The fact of the matter is that banning gillnets is an attempt at a wholesale re-allocation of as many fish as possible to the sportfishery.

I support this as a goal wholeheartedly, but I know that this goal has nothing to do with recovery, none at all.

It makes sense culturally, it makes sense socially, and it makes sense economically...but it does not recover anything...and those who either keep saying that when they know it's patently false, or believe it without actually thinking about it due to their fantasies about gillnets being what is causing the decline of Columbia River stocks, need to just be honest about what is going on here.

To better accomplish what this initiative will accomplish would be to get rid of the non-tribal commercial fishers altogether.

There's no need for subterfuge, no need for made up arguments, and no need for perpetuating the myth that once the gillnets are gone everything will be hunky dory (or actually improve much at all, if at all).

Just say "There is no reason for this industry to exist, and it costs us billions of dollars in lost revenue to have it. It is hereby gone."

Hard? Yes. Honest? Yes.

Fish on...

Todd