That is correct Bruce.

And to quote smalma:

*****

"While it is certainly true that interest and support for WSR and CnR opportunities among steelhead fishers has increased dramatically over the last 2 decades it is my recollection (don't have a copy in front of me) of the 2001 preference survey results don't support your statement:

"As I (Todd) posted on the other thread, WDFW's user preference survey from almost three years ago found that among steelhead fishermen, over 60% favored mandatory release of wild steelhead".

The survey give the folks several choices in response to a give situation - in the case with 60% support they were presented with a river whose wild steelhead were expected to return at less than the basin's escapement goal but whose hatchery run was at acceptable levels. Choices ranged from complete CnR for both hatchery and wild steelhead, to WSR to harvest of both hatchery and wild. In this case more than 60% support at least WSR. However that is far from a 60% support of a statewide mandatory WSR.

In fact the last question of the survey asked what folks thought the annual limit and daily limit should be for wild steelhead. This is the most germane facet of the survey. It gets directly at the issue of angler support of mandatory WSR. If most supported mandatory WSR as you suggest then more than 50% would have picked an daily limit of wild steelhead of ZERO. However more than 70% opted for a daily of 1 or more wild steelhead.

This would seem to suggest that many anglers are willing to accept WSR when there are hatchery fish for harvest but they still may wish to reserve some opportunity for wild fish harvest, especially if they are the only game in town.

My understanding that WSC and your allies couched your arguments to the Commission in support of WSR on recovering depressed wild stocks and protection of the few remaining "healthy" stocks - biological arguments if you will. This continuing after the fact trying to justify the change based on the "urban legend" of widespread support for mandatory WSR or that WSR will support more recreation are examples of revisionary history and only serve to discredit your original position."

*****