Originally Posted By: Todd
All that being said, I wouldn't be too surprised to see some sort of reductions if there were no commercial fisheries, at least in the programs that are mainly there to support commercial fisheries (e.g., SAFE area releases), but overall, unless massive changes were made, the net gains to sportfishing and wild fish recovery will far outweigh any reductions in Mitchell Act funding for the Columbia River.


For those concerned about changes/reductions, it's not like hatcheries are in some kind of stasis. Production ebbs, increases, and moves around the basin as policies - and politics - change. For better or worse, there's been big increases in the upriver trib area production, most of it Tribal driven I believe - Yakima River, Umatilla River, some other sites further upstream, for example. There is probably more spring and summer chinook production above Bonneville now than there's ever been.

IMO, most of this "no gillnets = no hatcheries" talk originates from the gillnetters and their allies. It's just more of the self-serving myth making those guys indulge in.
_________________________