I made another post letting everyone know that the WDFW has opened up the comment period for proposed regulations.

One of these regulation proposals is the elimination of the 30 fish annual limit for steelhead.

The regulation WILL NOT change the number of wild steelhead that an angler can harvest, only hatchery fish.

While I'm not a meat monger, for those that eat lots of fish, or give it away to friends, or whatever (as long as it's not wasted). I'm all for it. Maybe it might save a few more wild stock fish (salmon or steelhead) if someone chooses to stuff their freezer with them ... or perhaps they'll let a wild hen go because they caught gobs of hatchery fish and harvested them.

I'd never take more than 30 in a year, but I don't think it's a bad idea ... that's what brats are there for, and we sure want to see them all out of the systems anyhow.

What are your thoughts??

I'm with ypou Bob. Hatchery fish are put in to be taken out. I don't care how many someone keeps as long ass they eat them and don't toss them out next June all freezer burned.

Bob,

I have a few of questions - whom do you know that catches 30 steelhead a year and keeps them? How many wild fish are incidentally caught while getting to that number? Of those wild fish, how many are harmed because of handling, etc.? Are they going to open the limit up on hatchery rivers only, or increase the number of hatchery fish to allow for the increased take?

Personally I have never caught a steelhead....something I should maybe talk to you about? Maybe setting up a trip or something... I am just concerned that maybe we don't have all the facts. I can only assume - and I hate what that makes me into sometimes - that the WDFW has taken into account the possible negative side effects?

I believe eliminating the 30 fish limit would fuel a meat fishing mentality...

Fishing in this day and age should focus around convservation and should not be a blood sport.

I think many of us have taken up this enlightened view and are doing what we can to spread it onto another generation of fisherman.

By eliminating the 30 fish limit we are not advancing as sportsmen but are falling backwards.

Do you really believe our future fisheries will be able to sustain massive harversts (hatchery or wild)??

...and for those of you that do, please pull yourselfs away from the Cowlitz and/or NF Lewis.

Bob, I don't feel that dropping the annual limit below thirty fish would keep the brats out of the system. My neighbor, who is an avid steelheader and volunteers countless hours at numerous hatcheries and the fish collection facility on the North fork Toutle, discussed this situation with me the other day. The WDFW says it can't enforce more or keep the hatcheries going strong due to budget cuts and lack of revenue generation. How about going back to a separate fee for catch record cards? The reason so many people are out there fishing now is they are getting a real bargain in the fishing license. If most of these people had to pay like they used to, they might not fork over the extra dollars for the PRIVILEDGE of catching fish that the rest of us have been and continue to pay for. My opinion. Your thoughts?

For those that believe "so what???, they are just hatchery fish"...

steelheadslayer brought up a good point...at a time when we are seeing the first budget shortfalls due to our poor economy and inturn are hearing of more and more discussions about serious across the board budget cuts, who knows when (not if) the hatcheries will be hit.

We have seen it before and have dodged several bullets (Does Reiter or Fortson ring a bell??) in the past...and are going to see the beaucratic AXE very very soon.

Who even knows if our terminal fisheries will be able to sustain additional harvest???

Here is my take on this.

1. sparkey is exactly right it WILL!!!! breed a generation of anglers who all they care about is killing as many fish as possible and in years when there are not many hatchery fish they'll kill the wild ones legal or not.

2. if there is so many hatchery fish coming back then our hatcheries are overproducing maybe we could save a little money by not planting more fish than we can use..

3. Also no matter what else happens the 5 wild fish per year is absolutely unacceptable! the limit on wild fish should be 0 per year period. As long as there are hatcheries there is no reason for the harvest of wild fish period!

4. WDFW wants to lower all our fisheries to the lowest common denominator. They want ever river to be just like the Cowlitz. That is their modle fishery. They do not care about the quality of the experience only about high harvest numbers. This is a political ploy to add legitimacy to that approach. I know some people just want as many fish to catch as possible but that is not what everyone wants. Many and increasing numbers of us want quality fishing experiences, having tens of thousands of hatchery fish in every little stream does not accomplish that, in fact it makes our fishing worse by increasing the pressure and decreasing the number of wild fish. WDFW knows this and does not care!

5. I am all for eliminating hatchery fish from the rivers before they spawn. Harvesting is an extremely ineffective way to do that. This poropsal shows the flat out irresponsibility of WDFW and their hatchery managment. They refuse to operate their hatcheries in a way that is safe for wild ateelhead they could do so easily they just refuse to.

This proposed reg is not the outcome of logical thought, it is the avoidance of serious problems with WDFW policies and managment. It is in it's most basic form doing nothing about a huge problem that no one in the upper ranks of WDFW wants to deal with. The problem is our wild runs are going down the crapper and WDFW ain't doing nothing but flushing..

All Hatchery fish must die !!! That's what they are for ! Born and raised to supplement steelhead fishing for the times when the wild fish are not around to catch . Kill them all .

If it were not for hatchery fish we would have a pretty dull year of steelhead fishing on alot of the rivers I fish .

Let's face it if it were not for them how much fishing would we have ?

If we had to rely on wild fish stocks we would only be fishing a couple months of the year .

How much pressure would that put on wild fish if the time slot was that tight ?

Would fishermen be as inclined to let wild fish go if they only got to fish for a couple months a year ?

If we care so much about the future of wild fish why are we out fishing for them at all ? Shouldn't we be leaving them alone to do their thing without being hasseled by anyone with a fishing rod ?

Hatchery fish serve a purpose . Like it or not .They are here for the fishermen and that is all . If too many hatchery fish are getting back to the hatcheries on some rivers without being harvested then those rivers should have an increased kill on them .

Fishermens mentality is not breed , it is taught . Education is the key to the future of fishing . We can work with it now or deal with it later .

I know a few guys that fill their cards every year. I like what Steelhead slayer said about a seperate fee for catch cards. Except what I would like to see is the 30 fish card that you get with your liscense plus the opportunity to buy an additional card after you have already caught your 30 fish. Maybe this would be a way to make those unavoidable budget cuts not hurt so bad.

I like Vics idea of being able to purchase an additional punch card. Why not have a stamp that you purchase to fish a particular system? How about a hefty dollar amount for a trophy tag? You guys that are so worried about hatchery fish "polluting" the nates should think about what would happen if the state quit planting brats! How long would the wild fish last if they were all that are available.

ReiterRat

You're right on! Some of you others guys…well some things never change!!!

One day you complain that we got way to many hatchery fish completing with the wild fish. The next day you say that we will be "fishing" way too much and causing harm to the wild fish if we fish too much for hatchery fish.

Now you see why WDFW is so screwed up! You can't cut your cake and eat it too on this one. More people like harvest then not…that's just the way it is!

So let's just say that we "Purchase" ANOTHER punch card. Well exactly what will that do to save or enhance the recovery of "wild fish"? That money will just go right back into the general fund again and pay for some jerk to figure out a way to get on L and I or some other state run scam. Why not stop all the 4 day work weeks? Hell that will make "some difference in fishing pressure". Think about it, all those state and federal boys will have to stay off the rivers on those Fridays! That means that fishing pressure will be eliminated one more day a week by thousands of employees…that too should help recover all those "wild" fish that those guys hook and release (that should generate a few flames back).

Think of it this way, the game wardens wouldn't have to be spending all your tax dollars writing some guy up for over limits or not punching his fish out immediately after catching it. That same game warren could be out there catching that guy who's poaching that wild fish that so many of you are trying to protect…right?

That way you wouldn't have to have them spending so much time on places like the Cowlitz or North Fork of the Lewis…right?

It wasn't that long ago that WDFW cut back the number of punches on their salmon cards…right? What did that do when it first started out…It made you "purchase" another card and for what…the general fund!

I have spent thousands of hours in the past raising fish in net pens so that those fish could be harvested by sport fishermen. So why not harvest them? It really irks me when people nock the Cowlitz. Before you guys nock the Cowlitz and its fishery, you need to look into your own "back yard"! Like it or not, we get the zoo fishery because people outside of this area are brought here by your newspapers. Just look at who homesteads the area around Blue Creek… they ain't us! Those aren't locals camping down their.

It would make more sense to me to create a special fund through legislation that would mandate a "wild" catch punch card. That way, all you guys that truly support wild fish recovery can really make a difference. Even if you chose not to kill your quota, you have made a special contribution to the recovery of wild fish. Look at the good side of doing this; when that special wild fish that you have hooked to deeply start's bleeding or you have fought him to long and to hard, he won't have died for nothing.

Look at anther good side of it; for all of you that think that the Tribes are getting all of your hatchery raised fish, now you can get all those "hatchery fish" first before they do!
I know the same old guys will hate what I have just wrote…but what's new? If there are no limits on hatchery fish, how will the tribe get their haft?

Here's one last thought that I will leave with you to plunder your minds with. What will all those fishing guides do if there are no limits on hatchery fish? I won't even begin to reach into that can of worms…well maybe just a little bit!

Take the limits off hatchery fish, and enjoy fishing for what it is. If you don't want to harvest or kill hatchery fish, do whatever works for you.

Remember, its only my opinion before you attempt to bit off my head!

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

I think WDFW should manage salmonids with the conservation of the wild fish in mind for each river system individually.

For steelhead after you fill your first card you can get another card AFTER you return your first card. Each additional card is for hatchery fish only.

I think all cards should be free with incentives for those who return them. Maybe you don't get one the next year until you return the one from the year before. These cards are data for the managers. The more data they have, the better job they can do with managing the resource.

This might be a side issue but as far as funding goes I think the licenses now are a bargain. If funding is lacking for your favorite program then I think we should step up to the plate and pay more for a base license.

As far as increasing the yearly limits producing a "meat mentality", guess what, it's there now, was there yesterday, will be there tomorrow. Human nature.

cowlitzfisherman - your right on about some of those "other guys", sometimes I can't believe the things they post and their holier that thou attitude. They know who they are Their wacky man! For the most part I also agree with your other comments.

As for the "Other Guys" - Get Real

My thoughts:

I think in the fisheries management scheme, punch cards were used for both convservation and data collection in the early days of wild fish retention, and later, when fisheries were composed of mixed hatchery/wild stocks. Now with wild fish retention regulated byitself (5 fish per year; selected streams), the 30 fish limit would seem redundant, assuming the goal of removing all hatchery fish before they spawn in rivers.

However, here's another function of punchcards--spreading out the fishing opportunity. The old adage is true that 80 percent of the fish are caught by 20 percent of the anglers. This is probably true for most large rec fisheries just because you have your professionals like Bob, avid folks like me and many on this board, and the occassionals. My concern is this: would eliminating a 30 fish limit be taking away fishing opportunity? Would it skew catch rates further, say 95 percent of fish being caught by 5 percent of the anglers.

An example--summer running on the Sky. By most accounts, it was a reasonable sized run and fishing was fantastic in June thru early-July, particularly in the lower river. But come mid-July thru now, fishing was inconsistent to skimpy up high between Rieter and the upper South Fork. Some believe the large number of sleds and their abilities to catch lots of fish during a high water spring contributed to fewer numbers of fish in the upper watershed late in the season. Whether this is true or not, I don't know--no data like these have been collected. Another possibility is that the south fork run spread out in the upper river more than is typical because of the relatively high water present when they were trucked over Sunset Falls. But I personally know some sled guys that landed enough fish to claim a percentage of the run by themselves during the early season. This isn't a criticism of sleds, but an example of how unpredictable environmental variables can affect fish catch. This years high water made for some awesome fishing conditions early in the season on the Sky.

I know people are fond of voting their hearts and at first glance no punch cards sounds like more hatchery fish to bonk. But will it actually mean this over the course of a season? For winter steelheading, maybe. The winter brats run hard and fast and there aren't enough days for lower river fisheries to cause significant interceptions. But for summer-running, it really is nice to have productive seasons both early in the lower river and late in the upper river spanning a total of 5-6 mo. Rather than a 2 mo fishery during spring runoff and a scratch fest during the late summer and fall. I think most of us agree that maximizing fishing opportunity is a worthwhile goal, defined as fishing days as well as number of fish. If either of these goals is affected by the elimination of an annual limit, then as a management tool, it has some purpose.

One more variable to throw into the mix is the oft mentioned funding. To cite my home river again, over the past 10 years, summer-run collections at the Rieter Hatchery have gone from over 700 adults to just 350-400 because of decreased funding. Assuming similar smolt to adult survival, this is half as many fish to bonk. Last year, the North Fork Stilly didn't have much of a 2-salt run to speak of because of a funding hole that caused a one year skip in plantings.

During the early to mid 90s, this issue was moot--there were fish a plenty for everyone. But in the last half decade, the numbers of hatchery fish have not been as consistent. In these uncertain budgetary times, and always unpredictable environmental conditions, shouldn't management strategies seek to spread out catch over entire seasons rather than provide incentives to catch all the fish at once? This would seem prudent during low number years when meeting hatchery escapement goals are at issue. With no annual limit, this may be a possibility during some years, depending upon water conditions. And dependent upon conditions, the total size of the hatchery run, and the number of anglers, no annual limit may not mean more fish for all.

Excellent post Obsessed! That pretty much sums up my feelings on this issue.

Hang in there Sparkey, RA3 etc... You've got EVERY right to state your position, no matter what those "other guys" think! (They're pretty wacky too!)

I have to agree with what Obsessed.

I looked back at my old punch card return reports (I knew I would find a use for those someday). Up until 1994 they would report how many people returned there cards, what % caught fish, etc. On the average only about 50% caught fish and of those catching fish 2% caught 21 to 30 fish. That means 1% of the anglers were catching 20 to 25% of the total harvest. I'm not sure that we want to further skew the catch distribution!

In fact it would be my personal preference to reduce that difference by lowering the annual catch limit, say to 10 or 20 fish per year. Now I hear folks say "we got to get those hatchery fish out of the system!" Yes we do but somehow I think if we limit that 1% that is catching more than 20 fish the other 99% might be able to catch those uncaught fish and have better fishing for it.

If you insist on getting additional cards at least be willing to pay for those fish. It cost at least $0.50 to produce each steelhead smolt (the cost varies from hatchery to hatchery and it may be even higher than that). But at 4 bits a smolt and a 3% smolt to adult survival (a high average - current returns statewide is much lower than that) it would cost $16.67 for each adult hathcery steelhead returning to our rivers. 30 fish times 16.67 is $500- a fair price for an extra card!! It is unfair to expect the rest of us to subsidize your catch if you want more than 10 or 20 steelhead a year.

Tight lines
Smalma

Some good points everyone, swayed me Keeping it where it is sounds like a good option.

With all the other irons I've got in the fire right now, I hadn't thought this through much and the con's seem to outweigh the pro's.

I do however still believe that when there are plenty of brats back at the hatchery, there's no reason they shouldn't be harvested.

Many rivers, especially the Cowlitz it seems, gets an upward bump in limits when the returns to the hatcheries are high. Should we increase the limit to three in these situations??

Good dicussion everyone!

Sparkey,

Blood sport? Are you lobbying for a PETA membership or what? Whether you're whacking 5 fish or 50 in a season, somebody is going to label you a "blood-sport" participant. You'd better figure out whose side you're on before your sport disappears altogether.

I guess I don't really care one way or the other. I rarely keep more than about a dozen or so steelhead and salmon a year, so it really wouldn't affect me too much.

I'm also convinced that if NO fish were ever retained, 10% of the anglers would still catch 90% of the fish.

In Idaho upriver we generally are able to keep 2 per day / 10 per season, but the last two years it has went up to 3per day, 9 in possesion, 40 per season (hatchery fish only), because of better than usual returns. I think I tend to keep alot more than what I need when it's 40, (just about every hatchery fish I catch) than when it's 10 ( I'm not as picky on getting that mounter). I kept 19 last year, giving alot away, and smoking alot. I did not release many hatchery fish during catch and keep. One night last year we took home 4 fish total weight 70+ pounds. I released a 16lb hen on top of that , plus my dad had on 2 other 17-19 pounders near the boat. Thats alot of steelhead.

I don't think any bag limit will limit the amount of time I spend fishing, since I caught and released a few 100 fish last year, plus witnessed about the same. When the catch and release season is open, flyfishers compete with egg roe drifters for fish. People aren't out there to purposely kill fish, but they are there to fish never the less. Im not sure why Idaho allows baitfishing during catch and release, it makes it very difficult for flyfishers.

I don't believe any wild steelhead should be reduced to possession, and do not understand why you can or would keep them further down river. The hatcheries up here only take in about 1200 adults though, split from nov and march. That leaves a bunch of hatchery fish to be caught. So if they are hatchery I say catch' em. I'm not sure if the extra fish per day has an effect on mistakenly killing wild fish or not. It's still pretty rare to catch a 3 fish limit up here, don't know about downriver. If they want to protect wild fish up here I think they should go no bait during the catch and release season for a start, maybe no bait at all, any time of year.

I didn't read all of the posts but here is a thought. Maybe it has already been sais - maybe it hasn't. Will the state use the excuse that because sportsman are keeping more fish, that it is okay for the indians or commercials to keep more fish?

Maybe this could have intentions against us. It's something to think about.

Matt

Alot of good posts... Personally i would like to see all native fish released PERIOD. If Native broodstocks were used in all of our rivers than a 20 or 30 fish limit would be adaquate because those fish that didnt get caught could spawn. BUT most of our rivers dont have native broodstock so why keep these fish in a system that could jeopardize a native run that took thousands of yrs to establish? So, my vote is to scratch the 30 fish limit. I have no problem releasing hatchery fish to make room for winter runs this year, but its hard knowing the fish you release could weaken a native gene pool......

My wife and I would have to eat almost a pound of steelhead per day, 7 days per week - for a year in order to munch one punchcard of steelhead. So where would these other fish go? Would "sport" fishers become quasi-commercial fishers, selling or bartering the extra fish? Would low-end guides pass on their rod to their clients? If so, how many wild fish would be caught and released to bleed to death after taking a bait diver down its throat?
These are just things we could consider, but what really bothers me is that WDF&W is trying to pull this off in a "minor cycle" year. There is no rush here, so why not float this plan to the public next year, in the "major regulation cycle."