Originally Posted By: eyeFISH


If it means the commercials get to take more hatchery fish, BFD! The commercials will still be constrained by a measurable impact. They CAN'T physically get 'em all.

... Sporties will still be allocated an impact to consume.

...We'll probably even have a full season in which to do it, because it's much less likely that the gillnet mortalities would put the commies over their impact and into ours.

...Misrepresenting the CCA agenda only harms the cause of the recreational community and the wild resource so many of us advocate for.


Giving more to the commercial fleet sure was a BFD when sports angler were packing the hearings in Olympia and Salem to fight against that happening.

Nobody is stupid enough to say the commercials will 'get them all'. Of course they won't. They will just get more than they are. And with the Tribal Catch Balancing policy setting the overall cap - which we've been hitting -- every extra fish gillnetters take comes out of the sports angler column. That is the only way it can be.

As far as ESA impacts:

1. Without legislation that constrains the commercial take, CCA is handing the commercials the PERFECT argument as to why they should get a full 50% or even more of the impacts.

2. WA media has already reported the commercials setting out the case for a share of the impacts allocated to the 'selective harvesters' to reward them for their investment.

Nobody's misrepresenting CCA position, just pointing out the very likely outcomes of their policy as proposed.


Edited by OntheColumbia (10/21/09 12:35 AM)
_________________________