I believe habitat is the smallest of the problems. Look at Alaska. The habitat is pristene, absolutely perfect, but the fish are declining at a rapid rate. Look at the Kenai River. There used to be abundant salmon fishing there, now you can keep 1 per year and it has to be over 40 inches long. Again, I'm talking about pristene habitat there. Look at the bottom fish populations in Puget Sound. True/Tom cod are almost extinct, the rock fish population is almost totally decimated, and when was the last time you heard about someone who caught a legal sized ling cod south of Port Townsend? The habitat in Puget Sound is perfect. All these fish are gone because of over harvest. Alaska is the biggest resource for commercial salmon fishermen. They only fish in Washington because they can get a tax write off from it. In 1987 or 88 (I forget exactly), the WDFW released a fleet of bottom draggers in Puget Sound. Bye bye bottom fish.

I agree that having good habitat is very useful, but it is hardly the main cause of low fish runs. What good is pristene habitat if the fish can't swim through the nets to get there? I do agree with everything else that was said, though. We should do more to preserve fish. We should not be afraid to donate money to good causes. Sportsman should get a good lobbyist. When I worked on the Ban All Nets initive, I was amazed at the lack of funding we were able to get from sportsmen.

[This message has been edited by WA fisher (edited 03-28-2001).]