MMOUSE,

If it makes you feel any better, don't think of I-696 as a way to "save" our salmon. It might not do that, although I think it will help some. What it WILL do is assure that our state will no longer spend $40 to raise a salmon that will later be netted and sold for somewhere around $1 a pound. Do the math, it takes a 40 lb'er to break even. And that's only if you consider that the state will get back the entire amount the fish is sold for, which will never happen.

By contrast, a 40 lb'er on the end of a a recreational angler's line means that guy will most likely spend hundreds on tackle, lic, guide, etc. even if he can't keep the fish. Doesn't the state have an obligation to maximize the dollars they get from the harvest of their resources. Should they sell for a dollar what they could sell for ten?

What strikes me as a major reason to be pro-696 is nets don't release the "wrong" fish. They kill all fish that happen along. By-catch, schmy catch. Try telling the warden that the King you're packing out of the Hump this year is by-catch and see how far it takes you. It'll take you straight to a stiff fine. Yet the commercials do it regularly without so much as an "oops".

Anyway, I'm convinced you are a fan of nets and are only going with the whole Sierra Club facade to make it appear you are a fish conservationist. No conservationist would condone a fishing method that allows no chance for fish to be released, and that consistently kills the wrong fish and considers them "by-catch".


VOTE "YES" ON I-696!!!