In truth, with spring chinook, which so much of this controversy revolves around, the "catch balancing" provisions with the above-Bonneville Tribes as stipulated in the current US-v-Oregon agreement will be the limiting factor. NOT the FEDS "closing it down".

Without a cap on commercial harvest, low-impact alternatives move a greater percentage of a fixed harvest amount over to the commercial side. There is no "surplus" for us to draw additional spring chinook from when we're talking about springers destined for above-Bonneville.

This initiative, as written, will not provide additional sport opportunity. Period.

I wish I were wrong, but the facts say otherwise.

Additionally, all anglers and CCA members in particular ought to be asking about those $2 Oregon license surcharges. Those surcharges now fund pro-fishing activities. What projects/programs will have to be axed if this initiative passes and those surcharges are re-directed to subsidizing the commercial gillnetters?

Like I said earlier, there are much better solutions.