Aunty, that is a conservative view that I can live with wholeheartedly!!

Jerry,
My post said that Im sure both sides have some. I didnt say all now did I.
Also you seem to be talking a differant topic.Your talking WSR and this thread was concerning a case about Coho salmon in Oregon.
But yes I understand this case could change everything concerning wild vs hatchery fish.

The true cost of salmon by the pound is astronomical thanks to all the mitigation going on.

And I wonder what the true total cost to the tax payers is going to be to save "wild" fish.

Dave,
Did you know that the BPA is a Washington Trout supporter? I saw that on the WT website today.Also noticed there list of supporters for there Benafit auction looks a little shorter than last year.
AuntyM could that shorter list be a result of all the e-mails you sent to there supporters last year?

Duro: I did not know that. Don't know what to think of that? But I still beleive BPA would love to be able to stop trying to save the wild salmon.

That is a interesting link Aunty I hadnt seen that one yet.

Dave,
I was surprised to see BPA on there list too.But I really was shocked to see they also receive support from a couple of the tribes.

Try and look at it this way...

Anyone who uses river water, habitat, upland habitat near rivers, or fish, will benefit from more fish in the water. This includes BPA, and all the tribes.

The key is how much are they willing to put into it to improve the status of the fish populations.

If WT could save the fish and all BPA would have to do is donate a few $$ and not have to change anything they do, it would be a very happy and pro$perou$ day for the BPA. This goes for everyone else, too.

Fish on...

Todd

BPA is required by law to carry out measures to conserve fish and wildlife impacted by the hydro sytem on the Columbia. One of the ways they meet this responsibility is to fund research and restoration projects. BPA funded a multi-year research project developed and implemented by WT to locate, identify, and catalogue remaining native resident-trout populations in the headwaters of mid-Columbia tributaries.

BPA awarded the funding based on the merits of the proposal. Does that mean that BPA "supports" all that WT does? You'll have to ask them. It does mean that they supported WT's research proposal and our ability to carry it out. On our website we gratefully acknowledge that support. Does that mean we support everything the BPA does? I'll allow you all to examine WT's record and decide for yourselves.

What I really want to know is: who is this person posting under Aunty M's name, and what have you done with her?

(BTW, Bill Bakke is NOT crazy. He knows too much about what he's talking about not to be listened to. Unfortunatley, what he knows about the science and the politics can make him seem a little cynical, but he is romantic and optimistic enough to stay in the trenches every single day. We're lucky to have him, whether you believe it or not.)

Ramon VB
Washington Trout

Fair enough, Aunty.

I was really trying to do just that, but as usual being too glib. We're lucky to have you too, whether I believe it or not.

Ramon Vanden Brule
Washington Trout

AuntyM; Can I have the ice skate concession?

Release all wild ice skates!!

After reading Bill Bakke's statement he sure didnt sound very optimistic about the future of "native/wild" fish.