Posts: 345
Threads: 0
Joined: Jun 2010
Reputation:
0
138 fish over Bonn Dam and they once again extended thier season.
I really hope the run is just late. But as long as they get their 12,500 quota who cares right.
[url "http://www.dfw.state.or.us/fish/OSCRP/CRM/CAN/12/120412notice.pdf"]http://www.dfw.state.or.us/fish/OSCRP/CRM/CAN/12/120412notice.pdf[/url]
[signature]
Posts: 2,212
Threads: 0
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
so ridiculous. im getting pretty worried but there is nothing we can do.
[signature]
Posts: 345
Threads: 0
Joined: Jun 2010
Reputation:
0
Im really hoping its just because the lower river is raging. If it aint we may not get enough fish back to ID for us to have a season.
[signature]
Posts: 702
Threads: 0
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
I just returned from a trip to Oregon. I couldn't believe how many gill nets are all over the Colombia ?! It's amazing that we get anything over to our state![mad]
[signature]
Posts: 2,212
Threads: 0
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
yeah gill nets are something that need to be dealt with.
[signature]
Posts: 116
Threads: 0
Joined: Apr 2010
Reputation:
0
Idaho does have a say they just need to speak up and let it be known. All the tribes even said not to extend because of the low numbers. I think if idaho pushed the issue then things would be different. OR and WA have the dumbest people running the show over there. Simple no fish no fishing... Oh but wait there could be more fish we just dont know so lets fish... Stupidity
[signature]
Posts: 466
Threads: 0
Joined: Jul 2007
Reputation:
0
[quote LSR83]Idaho does have a say they just need to speak up and let it be known. All the tribes even said not to extend because of the low numbers. I think if idaho pushed the issue then things would be different. OR and WA have the dumbest people running the show over there. Simple no fish no fishing... Oh but wait there could be more fish we just dont know so lets fish... Stupidity[/quote]
Actually you are misled. Idaho has a "seat at the table", but is not a voting member of the Columbia River Compact or the Pacific Fisheries Management Council. they are there as a consultant, and to voice opinion only. Those agencies determine catch quotas, and the individual states determine seasons based on quota.
Unless PMFC and CRC, in partnership with NOAA fisheries, declares an emergency, and adjusts the numbers the states can pretty much do what they want. That being said, Oregon and Washington usually don't try to intercept EVERY salmon or steelhead, because they know where they come from and don't want to eat all their seed corn. They have to let some through to produce the next crop...
[signature]
Posts: 533
Threads: 0
Joined: Aug 2009
Reputation:
0
The fish don't come with point of origin tags that say "I'm from Idaho." Many of the fish in the Columbia or even the Snake are heading to rivers in Oregon or Washington, so I can at least see their reasoning.
Another issue is that Idaho anglers have lost much of their access to the adult fish thanks to the dams with no fish passage facilities. Most of the population simply does not live near enough to the rivers that still have runs for it to be anything but a special trip. I'd love to fish for salmon and steelhead, but it's a four hour drive unless fish and game dumps some in the Boise River.
Then when you get there, you have to find a spot among the crowds of other people with the same idea. Didn't we have a thread not too long ago where there was a dispute over a spot on the river?
Face it. Oregon and Washington have more population, more clout, more available water, and more anglers who can take advantage of the runs. So they get more fish.
[signature]
Posts: 345
Threads: 0
Joined: Jun 2010
Reputation:
0
[font "Times New Roman"]Stacy- you’re wrong on several points[/font]
[font "Times New Roman"][/font]
[font "Times New Roman"]1. [/font]
[font "Times New Roman"]The fish don't come with point of origin tags that say "I'm from Idaho." Many of the fish in the Columbia or even the Snake are heading to rivers in Oregon or Washington, so I can at least see their reasoning. [/font]
[font "Times New Roman"][/font]
[font "Times New Roman"]Point of fact they do come with tags telling creel surveys exactly where they come from. That’s how they monitor the lower river quota. And this is something we fisheries Bios use a lot. PAST data indicates about 60-70% of the march fish are bound for ID. OR/WA update their seasons based on the number of fish passing Bonn Dam which also detects PITT tags which can then be used to give an indication of the number of ID fish in the run.[/font]
[font "Times New Roman"][/font]
[font "Times New Roman"]2.[/font]
[font "Times New Roman"]Another issue is that Idaho anglers have lost much of their access to the adult fish thanks to the dams with no fish passage facilities. Most of the population simply does not live near enough to the rivers that still have runs for it to be anything but a special trip. I'd love to fish for salmon and steelhead, but it's a four hour drive unless fish and game dumps some in the Boise River. [/font]
[font "Times New Roman"][/font]
[font "Times New Roman"]-There are still plenty of fish coming up the rivers that have passage to allow fishing. [/font]
[font "Times New Roman"]-i[/font][font "Times New Roman"]f you think 4 hours of driving will stop people or that people from Boise don’t pack the rivers for salmon better do a little checking. [/font]
[font "Times New Roman"]-Fish and Game does actually put salmon and steelhead in the Boise River from time to time if they have extras[/font]
[font "Times New Roman"][/font]
[font "Times New Roman"]3.[/font]
[font "Times New Roman"]Face it. Oregon and Washington have more population, more clout, more available water, and more anglers who can take advantage of the runs. So they get more fish. [/font]
[font "Times New Roman"][/font]
[font "Times New Roman"][/font]
[font "Times New Roman"]You are 100% correct on this, but that doesn’t make it right. I don’t mind sharing. I just think the way they go about it is a crock of crap. Additionally while they may have “more available water” they don’t produce the majority of the springer’s, that’s ID. They ride our shirt tails on spring Chinook. [/font]
[font "Times New Roman"][/font]
[font "Times New Roman"][/font]
[font "Times New Roman"]For example, they extended their seasons 2x this spring without any hard data on Chinook numbers. They were making the "oh I’m pretty sure they are coming they are just late" assumption. If they are right, cool no harm no foul, if they are wrong they managed to have their fishery at the expense of ours.[/font]
[signature]
Posts: 463
Threads: 0
Joined: Mar 2009
Reputation:
0
+1 (million)
I drive 7 hours every weekend to fish for chinook in Idaho when they are running.
They (OR and WA) have way more salmon and steelhead water, that's what makes it so rude. If you lived over there, any day of the week you could put on a blindfold and spin around til you got dizzy, get up, take 50 paces, and you would stumble into a stream that gets salmon and steelhead.
Okay, I'm exaggerating to make a point, but still they have more than enough at an arm's length to keep them occupied year round. If they had a clue how to get salmon and steelhead to come back, they wouldn't even have to bother going to the Columbia to cut off our springers at the pass.
[signature]
Posts: 116
Threads: 0
Joined: Apr 2010
Reputation:
0
I have no problem driving 4-6 hrs to get some salmon/steelhead action... Got Bait we shall see you up there... They have started some what...
OR/WA can fish for salmon and steelies whenever they want..Would be awesome if Idaho hatcheries would change the adipose deal and do something different to mark the fish. And dont tell anyone except the fishermen on the river..
[signature]
Posts: 22
Threads: 0
Joined: Nov 2010
Reputation:
0
I'm not sure why they couldn't do a ventral or pectoral clip, or a combination adipose ventral/pectoral clip. The Great Lakes states do those clips to identify what state and/or a specific strain of fish comes from. Idaho could do a similar clipping and OR and WA would put in the regs that they can't keep double clipped fish. It would work if they did it.
Paul you're a bio, any insight on this scenario?
[signature]
Posts: 345
Threads: 0
Joined: Jun 2010
Reputation:
0
Ive asked the same question. It basically boils down to wild vs hatchery counts at the dams etc. If it has an adipose fin it gets counted as a wild and without this clip it would screw up the monitoring of the wild runs.
Not a lot of options in terms of other fins to clip. There are other marking options but all are either more invasive to the fish or more costly.
I think ID should clip the axillary process. Its a little fin attached to the pelvic fin. Kinda looks like a leach.
There would be problems and higher costs involved.
There some new science coming out that the adipose fin is actually an important sensory organ rather than just a lump of fatty tissue. So in the future other options may be looked more favorably.
[signature]
on the issue.