To clarify, also, I am not chasing "hotter" fishing. Simply the kind of fishing I like.

But, to the point, WDFW needs to realize that they need to produce a product in order to sell licenses. Or, sell them to folks who simply don't think much about what they are getting in return.

The interception fisheries are a problem, no doubt. BC is probably more of ani issue here than is AK, for our salmon. Those folks who go to the Kenai, Situk, Bristol Streams, Skeena, Nass, Dean, and so on are actually pursuing the fish as (to my mind) they should be. As adults in defined areas of separation. It is the marine mixed stock fisheries (everywhere, even WA and OR) that are exacerbating our issues with "recovery".

I also don't see that economics are all that bad. To chase salmon in marine waters here in WA I need a big, seaworthy, boat, truck to pull it, and the associated gear and electronics to purchase, operate, and maintain. Now, I don't have a need for a big boat or a truck to pull it, and so on. That money can go to trips on somebody else's gear.

As a more real-world example, to go deer hunting in WA, where I have permission on private land, will cost me about $500 a trip for the food, motel, gas and mileage, and so on. While I gladly pay this because I really like the folks on whose land I hunt, there are guided hunts (in WA) that are not much more spendy and I will get my doe. When all the costs are considered, the out of state trips aren't more spendy.

But, because I am a river fisherman, it is a whole lot cheaper to do that (non-boat). That is where WDFW has not only dropped the ball but kicked it out of play. The angler who is not a boat-owner (or boat-ho) is last in line as they just aren't that much of an economic benefit to the state. I think, too, that the river salmon angler wants/expects/demands a dead fish in return for the trip while the boat guy will are easily accept a beautiful day on the water.