|
|
Send This Page to a Friend!
To the shock of many anglers and fishery conservation groups, the Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations has applied to the California Fish and Game Commission for an experimental salmon fishery inside San Francisco Bay. The group originally proposed both a fish trap and troll fishery, but under pressure from the Department of Fish and Game, has declined to pursue a trap fishery at this time. In the Commission's meeting on May 10 in Santa Cruz, the PCFFA proposed a "troll only fishery" for San Francisco Bay to as far east as the Carquinez Bridge under the following conditions:
The commercial fishing group is proposing the experimental permit to give commercial fishermen "greater access" to salmon, in light of the relatively robust fall chinook runs of recent years. |
|||
|
"The purpose of the fishery is to determine ways to provide greater fishing effort on the abundant fall-run chinook salmon, particularly the hatchery production, which have exceeded spawning escapement goals by at least three-fold in past years," said Zeke Grader, executive director of the PCFFA. "The curtailment of fishing along the coast to both commercial and sport fishing to protect listed winter-run and spring run chinook, coastal chinook and coho, as well as Klamath Basin runs to meet tribal allocations, has significantly reduced fishing effort." Hinting at a possible expansion of this program, Grader said, "It is proposed that it be started on a small-scale to prevent any conflicts with sport fishing in San Francisco Bay for either salmon or striped bass." The Fish and Game Commission decided to postpone approval of the permit at the meeting because of the controversy it has incited, opting to move the agenda item to the Commission's August meeting. United Anglers of California and other sportfishing groups are adamantly opposed to the proposal because it could impact endangered species stocks on the Stanislaus, Mokelumne, Cosumnes, Tuolumne and other rivers; could adversely impact salmon fishing on the Sacramento, Feather and American rivers; and could cause greater boat congestion in an already overcrowded bay. "We have no problem with the commercial salmon fishery in the open ocean," said Bob Strickland, president of United Anglers of California. "There are plenty of fish for all. But we need to let the recreational fishermen - whose limits have been cut severely - to have the excess." Commercially caught salmon create revenue of $28 to $40 per fish within the state. Recreational fish, including those caught on Central valley rivers, generate revenue of $560 to $1,000 each, according to the Norcal Guides Association. "The salmon commercial catch is already 3.3 fish to every 1 recreation fish caught in the ocean," added Strickland. "There are many more recreational fishermen than commercial fishermen: let the greatest number of people enjoy this excess. We as recreational fishermen are not going to allow our state's fisheries to be depleted by greed." Strickland is also concerned that the monitoring of the commercial fleet would not be sufficient, due to the DFG's lack of funds and personnel. The DFG only has enough money to fund observers for 40 days, while the proposed season is 90 days. This would be a gap of 50 days where the commercial fishermen would not be officially observed. Both the DFG and National Marine Fisheries Service are supporting the proposal. Robert D. Hight, Director of the DFG, urged support for the proposal. "We have discussed this subject with PCFFA board members and Mr. Zeke Grader and concur with the intent of their proposal," he stated. "It is true that ocean fishing regulations aimed at protecting listed salmonids have resulted in reduced fishing opportunity for robust populations of Central Valley fall chinooks and that expanded fishing opportunities in the Bay-Delta region of the State could lead to greater utilizations of those stocks." Hight recommended that the vessels not congregate so as to "minimize potential conflicts with other vessels in the area." He recommended that they should stay at least 500 yards apart during commercial trolling operations. Although I respect the efforts of the PCFFA and other commercial groups to restore salmon habitat on the rivers, I think this is an ill advised proposal that will only create bad feelings among sport and commercial fishermen while threatening endangered and threatened runs of salmon. The stated legislature closed the bay and inland fishery to commercial fishing in the 1930's for a reason - to stop the plunder of salmon close to the spawning grounds. The support of Director Hight for this proposal is simply appalling. It is clear that just as Governor Davis has been bought off by the timber and agricultural lobby, Hight has bent to pressure to the commercial lobby without any respect for sport anglers. Rather than exercizing leadership, Hight is showing his total lack of it. Anglers have suffered from increasing and often ridiculous sportfishing regulations for salmon and steelhead throughout the state. If there are "surplus fish" - if indeed any fish are really "surplus"- I propose that they be given to the sport angler. In reaction to Grader's and the DFG's proposal, I instead propose that the salmon limit be increased to three fish, as it was 20 years ago, on the ocean and rivers, if it is proven by the best available scientific data that there are "surplus" hatchery fish available. This would make much more sense that taking a dramatically backward step like opening San Francisco Bay to commercial salmon fishing. Anglers and environmentalists must unite to stop this retrograde proposal in its tracks. We should flood the Fish and Game Commission with letters opposing this poorly thought-out proposal. We have time left to register our opposition to opening up the bay to commercial salmon fishing, so let's do it now!
Send your letter to:
Robert C. Hight, Director
|
|
Copyright © 1997 - 2000 The Fish Sniffer. All rights reserved. |