won't help worth a damn. not even worth consideration in my opinion.

just another example of not being able to see the forest for the trees.

Did you just enter the fishing world????????????????????? Welcome by the way....

Clue in a bit and understand that there have been rivers that have been bait restricted for a long time and the WILD fish haven't recovered... So why would you suggest a bait restriction?? Do a little more research, would ya?

P.S. Go ahead and jump on the bandwagon you fly guys..... Here's your chance to talk some jibberish........

AUNTY - The Sky is falling again.......

Keith

Couple things come to mind. As long as we are willing to say "what he does is worse", nothing will get done.

Dams? Nope, it's the sea lions. Logging? No, it's the gill nets. Fishing? No, it's ocean mortality. And so on. There is so much blame that everybody can find somebody worse. And, until the worst is fixed I don't have to.

And, saving the fish, or any natural resource is going to cost each one of us some money or freedom. We have very convincingly shown, over the course of millenia, that we when we do whatever we want nature loses.

As to bait and the problems of. Can anybody out there tell me of a full access (not 25 miles back in a wilderness) fishery on salmonids that uses bait and has a robust population of naturally reproducing wild fish? Seems to me that the well know, popular, and intensively fished wild-stock fisheries have one thing in common. No bait.

I wonder how long it would take to conduct a study of the Oregon fish and wildlife COMMISSION and determine how many smolts they kill?

While I agree with Aunty, Id like to preface or add, that selective harvest is the first of many changes needed for recovery. She knows it, but the usual suspects will chime in and pick it apart.

Again, no group can do all things at the same time. If it was a car accident, we would fight over clean up the radiator fluid or fixing the flat tire or pulling out the bumper to drive the car away. Thats why they have tow trucks and hazmat crews.

We dont.

If the state Wanted to fix these problems, really wanted to fix these problems, we would already have nuclear power, no dams, no culverts and no gillnets. The few selected hatcheries would be state of the art. If we had all those things, at the same time, we would have no money.

As long as they keep us fighting, they dont have to solve the problem. Process of elimination.

Nets
harvest limits, or segregated production increases.
Culverts
adequate or increasing spawning grounds
improved hatcheries, or selective closures
pollution,
predation
leaves one thing.

and nowhere to run, hide or blame someone else.



Nothing will please the ME< ME< ME crowd.

I attended ODFW 2010 run forecast meeting in Clackamas on the 16th.
One of the topics was this study.
There wasn't any money to do this study, so the gillnetters graciously ponied up the cash to get it done.
A representative from the Governor's office was present, look for a ban on cures containing sulfide, also don't look for any more studies from ODFW on the subject.

My guess is it's just a little pay back from our friends in the commercial fishing industry, you know the ones your trying to help catch more fish.
This is retribution from the failed attempt to relegate commercial harvest out of the mainstem CR into the SAFE Areas.
Or what ever that half baked idea CCA was pushing.

While it probably is a joke, the study has made me wonder. I can't help but think of those time when the releases are up and a toss of bait in the water results in a cloud of smolt attacking it. If it is truely harmful, then it could have a small effect. We outlawed trebles in the salt and require barbless hooks, so a regulation on this probably is not that far fetched, especially if it just puts a limit on the amount or percentage allowed.

I'd be more worried about the more powerful Nofishing group than the commercials playing [censored] for tat. Next a study that proves outboard motor fumes causes birth defects in smolts.

Hey i didn't write censored! Change that to teat

Which more powerful nofishing group?

The Pew, MPA and Wildlife viewers gang.

That's a interesting diverse "group" of individual entities.
Example: If another initiative went before the voters in this state like
I-696 to ban all nets, that was out spent 20-1 by commercial interest VS
I-696 sponsers, and defeated to ban all nets. What group could defeat this bill next time around and possibly out spend commercial fishing interest?

Isn't CCA pushing Columbia commercial for seining, which is a net fishery. Not sure who's pushing what anymore, everyones got a different plan. My guess is mass confusion is the biggest enemy.

That's interesting that you think CCA is the answer to that hypothetical question I posted on previous post. I was thinking in a different direction.
My take is the people spoke on I - 696 ,which I disagree with, but respect. So next available step to get wild salmon back on their gravel and eliminating by catch of everything that swims,fish and birds would be to replace non selective gillnetting with selective fishing by seining. Separating wild from hatchery fish unharmed, and eliminating a majority of waste of by catch. Nothing has changed that I know of to answer your above question.

I'm not trying to stir the pot and have seen previous concerns posted. Now having said that, I'm out of here my wife wants to finish Christmas shopping.

Lucky,

His post isnt correct in the scope of the bill. So his answer isnt an answer for anything and neither is the bill as written, other than to stop the slaughter of wild fish and hatchery steelhead, that commies cant sell.

If we banned all netting, we still have a lot of work to do, to get actual recovery. There are so many problems to fix, even if we Banned all nets, including tribal, we could still lose a lot more fish and some of the runs, when you consider that some have only a few hundred fish coming back.

what is your definition of "actual recovery" ?

I've had it!
You fly tools just added 1 more full time Columbia River Gill netter to the table!
I have money burning a hole in my pocket and I'm going to be looking for a nice 30-36ft gill netter, with a Columbia River License. Don't give two bits for any SAFE area fishery! I'm going to show you real mortality!



EARTH FIRST!
We'll log the other planets later!

LL Guess I'm not up to speed on these bills, but I'm pretty sure Washington State Law has no bearing on tribal treaties. If you review the George Bush presidental order to ban high seas driftnetting for RedDrum. Its very direct that it would only apply to nontribal fisherman, which aren't fishing it anyway? We also have the Sac as a prime example of what does't work, gillnetting shut down, trolling shut down, sportfishing shut down, Sealions are protected and there still just pumping the rivers dry.

Please don't associate my comments to CCA or their issues. I think that is what is confusing to you on previous post. Like I said above, that it is my take on these particular situations.

My wife and I had the chance to fish the gulf for 1)tarpon, 2)grouper, and 3)drum, snook, and sea trout. We targeted these three individual groups on seperate days.The guides and I had time to talk about many issues affecting the gulf area. I have accumulated some data since that time.
You and I apparently, try to compare other areas that aren't in our backyard to see if there is a common thread. So here we go again to by catch. Just because there isn't a fishery in your back yard doesn't mean that specie isn't being severely effected in some shape or form.The shrimp fishery, just one fishery that has cause and effect on drum and many other species in that area. Here is a link to the utter waste by this fishery.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bycatch

This link states that of the global shrimp fishery of 7,000,000,000 lbs. the discarded waste range from 3:1 to 15:1 ratio in the US, depending on what area you fish, to 20:1 in some parts of the globe.That means that some number between 21 Billion lbs. to 140,000,000,000 lbs. of by catch is thrown out as garbage each year. I repeat, just one of all fisheries around the globe with by catch.

OH OH grandkids are here. See ya