Cowlitz,

I think you are missing the big picture of this.

I also agree the decision goes agianst and looks like it violates thier guidlines they must follow.

I think it was the intent to go agianst the policy and guidelines. I think the intent was to show we needed new policy, new management. I think the intent was to show sport fishers want our wild steelhead to be managed for CnR and conservation not harvest.

The Policey says nothing about wild stocks being managed for CnR as a priority its clear goal is harvest. It was written so decisions could only be made with harvest as the main goal utilizing other management tools such as CnR when harvest was not acceptable or could not be supported by independant populations.

This decision shows a strog clear message that current policy, guidlines and management is completely unacceptable, outdated and non-condusive to CnR wild steelhead fisheries as a policy. The decision shows management and the goals of management of our wild steelhead stocks has no choice but to change with the change in the will of the users on how they want to use their allocation and what their priorities are.