PORTLAND, Ore. - Oregon and Washington fish and wildlife officials meet Thursday to consider a plan to limit gill-net fishing on the lower Columbia River. It's been a controversial topic for years, but Gov. John Kitzhaber has made a series of recommendations that at least some groups say they can live with.

The concern is that nylon nets, strung across sections of the river, entangle a lot more than fish.

Nine wildlife and conservation groups have voiced support for the governor's plan, including Oregon Wild, where Steve Pedery is conservation director.

"The argument the gill-netters make is, 'This is really just about who gets to catch the fish.' This is really a much bigger issue, and when you're using a fishing technique like gill-nets - that is inherently dangerous to marine mammals, to seals, to otters, to diving birds - that's not a good thing."

Gill-nets aren't allowed along the coast, but commercial anglers still can use them on the Columbia River.

Nello Picinich, executive director of the Coastal Conservation Association, says his group agrees with Kitzhaber that they still could get a good catch by moving into "safe zones" that are closer to hatcheries.

"The biggest component that CCA supports is getting gill-nets off of the lower main stem Columbia River and moving them into the off-channel areas, where they will have, ideally, less impact on ESA-listed salmon and steelhead species."

Other types of nets, called purse seines, allow fishermen to sort and release what they didn't intend to catch. Pedery says their use and the other recommendations aren't new, although a small but vocal gill-netting industry has opposed them in the past.

"They are concerned that the money might not be there for future hatcheries, or that at some point they're going to be required to switch to this more selective fishing gear - and they don't want to do that."

On the Oregon ballot, Measure 81 also seeks to ban the use of gill-nets on the Columbia. Kitzhaber is calling his plan a compromise, however, and says the fish and wildlife agencies are the ones that should make the final call.

They're meeting from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. on Thurs., Oct. 18, in the Spruce Room at the Airport Embassy Suites, 7900 N.E. 82nd Ave., Portland. More information on the meeting is online at dfw.state.or.us.


get more stories like this via email

The state Department of Natural Resources and Iowa State University are looking for volunteers to help create a new Bumble Bee Atlas.

Bees are an important part of the ecosystem, and scientists are figuring out their habitats to help them thrive.

Iowa is home to at least 14 species of bumble bees that help pollinate native wildflowers and flowering crops in farm fields and backyard gardens.

Iowa State University University Professor of Sustainable Agriculture and plant pathologist Matt O'Neal said the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service recently listed several bee species as endangered.

"And that includes the Rusty Patch bumble bee," said O'Neal, "20% of what it used to be, and that includes parts of Iowa. There is also evidence that other bumble species are in decline and so, this survey will give us a chance to see where those bees are and how abundant they are."

With that information, O'Neal said scientists can work to protect the bees' habitats and create Iowa's Bumble Bee Atlas.

It's part of a larger project to map the bees and foster bee development nationwide. Sign up online to volunteer.

The national project is part of a collaboration with the Xerces Society for Invertebrate Conservation.

Some 900 people have volunteered for the national atlas project, and counted more than 20,000 bumble bees - which O'Neal said face several major threats.

"Pesticide exposure, parasite and pathogens," said O'Neal, "and then the last 'P,' and probably the most important, is poor forage."

The researchers will work to alleviate those threats by knowing where the bees are.

Volunteers have discovered species thought to be gone from their states, contributed to new field guides, and improved scientists' understanding of bumble bee populations across the country.




get more stories like this via email

A coalition of conservation groups has sued the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for refusing to relist wolves under the Endangered Species Act.

Helena-based Alliance for the Wild Rockies is part of the suit. The Alliance sued to successfully overturn the wolf's delisting in 2012 but the move fell victim to congressional funding bill negotiations.

Mike Garrity, executive director of the alliance, said the wolves clearly qualify to be protected under the Act and hunting is driving down their numbers, which could cause problems for the animals.

"As their numbers decline, they are at greater risk for inbreeding," Garrity pointed out. "Once inbreeding sets in, the population is sunk."

Livestock and cattle owners argued wolves are a threat to their flocks and herds and want their numbers reduced. The suit was filed in federal District Court in Missoula.

Beyond keeping a robust population of wolves on Montana's lands and helping their species thrive, Garrity noted wolves can also help reduce the population of diseased animals.

"We're starting to have disease in deer, such as Chronic Wasting Disease," Garrity explained. "Predators like wolves are really good at focusing on the sick animals, so that's an excellent way to control Chronic Wasting Disease."

Garrity added wolf management policies in Montana, Idaho and Wyoming, all of which allow aggressive hunting of the animals, fail to protect wolves and all native species for future generations, the primary mandate of the Endangered Species Act.

A lawsuit over a federal agency's decision not to boost wolf protections in New Mexico and other western states has been filed, days after video surfaced showing the torture of a captured wolf.

According to accounts, a Wyoming man ran the wolf down with a snowmobile in late February, disabling it. He then took it to a local bar and posed for photos before shooting it.

Erik Molvar, executive director of the Western Watersheds Project, said federal protections under the Endangered Species Act are essential because there are still those who don't respect wildlife.

"That's why wolves were driven extinct in the first place, is because these types of people were the ones who controlled the public policy discussion throughout much of the 20th century when wolves were driven extinct," he said.

In early February, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service declined to restore protections for gray wolves in western states. The agency said it concluded the animals weren't in danger of extinction under the Endangered Species Act.

The lawsuit was filed by the Western Environmental Law Center on behalf of Western Watersheds and a coalition of nine other conservation groups.

Molvar believes the federal agency's decision not to re-designate western wolves as "endangered" was profoundly misguided. He said some states such as New Mexico and Colorado have adopted extra penalties for killing wolves, but the Endangered Species Act lets hunters in other states off the hook if they claim it was a case of mistaken identity.

"There were special loopholes for Wyoming, Idaho and Montana - and also parts of Oregon, Washington and Utah - so it does beg the question of how often this is happening quietly and under the radar," he explained.

In Wyoming, wolves and coyotes, which are considered predators, aren't eligible for protections under the state's animal cruelty statute. To date, the only penalty inflicted on the person shown on social media tormenting the wolf was a $250 fine by the Wyoming Game and Fish Department.