From December 12 OREGONIAN.
> CLACKAMAS -- Sturgeon fishing, or at least the keeper season, might not reopen Jan.1 in the lower Willamette River as scheduled.
>
> When it does open, Oregon fish managers don't expect it to last long, because they're about to make another deep cut in the number of fish that anglers can keep from the river and Multnomah Channel.
>
> In fact, a record-early closure is a certainty no matter when it reopens.
>
> Oregon and Washington biologists have lots of evidence but are at a loss for a definitive explanation for a steady decline in white sturgeon throughout the lower Columbia River system. The decline will force another deep cut in 2011 sport and commercial harvests in the Columbia and lower Willamette rivers.
>
> In public meetings last week, biologists warned anglers and commercial fishermen in both states of a pending cutback of 29 percent from this year's harvestable sturgeon quota. That 2010 quota was down 40 percent from 2009's 40,000, a relatively stable figure for the previous few years.
>
> In 2009, anglers were allowed a harvest guideline (quota) of 32,000 legal-sized sturgeon in 2009. The other 20 percent, 8,000 fish, was allocated to commercial gill-netters. The harvest was cut to 24,000 this year (19,200 sport and 4,800 commercial) and, most likely, will be held to 17,000 (13,600 and 3,400) in 2011, where the states hope to draw the new line for at least two or three years. Decisions by both states' fish and wildlife commissions are due in January (Washington) and Feb. 4 (Oregon).
>
> In the Willamette, by far the most-popular winter sturgeon fishery, the magic number will drop from 3,600 to 2,550 legal-sized fish. The fish are almost certain to be caught during the winter angling peak, Jan.1 to March 31. Mid-February through the end of March are the best sturgeon fishing days of the year in the lower Willamette.
>
> Question is, which of those days should the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife -- which alone sets rules for the lower Willamette -- allow the fish to be taken?
>
> Perhaps instead of letting the sport fishery open Jan. 1 as scheduled in the printed regulations, department managers should postpone the opening and let the Oregon Fish and Wildlife Commission decide. It meets Feb. 4, anyway, to rule on a new sturgeon management pact with Washington and to look at other Columbia sport and commercial seasons.
>
> With such a low quota in an area of such high interest, it seems prudent for policymakers, not anglers, to decide how to spend the fish. Otherwise, retention fishing might be closed by the time the commission meets.
>
> The lower Columbia will also reopen to retention Jan. 1, so it's not as if anglers won't have anywhere to go.
>
> Steve Williams, deputy administrator of the department's fish division, said all options are under consideration.
>
> "We can boot it to later, we can boot it to the commission, or we can just let it open," he said. "It needs to be understood, however, that moving the season to later or asking the commission to decide means the lower Willamette will not open Jan. 1. I know there are some anglers expecting that opening."
>
> Williams and others might be pleasantly surprised.
>
> There has been considerable discussion about sturgeon on local angling Web sites, much of it in support of a total retention closure for at least a year -- or more.
>
> While that's probably not necessary, it does show anglers -- as usual and not always acknowledged -- are willing to shoulder the heaviest conservation burdens in the name of their resources.
>
> Meanwhile, researchers in both states are making remarkable progress in learning more about sturgeon and their challenges.
>
> With small nets and set lines, biologists can now assess baby sturgeon and larger fish in various age classes.
>
> They know, for example, there was improved spawning from 2001 to 2003, which should yield a bit better fishing for legal-sized fish in 2012 through 2014. Unfortunately, poor spawning years in 2004 through 2008 means more lean years from 2015 through 2019.
>
> Although some anglers are quick to point fingers at gill-nets, commercial fisheries are not the reason for problems for sturgeon.
>
> * Sea lions have zeroed in on sturgeon faster than the states could keep up. Sea lions will probably take more than 2,000 sturgeon next year, 80 percent of them smaller than 4 feet.
> * Sea lions, especially below Bonneville Dam, might have forced sturgeon to seek refuge in other parts of the river. The percentage of large spawning fish has risen sharply in the estuary, for example, and the hungry predators could account for the influx of fish into the lower Willamette in the winter.
> * Smelt runs are in the tank, which could also spread sturgeon out as they search for compensatory food.
> * Fluctuations or reductions in flows below Bonneville and other dams during spawning periods might be reducing numbers. Sturgeon spawn only in deep, fast water.
> * Biologists said Tuesday they're aware of similar sturgeon problems in the Sacramento and Fraser (B.C.) rivers, but they don't know the causes.
>
>
> John North, an Oregon biologist on the Columbia River management team, echoed the states' new sturgeon mantra as a result of improved research when he talked about the pending gloom for the 2015 through 2019 seasons.
>
> "We can see a hole coming," he said. "But we can't tell how wide and how deep it is."
> CLACKAMAS -- Sturgeon fishing, or at least the keeper season, might not reopen Jan.1 in the lower Willamette River as scheduled.
>
> When it does open, Oregon fish managers don't expect it to last long, because they're about to make another deep cut in the number of fish that anglers can keep from the river and Multnomah Channel.
>
> In fact, a record-early closure is a certainty no matter when it reopens.
>
> Oregon and Washington biologists have lots of evidence but are at a loss for a definitive explanation for a steady decline in white sturgeon throughout the lower Columbia River system. The decline will force another deep cut in 2011 sport and commercial harvests in the Columbia and lower Willamette rivers.
>
> In public meetings last week, biologists warned anglers and commercial fishermen in both states of a pending cutback of 29 percent from this year's harvestable sturgeon quota. That 2010 quota was down 40 percent from 2009's 40,000, a relatively stable figure for the previous few years.
>
> In 2009, anglers were allowed a harvest guideline (quota) of 32,000 legal-sized sturgeon in 2009. The other 20 percent, 8,000 fish, was allocated to commercial gill-netters. The harvest was cut to 24,000 this year (19,200 sport and 4,800 commercial) and, most likely, will be held to 17,000 (13,600 and 3,400) in 2011, where the states hope to draw the new line for at least two or three years. Decisions by both states' fish and wildlife commissions are due in January (Washington) and Feb. 4 (Oregon).
>
> In the Willamette, by far the most-popular winter sturgeon fishery, the magic number will drop from 3,600 to 2,550 legal-sized fish. The fish are almost certain to be caught during the winter angling peak, Jan.1 to March 31. Mid-February through the end of March are the best sturgeon fishing days of the year in the lower Willamette.
>
> Question is, which of those days should the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife -- which alone sets rules for the lower Willamette -- allow the fish to be taken?
>
> Perhaps instead of letting the sport fishery open Jan. 1 as scheduled in the printed regulations, department managers should postpone the opening and let the Oregon Fish and Wildlife Commission decide. It meets Feb. 4, anyway, to rule on a new sturgeon management pact with Washington and to look at other Columbia sport and commercial seasons.
>
> With such a low quota in an area of such high interest, it seems prudent for policymakers, not anglers, to decide how to spend the fish. Otherwise, retention fishing might be closed by the time the commission meets.
>
> The lower Columbia will also reopen to retention Jan. 1, so it's not as if anglers won't have anywhere to go.
>
> Steve Williams, deputy administrator of the department's fish division, said all options are under consideration.
>
> "We can boot it to later, we can boot it to the commission, or we can just let it open," he said. "It needs to be understood, however, that moving the season to later or asking the commission to decide means the lower Willamette will not open Jan. 1. I know there are some anglers expecting that opening."
>
> Williams and others might be pleasantly surprised.
>
> There has been considerable discussion about sturgeon on local angling Web sites, much of it in support of a total retention closure for at least a year -- or more.
>
> While that's probably not necessary, it does show anglers -- as usual and not always acknowledged -- are willing to shoulder the heaviest conservation burdens in the name of their resources.
>
> Meanwhile, researchers in both states are making remarkable progress in learning more about sturgeon and their challenges.
>
> With small nets and set lines, biologists can now assess baby sturgeon and larger fish in various age classes.
>
> They know, for example, there was improved spawning from 2001 to 2003, which should yield a bit better fishing for legal-sized fish in 2012 through 2014. Unfortunately, poor spawning years in 2004 through 2008 means more lean years from 2015 through 2019.
>
> Although some anglers are quick to point fingers at gill-nets, commercial fisheries are not the reason for problems for sturgeon.
>
> * Sea lions have zeroed in on sturgeon faster than the states could keep up. Sea lions will probably take more than 2,000 sturgeon next year, 80 percent of them smaller than 4 feet.
> * Sea lions, especially below Bonneville Dam, might have forced sturgeon to seek refuge in other parts of the river. The percentage of large spawning fish has risen sharply in the estuary, for example, and the hungry predators could account for the influx of fish into the lower Willamette in the winter.
> * Smelt runs are in the tank, which could also spread sturgeon out as they search for compensatory food.
> * Fluctuations or reductions in flows below Bonneville and other dams during spawning periods might be reducing numbers. Sturgeon spawn only in deep, fast water.
> * Biologists said Tuesday they're aware of similar sturgeon problems in the Sacramento and Fraser (B.C.) rivers, but they don't know the causes.
>
>
> John North, an Oregon biologist on the Columbia River management team, echoed the states' new sturgeon mantra as a result of improved research when he talked about the pending gloom for the 2015 through 2019 seasons.
>
> "We can see a hole coming," he said. "But we can't tell how wide and how deep it is."
