I would say I am part of fishing community. I take part in about every species of fish we have hear in the state and all over the state. Although that definitely doesn't give me any more authority or clout or the right to say that my word is the final end all. I'm sure people disagree and that's fine.

Arrogant...... maybe behind a computer, but I'm a facts, data guy and well calulated or documented numbers usually don't lie.

My main beef, besides the rant, is the lack of hard data, reports, documented facts for their case. It may be out there, but I haven't found it nor has anyone I've talked to so far. If these Chambers Creek and hatchery fish in general truely due have as much of a negative impact on wild stocks as they say, I definitely might change my tune. However, for a group to make the kind of claims they make, file lawsuits, and possibly be publicly funded (I'm haven't seen this for fact, but have been told), there just isn't the data, for me, to justify this.

Either way, this lawsuit will use up a lot of public taxpayer money and right now I'm not confident anything will change. Other than less fish. That's not really the goal... right?? And if this lawsuit does make a major impact in how things are run, I guess I'll be eating my words and buying lots of beers for people who say 'I told you so.' I'll honor that any day.


Open question still stands, does anyone have this Skagit report they talk about?

PS. and if it came down to it, I probably still wouldn't bonk a wild one. Just more of a point.