I wonder what would happen if hatcheries on Chambers Creek, Minter Creek, and the Dechutes (most likely raised at Coulter Creek) quit reproducing fish in the South Sound? Hell... would we even have a fishery? Thankfully the Squax's have some returning fish. Where would the natives fish then? Granted they are terminal fisheries, but....

To use the term "surplus" is absolute BS when 50 or 60-years ago I could have quite possibly agreed with the word "surplus" except for resident chinook. Think of the numbers 40-years beyond that!

What were the escapement goals in the 70's when Minter Creek release over 10M chinook? What are they now? White River chinook....? 500?

In the early 70's when I first started fishing in the rivers for salmon/steelhead, the Green was the number one river in the State (Puyallup was number two). What happened? Urban Sprawl? Nutrients? Ocean conditions? (Puke- Jack Daniels and Pepperoni pizza with heavy sauce and residual hanging in the nasal cavity). I have to believe nets were the first contributor!
I don't think it even possible for the numbers of fish caught to drop that fast in the late 70's without nets making an impact.

I have a hard time believing all the brain power at state level can state, "We can't do this or that" yet not say , we can do this...." The only example I can even recall of "If we do this" was Frank Haw and his vision for the blackmouth program. Bless you Frank Haw! Here's another example... anyone know where the new net pens for the blackmouth program will be after Percevial are pulled? Either does WDFW- after some 50-plus emails!

Pull all nets for a few years... Then let's sit down and discuss forecast models, ocean conditions, urban sprawl, and nutrients. I am positive I would hear, "We can't do that" instead of, "we should do this!"

If we have so much surplus then our seasons should be extended to grant us an equal share!

Capt -
Actually I hear a lot of "we should do this". The problem is that there isn't a lot of agreement or commitment to bring the idea to fruition.

When one looks at the catch contribution of the various stocks during the winter blackmouth season I don't see how you can consider this fishery a "clean" fishery. While the portion of hatchery fish in the blackmouth fishery is pretty high the wild fish that are caught tend to come from the very stocks (springs and summers) that a key to any meaningful Chinook recovery in Puget Sound. We "spend" a pretty good chunk of the allowable ESA impacts targeting those immature Chinook.

To illustrate how divided the sport fishing community be what would be your reaction to my "we should target adult Chinook during the summer rather than the immature fish during the winter - for similar ESA impacts I suspect that we could provide access to larger Chinook for a larger cross section of the angling community." The effort duirng the 2 1/2 week selective Chinook fishery this summer in MA 9 and 10 dwarfed what you be seen in months during the winter blackmouth season.

Apologies to other readers for being off topic.

Tight lines
Curt

Now if we could only convince the tweakers that the nets and bouys have copper in them.

That would eliminate the problem!!!

Todd,
Back to my post a back quite a ways. What I was trying to get across was that I you and I were room mates and we agreed to split utilities and rent, wouldn't you want to see some documentation. I feel like sportsmen are the ex-wife trying to get her fair child support. We keep being told how much the state uses and why the split is fair and that each side is paying so much, but seeing the actual numbers takes a court order. There really is no reason why the state couldn't easily provide the actual treaty vs. non-treaty catch allowances for each watershed. I am sure that when they sit down to make the allocations the tribe insists on or provides their view of the non-treaty vs treaty takes (and available catch) and that the state/Feds do the same. The fact that no one has provided these numbers for this arguement yet points to the fact that these numbers are not readily available. My opinion is that veiled practices like this are usually not by accident. It probably has as much to do with how much commercial take as anything, but it sure would change public opinion if the numbers were posted here; which lleaves a cynic like me believing there is a reason why they aren't.

Ahhhhh.....14 pages so far of "same chit, different year". You know the topic...."The obvious doesn't matter." The treaty was wrong, is wrong, and likely will forever be wrong. The end ruling was/is the ridiculous result of modern interpretation and would have been shot down long ago at the original signing if any of those involved could see where we are today.

I am curious about something, however. Todd, you pound on Slade Gordon whenever the opportunity arises. What is it that you dispise about his efforts? Was he not a lawyer trying to reduce the tribal impacts, or do I have that wrong? He/we lost, for sure, but why does that affect you personally? It's a serious question. Anyone who is as obsessed with fishing as you cannot not care about fishing opportunity, as do I, but I am confused about where you are coming from with Slade Gordon.

Dude, you hit the nail on the head!

I'm not speaking for Todd (the idea that he'd need anyone to speak for him is kinda funny). I'm only speaking for myself. Maybe B-Run too.


As a long time upstream (Idaho) resident, Senator Gordon was always on my news radar. The man represented irrigators, and the hydropower industry very well, and has never been friendly to wild salmon restoration except for lip service. He and Larry Craig are cut from the same cloth.

For context keep this in mind; to serious Idaho anglers, the Lower Snake river dams elicit the same gut response that gill nets do to the guys on the I-5 corridor.


But since most of us are west end residents, how about something more local? Like Sen Gordon holding up the Elwha dam removal?

I'm still looking for it, but I recall a quote that was attributed to him that was basically saying that wild salmon are a remnant species that wasn't worth our time and money. We should be making more hatcheries instead.

The quote might be an urban myth, but that it sounds like something the honorable Senator might say, which should say a lot in itself.

And after writing all that, I just realized I took part in a thread hijacking. I feel dirty.


Vince

October 15, 1998

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE-Gorton Stalls Progress on Northwest Salmon
(SEATTLE)--Fishing and conservation groups today commended the Clinton Administration for standing up to Senator Slade Gorton's demands for draconian restrictions on Columbia Basin salmon recovery. These organizations also blasted Gorton for his one-sided support of industrial river-users on the Columbia and for his broken promise on Elwha River salmon recovery.

"For months Gorton has unfortunately held Elwha River dam removal, a salmon recovery measure with near-unanimous support, hostage to draconian restrictions on Columbia Basin salmon recovery, a completely separate issue," said Bill Arthur of the Sierra Club. "Since the Administration correctly rejected Slade's attempt to lock in the status quo of industrial dominance, taxpayer subsidies and failed recovery strategies on the Columbia, Slade decided to kill his hostage by withdrawing money for Elwha River salmon. Our senior senator has once again tried to legislate river management from D.C., and failing that, is taking out his anger on Elwha River salmon."

Negotiations between the White House and Gorton on Northwest salmon recovery just broke down over Gorton's demands to exempt Columbia Basin dams from salmon recovery measures and studies called for by the Administration, Northwest governors, fisheries biologists, fishing groups and others.

"It's sad that Washington's senior senator continues to pander to industrial river users at the expense of salmon, the fishing economy and a long-term regional solution to the salmon crisis," said Tim Stearns of Save Our Wild Salmon. "His unreasonable demands for major restrictions on Columbia Basin salmon recovery flies in the face of the best available science and undermines attempts to come to regional agreement. We applaud the Administration for resisting his efforts to re-write or ignore major laws designed to protect salmon and provide for balanced uses of the river."

Gorton has said that he is merely trying to ensure that the northwest and its members of congress have a major role in Columbia salmon recovery decisions.

"Gorton's claim that he is merely trying to ensure a Northwest voice in Columbia salmon decisions is disingenuous," added Bill Arthur. "Federal law already reserves to Congress the power over dismantling federal dams and the Administrations '1999 decisions' process already includes strong public participation. Gorton is trying to pre-empt this public process and lock in status-quo management. It is wrong for him to consistently stand in the way of the public process and the best available science."

NOTE: Representative Elizabeth Furse is expected to announce her new bill on salmon recovery and energy policy in a speech today in Portland.

September 11, 1998

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE-Less Words, Same Number of Dead Salmon: The Gorton
(SEATTLE)-Fishing and conservation groups today blasted Senator Slade Gorton's latest "compromise" on Columbia and Snake River salmon recovery.

"Gorton's latest rider is unnecessary and counterproductive," said Tim Stearns of Save Our Wild Salmon, a coalition of 50 sport and commercial fishing groups, fishing businesses and conservation organizations. "It goes far beyond reiterating that Congress already has the power to authorize the removal of federal dams. Gorton's rider will tie the hands of regional fish managers, undermine informed, public debate and doom salmon to extinction in trucks and barges. We urge the President to veto this rider or his '1999 decisions' on long-term recovery are at risk."

On September 9th, Gorton amended his rider (section 343) to the Interior Appropriations bill to read:

"Unless specifically authorized by Congress or with the consent of licensees for dams licensed by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, a Federal or State agency shall not require, approve, authorize, fund or undertake any action that would remove or breach any dam on the Federal Columbia River Power System or any dam on the Columbia or Snake Rivers or their tributaries licensed by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission or diminish below present operational plans the Congressionally authorized uses of flood control, irrigation, navigation and electric power and energy generating capacity of any such dam."

While much shorter than Gorton's other Columbia salmon riders and bills, this amended rider has the same basic flaws:

It is not necessary. Congress will clearly have to authorize the removal of a federal dam. Nobody disputes this.
It undermines the Biological Opinion for the Columbia/Snake Rivers and ties the hands of regional salmon managers that need to make day-to-day operational changes at the dams.
It threatens a Habitat Conservation Plan recently negotiated between Douglas and Chelan County Public Utility Districts, which operate three dams on the mid-Columbia, and federal, state and tribal fish managers.
It will prevent resolution of fish passage problems at other Columbia dams, those owned by Grant County PUD for example.
It undermines the public debate on salmon recovery and could prevent federal and state agencies from making vital salmon recovery recommendations.
Senator Gorton's efforts to lock in the status quo of industrial river use is particularly distressing to the fishing community, coming only days after a potential fishing closure was announced for the Columbia River and tributaries.
"Senator Gorton's rider will continue to waste taxpayer funds on failed recovery strategies like fish barging, while the federal dams, the main killers of juvenile and adult salmon, go unchanged," said Judie Graham of the Washington Trollers Association. "We're willing to do our part to protect salmon, but not while the dams get away with killing up to 80% of the juveniles and 40% of the adult salmon. This is unfair and it won't save salmon. The Clinton Administration must show its commitment to salmon recovery and fishing families by vetoing Gorton's rider."

Senator Patty Murray has been seeking a compromise with Gorton that ensures Congress' role in any decision to remove a federal dam. However, she has been rebuffed and it is clear that Gorton wants to do far more than just ensure Congress' authority on dam removal. National and regional newspaper editorials have criticized Gorton's riders as going too far. An August 19th letter from Oregon Governor John Kitzhaber and Washington Governor Gary Locke to President Clinton stated, "By prejudging the benefits and costs of certain recovery measures, the rider severely undermines our regional effort to work towards such a plan" and urged a veto of the Interior bill.

"Gorton does a major public dis-service by misleading and inflammatory statements about dams and salmon," added Stearns. "We would prefer to work with the Northwest delegation to address problems and make thoughtful decisions. Unfortunately we are forced to attack Senator Gorton's self-serving pre-judgment of the issue."

Gorton's efforts to lock in the status quo of expensive and failed techno- fixes is exposing the Northwest's hydropower system and cheap power rates to outside scrutiny.

"Gorton's riders have been criticized by regional and national newspapers, taxpayer, fishing and conservation groups, the Clinton Administration, various agencies, and members of Congress," said Bill Arthur of the Sierra Club. "His efforts to protect four salmon-killing, taxpayer subsidized dams on the lower Snake River invites outside scrutiny of the Northwest's "special deal" for cheap electricity, which is coming at the expense of the salmon. I don't think too many folks want to see the status quo of taxpayer-subsidized extinctions continue."

Just like the ad on the radio and TV Prime silvers caught by the proud muckelshoots , Caught the traditional way., carefully handeled and stored
ok bye JP

Thanks, guys....

Vince has always had a way to cut through to the meat of things...."For context keep this in mind; to serious Idaho anglers, the Lower Snake river dams elicit the same gut response that gill nets do to the guys on the I-5 corridor."

Tunakir, thanks for the old articles...where did you find them? Very nifty to dig up old, long-fought battle data.

Good stuff to bring to light again.

Slab, I think one (don't get him started) of the many problems Todd had with our fine senator was him having such close ties to the commercial fishing industry...you might say he was a little biased in allocation issues:

http://www.sladegorton.com
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slade_Gorton

Slade was no lover of tribes and their "special privileges" for sure...he spent much of his time in Congress trying to cut funds, ban tribal tax-exempt status, and end sovereignty.

Ike

I think the above has enough of the reasons to view Gorton as nothing as an enemy to the fish and to sportfishing, but I'll wrap it up by saying this:

1. Slade did nothing but thumb his nose (on behalf of the State of Washington) at judicial court ruling after judicial court ruling telling the State they better get it together on equitable treatment of the treaty tribes, or there'll be trouble...and after several years of denying the treaty tribes anything, and continuing to defy the orders of several judges, THAT"S when the Boldt Decision came down...the Boldt Decision was as much a punishment for an intrasigent and contemptuous Slade Gorton as it was anything else.

2. Slade was NOT fighting for the fish, or for sportfishermen...ever heard of Gorton's Fish Sticks...Gorton's SeaFood? It's not a coincidence that they have the same name...Slade wanted more and cheaper fish for his fish brokerage family business, and those fish come from commercial fishermen, his friends, colleagues, and business partners.

3. Slade singlehandedly f*&ked up salmon and steelhead management in this state more than anyone or anything else, and probably everything else combined...if he would have had his way there would be no treaty fishing, no sportfishing, and all the fish would be made in hatcheries on the Columbia, built at the base of every dam, and sent directly to market.

Most of Slade's bitterness towards tribes nationwide still stems from his greedy and dastardly actions in the early '70's that doomed us all to a life of "co-management"...

Fish on...

Todd

Thanks, Todd...about it sums it up rather well, I'd say.

I googled slade gorden salmon elwah , It pulled a bunch of stuff up about that other guy from Idaho also ============= and his efforts regarding the dams