If the Commission believed that such a rule would eliminate anglers, there is no way they would entertain it. Steelhead anglers don't have much clout, but we do shell out each year for our cards. If this revenue were eliminated in an already resource poor budget, it would be counterproductive. This stance is banking on the notion that most steelheaders would welcome or not mind such a rule and continue to buy licenses and use available fishing opportunities.

Although a lot of anglers fish native release year-round, there are still a lot of nates bonked. You can see this particularly on streams that have early native keep seasons like the Green and Sky. The run comes in during March and April after the rivers go C&R or close. The gene pool of early arriving nates has been severely diminished. With year-round native release, it would be hoped that the nate runs will expand seasonally. I'd love to have to use line heavier than 8 lb test in December.

Essentially anglers and tribes are the only users of steelhead (not including by-catch by commercials). If one of the users no longer harvests, conservatin and restoration concerns can put additional pressure on the remaining harvester (tribes). This is why the tribes were against I-696 even though it didn't affect them. I believe year-round C&R can have positive affects on the remaining steps that need to be taken to restore wild steelhead populations.

[This message has been edited by obsessed (edited 05-18-2000).]