Originally Posted By: Rivrguy
Yes / No As Francis pointed out the impact % will probably stay the same. So no to coming from the sports share. That the increased numbers harvested will come from the pool of fish available to harvest and will impact the success rate of the average fisher, yes as sport fishing success is determined by the abundance in the pool. The commercial harvest could reduce it but the " silly little rule " thing is interesting.

I can not see major impact unless the tribal fisheries go selective. Now not being a ass I would have thought that when the push for selective fisheries started that folks would have recognized that fact. That the primary beneficiary would be the remnant stocks of natural spawners is obvious. That the sport fishery would take a hit was also obvious. Is not that the purpose of the selective fishery bit, to save the ESA listed stocks and maintain harvest.


Well, the tribes should switch over tomorrow. That would be the biggest FU to the state in history. And what politician in Washington Oregon and in DC will have time to answer a half million phone calls and letters. Tell me what law or policy will not be changed in the face of that. Cant wait till all the residents in the Northwest find out, they have been paying an extra 20-30% for their power bill, so the tribes and the cowboys can catch the sport portion of the fish. Never mind Boldt. The type of net, to recover ESA listed fish will render Boldt obsolete. 12,000 jobs and the revenue from 900 million dollars in business activities and a complete collapse of Fishing licenses in two states is our destiny. computer


Edited by Lead Bouncer (12/24/10 11:42 PM)