Almost sounds like B-Run thinks Idaho fishers should get a shot at catching the hatchery fish THEY raised.

What's the world coming to?

Let 'em eat potatos.

Fish on...

Todd

I think when the fish get here it will coincide with epic run off off ?? That seems to be the big wild card right now. That said, I'll be there. Bet you can get a seat on any droolers boat Marsha. You should make the drive if its right. You know most of those guys. It would be an honor.

B-Run I've tried to hook the hubby with an Idaho trip but he's not biting.

You're right about the epic runoff timing...hope for a quick cold snap before the opener, or you could be fishing the biggest salmon fishing river in the world...literally the biggest.

Fish on...

Todd

Aunty has it right. The purpose of the 1-fish limit is to distribute the allocation among the widest group of anglers.

However, Keith's point is valid. The overall allocation remains the same regardless of the individual bag limit. Otherwise, a very small number of anglers could catch the majority of the fish. But that's called gillnetting......

Sorry, had to throw that in.

I think most are missing the main point of management, that is maximum extract of dollars from the sportsments pockets, more trips means morey money spent...good for the economy, I am a firm believer that this state manages the people for the income they can provide, not the fisheries and what may be best for them.

Might as well distribute the fish as evenly as possable...and remember, it costs just as much to launch and run your boat if you get skunked as it does if the limit is 4....it just takes four more trips to get four fish with a one fish limit.

stam

I don't always judge things on how it affects me--- I try to take a global view---- and keep your stinky chum away from me.

Amen Brother!!!

Kevin, only from a guides standpoint is a 1 fish limit helpful to your working day! 4 clients 4 fish and then its Miller Time!

Tons of great replies. keep them coming.

I'm not for or against a 1 or 2 fish limit. What ever is done needs to be best for the fish. Just for business sake, i'd prefer it stays at 1 fish, as it makes my day go that much quicker. I love to be on the water as much, and most of the time, more than anyone here. But when you are on the water everyday, it is kinda nice to get an early limit and get home to see my family.

My point is this.........

The same nubmer of fish are taken from the river with a two fish as a 1 fish. When I left the Dam on Sunday afternoon, the presure was still the same as wehn we got there, minus a few boats. The limit was one fish, so why were people still fishing. Because they had not caught there fish. All the fish that wanted to bite, had hit the bottom of boats and were dead. No more or less would have been killed by an increase in limit size. If everyone caught there 1 fish the river should have been empty of boats by the afternoon. It was still packed and as fast as you could catch a fish, it was being killed. The only way to harvest more fish than what was harvested would be if more fish wanted to bite. As long as you have bait in the water and they keep biting, it makes no difference how many the limit is set at.

There is one variable in the deal. Yes, some fisherman are better skilled at catching fish, but the level of skill needed to catch one at Bonneville is not that demanding. Kwikfish are a top producer, and most guys who spend a day up there are getting there fish. I agree, it does spread out the opportunity to other less fortunate anglers if the limit is one.

I believe the one fish limit was to spread the impacts, rather than burn them at the dam. Perhaps the limit should be two while there are few unmarked fish below Bonnie.
Once the encounter rate increases, I'd favor a limit reduction in the areas of the higher encounter rate.

Why use up all the allocation in such a small area in a short amount of time?

So we can hurry up and get on with crying about " more allocation " of course !!

Because no matter what, we gotta cry about something.. Is that not where this is really all headed anyway ??

Not for me. I have one last naive optomistic stand in me and if it turns out to be another allocation grab instead of "doing the right thing" I will retire from fishing politics.

No, not really. Not until you attemped to hijack the thread.


Think about the total number of fish that were taken............. 20,000 + finclipped fish. The fish were caught at the rate at which they would bite. At no point in time did you see any less effort to take fish from the Columbia river because of a 1 vs 2 fish limit. If you had witnessed a difference in teh number of boats of the water, then you might be able to say that everyone caught there limit and left the river open for someone else.

What I am getting at is this.....

If I guided the river and was efficient at what I did, I could run two trips a day and take doulbe the fish from the river, if they would cooperate and bite that good. Nothing illegal about it, but definatly going to use up more of the impacts. So by making the limit 1 fish, I am able to get more people into a fish rather than just one group. Now I've taken twice as many fish out of the river as the one fish limt was intented. Not only that, I created double the revenue. Wait, I jsut realized my buddies havn't yet had an opportunity to go out. Hey guys, I'll call ya when i'm done with that early limit and I'll get you into a few fish too.
Now can you see where I'm goin with this.
You shorten the day with a 1 fish limit and now you've got time on your hands, so now you can get more people into a fish rather than just getting your 2 a piece, you might let 2 guys out of you boat, and pick up three more. Why do that. Because you are only allowed one fish. The guys in the boat with 1 fish drove their cars and are ready to go home. The bite is pretty good, so you know you will only be out there a little while, might as well get a few more guys in the boat. I know one guy who ran 12 guys throug his boat one day. All of them took home fish. If it were a 2 fish limit, maybe it would take a while longer to get two fish, and thus create a bigger opportunity to stay on the boat longer. Less people to cycle through the waters is less fish that will die. Limit the opportuntiy on something as good as the Springer fishery in the Big C. and you will see a huge impact on pressure.

The only way to relieve the number of fish taken out of a river in one day is to limit the number of days it is open. When you have an umlimited supply of fisherman and a limited supply of fish, it is a no brainer. The amount of fish to get taken in a day will not change until there are no more lines in the water.

As long as there are empty tags on the water, you have done nothing to slow the harvest rate by making it a 1 fish limit.

Nobody's hijacking your thread. Some just think your points not valid.

No chance of just saying " wow, that was pretty good for everybody this year ". Does there HAVE to be a problem all the time.

Kevin you provide your reasoning as linear and everybody is equaly talented at hooking and landing fish (just like B-run said already). If you prove your point with actual data from consecutive years where there was a difference in limits you might sell your point. Data cant be you and your other guide buddy. That would be a small biased sample.

BTW B-run I think we might get the very first part of the run with the water being in good shape. I'm all licensed up and chomping at the bit. Cant wait. I love to hear all this whining about a bunch of fish when all I want is to catch a couple.

Why did I read this. fk

B-RUN, My testimony was for a 65% allocation for sportfishers, and is a matter of the public record.

I took some heat for supporting the leave the unmarked fish in the water rule. As far as I am concerned our impact should be reduced to eight percent to reflect the newer handling rule. We would be best served by minimizing our impacts on our wild fish stocks IMHO.

Hans