Big shot out to ODFW!!

G

GreenDrifter

Member
Joined
Jan 20, 2009
Messages
39
NOT

Fishery managers set spring chinook seasons


Date:


February 11, 2009

Contact:


John North (971) 673-6029
Chris Kern (971) 673-6031
Rick Swart (971)673-6038
Fax: (503) 842-8385

CLACKAMAS, OR – Fishery managers from Oregon and Washington set spring chinook salmon fishing seasons for March and April only for the Columbia and Willamette rivers today during a joint state hearing.

Several fisheries, including those in the Willamette River and in the Columbia River between Bonneville Dam and the river mouth, are currently open under permanent rules and will remain open through February. The seasons adopted today will take effect March 1.

On the Columbia below the Hayden Island powerlines (west towers), anglers will be able to fish 7 days a week from March 1-15 and three days a week (Thurs. - Sat.) from March 19-April 18.

From the Hayden Island powerlines (west towers) upstream to Bonneville Dam, the season will run 7 days a week from March 1-22, and four days a week (Wed. - Sat.) from March 25-April 22.

The daily bag limit for these areas will be two adipose fin-clipped salmon or steelhead, but only one may be a chinook. The mainstem Columbia will be open for retention of adipose fin-clipped steelhead and shad ONLY during days and seasons open for retention of adipose fin-clipped spring chinook.

The season for the area between Bonneville and McNary dams was set for March 16-April 30, with a bag limit of two adult adipose fin-clipped chinook or steelhead per day. Recognizing that chinook catches in this area are typically low through April, the two states intend to continue working together to set additional fishing time for this section of the river after April 30.

On the Willamette, ODFW modified the permanent season to allow retention of adipose-clipped chinook 7 days a week from March 1-15 and three days a week (Thurs. - Sat.) from March 19-April 30. These rules apply to the Willamette downstream from Willamette Falls, including Multnomah Channel and the lower Clackamas River downstream of the Highway 99 Bridge. The daily bag limit will be two adult adipose fin-clipped salmon or steelhead, but only one may be a chinook.

The Willamette River upstream of Willamette Falls and the Clackamas River upstream of the highway 99 bridge will remain open under permanent rules.

"Given the constraints we have, we are fortunate to be able to provide this opportunity," said Steve Williams deputy administrator of ODFW's fish division. "We have a high level of confidence that we will be able to meet the objectives of the season we've adopted."

The seasons are based on a forecast of 298,000 returning upriver spring chinook, and a combined estimated harvest of 17,300 fish in the sport fishery downstream of Bonneville Dam.

More than 90 people including sport and commercial fishermen showed up to listen and present testimony at the hearing, conducted at City Hall in Longview, Wash.

In other business the agencies took the following actions:

* Adopted the 2009 Winter/Spring Preseason Commercial Fishing Plan
* Set commercial fishing seasons for Select Area fisheries, including Blind Slough/Knappa Slough, Tongue Point/South Channel, Deep River and Young's Bay.
* Modified daily bag limits for chinook in Select Area recreational fisheries to be identical to those in the mainstem Columbia River downstream of Hayden Island when the Columbia is open for retention of chinook.

###
 
A

ArcticAmoeba

Active member
Joined
Jun 5, 2008
Messages
974
Location
Oregon
Ah you saw this too... I thought the same thing. The future is blurry at best for us sport anglers.

It is not lookin like our state cares too much about the sport fishers. The ones who are putting up a lot of cash that doesn't even get partitioned properly.(.83 cents out of every dollar you spend on tags, and harvest cards goes to OSP, not ODFW, or fisheries management accounts.) And why are certain hatcheries in our locale only continuing to spawn fish for Comercial gill net/Native dip net supplementation!? It does not make sense, unless the higher ups, like our Governer, and reps. are getting their pockets laced with cash money. Why else would a person/persons play so favorably to people who contribute less than 1% of our Salmon runs. The gill-netters put in less than 1% of fingerlings, or smolts, and they get to harvest how much???... No, I don't think so... And their harvest methods are disgustingly damaging to "by-catch." Our state reps. seem to have so much concern for our place of residence in the way of terra firma, and for our waters health, not the species that use the water. Something is amiss, and everyone can see it. Someone within our Fish & Wildlife division better step up bnig time and start a process of recovery, or it will be left up to the folks who get paid to pretty much turn a blind eye to sport fishing intersts. It is time for a lod voice of reason. It might not seem that bad to some, but we really are in dire straits, and our fisheries are not hanging by a thread anymore, we are well past the break. The whole shebang is on the drop, and only a well thought out "net" will save our sport harvestable Salmon runs...Ironic.
 
T

Trick

New member
Joined
Feb 12, 2009
Messages
2
Location
St Helens
It's better a deal on the lower river then we had last year.

Yep, the Commission is ran by commissioners that are funded by the commercial interest (insert Jon England). All appointed by our fearless governor Ted Kulengoski. Jon England (owner of England Marine Supplies) is a top supplier of commercial gear to...you guessed it....the CR gillnetters.

ODFW is not the bad guys here......it's the commission that you should have a beef with.

Everyone needs to be writing the governor and your representatives in your district and let them know how you feel. Currently we have nobody on the commission that apparently has a sport-fishing slant. Stan Steele has thrown his name into that hat (there is a spot open on the commission) and I've already emailed my reps and governor to throw my support behind him.

If you haven't already joined the CCA, consider this as well. I truly feel they are our best hope at slowly chipping away at the gillnetters strangle hold on the CR. Best $25 bucks I've spent IMHO.
 
F

FromTheHills

New member
Joined
Feb 9, 2009
Messages
9
Location
Corvallis
It's complex...

It's complex...

The issue is complex, sports fisherman blame the nets, the nets blame agriculture, agriculture blames someone else, and someone else blames their neighbor, brother, and cousin. And each is relieved when the spotlight is on the other. It would also be interesting to better understand the effects of poaching from foreign and domestic fleets at sea and even in our own rivers. I think it is safe to say that at this point every fish counts in relation to survival of the species.

I agree that we should not target ODFW. I don't think anyone has ever heard an ODFW employee, from the top to the bottom, say, "I am intentionally doing this to benefit the netters and screw the sports fishing community." or vice versa or insert any other groups name.

The politics, sure, we should be disgusted.

But we should all blame ourselves. The history of what humans have done to salmon rivers is to blame. And while we have recognized the faults of history, there are still issues at hand.

When we water our lawns and spray pesticides, or cut trees even in the smallest backyard stream, we are affecting the salmon (and other species). And if you can say, "I don't do that." We still allow our banks, parks, businesses, and government buildings-- in every corner of the state-- water and spray in order to have green grass all summer. Last time I checked green grass has yet to help me have a nice walk, get a good loan, or get a bill passed, or even buy some delicious french fries.

Early U.S. Army Corps surveys found rivers like the Willamette to have hundreds of log jams in just one river mile-- it all got cleared. Now the Willamette is fast and lacking structure on a grand scale... but... it is open for transportation and economic benefit. Or, is it?

If we truly cherish the salmon, particularly the wild ones, as much as they are revered, we have to change our lifestyle habits on a grand scale-- from consumerism and daily living to industry and politics. We have to blame ourselves.

We have to address this issue through the entire life cycle of the salmon. We can restore uplands and wetlands all day long, but if the young can't survive in the big rivers or get trapped, predated, or fried in the estuaries because of
tide gates, habitat destruction, and high water temperatures, is that effective? No, and while it's a respectable effort at the citizen level, it's political lip service and like giving someone a band aid to treat their cancer.

Vice versa, if we restore the estuaries, but allow upstream areas to be polluted by urban runoff, eroded by ditching and channelization, and silted by questionable land and development practices... it's a bleak scenario.

And if adults can move upstream past dams, but the young returning to sea get ground into chum in turbines or trapped in pools and boiled or predated ... what good is that?

Likewise, we can put logs in streams all day to improve habitat, fix passage barriers, and overall restore habitat from sea to the headwaters, but if we don't also pay attention to water quality... well... we're wasting our time. But politics doesn't want people to pay attention to water quality, that's just "too controversial" and then they may actually have to focus on real problems, not just surficial ones.

If we keep depending on hatchery fish to solve the sports fishing problem, we perpetuate the problems above because the lobby that frustrates so many people can continue on the same track because, after all, hatchery fish are "fish" and they keep the sporting folks fat, happy, and quiet. I'm not against hatcheries and think they have their place, but they are not a wholesale solution, which is how they have been treated from the start, particularly by politicians.

Stocking more fish isn't the answer, in my opinion. I know the hatchery issue is hot-hot-hot, but the survival of a species can't depend on that alone.

I would rather see wild stocks prevail and our money go toward public safety, education, conservation, and restoration. But, that's just me. The wild fish are genetically stronger and they have adapted specifically to surviving in individual rivers over millions of years.

When we take away the intense hatchery stockings form the equation, the issues of survival and reproduction are magnified. And we all get jaded because there aren't as many fish to catch. Instead, shouldn't we be recognizing the severity of the problem (which I think we actually are)?

But what are the solutions? Ugh... ... ... well, I at least agree that one aspect involves challenging the commissions that set the limits, as well as the commercial lobby.

Am I an idealist? Perhaps. But the longer we keep saying, "Oh, that's an ideal world. It's not possible." The longer it will remain impossible.

I was raised in a place where 2,000 miles of streams ran polluted and essentially lifeless. Yes, these places exist, here in the United States. The wild salmon runs of the Pacific Northwest are surely a resource not to be squandered toward extinction.

I remain optimistic, however, that the effects of restoration and management that have been done in the last 5 years have not yet come to fruition. The salmon that we are helping through restoration efforts are still at sea, coming to a river near you in the near future.

My opinion.
 
B

bigdog

1
Joined
Sep 1, 2008
Messages
1,252
Location
Portland, Oregon
I see where you are coming from on this. Yes us as a human raise have ruined a lot of things and we continue to do so and I'm sorry to say I'm sure we will keep doing it till the day where there isn't even a earth to live on.

Yes we all should do something to make a difference in this and everything, but you have to also stop and think of how hard this would be to make happen. I'm not saying we as people shouldn't do something and I'm not saying we can't do something. In fact I agree we need to do something if not for ourselfs but for our children and there children. No I'm not a tree hugger, I live in a house made of wood, I use the same toilet paper as the next person, but there has to be a line drawn to what we do and what we affect.

Just writing to someone in the politics won't change anything at least as far as I see it it won't. They really don't care what the little people have to say we aren't the ones linning there pockets and building the bank accounts for them.

I could go off on this whole subject all night but what good would it do. Bottom line is something does need to be done to make a change. How hard would that be and how long would that take who knows. One person can't make a difference in this but then again its thinking like that, that keeps people from trying to make a difference.

We don't know where to start or where to go if we do start. Who to start with or what to start on with them. We do need to put some thought in to it and hope that more people out there think about it as well and maybe just maybe someday something will change for the better of the future of it all.
 
Last edited:
A

ArcticAmoeba

Active member
Joined
Jun 5, 2008
Messages
974
Location
Oregon
FTH, I wholly agree with your statements. Do you think that if we concentrate our efforts solely on fish with fins, would we be able to angle, and retain them? I doubt it, but if thats how it goes, then I guess I have no reason to purchase a Combo linence, and countless Harvest Cards. I would rather give my money to an organization that will actually do the right thing with my hard earned cash. CCA is a start, but we need to be more tactful, slightly more aggressive. The health of any fishery depends on a lot of factors, but the few rivers that can manage a real, healthy brat stock run are currently forced, or decided to discontinue their sport based fishing programs, and I just can't see the logic there. A healthy start would be to get rid of commercial targeting of Salmon, and Steelhead. If they are to harvest such vast quantities, then they should harvest only what they put into the system. Same with sport anglersas well. But first, for that to be a reality, our money we pay for tags/lisences needs to be delegated properly. And there are plenty of areas to set up terminal fisheries on the coast, if commercial netting is to be carried on in the future. a lot to talk about, and yes write your state reps, call them. I spoke with Rick Swart, and Chris today, and got some answers. Still, they are as much in the dark, as a lot of people within the state boards, or they are lying, one of te two, but what really needs to happen is more than what is being put out on the table right now. I hope it will get situated, but I have a feeling one group is going to be very upset with the end results.
 
K

Kodiak

Banned User
Joined
Jul 7, 2008
Messages
844
Location
Mill City, Oregon
Grab me torch and pitchforks!!!!

Grab me torch and pitchforks!!!!

There are several measures that will be introduced to the senate floor that deal with banning gillnets. Contact your rep. and let your voice be heard! If they don't pass I have been in contact with a gentelman that writes proposals for ballot measures, and will be trying to get the money together to start collecting ballot signatures. Between the sports fisherman and hippies in this state we should be able to ban gillnets forever, we did it to protect our steelhead here in Oregon, why not for the sake of our salmon. I wonder how many *OFFer's* I will get to donate time and help! Maybe we should consider forcing ODFW to list all salmon species as sport fishes instead of food fish.
 
Last edited:
A

ArcticAmoeba

Active member
Joined
Jun 5, 2008
Messages
974
Location
Oregon
I would contribute to any worthy cause, and yes turn the Salmon listing over to Sport Fish, not Food Fish. It only means that it is a food if you harvest them via "sporting" methods...I.E. Rod and reel.
 
L

luv2fish

Member
Joined
Apr 29, 2008
Messages
271
Location
Portland
There are several measures that will be introduced to the senate floor that deal with banning gillnets. Contact your rep. and let your voice be heard! If they don't pass I have been in contact with a gentelman that writes proposals for ballot measures, and will be trying to get the money together to start collecting ballot signatures. Between the sports fisherman and hippies in this state we should be able to ban gillnets forever, we did it to protect our steelhead here in Oregon, why not for the sake of our salmon. I wonder how many *OFFer's* I will get to donate time and help! Maybe we should consider forcing ODFW to list all salmon species as sport fishes instead of food fish.

Count me in Kodiak
 
B

bigdog

1
Joined
Sep 1, 2008
Messages
1,252
Location
Portland, Oregon
I would give my time as well. If people want fish for food catch it or they can always sell FARM raised fish don't need to get the fish out of the sea or rivers. If you want a fresh fish you should have to get it with a rod.
 

Similar threads

Top Bottom