Jim, I hope you are right about the leadership behind the scenes at the CCA...I know there are some really good folks involved there. What they really need to do is either get their ignorant self-appointed new experts on the internet to stop sharing their ignorance with the world, or take them aside and give them a little of the education that they've gathered up over the decades.
Either way, the distinct level of ignorance shown by the '$25 experts' on the various BB's is what will be shared by those 'experts' at Commission meetings, where they won't be doing anyone or anything any favors, including the CCA, other organizations, sportfishing in general, or the fish.
Credibility is how you get managers to listen...not knowing what you are talking about not only destroys any credibility you may have had, but hurts the credibility of the rest of the fish and fishing advocates, too. We have enough trouble as it is without having to waste time and resources requesting that the policymakers ignore what others are saying on our behalf so that we can actually get down to business.
Fish on...
Todd
P.S. Another note for the new experts...almost all of the work I do for the organizations I belong to now centers on battling Oregon, Washington, and the feds over the archaic and destructive lower Columbia River gillnet fishery, fighting to have its impacts reduced more and more each year, while hoping eventually to just have it eliminated.
When I worked at the State a good portion of my work centered on taking the licenses away from commercial fishers who either played loose with the rules or failed to fulfill the necessary qualifications to participate.
Many of the "new experts" seem to think that I must be a commercial fishing advocate because I keep insisting that they stop bashing where it's not called for...what I am is an advocate for the truth, and the bending, twisting, and outright fabrication of the truth by those "new experts" is just one more obstacle that sportfishing advocates have to overcome to get meaningful work done.
One thing the CCA has tried to stress to its members is to not debate to much on these boards....You are right when it comes to the $25 dollar experts. I see some here and on other boards doing more harm than good.
Just because you paid your $25.00 does not make you a spokesperson for the CCA. It makes you a contributing member....I appreciate that. I would encourage all CCA members to go to there local chapter and submit there ideas. Your ideas may or not be what the CCA is wanting to do at this time, so please understand that there are steps to take. We cant achieve it all at once. Small steps is the key!
There are so many different issue's involved with the low numbers of salmonoids.... one is definetly overharvest. Habitat is a big one, ocean conditions, and on and on. But why improve the habitat so that there can be more harvest?
The Columbia is managed for maximum sustainable harvest....BAD! What we need is for the entire NW to be managed for maximum sustainable return.
To achieve that, you must first limit harvest. That would benefit the habitat by adding nutrients back in to the system. It's not a fix all idea, but it is a start. You can have the best habitat in the world, but with out fish to inhabit it, what good does it do?
We need to take small steps, limiting harvest is one step.
Previous Topic
Index
