Originally Posted By: GBL
Todd-
Point taken.
I will say that the Wildcat Steelhead club ( I am not a member) has done many good things for the Skagit, yes there are bonkers in the club as there are everywhere.
Their point, and I agree, is that those spawning beds that you say have thousands spawning, used to have tens of thousands and the fisheries numbers as well as the Federal numbers support a sharp decline in the Native population within 3 years of the Bolt decision. Just because the our fiseries agency say we are meeting escapment does not mean a darn thing, they will tell you whatever they want to appease the masses.
Remember my brother in law is one of them and has over the years shocked me with what goes on behind closed doors among themselves as well as what they have done with the Indians.
We are all saying the same things, just a different delivery. You are a lawyer, how many times has the same story been spun a different way to make a point?
I just want to make sure everyone keeps an open mind and remembers that places like the Skagit were in decline right after Bolt and before the logging community screwed up the Sauk.
Before the Bolt decision, I was there for years before Bolt and the sportsman had little affect on the fisheries, in fact the runs stayed strong for 25 years, now I know that fishing preasure increased about the same time and that does have an effect, but those nets (and the ones still there today) have had the biggest impact on the Steelhead, not Habitat.
Habitat is the States way of deflecting the stupid management they have done over the years.


The state while culpable for the mismanagement of the fishery, can't be blamed for the nets. If anything, the generous harvest limits are quite a bit to blame, but once again with wild fish release if the numbers were to rebound, the would have done so by now....

I don't think anyone has suggested the netting is good, quite the contrary. But in terms of things that can be done, habitat is such a crucial element that it must be addressed. Debating whether netting is a bigger problem is completely moot. Unless someone wants to come up with a compelling argument that it's wrong and take it to court and see if it passes the litmus test of our legal system, habitat fixes are where we are at.

Besides all of that, if you *really* want to save the fish, the long term issue at hand is habitat. With the quickly expanding SeaTac metro area gobbling up all cheap land, it is an *IMPERATIVE* to start working now to maintain that habitat rather than waiting for it to get better...

Finally, I've *very* surprised that everyone keeps saying the Sky is great habitat. The entire lower stretch has been completely diked via rip-rap, and within the last dozne years the sleep town of Monroe has turned into a gigantic strip mall resplendid with impermeable surfaces and all sorts of run off associcated with it. While the upper stretch is still pretty good, it's obvious to me that encroachment is well under way.....