World Photo by Madeline Steege Commercial and recreational salmon boats and pleasure crafts sit at the dock in the small boat basin in Charleston on Thursday morning.

SACRAMENTO - Fishermen on Thursday predicted huge losses to coastal communities in the wake of fishery managers' decisions to close or restrict much of the Southern Oregon and Northern California coasts to commercial salmon fishing.

In reality, it's a domino effect.

The Pacific Fishery Management Council - and fishermen and businesses dependent on wild salmon - agonized through several rounds of salmon proposals before voting for the restrictions, designed to protect sensitive levels of returning Klamath River fall Chinook.

“This is about as brutal an action as I've seen the council have to take,” said Bob Alverson, council member and executive director of the Fishing Vessel Owner's Association. “It was not the fishermen who caused the problem this year. It was the management of that river.”

Fishermen packed the DoubleTree hotel meeting room most of the week but the large room was mostly empty Friday, as the council moved on to other fishery management matters.

Trollers, too, moved on, catching planes or driving back to their home ports, their homes and their boats. Many were critical of the council and were left reeling.

“All of us are very much aware it's not about fishing,” California Department of Fish and Game representative Marija Vojkovich said Thursday, of the council's decisions. “It's about a lot of other multi-layered issues.”

The fallout

The Oregon and California salmon industry is in disarray, but the ripple effects extend beyond economic hardships.

Salmon fishermen, though, focused on their immediate plans Thursday when testifying before the council and talking amongst themselves in the hallways.

A couple of them said they had no alternative but to sell their boats.

Moving to another state to fish - at least, for the summer - could work for others.

Still others hoped for some kind of immediate federal relief.

All those considerations are in the mix, just like the way the salmon and other fish from Alaska to California mix in the ocean.

“This is all just one big pond,” Salmon Advisory Subpanel member Jerry Reinholdt said Friday.

Failure declaration

Much of Oregon's state and congressional leaders already are upping the political pressure on the U.S. Department of Commerce to declare the fishery an economic failure, thereby opening the way for state and federal disaster relief.

Several members of Congress have signed letters requesting an expedited decision and relief package. Oregon Gov. Ted Kulongoski also sent a letter to U.S. Secretary of Commerce Carlos M. Gutierrez on Wednesday.

“Oregon requests that you determine there is a commercial fishery failure for salmon fisheries in 2006 due to a fishery resource disaster Š ,” Kulongoski wrote.

U.S. Reps. Peter DeFazio, D-Ore., and Darlene Hooley, D-Ore., are planning rallies in Coos Bay and Newport on Monday to put an even finer point on the issue.

“The rally will raise awareness of the need for immediate assistance from the Bush administration and a long-term solution for the health of the Klamath River,” DeFazio and Hooley said in a press release.

Fishermen have requested direct payments, but other relief programs, such as the one for groundfish between 2000 and 2004, put together suites of plans to help displaced fishermen. They often include retraining, temporary work in an industry related to fishing, or low-interest loans.

The income impacts to Oregon, according to estimates from Kulongoski's office, is between $11.6 and $14.5 million. The figures for both Oregon and California are greater, though not as high as they could have been if recreational fishing also had been closed.

Fishermen need direct payments, Gold Beach fisherman and business owner Scott Boley said Thursday.

He also warned about other consequences that must be considered.

Ports should be prepared for moorage delinquencies and be ready to work with fishermen. Infrastructure such as ice plants and small businesses that depend on the salmon season also may need help.

The river needs help

It's no secret that the Klamath River is in critical condition. Farmers depend on the water for their crops, but fish also require the water.

Current controversy has brought the needs of the river to the fore.

“When the Council was discussing this issue, we heard a lot about poor habitat conditions for salmon in the Klamath River,” Council Chairman Don Hansen said in a press release. “We also heard compelling testimony from many people - commercial and recreational fishermen, environmentalists, communities - calling for a solution to the habitat problems there.”

Reinholdt noted there is hope on the horizon.

Some of the Klamath River tribes have been successful in opening a dialog with Klamath Basin farmers, Reinholdt said, and the fishing industry is interested in getting on board.

“Providing for the long-term health of the river and its tributaries requires a bi-state, ecosystem-based strategy,” U.S. Sen. Gordon Smith, R-Ore., said in a March 27 letter to Gutierrez.

Fixing the river requires more than just making more water available. Populations of parasites that have exploded in the river system during recent drought years will require more study. Fishermen have offered to truck the salmon smolts around the parasite hotspots and do whatever work is necessary to work together and help the fish.

Releasing water also depends on timing. More water is needed for fish at certain times of the year, such as when smolts are migrating downstream, Reinholdt said.

Much of the testimony on Thursday focused on tearing down the dams on the river. The council agreed, and on Friday sent a letter to the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation and other federal agencies calling for removal of four dams on the Klamath River.

Market loss, effort shifts

Joel Kawahara owns salmon permits in Alaska, Washington, Oregon and California. He knows some of the Oregon and California trollers will move north, to Washington and Alaska.

“What are those guys going to do?” Kawahara said.

Some are likely to troll for coho and Chinook in Southeast Alaska, but some may also use gillnet permits, permits they've held for years but haven't used, in the Bristol Bay sockeye fishery. There are several Bristol Bay permit holders in Sausalito, Calif., he said.

“There will be refugees in the net fishery, too,” Kawahara said.

Washington troller Jim Olson also is concerned about the ocean troll fishery north of Cape Falcon. Both Oregon and Washington trollers have access to the waters off of both states between Leadbetter Point in Washington and Cape Falcon in Oregon.

Some fishermen from Newport who don't usually fish north of Garibaldi could move north, Olson said. And the Washington season also is restricted this year.

“It will take our small season and make it accelerate faster,” Olson said. “It's a very delicate balance.”

Others, too, plan to expand into longlining for blackcod or fish for tuna - fisheries already nearly at their fishing capacity maximum.

“They have to go somewhere,” Olson said.

On Thursday, though, marketing professionals were concerned about losing ground to imports of farmed fish and losing customers its taken years to get.

“A closure would erase customer gains we've made,” Seafood Producers Cooperative President Tom McLaughlin said.

It's a matter of credibility, he said.

“Once we lose that customer, we lose that space on the menu or in the retail store,” McLaughlin said.

To have credibility with customers, McLaughlin noted, the company must be able to supply the product.

“It's a longer process than getting in the first time.”

- Staff Writer Susan Chambers, who writes about fisheries for The World, has been in Sacramento this week, covering the meeting of the Pacific Fishery Management Council. She can be reached by calling 269-1222 ext. 273, or by e-mailing schambers@theworldlink.com.