Originally Posted By: boater
Originally Posted By: Lucky Louie
[

I suggest that the highly contested---” gill net VS selective live capture gear equals no ESA listed saving” is incorrect and that 50 % ESA listed can be saved by using the new selective capture gear.



one of the guiding principals for the wdfw is the new Hatchery and Fishery Reform policy http://wdfw.wa.gov/commission/policies/c3619.html, one of the guiding principals in that is the 21st Century Salmon and Steelhead Initiative http://wdfw.wa.gov/publications/00036/draft_framework_20090131.pdf, now, for some unknown reason your thinking that gillnets are going away and we are going to a total new commercial harvest method and i`d have to ask "where did you wish you heard that" ?, i`d suggest that you ask who ever it was that told you that why the 21st century initiative calls for having a net drop out study done by the year 2040 is there that much drop out in purse seines or beach seines ?, plus, do you realy think the non-tribal commercials are going to give up harvesting upriver brights ??, i dont.

This is more like it Boater.

I have read both over the past year and they both make reference to conservation of wild fish.

So far I’ve shown that some conservation of some of the wild fish can be achieved with the implementation of selective live capture gear while catching much more hachery fish as intended. That is and was the point. People have been incarcerated with less evidence than I’ve shown in this thread.

Here is the whole document for people to see instead of the snippet you want to show.
http://wdfw.wa.gov/publications/00036/wdfw00036.pdf

I thought you said that you weren’t Todd. I want to hear from the top clown not the circus grunt about the unfounded accusations over the last year. smile
_________________________
The world will not be destroyed by those that are evil, but by those who watch them without doing anything.- Albert Einstein

No you can’t have my rights---I’m still using them