Yeah. I think you have it right.

The first time I saw the announcement I posted, I didn't read past "Susewind, gillnets, and selective" before reacting in the typical, angry way I do anytime I read accounts of our fisheries managers justifying fisheries that do too much collateral damage... No matter what the fishery. Having read through the whole thing, I see the irony of saltwater sport anglers condemning other groups/methods as non-selective. As long as we want to fish saltwater, we ought not make such outrageous claims.

Ultimately, I think all the salmon fishing, sport or commercial, should be in terminal areas. Also, considering some of the ridiculous things we can do with technology and innovation, I just don't buy that we can't find a more sustainable way to farm fish for markets. Everybody's going to have to make some sacrifices if we're to be able to fish for salmon long-term. My position is that the increasing number of places freshwater anglers can no longer fish due to relentless, perennial overfishing in the salt and estuaries has been a painful sacrifice, and mayne it's time for some other stakeholders to share some pain.

You said something about the money invested. To that, I can only say YES. A lot of money is being spent on the privilege to harvest the last salmon, and the ones with the least money are absorbing the full burden of conservation. The real hell of it is that none of these river closures help; the damage has been done before the fish get there, as evidenced by decreasing escapement goals.