Gee things aren't what they use to be -

The population in this state has tripled in the last 30 years - 3 times as many people same number of fish means less fish per angler don't you think?

That rapid population growth has been at environmental cost - less water for the fish, poor water quality, more flooding due to timber and development activities have all lead to there being less fish. Fewer wild fish means less fish per angler don't you think?

Rapid development in fishing gear and lesiure time results in each angler being able to fish more often and more efficently. How many of you would give up your GPSs, depth finders, downriggers, graphite rods, modern day reels, travel less so that the pressure on the fish resource would be reduced? Increased angler efficency has resulted in rapid depletion of the resource. Meaning fewer fish available most of the season meaning less fish per angler don't you think?

A sporting public that by and larger refuses to get involved in the politics of resource management and protection. The result is this state spends less than 1% of its budget on natural resources - Dpeartments of Ecolgy, Parks, Fish and Wildlife, etc. Means less fish per angler don't you think?

Rather than blame mis-management it might be better as suggested earlier to look in the mirror. Each and everyone of us that is not consistently fighting for the protection of our fish and their habitats are part of the problem of declining fishing. Whinning is not going to improve things - in fact that and apathy is precisely what has brought us to this state of affairs.

My $0.02!

Tight lines
S malma