Salmon recovery would be profitable for much of Idaho

[Ithaca 37]

http://www.idahostatesman.com/Opinion/story.asp?ID=57277

"The Idaho Statesman reported (Nov. 20) on the first Idaho Rural Summit in Coeur d´Alene, where several participants emphasized the need to educate rural leaders on resource issues. Some also suggested the state needs “to sell the idea of rural development to folks who still hope the mill will reopen or the mine will start hiring again.”
I would submit that a large chunk of rural Idaho needs to look carefully at the economic benefits that sustained runs of salmon and steelhead could bring to the state each year. Unlike timber, which has a rotation time of 80 to 150 years to reach maturity, salmon and steelhead can be caught in three to five years.

Studies by Boise economist Don Reading estimated the value of recreational salmon fishing to Idaho during 2001 was about $90 million. River communities such as Lewiston, Orofino, Kamiah, Kooskia, Whitebird and Riggins were the major beneficiaries of the salmon fishery, but off-river towns such as Grangeville, McCall and Cascade also profited.

In Riggins, anglers spent $10.1 million, which represented 23 percent of the total sale of all goods in that town during 2001.

Likewise, a 1996 study by the same author showed that the 1992-93 steelhead fishery in Idaho was responsible for more than $90 million in expenditures.........."

Salmon and steelhead are a renewable resource every three years! That beats the hell outta waiting 100 years for a tree to grow!

 

[Ten Bears]

Could you show a map demonstrating that "large chunk of rural Idaho" that will benefit??

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>...but off-river towns such as Grangeville, McCall and Cascade also profited. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> McCall and Cascade are not off the rivers that have fish, and Grangeville isn't far (probably lees then 20 miles) from Whitbird on the state hiway.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> The North Fork of the Payette River begins at Payette Lake at McCall and flows south. It joins the westward flowing South Fork and bends slowly west and finally almost north before joining the Snake River at the town of Payette.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> http://www.ohwy.com/id/p/payetriv.htm

 

[Ithaca 37]

Ten, "Could you show a map demonstrating that "large chunk of rural Idaho" that will benefit??"

Why don't you show a map demonstrating that a large chunk of rural Idaho won't benefit?

 

[Troy Jones]

Blah...blah, blah, blah...blah, blah...blah, blah, blah, blah, blah...

Are there any topics other than Idaho salmon, public land grazing, or ATV's Ithaca? All your whining doesn't seem to be going very far. Sorry to tarnish your delusions of granduer, but any changes that have occured pertaining your loudest bitches had absolutely nothing to do with anything you have said or done. I find you extremely vexatious and tiresome. Could you maybe find some other altruistic endeavor to embark on Ithaca? Humor us cut and paste king.

 

[Ithaca 37]

Troy, Those topics, along with wolves, Forest Service, wilderness, BLM and roads are what keep the SI section going. Well, maybe the unions will be a hot topic, too.

But I'll tell you what, Troy, why don't you show us what you can do and start a few topics, yourself, that will stimulate lots of discussion?

What topics would you prefer to debate? I always like to see guys with a big mouth actually produce something, so here's your big chance. I'll just sit back and take a break.

BTW, I checked the topics started in the last hundred days and there's only ONE started by you.

ONE RINKY DINK LITTLE TOPIC!

Any idea how many I started?

Show us what you can do, loudmouth.

<FONT COLOR="#800080" SIZE="1">[ 12-31-2003 20:10: Message edited by: Ithaca 37 ]</font>

 

[JoseCuervo]

Troy,

If I can take a different "spin" on this, please indulge me. Yeah, I too would like to see the Idaho Salmon recovered via Dam Breeching, I would love to see the Welfare Ranchers get their cattle off of MY land, and I would love to see ATVs banned off of anywhere a full size car can not drive. So on that, I too would love to see these issues go away. Thanks for your support.

If I remember your posts, you mainly recreate/hunt on private land, so Public Land issues to you, are not a "lifestyle" issue. I, however, happen to spend about 30 nights per year in a sleeping bag on Public Lands. You can do the math, but that is about 8% of my nights out roaming Public Lands. To me, I am just doing MY housekeeping, keeping my house in order. Therefore, I will likely keep beating these same deadhorse topics over and over.

Does any good come of it? I think so, as there are now people I know, who, if I need to comment on a issue during a Public Comment period, I can ask them to also comment. So, instead of one loney Gunner opinion/comment, there can be 2, or 3, or 4, or 5x the influence. I would (and have) also commented on issues at the request of other members on this forum. To me, there is some power in that.

Secondly, I also like to hear the "other side" of the debates, as I already know my opinion, but I like to hear other's views.

Thirdly, I do see some people drop out of these debates, as they are wrong, and they don't have the energy to become educated on the topics. But, I think that shows the process in a microcosm, as these things play out in Newspapers, Courts, and Legislative bodies. The people that care to protect and manage our Public Lands are much more dedicated, devoted to the cause than are those who only seek to destroy Public Lands for a quick dollar. That is why we see the tides turning. We now have the BLM and Forest Service actually looking at their land before re-issuing grazing leases. We have the State of Idaho looking out for our school children instead of for fat-cat Welfare Ranchers. And we now have "Breeching the Dams" as the preferred/most likely solution to restoring wild salmon and steelhead to Idaho. True belief in doing the right thing for your children, grandchildren, great-grandchildren, etc.. is a powerful force, and one that even YOU will be able to reap the benefits from, if you ever come to Idaho.

And finally, I too worry about the "Idaho Focus" in Sportsmans Issues. And other than Darren (Threadkiller) Gibson, I don't see that many others trying to start topics who live in states not contiguous to Idaho.

I think the Union topic that Moosie started is ridiculous, and not a Sportsman's Issue, and my main contribution is just to agitate Yuke enough to see some sort of "action" in a sleepy SI...

I won't say it in the same manner as Ithica, but I would love to see you start threads with issues you think are important.

Happy New Years...

 

[JoseCuervo]

Ten Beers,

I have to wonder what time you started drinking today. Were you drunk when you started posting, or have you never been to Idaho.

You claim to be from Idaho, but I am not sure if you have ever been anywhere farther than 2 miles from your 3rd grade classroom.

When I go fish on the Little Salmon River, I sleep in Cascade, I drive to McCall for gas and breakfast, and then hit the Little Salmon in about 20 minutes from McCall. I don't know what you call the money that I leave in Cascade and McCall, but I would guess the proprietors of those businesses call it Economic Impact.

When I go fish on the South Fork of the Salmon, I must drive thru either McCall or Cascade. Both of those towns are the "last chance for gas", so I buy plenty of gas from Howdys in Cascade or from the Cheveron in McCall. I also buy Roe from Tackle Toms in Cascade. When I come out, I love to stop at Si' Bueno for Mexican food in McCall. Again, I drop "Economic Impact" all over those places.

Probably 80% of Idaho can not get to the Little Salmon or the South Fork of the Salmon without going thru McCall and Cascade. Same goes for us to get to the Clearwater system and the rest of the Salmon system, we have to go through McCall and Cascade.

Ten, please don't comment on Idaho issues, if you have never been here.

 

[Troy Jones]

Ithaca, I don't know if an egocentric person as yourself could possibly understand. But you nor hunters or fisherman are the only ones involved in determining the uses of government lands. They are not there just for ithaca or gunner. Hard to believe I know. I see changes happening for the good and you cannot expect everything you want overnight. The plans are going to try to have some kind of median. You ever hear of not being able to please all the people all of the time? Kind of funny how the people that have the most time and/or money on their hands do the most bitching and moaning. Tunnel vision is a dangerous game, expand your sight to include the big picture.

The problem is easy and it's not coming from any source I have read here to date. Simply put, there are billions of people breeding exponentially, a good portion require or desire a certain standard of living. That is stripping the earth. What can anyone do about it? The solution is not an easy one and it's nothing you can currently cut and paste ithaca.

Sorry I don't waste more time, I can't afford to. When I do research I get paid. I check in once in a while for entertainment, not to give myself additional work or do a lot of aguing that goes no where. I pulled in over a hundred grand worth of grants for the betterment of your public lands over the past year. This was for education, weed control and cooperative agreements with all the area government land operating agencies, forest service, BLM, etc... Some people get things done and others bitch about it all the time and think they are getting something accomplished.

Gunner, sometimes I wish I only spent 8% of my time on fed lands. I spend half the year or better doing inventories and mapping weeds and beetle infestations on your land. Don't be mistaken, I do know what's going on and see it all the time. Things should be getting better, I might take an offer to join a mapping and consulting company this next Spring. Contracts are already getting made with area counties, state and federal agencies.

 

[Ithaca 37]

Troy, Take a look at your Blah, blah, blah, blah post up above. You wanna bitch about the topics I start, but you say you're too busy to start any of your own? Besides, you wouldn't be gettin' paid for it! Who the hell do you think is paying me for it, Moosie?

Nice try changing the topic to overpopulation, like we don't know that's the basic problem, but if you want to debate overpopulation you can start your own topic about it and see what kinda action you can generate. I'll start whatever topics I feel like and see what kinda replies I can generate.

It's been about three years since I started posting in this section and we've come a a long way and lots of us have learned a lot about many issues. Some people have even decided to get involved in the public process of commenting on issues they take an interest in. Some people have decided they were disgusted with other's apathetic attitudes about destruction of public lands and started working to do something about it. Some people have decided it was time to start giving something back to the outdoor recreation they enjoy. Try going back as far as you can in SI and follow the changes in attitudes as people have become more aware of how habitat destruction affects their hunting and fishing. Debating some of these issues has forced many of us to do research that has led to increased awareness of many subjects.

You wanna teach people about weed control and beetle infestations so a few people might start taking more interest in it and increase public awareness of the problems? Get off your ass and try starting a public debate about it!

What you see here in SI is just a tiny bit of what some people do to get things accomplished in some of their favorite issues. So you brought in a hundred thousand bucks last year for weed control and education? Since you think raising a hundred thousand bucks in a year for weed control etc. is a big deal here's some news: There's a regular poster here in SI who has been primarily responsible for raising over a hundred thousand bucks a year to benefit wildlife EVERY YEAR for the last fifteen years. And it wasn't something they were getting paid for. Never made a dime off it.

You say, "Sorry I don't waste more time, I can't afford to. When I do research I get paid. I check in once in a while for entertainment, not to give myself additional work or do a lot of aguing that goes no where."

Well, if all you're doing is checking in here for entertainment maybe you're really not dedicated to improving the weed control and gummint land agency cooperation situation except when you're on the timeclock. Others here are in similar situations to yours and they don't mind educating the rest of us for free. That's dedication.

Next time you wanta bitch about the topics I start how about starting some better ones? Too much work and you don't get paid for it? You sure came up with a couple lame excuses when I threw that back at ya!

<FONT COLOR="#800080" SIZE="1">[ 01-01-2004 08:45: Message edited by: Ithaca 37 ]</font>

 

[JoseCuervo]

Troy,

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> Gunner, sometimes I wish I only spent 8% of my time on fed lands. I spend half the year or better doing inventories and mapping weeds and beetle infestations on your land. Don't be mistaken, I do know what's going on and see it all the time. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I think I see the differences we will always have. You look at Public Lands and see it as a job and see $$$$$ signs. You appearantly missed the point I was trying to make. I CHOOSE to spend my time sleeping and recreating on Public Lands. I do not spend a single second of my time making money on Public Lands (unless you consider Poker Games around a campfire....

). It is not a Job to me, it is a choice and a passion.

I wrote the Forest Service a $500 check in August to spend a week on MY river with MY equipment, MY family, and MY friends. I pay a "sh!tload" in taxes each year to the Federal Government and I pay User Fees all year long to recreate on Federal and State Lands. I end up with mulitple "parking tags" hanging on my rear-view mirror, so I can park at the River put-in or the trailheads I choose.

I don't begrudge for a minute, the fees I pay to the Forest Service, as I honestly feel the Recreation Side of the FS is grossly underfunded. But, as a Taxpayer and a Fee Payer, I take exception to subsidizing Welfare Ranchers and being forced to step through the damage by Fat-Assed ATV Riders on my hike to LOOK (can't fish for them) the handful of Wild Salmon that return to some of my favorate places.

I talked to a buddy last night, and he asked me if I was interested in going in on a Duck/Goose lease next year. $700 per gun, for 6 guys. I said "No Thanks", as I think my $700 would be better spent by Western Watersheds, Idaho Rivers United, and the Idaho Conservation League to ensure that MY public lands continue to provide me with my Hunting and Fishing opportunities.

And Troy, with respect to these topics, look at ol'Ten Beers, as he claims to be an Idaho resident, but has no clue where the Salmon and Steelhead in Idaho come from and spawn. We debate these topics endlessly, yet he still is not able to understand the issues of these fish.

 

[Troy Jones]

Half my hunting is done on public land and all my camping is done on public land. Maybe I've just given up.

 

[1_pointer]

Troy- I know that you haven't given up. I agree with you that cooperation is the KEY to getting successful management on the ground. Without support from all with a vested interested there won't be the ground swell of support needed to get things done. Weed problems in UT are getting a bit better. I don't see it all as depressing. Things are getting better, but I don't think most any issue will ever be 'solved'. But, we can make it better.

 

[Ten Bears]

OH, the egocentricity and name calling...... EG, remember the quote from Jimmy Carter on insecurity????

BTW, I live in Idaho, and have for most of my life, with exception of the period of time that Uncle Sam shipped overseas to meet other peoples on their home soils.... I ask you and IT to regularly clarify your stances (ambiguous statements) for the benefit of others who may not have a clear idea of what your talking about.
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> We have the State of Idaho looking out for our school children instead of for fat-cat Welfare Ranchers. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
????? Please clarify that one, would you?

Hate to tell you, but anybody traveling N-S in Idaho has very few choices but to travel either through McCall-Cascade, or Weiser. You spend your money where you want to, but the choices are limited. What is the snowmobiling generated economy in those same communities? Are you saying there is no fishing in the Payette system?

 

[Ithaca 37]

Ten, "I ask you and IT to regularly clarify your stances (ambiguous statements) for the benefit of others who may not have a clear idea of what your talking about."

Just because you don't understand English doesn't mean the rest of the board doesn't.

 

[Washington Hunter]

Ten, he's talking about the school trust lands, the ones that the state leases to the welfare ranchers.

 

[JoseCuervo]

Ten,

Yes, the Payette has fish in it. Payette Lake has Mackinaw, Cascade Reservoir HAD perch and trout, the No. Fork has a few trout, the Main has whitefish, the So. Fork (no where near McCall) has Bull Trout. I have no idea why you want me to say the Payette system has no fish in it. I will say the Payette system has ZERO wild (or hatchery) runs of Salmon and Steelhead, due to the construction, by Idaho Power, of the Hells Canyon complex.

You were the one who said McCall and Cascade were not Salmon towns, and would not be impacted econmically by recovery. You are flat out wrong on that statement.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>We have the State of Idaho looking out for our school children instead of for fat-cat Welfare Ranchers. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>????? Please clarify that one, would you? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Western Watersheds bid on a grazing lease, was the high bidder, and the State Land board gave the lease to a Welfare Rancher. Marvel pursued the issue to the State Supreme Court, and won a ruling that said the State Land Board is required to uphold the State Constitution. Therefore, they are to maximize the return on the endowment lands for the benefit of the school children and not the Welfare Rancher.

The next year, the Legislature tried to pass a law prohibiting Marvel from bidding on the leases, and that law was struck down. Perhaps if you were to have actually read a paper in Idaho, you would know what your Legislature, State Land Board, and Supreme Court are doing.

 

[Ten Bears]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> Just because you don't understand English doesn't mean the rest of the board doesn't. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I know the language quite well, thank you. Care for another debate in semantics or syntax????

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> Ten, he's talking about the school trust lands, the ones that the state leases to the welfare ranchers. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Thanks WH, that's what I thought he was talking about. The same measure that now holds the board to sell lands for development to gain money for the schools, if that is the highest value of the land. I see.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> We have the State of Idaho looking out for our school children instead of for fat-cat Welfare Ranchers. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Now lands that generated money annually for grazing leases will be sold fro developement. Tell me again how the wildlife and hunter benefitted from that.

EG, do you really think that salmon recovery will increase local economies?

 

[Ithaca 37]

Ten, "EG, do you really think that salmon recovery will increase local economies?"

Just when I'm starting to think you can't say anything dumber, you come up with that one! Why don't you ask the people in Riggins and Orofino that question?

 

[JoseCuervo]

Ten Beers,

I assume you were just being silly, when you asked a stupid question like "EG, do you really think that salmon recovery will increase local economies?" Uhhhhh, Yeah, I do, and so does everyone else.

Uhhhh, Ten, with respect to the Land Board selling off the land, I believe it was the voters of Idaho who continued to put Republicans in office, who make up the board. Marilyn Howard, the lone democrat, is being so stripped of her powers by the legislature, it is ridiculous. The GOP legislature has now taken over control of her budget, and will not fund programs that she wants. Most Land Board decisions are unanimous, except for Ms. Howard's lone vote of dissension.

I will never defend Gov. Klumpthorne and his horrible record on Wildlife and Schools.