Bombshell Court Victory: Chinook Harvest Harms Southern Resident Killer Whales and Wild Chinook

gpt said:
so what happens next???
Click to expand...
Waiting for a report and recommendation from the magistrate judge on remedy.

(2) Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. # 91) is GRANTED. Judge Peterson will submit an additional report and recommendation to the Court considering an appropriate remedy for Defendants’ violations of section 7(a)(2) of the Endangered Species Act and the National Environmental Policy Act.
 
Cowlitz Bottomfeeder said:
Lots of lawyers get rich. Commercial netting continues. Congress funds more studies. Populations of salmon and Orcas continue to decline.
Click to expand...
Guarantee you the nonprofit's lawyers and government attorneys aren't getting rich off this case. It's not like personal injury cases on contingency where the lawyers get a cut of the damage award, there are no money damages in ESA or NEPA cases. The lawyers will get paid for the work they did, but everyone should get paid for working.
 
gpt said:
so what happens next???
Click to expand...
WDFW rolls back hatchery Chinook plants.
BC commercial fisherman seek retribution in the form of increased harvest of lower 48 bound Chinook for BC bound Chinook harvested in SE Alaska.
Asian trawlers continue to take a toll in "international " waters.
Fish stocks crash.
Government eventually pays SE Alaskan fisherman not to fish in the name of climate change.
Conservation groups continue to beat the LSRD removal drum.
Recreational fishing for Chinook is halted in Washington, Oregon, and Idaho.
Beardsley and ilk go to Norway to fish for Atlantic salmon on donor funded junkets, and post articles wondering why we can't be more like Scandinavia in our salmon management.
WSC attorneys sip expensive wines from their Mercer Island estates and ponder their next salmonid lawsuit.
Wash, rinse, and repeat.
 
JayB said:
Interesting. Is there a plausible best-case scenario in which the SE-AK troll fishery is curtailed and more mature salmon make it back to their natal waters in the lower-48?
Click to expand...
No. That would be an actual solution, and it would put the commercials out of business. Non-starter. What is clearly needed here is more ways to deflect blame away from the open ocean fisheries and make more spawners by closing more terminal sport fisheries (those are OUR fisheries, BTW).

Sarcasm and irony absolutely intended....
 
WDFW needs to prevented from closing any more sport fisheries or fishing seasons regardless of the circumstances..

One fish in the Hoh river it should remain open.
 
I’m kind of surprised the state even plants hatchery chinook anymore.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m not anti hatchery.
I always thought one of the main reasons for planting hatchery fish was they were intended for harvest.
I understand ESA, treaty rights, ocean take outside the sound, orcas etc but is the goal of planting fish to get excess returns back to the hatchery? I’m specifically referring to Puget Sound and Hood Canal.
Last year had a quota in MA 9 of 4,700 hatchery chinook. Some quick math on some hatchery returns of fish that would have swam through MA 9 on their return journey to be 72,000 fish.
So yeah, let’s increase hatchery production of fish we pay for but can only harvest in a very limited fisheries…..was it 9 days of fishing this chinook fishing in MA 9 this year?
SF
 
Stonedfish said:
I’m kind of surprised the state even plants hatchery chinook anymore.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m not anti hatchery.
I always thought one of the main reasons for planting hatchery fish was they were intended for harvest.
I understand ESA, treaty rights, ocean take outside the sound, orcas etc but is the goal of planting fish to get excess returns back to the hatchery? I’m specifically referring to Puget Sound and Hood Canal.
Last year had a quota in MA 9 of 4,700 hatchery chinook. Some quick math on some hatchery returns of fish that would have swam through MA 9 on their return journey to be 72,000 fish.
So yeah, let’s increase hatchery production of fish we pay for but can only harvest in a very limited fisheries…..was it 9 days of fishing this chinook fishing in MA 9 this year?
SF
Click to expand...
i think you would be surprised by the very low rate of return of these hatchery fish. so repopulating is a nice word but in reality it does not work!!!
 
Stonedfish said:
I’m kind of surprised the state even plants hatchery chinook anymore.
Click to expand...
WA taxpayers and fishing license buyers are subsidizing Canadian salmon fishing. I've advocated an audit of WA state financed salmon hatcheries based on how many $$ is costs to return a salmon to a WA angler's creel, and stop raising salmon at the hatcheries that cost the most to return a hatchery salmon to an in-state angler's creel.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top