DH,

Nobody, myself included, would ever argue that it isn't beneficial to check in with local groups that have been fighting for the fish for years to get the "lay of the land".

Nor do I question the value of what the WSC has done, which was landmark in coordinating the public fight for protection of our favorite gamefish. That learning thing, of course, goes both ways. Maybe the WSC can learn a thing or two about how to conduct themselves in the political arena?

Just as the WSC deserved the benefit of the doubt when they were formed (even thought many in the local Fish Politics arena wrote them off as a bunch of elitist flyfishermen ), so too do the CCA. If for no other reason than their abundant successes on the East Coast, Florida, and Texas.

What irritates me the most are those that trash a group publicly before they even have a chance to get established!!! Remember the early debates within the WSC on whether they should oppose or accept the use of bait in fishing for steelhead?? Or what stance they'd take on hatcheries???

I do -and am also aware of those that left en masse when the WSC went in a direction they didn't agree with. It's never easy going thru this process, and it takes time. Just something to keep in mind.

As well, I'm of the opinion (and you know about opinions - they're as many of them as there are posterior orifices) that there are many roles in a good organization. Financial contributors, those who donate their time and skills, and friends lend a voice in times of need should all be valued. Demanding more only alienates those on the fringe instead of drawing them into the process.

Just my .02,

Brian