Dec 7-8. Vancouver WA

2002-2003 Sport fishing regulation proposals
Public testimony on Statewide Wild steelhead release and other issues. I suggest everyone read the proposed regulations document on WDFW's website then come and testify at least in written form about everything thats important to you..

The document that Robert refers to is long. There are about 65 pages of proposed rules changes. One that will be voted on this year is the total non-retention of wild steelhead statewide. If you can't make it to Vancouver at the end of next week, I encourage you to read it and pass e-mail comments along. Here are the links:
http://www.wa.gov/wdfw/fish/regs/2002-2003prop.pdf
michapjm@dfw.wa.gov - email address for Pat Michael - e-mailed written testimony

Thanks Eddie...

If all of us got involved by sending emails or writing letters, we would have a wild steelhead release.

And one of them proposals was created by yours truly. Let you guess which proposal.

If you can only attend one day, testimony on wild steelhead C-and-R will be taken on Saturday, Dec 8. If you only do one thing for the fish this year, make it this.

I realize that personalized letters carry more weight, but does the WSC or perhaps someone else have a form letter that we can use for guidance (language suggestions, how to address specific rule changes, etc.)?

Also, even if we don't plan on testifying, is it worth going down there just to show our support in numbers?

If you carea bout CnR it is easy to comment...cut and paste the following and send an email to the following people....

Evan Jacoby
jacobesj@dfw.wa.gov
and
fishpgm@dfw.wa.gov


As a licensed angler and Washington resident, I urge you and the WDFW Rules Commission to eliminate all exceptions to wild steelhead release rules. I support a statewide catch and release policy on wild steelhead.

Please consider this an official comment on the current 2002 rules proposals.

Then send a hard copy via US MAIL to this address

Evan Jacoby, Rules Coordinator, 600 Capitol Way N., Olympia, WA 98501-1091.

I think Jumbo's letter is fine. I would encourage people to take a minute extra and personalize it a bit. All responses will count but identical responses are tallied together and in all honesty, don't carry the same weight.

If anyone needs any additional talking points I would consider including some or all of the following:

loss of genetic diversity -- catch and kill seasons tend to remove the early arriving large wild fish from the gene pool

economic impact of catch and release fisheries

3-5% hooking mortality of C and R v. the 100% mortality of C and Bonk.

Importance of repeat spawners -- up to 15% of hens are repeat spawners and these carry up to 25% of the eggs

Hope these help!

Duggan Harman
WSC Board President

For those that won't be sending in a personalized letter or going to the meetings, I will have a form letter available to be email the commission within a day ... Duggan is right, personalized letters carry more weight, but if nothing else, fill out on the info on the form and send it in

Bringing this back to the top. For those without the time to write a personal letter, please see the form letter 'click to' at the top of the BB page that Bob put up for us. It's an easy 30 second task to sign this form letter in support of proposed regs for C&R of native steelhead stocks in Washington. (Oregon already has this in place). Thanks Bob and all.

RT

Is it strictly just changing to catch-and-release for wild steelhead? Will we still be able to use the same gear or will it change to single barbless hooks and no bait? I already put my name down on the wild steelhead proposal, but I was just curious about this.

~ Dr Pepper

Dr. P,

The proposed regulation will change nothing other than prohibiting the retention of wild steelhead statewide, year round, with no exceptions. It has no effect on existing seasons, gear restrictions, or bait restrictions.

Fish on,

Todd.

My ? is how will this impact the netting of wild stealhead by Indians in WA? I realize it will help public sentiment turn against it but is there restrictions against netting in this proposal?

[ 12-02-2001: Message edited by: bugleman ]

bugleman no there is nothing related to netting addressed by this proposal at all.
It only addresses sport harvest.

You know I just read an article about tanglenets. They are just like a gillnet, but they catch the fish in the tooth or jaw area and allow the fish to respire while caught in the net. Some commercial fishermen in the Columbia are using them to fish in mixed stock areas with chinook. The guy the was the focus of the article ended up catching shad, sturgeon, steelhead, wild chinook and hatchery chinook. He released everything except for hatchery chinook. Why can't the indians use tanglenets instead of gillnets and release the wild fish?

~ Dr Pepper

Wheres the form letter for those of us opposed to the new broad band catch and release regulations?