Well, we all survived the hearing in Bremerton. My informal tally showed that 59 people spoke in favor of retaining the moratorium and 19 against. The written testimony provided to us by the Commission showed 163 For, 75 against. Nobody can say this hearing was done outside the light of day!!!

A number of random thoughts:

1. Most importantly, it was great to meet and converse civilly with Cowlitz Fisherman, Todd, Hairlip Angler, Salmo G., Aunty M & Caveman, and TRBO - Bob Ball.

2. No fisticuffs!!! Only two people shouted down by the audience for trying to exceed their 3 minutes - Ramon from Washington Trout and the Mayor of Forks.

3. Real civility and respect for the opposing viewpoints. The one exception (maybe minor) was the City of Forks lawyer who threatened a lawsuit. But hey, he's a lawyer (Sorry Todd).
I wonder if the City of Forks realizes the pretty major PR blunder in labeling all who were for the moratorium as urban elitist fly fishermen??

4. The most memorable line of the day from an Aussie guy talking about the science that the WDFW staff presented at the outset. He said it was not science, it was statistics and "Statistics are like bikinis, what you can see is pretty interesting, but the good stuff is hidden".

5. I was disappointed in Clint Muns of the PSA. I believe that Clint is a good advocate for the Sportsfishermen and that PSA is a good organization (especially Grandpa's chapter). However, they are on the wrong side of this issue IMHO.

6. Even though it was an overwhelming showing by the Pro moratorium forces, like George Orwell said in Animal Farm - "Everyone is equal, but some are more equal than others". I believe that the NWIFC written testimony will carry tremendous weight. It does give new context to the infamous "backroom dealing" that we began with back in February.

7. I thought both sides did a generally good job of presenting their cases (note the caveat about urban elistist, yada,yada, yada). It always takes courage to talk to the Commission. My thanks to all who chose to get involved.

8. I was surprised that there were not more anti-Moratorium folks at the meeting. Certainly by looking at the heat generated on this subject, I expected more of the Antis.

For What It's Worth: Here is my testimony to the Commission. Nothing really new here but it completes my recording of the day's events.

Director Koenings, Deputy Director Peck, & Members of the Commission,

My name is Ed Scherer and I am representing myself. The challenges facing Wild Steelhead are numerous and well documented. Habitat, Harvest, Hatcheries, Hydro, and History are factors that have been discussed in a more scholarly fashion than I can do in these 3 minutes. Addressing one of those H’s, harvest, through this moratorium is not a “silver bullet” however, it is a step in the right direction.

The beauty and uniqueness of this fish has been described far more eloquently in both print and voice than I ever could. That testimony can stand on its own. I will take a more practical path.

I submit that there is really only one question to ask if we are serious about keeping our Steelhead resource in this state. That question is “Do you believe that hatcheries are the answer to a declining steelhead population and will offer certainty of a continued run of fish?” If the answer to that question is anything other than “Absolutely, 100% and I have the science to back it up.”, then you must take whatever steps you can to protect the gene pool that Wild Steelhead represent.

Fifty years ago and longer (or so I am told), there were strong runs of Wild Steelhead in most rivers of our State. We have seen great declines. Now we are down to arguing about 12. My perception is that the single most devastating reason for those declines is loss of Habitat. Of all the H’s, Habitat is the one that will take the greatest amount of capital, both financial and Political to solve. If we find the will to tackle the Habitat problem, we must then have a gene pool of Wild fish to reseed those streams with. For me, that is the single, most persuasive reason for a Statewide Moratorium. The gene pool is too valuable and a real rainy day fund for the future if we have a prayer of restoring the Wild fish to its previous abundance.

I ask the question again - “Do you believe that hatcheries are the answer to a declining steelhead population and will offer certainty of a continued run of fish?” I submit that no reasonable person can answer that with the 100% certainty that is required if we are serious about Wild Steelhead Recovery. With that in mind, I urge you to continue this moratorium and take steps to make it permanent.