![]() |
| World Photo by Madeline Steege Commercial and recreational salmon boats and pleasure crafts sit at the dock in the small boat basin in Charleston on Thursday morning. |
SACRAMENTO - Fishermen on Thursday
predicted huge losses to coastal communities in the wake of fishery
managers' decisions to close or restrict much of the Southern Oregon and
Northern California coasts to commercial salmon fishing.
In reality, it's a domino effect.
The Pacific Fishery Management Council - and fishermen and businesses
dependent on wild salmon - agonized through several rounds of salmon
proposals before voting for the restrictions, designed to protect sensitive
levels of returning Klamath River fall Chinook.
“This is about as brutal an action as
I've seen the council have to take,” said Bob Alverson, council member and
executive director of the Fishing Vessel Owner's Association. “It was not
the fishermen who caused the problem this year. It was the management of
that river.”
Fishermen packed the DoubleTree hotel meeting room most of the week but the
large room was mostly empty Friday, as the council moved on to other fishery
management matters.
Trollers, too, moved on, catching planes or driving back to their home
ports, their homes and their boats. Many were critical of the council and
were left reeling.
“All of us are very much aware it's not about fishing,” California
Department of Fish and Game representative Marija Vojkovich said Thursday,
of the council's decisions. “It's about a lot of other multi-layered
issues.”
The fallout
The Oregon and California salmon industry is in disarray, but the ripple
effects extend beyond economic hardships.
Salmon fishermen, though, focused on their immediate plans Thursday when
testifying before the council and talking amongst themselves in the
hallways.
A couple of them said they had no
alternative but to sell their boats.
Moving to another state to fish - at least, for the summer - could work for
others.
Still others hoped for some kind of immediate federal relief.
All those considerations are in the mix, just like the way the salmon and
other fish from Alaska to California mix in the ocean.
“This is all just one big pond,” Salmon Advisory Subpanel member Jerry
Reinholdt said Friday.
Failure declaration
Much of Oregon's state and congressional leaders already are upping the
political pressure on the U.S. Department of Commerce to declare the fishery
an economic failure, thereby opening the way for state and federal disaster
relief.
Several members of Congress have signed letters requesting an expedited
decision and relief package. Oregon Gov. Ted Kulongoski also sent a letter
to U.S. Secretary of Commerce Carlos M. Gutierrez on Wednesday.
“Oregon requests that you determine there is a commercial fishery failure
for salmon fisheries in 2006 due to a fishery resource disaster Š ,”
Kulongoski wrote.
U.S. Reps. Peter DeFazio, D-Ore., and Darlene Hooley, D-Ore., are planning
rallies in Coos Bay and Newport on Monday to put an even finer point on the
issue.
“The rally will raise awareness of the need for immediate assistance from
the Bush administration and a long-term solution for the health of the
Klamath River,” DeFazio and Hooley said in a press release.
Fishermen have requested direct payments, but other relief programs, such as
the one for groundfish between 2000 and 2004, put together suites of plans
to help displaced fishermen. They often include retraining, temporary work
in an industry related to fishing, or low-interest loans.
The income impacts to Oregon, according to estimates from Kulongoski's
office, is between $11.6 and $14.5 million. The figures for both Oregon and
California are greater, though not as high as they could have been if
recreational fishing also had been closed.
Fishermen need direct payments, Gold Beach fisherman and business owner
Scott Boley said Thursday.
He also warned about other consequences that must be considered.
Ports should be prepared for moorage delinquencies and be ready to work with
fishermen. Infrastructure such as ice plants and small businesses that
depend on the salmon season also may need help.
The river needs help
It's no secret that the Klamath River is in critical condition. Farmers
depend on the water for their crops, but fish also require the water.
Current controversy has brought the needs of the river to the fore.
“When the Council was discussing this issue, we heard a lot about poor
habitat conditions for salmon in the Klamath River,” Council Chairman Don
Hansen said in a press release. “We also heard compelling testimony from
many people - commercial and recreational fishermen, environmentalists,
communities - calling for a solution to the habitat problems there.”
Reinholdt noted there is hope on the horizon.
Some of the Klamath River tribes have been successful in opening a dialog
with Klamath Basin farmers, Reinholdt said, and the fishing industry is
interested in getting on board.
“Providing for the long-term health of the river and its tributaries
requires a bi-state, ecosystem-based strategy,” U.S. Sen. Gordon Smith,
R-Ore., said in a March 27 letter to Gutierrez.
Fixing the river requires more than just making more water available.
Populations of parasites that have exploded in the river system during
recent drought years will require more study. Fishermen have offered to
truck the salmon smolts around the parasite hotspots and do whatever work is
necessary to work together and help the fish.
Releasing water also depends on timing. More water is needed for fish at
certain times of the year, such as when smolts are migrating downstream,
Reinholdt said.
Much of the testimony on Thursday focused on tearing down the dams on the
river. The council agreed, and on Friday sent a letter to the U.S. Bureau of
Reclamation and other federal agencies calling for removal of four dams on
the Klamath River.
Market loss, effort shifts
Joel Kawahara owns salmon permits in Alaska, Washington, Oregon and
California. He knows some of the Oregon and California trollers will move
north, to Washington and Alaska.
“What are those guys going to do?” Kawahara said.
Some are likely to troll for coho and Chinook in Southeast Alaska, but some
may also use gillnet permits, permits they've held for years but haven't
used, in the Bristol Bay sockeye fishery. There are several Bristol Bay
permit holders in Sausalito, Calif., he said.
“There will be refugees in the net fishery, too,” Kawahara said.
Washington troller Jim Olson also is concerned about the ocean troll fishery
north of Cape Falcon. Both Oregon and Washington trollers have access to the
waters off of both states between Leadbetter Point in Washington and Cape
Falcon in Oregon.
Some fishermen from Newport who don't usually fish north of Garibaldi could
move north, Olson said. And the Washington season also is restricted this
year.
“It will take our small season and make it accelerate faster,” Olson
said. “It's a very delicate balance.”
Others, too, plan to expand into longlining for blackcod or fish for tuna -
fisheries already nearly at their fishing capacity maximum.
“They have to go somewhere,” Olson said.
On Thursday, though, marketing professionals were concerned about losing
ground to imports of farmed fish and losing customers its taken years to
get.
“A closure would erase customer gains we've made,” Seafood Producers
Cooperative President Tom McLaughlin said.
It's a matter of credibility, he said.
“Once we lose that customer, we lose that space on the menu or in the
retail store,” McLaughlin said.
To have credibility with customers, McLaughlin noted, the company must be
able to supply the product.
“It's a longer process than getting in the first time.”
- Staff Writer Susan Chambers, who writes about fisheries for The World,
has been in Sacramento this week, covering the meeting of the Pacific
Fishery Management Council. She can be reached by calling 269-1222 ext. 273,
or by e-mailing schambers@theworldlink.com.