repeatedly blamed Indian gillnetting for a host of fishery problems, real and perceived, regardless of any correlation between the gillnetting and the status of the fish population.

Todd,

With respect to the Stilly and the severity of the habitat condition, I wouldn't be surprised if it's closer to a 95% reduction in productivity. Unfortunately, it's bad. But your point is on the right track, at historic productivity, the coastwide bycatch would be less than a drop in the bucket, but it would probably exceed the Stilly chinook run. But not by an awful lot.

Sg