Irrelevant
Well-known member
Hey @Gatekeeper stop being a dick. You clearly love salmon. I clearly love salmon. I'm sure to some degree we both want what's best for salmon.
Unless you know of better research than I, sockeye from Redfish Lake, ole lonesome larry et al, spend their ocean lives in roughly the same places as Bristol bay's. My point was that salmon in general, not sockeye in specific, are in terrible shape across the vast majority of their range. And if ocean fisheries are unable to effectively sort salmon at sea, between endangered runs, and healthy runs, that something needs to be done differently. I personally said the easiest would be to stop fishing with the hope that given a full cycle or two we can see some considerable upticks in populations. We have some incredibly healthy watersheds that only see a few fish return each year, the those same runs are hammered by harvest their entire lives, AK, CAN, WA/OR, Tribal, and recreationally with the most restrictive being terminal fisheries. But clearly you don't support that. That's fine.
Unless you know of better research than I, sockeye from Redfish Lake, ole lonesome larry et al, spend their ocean lives in roughly the same places as Bristol bay's. My point was that salmon in general, not sockeye in specific, are in terrible shape across the vast majority of their range. And if ocean fisheries are unable to effectively sort salmon at sea, between endangered runs, and healthy runs, that something needs to be done differently. I personally said the easiest would be to stop fishing with the hope that given a full cycle or two we can see some considerable upticks in populations. We have some incredibly healthy watersheds that only see a few fish return each year, the those same runs are hammered by harvest their entire lives, AK, CAN, WA/OR, Tribal, and recreationally with the most restrictive being terminal fisheries. But clearly you don't support that. That's fine.