Originally Posted By: boater
Originally Posted By: Lead Bouncer


Only allocation fight they care about is to reduce the commercial side of the impacts.



in the spring chinook fishery on the main stem columbia its well documented that sports get a bigger share of the esa take of upriver fish than the lcr gillnetters, why wouldnt the cca want to reduce that ?


My statement and your question are not compatible.
Based on the current gear, cca is supporting that sports have the higher esa allocation. When selective gear is adopted and the wild fish are not getting hooked in the nets, I dont know what they will ask for. I wouldnt tell you if I did. All you do is complain.

If all goes well and we make other improvments and CR fish multiply, there will be an ongoing struggle to keep wild mortality low. At some point, the wild ratio will be so high, we could be talking about wild sport harvest, rather than risking dead fish after dead fish after dead fish. A limit of ONE, could be a mandatory keep or not....

I think that plastic herring introduced on the radio, will be very popular.