Cowlitzfisherman,

I could tell you some interesting stories about how vets used to treat/mistreat animals due to ignorance and lack of knowledge. Things have come a long way. There are still some old-school vets out there, but overall the profession is doing far better work than it was 20 or 30 years ago, much less 50 or 60 years ago.

I think fisheries biology has gone through a similar learning curve in the last few decades. I think it would be foolish to take control of our natural resources out of the hands of those who have the most training to manage them. Agreed, we have to be vocal about what we want from our fish resources. You and I certainly are that, huh?!

Wild Chrome

The problem is that thoes who know what to do to save the fish are not the ones making the decisions. the head steelhead manager in washington state ignores all the incoming new science, throws it in the trash infavor of thoes old school ways. His name is Bob Gibbons and he believes only in hatcheries and MSY. he is the enemy not your regional biologists. I desperatly wished that he read this forum because I'd love to tell him that his professional career has been a dismal failure. This man should be fired for the didservice he has done to this state.

Robert,

there are a few other "key" names, but I will save them for a later date!

Cowlitzfisherman

Is the taste of the bait worth the sting of the hook????

I do not wish to sound like a self proclaimed expert on the steelhead situation, because I am actually the least informed fellow that follows your guys' threads. I do use these discussions, to learn, and slowly you guys are helping me form the the feelings I have, with the science and facts around the science into an understanding.I have hidden back in the canyons and quiet spots to ignore the situation for as long as I can.I have developed such a deep love for the wild steelhead, that are left out here on the canal, that I can't stand the thought of sacrificing the wild,for numbers of bonkable fish. Please bear with me; I am using interaction with you and others in the know, to learn as much as I can! I respect the veiws of others as much as my own, even when they are not the same as mine. Over the years, I have found that interaction with others has lead to a greater understanding of the whole picture and truth.

I whole-heartly have to agree that every river system is differant than the other. They are all unique and all have differant impacts that are affecting them. There is no way to lump them all into a single cure all.

This leads to a need to STUDY every system seperately? As has been mentioned before, these studys can be manipulated to meet the needs of which ever group is looking for the answers. These studys also have become a scape goat. It is safer to study than react. There is less of a responsibility in the end. Is there a third party unconnected, to the seperation of interest Would the state ever allow a third party to reveiw existing studys? Then would the third party have the ability to take their findings and combine and review them with the states findings?

As complicated as the decision making process is in this state, and the united states, how do you get the facts made into a decision?

Due to the seperation of interest in this state, I do not see a solution beng reached in time to help the situation. This whole scenario alarms me! There is enough wild stock left out here to bring back the natives, but what we have now,will not be here ten years from now.

Bob All 3,
I keep hearing this about WDFW. It's sad. The only way to fight it is by joining with others and being an incredibly squeaky wheel! Having the mainstream fisheries biologists and ESA on your side doesn't hurt either.

LtlCleo,
Unfortunately, getting the facts made into decisions is political to the core. The powers at be cannot even decide what the facts are. Here in Oregon, we have some very vocal pro-native fish organizations. They must exist in Washington too, right? These groups are pretty connected with managing fish biologists, and some have the ear of the governor. Afterall, we have a flyfishing, pro-environment, pro-native fish governor here in Oregon 7 years running. Maybe that's where the difference lies? I don't know enough about the situation to say. If Gov. Locke were concerned about the extinction of native salmonid runs, maybe your cause would be in better shape.
This probably is completely incidental, but I wrote a very pointed, but respectful and eloquent letter to Oregon's U.S. senator Smith regarding his labelling anyone who supported an environmental cause an "extremist" a few years ago. He had been using that term frequently to defend the natural resources industry from a variety of environmentalist initiatives aimed at protecting certain threatened forests, animals, and fishes. Anyone who didn't agree with him (and the industry) got labelled an "extremist". After my letter, I never heard him use that term again and he's since taken a much more moderate tone toward the environmental community. I think his change of tone was mainly influenced by Slade Gorton's defeat and by his then-potential U.S. senate race with Gov. Kitzhaber. I do wonder if my letter may have touched a button in his mind though. Sending letters to those in power cannot hurt and might help. If an organized group sends a few hundred letters, all the better.