Since commercial fishing brings in less than 3% of the Department's budget, this could be a golden opportunity for the Department to close hatcheries that primarily produce salmon for BC and the small NT commercial fleets in GH, WB, and LCR. The Department should spend no more on commercial fishing than commercial fishing contributes to the Department, unless the Legislature chooses to provide GF $ to subsidize welfare fishing. That could alleviate most, if not all, of the projected budget shortfall.
It is a interesting concept but it does not come without consequences. Reduce the number of hatchery fish in the ocean pool and impacts on natural production will rise rapidly but it takes 3 years to show and 4 & 5 ( Chinook ) to really kick in. So you end up with the old problem of intercept fisheries being at the root of any changes. There are a couple of places in our state that if you take out hatchery production both Rec and NT Commercials are history with a vastly diminished tribal catch all that is left.
So the argument that is the hatcheries or Rec fisher that are the problem is not exactly true but absolutely true depending on your location.
On another note Willapa has Rec priority so that is a bit off BUT WDF&W staff keep trying to chip away at that so right / wrong at the same time. As to GH the NT Commercial impacts are limited by policy but as in Willapa games are played some but nuthin like elsewhere. I will stay out of the LCR bit as I know little but again reduce the ocean pool without reform to AK & BC and nothing good happens.
Previous Topic
Index
