A recent headline from the Oregonian newspaper a few days ago (Jan. 6) reads: Poor Sacramento River salmon runs a bad sign for Oregon fishing fleet.
What remains of the Oregon coast’s salmon fishing fleet is largely dependent on chinook salmon that are born and spawn in California’s Sacramento River but mature in the ocean.
Poor runs in the Sacramento have led to the repeated shutdown of the salmon fishing here, and the signs are pointing to another nonexistent commercial fishing season this year.
This article largely mirrors a similar Oregonian article from Feb. 2009: Ocean fishing shutdown possible as few chinook returns to Sacramento.
That article states:
Last summer, poor chinook returns in 2007 helped shut down commercial salmon fishing in the ocean below Cape Falcon, south of Seaside, and severely curtailed ocean sport fishing and tourism in some ports.
Before last year’s closure — the largest salmon fishing shutdown ever off the Oregon and California coasts — the state predicted Oregon would suffer a $45 million hit and the loss of 763 jobs. The state requested federal aid then and probably will again this year…
But the fishery, which relies on salmon runs that are in long-term decline across the West, is a fraction of what it once was.
Only 194 vessels fished commercially for salmon off the entire West Coast last year, down four-fifths from more than 1,000 in 2007. And the value of Oregon’s ocean salmon fishery was about 3 percent of the average from 1979 to 1990, according to the council. Those numbers aren’t likely to improve.
Would a review of newspaper headlines along the east coast of North America a few decades back (i.e. cod fishery) – mirror similar stories?
Was it Einstein that suggested “insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results”?