Sunday May 18th at 4pm is the Washington Trout Auction to raise more money to start some more lawsuits and close hatcheries. Maybe we should organize a protest march at the venue in Issaquah? Complete with signs?

that could be a good idea if it is done in the right way.

I'll bring it up at our chapter board meeting next week.

Well I ceratainly don't want to provoke anything, but I have to ask grandpa, Do you plan on harrasing any of the attendees as they try to go in to support an organization whose principles they believe in? Will you follow any of them home? Do you plan on doing anything to their cars?

Will you harass our keynote speaker, Dr Bern Shanks, former Director of WDFW who was railroaded out of his job by commercial fishing interests because he dared to consider changes to harvest and hatchery practices?


This is America. I support your right to your opinion and your right to make it known. I hope in your campaign you will strive to be honest, and to actually learn the facts before you address them. I hope you will attempt to make sure that you aren't misrepresenting WT or attacking good people for things they are not doing. I hope things won't get too extreme.

It is apparently convenient for you to decide that I am a liar. Given that, I would at least hope that you will attempt to find out what Washington Trout does, on all sorts of fronts, before you decide that my alleged deception just confirms the suspicions you have developed. You have expressed things on this board about WT that are baseless and untrue. But please, don't take that on my word, which is apparently useless to you. Please research the facts yourself; then base your accusations on those.

I hope that you will allow the principled people who believe in and support WT's mission and positions to enjoy their evening. Most of them are sportfishers just like you, who happen to have a different opinion than you do how wild-fish resources should be managed. I hope that while you do what you believe in, you won't infringe on their right to do exactly the same.

Ramon Vanden Brulle
Washington Trout

Ramon,

no one said anything about harrassing people or vandalizing cars.

of course you have the right to voice your opinion, just like the rest of us do. so dont expect WT's claims to go unchallenged at the meeting.

Actually metalhead, grandpa mentioned all that stuff, regarding what I might be prepared to do to achieve my "hidden agenda" (which I'm still waiting to hear defined). I don't believe I've ever given anyone ANY hint of a reason to accuse me of those things. But he wants to disrupt our party, and I just hope it doesn't get out of hand.

I don't know what "meeting" you're talking about. We're going to have dinner, probably a little wine. We're gong to listen to a speech by Bern Shanks (I thought he was a bit of a hero to WA sportfishers). We'll auction off items to raise money. The people coming are hoping to have a good time and support WT because they believe in it. It's a night I know many of them look forward to every year. They are good people who share a set of principled beliefs. None of them are trying to give anybody the shaft, grandpa's delusional world view notwithstanding.

Some of the money we raised at the 2002 auction supported our efforts to curtail the 2003 spring-chinook commercial fishery on the Lower Columbia. The by-catch of steelhead in that fishery in 2002 was 20,000 steelehead, with a mortality of almost 50%. In 2003, thantks to the work of WT and others, the bycatch of steelhead from that fishery was in the hundreds of fish. Some of the money went to forcing timber companys to leave trees in floodplains so rivers have room to meander and change channels, in other words function like rivers that can support healthy populations of salmon and steelhead. Some of the money went to restore salmon and steelhead habitats in the Snohomish, Stillaguamish, and Washougal watersheds. Some of it went in to valuable field research throughout the state that influences policies to protect native fish habitas and poulations.

And yes, some of it went into challenging current hatchery practices. We are suing to challenge those practices. We believe that if those practices can't or won't be improved, then the hatcheries should be closed. There IS a difference between that and just saying hatcheries should be closed. I'll ask again: do you believe those practices can be improved without closing the hatcheries? I have said here and elsewhere that WT is skeptical, but if WDFW thinks they can be, then they should propose and implement those changes, and quit just talking about them without even naming them. WDFW talks about the HSRG process, but I cannot find any of the HSRG recommendations incorporated into WDFW's proposed hatchery plans.

Ours is not an extreme position. It is well within the mainstream of current scientific opinion. It is shared by the BPA Independent Scientific Review Board, the NMFS Salmon Recovery Science Review Panel, the National Research Council, and literally scores of independent researchers.

But be all that as it may, I concede that many reasonable people will continue to disagree with WT's position and actions regarding hatcheries. I'm just asking for a little reason, a little less emotion, and a little more attention to the truth. If you feel you must come and demonstrate your beliefs at our party (which you're invited to if you want to pay the $55), I just hope you'll do it honestly, and that you'll care to do it civilly, without trying to ruin anyone's evening. And once again, I would hope that everyone would consider EVERYTHING WT does before they decide what they think they must do.

I don't Know why that should sound unreasonable or deceptive.

Ramon Vanden Brulle,
Washington Trout

Ramone,
Why don't you cordially invite the WDFW, Puget Sound Anglers, and other fishing organizations to sit down at the table and take a look at teaming up with some of them. Try to come up with better solutions than lawsuits. Taking WDFW money away to fight off your lawsuit is a huge misdirection of funds for Washington State fish. You would have a lot better chance of making a difference that way. Take another shot at banning the nets. I saw the netters out in Neah Bay this last Friday. They took a bunch of Springers/Blackmouth according to the fish checker that checked them in. Fish don't spawn if they can't get home. If fish could return home, maybe hatcheries could start to withdraw and not be needed. But an all out stoppage of hatcheries could be devastating. I know a lot of people do not like the WDFW, but working within to change works better than fighting against. We, as Puget Sound Anglers, have learned and redirected to try and work within the system to make a difference. It takes time and a lot of work we have found out. We got a bad name with the "ban the nets" campaign and the way it was approached. Had it been run differently it might have had better results. I personally do not care for most of the WDFW commissioners. The commission is needed, but the one in place is broken and has gone far astray in favor of commercial fishing with Will Roehl leading the way (ex commercial fisherman). I think a redirection is of Washington Trout is needed.
.

Ramon

OK now you have replied to me even though you vowed never again to do so. Let’s say we’re even now since you are implying that a peaceful protest of WT would turn to violence. In your post you did imply that I would personally commit illegal acts. I never accused YOU of any of the civil disobedience references in previous posts. I merely tried to paint a word picture of how causes that sound so noble can get out of hand when the followers resort to extreme measures. You chose to be paranoid and drag it on and on and on that I was accusing you of awful things. Not so. Lots of what you say is not so.

Furthermore, I am far from delusional. That is another tacky personal slam by you. I am outspoken. I am opinionated. I am conservative. I am passionate. I am a fisherman.
By the way are you? Where do you fish? Why types of fishing do you like best? I have similar opinions when it comes to opposing the Washington Trout lawsuits to about 70% of the people in the fishing community. We simply oppose your movement as an organization towards extremes measures to advance your agenda. I honestly and truly believe that your agenda has less to do with fishing than you imply and more to do with environmental activism which includes fish issues.

As complicated as you may want the opposition to be, it is quite simple. We oppose WT’s extreme agenda to close hatcheries and we especially oppose the lawsuits you file to get your way. We all know that the process of reform is slow and not acceptable but so many groups are working within the system while your group stands on the outside alienating all of us. Your membership and sponsors most likely don’t know your opposition’s position on the lawsuit. They probably, for the most part, applaud the lawsuits as getting one over on an authority figure,WDFW. I suspect most of your members are environmentally concerned and contribute based on the association of WT with the environment more so than fishing.

A protest of your auction sounded less extreme to me than your lawsuit. Peaceful and legal protests are the backbone of the left wing you so proudly ascribe your loyalty to. When the opposition wants to protest, lookout…Oh that’s not fair! We just want to sip our wine and listen to Bern Shanks…Not so simple Ramon. You are raising money for your war chest to file more lawsuits. We aren’t raising any money to oppose you and your extreme tactics but we can protest them. Peacefully and legally.

The issue seems really simple. Is it worth shutting down the hatcheries to perhaps improve the wild fish runs? Emphasis on "perhaps." WT feels that we should be willing to pay the sacrifice (giving up our hatchery fish) to find out.

I don't.

Good luck on the demonstration up there.

GREAT Idea Grandpa,
I have plans for the 18th but I might have to cut them short so I can be there. By Ramon's reply it sounds like he's worried. And with a protest going on maybe the cops will be there and can catch some of the wine sippers getting into there cars after there party. (think DWI)

So Ramon come out from under your bed...the boogey men aren't outside waiting for you. We are peaceful protestors looking only to expose you. Did your mom every read you the book "The Emperor's New Clothes"? If not please go to the library and check out a copy. You are the emperor, in my opinion.

Didn't WT sue WDFW because they refused to see it your way? Isn't a lawsuit pretty extreme. Isn't a lawsuit more extreme than a peaceful protest? Nowadays everyone sues everyone for some pretty lame reasons but mostly to get money for the plaintiffs and the LAWYERS...People of all walks of life protest every day,too. Which is more honorable?

I understand that WT has been haggling over how much cash WDFW has to give you so you will go away AGAIN and not about hatcheries or any of your other causes. Deliberations have been underway for some time as to the size of your prize. You sound like mercenaries to me. Shameless opportunists.

I hope hundreds of protestors show up at your "party" and peacefully protest WT. I am sure there are sign makers busy right now dreaming up clever slogans.

Will Sue For Food???

That sounds like a liberal guncontrol argument, screw ya a little bit at a time. Well I for one and not wearing a dress and will try my ass off to be up there protestin with you guys if you get it going. WT's goal is to have a bunch of yuppies with spey rods out there chasing 8 in trout. Salmon fisherman, come in all forms but, fortunately the majority of us aren't elitist *****s. So by getting us Outsiders off the river they can have the wonderful rivers all to themselves.

Im am in! Please email odr PM me the particulars..
If in fact this is a go and gets organized, we may be able to distribute this to many organizations that really opposed WT endorsement of HSUS/PAC in I-713 Which in turn has cost many, many dollars.

Standing BY..........

Boy, If I had to design an intelligence test, I'd think I'd start with the question, "Let's say here's a group that supports restoration of fish runs, but not in exactly the same way that you do, and lets say that they are more effective in bringing in the big money than you you are. Should you attack them and alienate them, or try to work with them?"

Whether you guys realize it or not, WT is much more effective than you are in reaching the powers that be, and in extracting money from those that have it. That means that they are politically more effective than you are. Would it not make sense to buddy up with them and see what can be worked out? Or would you rather render the sportfishing community into a bunch of splinter groups with less than 5000 votes each, which the politicians can easily ignore?

The dialogue I have seen here demonizing WT is better than PETA demonizing fishing. For crying out loud, this is a group that is trying to restore fish runs! They are on our side! We disagree about tactics, but we agree about goals. Why are you shooting your own troops?

silver hilton,

did you just offer aid and comfort???

dont forget, PETA also wants their own way to restore the fish runs, but you wont see me singing kumbaya with them anytime soon

They have already buddied up with HSUS, maybe WT will choose PeTA next time..

Grandpa,

Unfortunatley for me, as a representative of WT I have no choice but to respond when people purposely misrepresent WT and its mission. Believe that I am sincere when I say I would prefer not to engage you directly, as I have come to have no respect for your arguments or tactics.

Unless someone at WDFW is acting with a complete lack of ethics (which I do not believe), then it is impossible for you to have any idea what is going on iside the rooms where WT and WDFW are attempting to negotiate a settelement to our case. That gives you no basis for characterizing those negotiations. Further, your wild guess about what is going on is absolutely wrong. I, along with anyone else in those rooms, am bound by ethics (do you know what those are?) not to disclose exactly what negotiations are taking place, but I can say that when it is over, you will be shown to be wrong, if not a liar. If the negotiations are successful in reaching a settlement, you and everyone else will see that WT negotiated for the best interest of the fish, and you will all be able to judge how extreme WT's final position turned out to be.

I simply painted the same word picture you did. So I guess we are even. And we will see how your peaceful demonstration goes. Everybody on this board has continually demonstrated their commitment to reason, honesty, and good manners, so I'm sure that my concerns were completely unfounded.

Please allow me to thank everyone for considering the substance of my last post. I did not question your right to do what you think you must, I tried to appeal to your sense of fair play and honesty. Thak you again for taking it to heart.

Ramon Vanden Brulle
Washington Trout

I can't take this anymore a couple of things that people seem to miss:

1) WT has never ever as long as I have known them to claim to be a Fishing organization. They are a environmental organization and have never claimed any differetn. So let go of the this is not a fishing group but an environmential group. They don't claim any different.
2) The lawsuit is only a part of what they do. Stream studies and restoration is also part of what they do and where their money goes so I guess by opposing WT completely you oppose everything they do you don't believe in these either.
3) You can disagree with what they are doing but no one should question what they want. To give Wild fish the best chance to survive and thrive through alll methods. So it sounds like a lot of you don't want this if it hurts you ablity to wack a fish on the head. I for one would never kill an other steelhead if it gave wild fish a better chance of survival.
4) Sometimes for a compromise to occur you have to start at an extreme and work from there for real change.
5) WT i beleive worked with the WDFW for over 2 years, I believe, before they filed suit. So please stop saying that they just jumped in an filed suit without sitting down with the WDFW at the table. They did.

Everyone points fingers else where and it is always someone else's fault well guess what it a combination of everything. You fail to recognize that WT isn't just going after hatcheries but helping with habiitat and harvest and Hydro. They are taking a bigger picture to look at here.

I for one will be there to support WT. As a wise man once said, "He who I agree with 70% of the time is not my enemy."

Flame Away
JJ

I believe it was Patrick Henry who once said, we must all hang together, or we will all hang separately.

Sounds like a good turnout for the protest. Has anyone thought of trying to get the local media there to cover it?

I am sure that a group of angry fishermen marching and chanting against a respected environmental organization's dinner and auction would play really well with the viewing public. Of course you must remember that the majority of the public doesn't fish so it might be somewhat difficult to convince them that a group sueing to protect wild fish are in the wrong.

And of course you need to be careful not to come off looking bad and actually causing WT to get more donations from the a suddenly wider audience. In fact, I bet WT is not all opposed to the protest. After all, any publicity is good publicity. (I suppose unless your Mike Price that is) Either way, I am sure you have thought all this though.

Good luck!

Sinktip,
"Respected environmental organization"
Geez dont make me puke. This is a group of fish Nazi's willing to kill millions of fish to maybe save afew.

Gee, I wonder what the response here would have been if WT had to sue WDFW to restrict commercial netting?

Somehow I doubt there'd be howls about that 'extreme' tactic taking up the agency's time and money. If fact, I think there'd be a whole lotta 'attaboys' and no nonsensical deliberating over whether the organization is about fish, fishing or the environment.

Good job JJ and Silver Hilton for trying to add a rational perspective.

Talk about distraction! Bashing organizations that you're in agreement with, probably 90% of the time, and then trying to punish the companies that comprise the sportfishing industry, all the while letting the dam operators, etc. off the hook for the very real damage they do everyday is logic I cannot follow.

Boycott Amato, Loomis, etc. NO WAY!

I have to say that these are some pretty strong words, but I would have to agree. I like what WT dose when it comes to repairing creeks and the area around them. What I don't like is the fact that they whant to get rid of all our hatcheries. With out these hatcheries there would be no salmon, steelhead or even the planter trout to fish for. WT needs to stop the law suits and focus on the streams. Stopping the law suits will also save money for WDFW.

Jay

Gee, wouldnt that be great? But you know what...THEYRE NOT! Thats what I asked in one of the first few threads on this subject and never got a response. The way I see it they are barkin up the wrong tree, but then again, from what Ive read, these guys (WT) dont give a damn about the anglers, Ive yet to see them state otherwise.
Besides the commercial netters catch hatchery fish too, so they are probably "good guys" in WT's eyes (to a certain extent).
Its (commercials/tribes netting) definately a much bigger problem than the SUPPOSED kill of native stocks by hatchery smolts.

RL

Ramon

The fact that you have no respect for me is fine with me. I am in good company with a horde of people who have no respect for you and they actually know you and have dealt with you for much longer than I. But I don't know you and I understand the volatile nature of this bulletin board and I know I contribute to that volatility. How can I honestly villify you under those circumstances? I can poke fun and incite your dark side but I can't disrespect you or hate you. I do have some interesting email correspondence about you that I will not share out of respect for the good people who sent it to me. Let's just say that you are not as right and squeaky clean as you would like us to think.

If my tactics piss you off then maybe you can empathize with how the tactics of WT piss others off and move them to comment so much. Your 30% following chimes in with support and they make some convincing arguments as do the 70% who oppose WT. At the end of the day that is what it is all about.

I only hope that WT does not try to take credit for the hatchery reform already underway by claiming that the only reason it happened was your penchant for lawsuits. There are many individuals and groups working hard within the broken system to make it better out of the court room. I know time will tell who was on the right side of this issue.

Ramon

I almost forgot to adderess the "secret" nature of your negotiations with WDFW. What are you so afraid of? I imagine that the transcripts and written records of what is taking place will be kept confidential so we will have to hear your version of what really happened. I hope not. Secrecy has nothing to do with ethics unless you all signed a gag order. If you did you would be totally silent until the lawsuit is settled. Just as you leak little inuendoes others can do the same. It will be interesting if in the end the settlement is undisclosed. oooooooooo the mystery of it all.

Settlement negotiations are always confidential, to protect the interests of both parties, and to keep any taliking "out of school" from queering any potential deal. I couldn't give you any details if I wanted to, without getting in hot water with WDFW. I don't anticipate that any facet of a finished deal will be confidential, but these negotiations are, by the terms of both WT and WDFW. I've never heard of any settlement negotiations being carried out differently. (Maybe Todd can help here?)

When and if a deal is finalized, I'll be free and happy to disclose any details that WDFW allows me to.

I don't know what you mean by innuendo. I've never said anything here or anywhere else about this issue that I don't know or believe to be true. If you can't understand my points or disagree with them, that does not mean I've attempted to distort or hide anything.

Ramon Vanden Brulle
Washington Trout

Ramon...
I have been sitting on the fence watching this argument, and i do think WT has done great things.
And as of this thread I have seen you put words in peoples mouths to justify your stance. Grandpa never said the things that you accuse him of in the context that you mention. At this point I have to wonder what the motivation would be for you to twist the conversation as such...
I think it may have been touched on when someone said "any publicity is good publicity"
You are very good at stirring the pot Ramon, I do dearly hope that whoever shows up at your auction to protest can effectively state their feelings about what you are doing with this suit.

SilverHilton...Don't you think that WT should have done a little more to work with the system instead of against it? I don't have a clue about any hidden agenda but this tactic of suing and settling is a classic fund raising effort. Granted the system may be broken but shouldn't it be fixed instead of eliminated?

All that said if WT's goal is to effect change by hitting WDFW where it hurts, and they have a plan that has the best intrest of the fish at heart then I could understand. Agree? Probaly not. Different strokes for different folks. But to see first hand how the pot is being stirred....I trust Ramon about as far as I can spit a rat. And I will be the first to say that my opinion of him is based solely on what I have seen here on this board. My answer to that? If someone will misqoute the truth to me about something I know about, what are they telling me about that of wich I know very little...

This is not a complex issue. WT has threatened suit, and then pursued that strategy, to attempt to force the department to substantially modify its practices. They are threatening all of us with closure of many hatcheries, thereby bludgeoning through lawsuit as a means of negotiation. That stinks. I hope that the state tells them to go pee up a rope.

Actually, it is a complex issue. Which people of small minds have either not been able to grasp or have chosen to ignore. Hatcheries do not always work as run mitigation strategies. If you have only half a brain and fished steelhead this past winter season, it should not be hard to understand that they sometimes don't work at all well.

WT is a group of people that is oriented around the belief, which I find sensible, that wild fish populations, in healthy river systems, are a good thing. From my knothole. wild fish don't cost money, are resistant to the upturns and downturns in the ecosystem, and are generally a nice thing to have around. But, maybe you'd rather catch tiny fish that don't fight...

The state of washington has neglected wild runs for 50 plus years and has tried to make hatcheries work as a mitigation strategy. Well, guess what? It hasn't worked. It hasn't kept us fishing, and it hasn't reduced pressure on wild fish, as promised. WT is simply suing to make the state keep it's promises. If this were social security, you'd be singing thier praises. Instead, you're ignorant and not too bright, and are trying to crucify a group that is trying to protect our fisheries.

I shudder at the implications of the ignorant intersecting the internet.

Aunty- I would not call this a letter by PSA that you linked above-

"My response to you, and Washington Trout, tonight is as an individual. I am not speaking on behalf of either the North Olympic Peninsula Chapter of PSA nor the PSA State Board and its affiliated chapters."

Also is your and Grandpas boycott sponsored by PSA? If not, I would be careful as members throwing the PSA name around. As an observation the PSA association in your posts could be taken as an endorsement.

Duroboat15, Talk about "throwing up", what makes me sick is all this energy directed at WT and that there were only 70 responses to the Olympic National Park major fishing rules proposal.

I guess I have to agree that I am not too bright and may indeed be downright ignorant.

I have, however, supported fundraising for many conservation organizations, including spending over 20 years on the DU committee here in Vancouver. But the conservation organizations that I support don't use the banquet donation proceeds to sue the state agencies responsible for trying to improve our wildlife.

There may be many areas where improvements can be made in hatchery operations, and those improvements should be made as quickly and responsibly as possible. But suing to close the hatcheries of an entire region is either a temper tantrum or a new and creative way to raise money. In either case, it needs to stop.

A proper and respectful demonstration by concerned sportsmen at WT fundraisers would be very effective in forcing the attendees to really see where their money is going.

Silverhilton
"hactheries don't work as mitigation strategies"?
The first thing that comes to mind is habitat. When I worked at Cowlitz the #1 thing we fought on a daily basis was water temp. That is a habitat issue!
Sure the hatchery system has not had stellar success as a mitigation strategy, but is it entirely the fault of the hatchery system? Or is it GENERALY making the best of a bad situation? I do firmly believe that WDFW has not done an even passable job and way to many directors and other management types have worried more about their next appointment than the issues at hand.
And I would even agree that a major houscleaning is in order. However the bulk of the bio's and fish culturists that work in the system are trying to do the best they can with what they have, and beat their heads against the wall on a daily basis. This suit to me seems to be throwing the baby out with the bathwater! I have not seen data to back up the WT theory and basis for this action and I have seen considerable data refuting it.
the entire crux of your argument lies in the fact that we do not have healthy river systems, along with myriad other problems. I can't see how shutting down hatcheries can help. I do understand how launching this suit and settling can accomplish goals for WT, some of wich I may agree with, but in this context I see it as counterproductive to the issue at hand. It might even be said that you(WT) are trying to crucify a group that has the best interest of the fish at hand...

silver hilton....remember that old saying about glass houses..you should if you are as intelligent and superior to others as you seem to think.

The debate about WT's lawsuit is just that..it's about the lawsuit. If we oppose WT's lawsuit tactics we do not automatically endorse hatchery practices or condone the mismanagement of them. Check in with some of the tribes on the Columbia as far as your mitigation theories are concerned. And also look into the amount of money spent on wild fish. I think you will find the numbers mind boggling.

The hatchery/wild fish issue is indeed complex. It is the opposition to the lawsuit that is simple.

AuntyM and Ramon

I think Dave Croonquist's letter needs to be out in the open because it is a concise response to why he, as an individual, cannot support WT on the lawsuit issue. I think it is also important to know that the Puget Sound Anglers board of directors has agreed as a group in a unanimous vote representing some 3,000 members that we cannot support WT on this lawsuit issue. That certainly doesn't mean that we don't have members who disagree it only means we haven't heard from any of them if they do.

Here is Dave's response to Ramon:
----------------------------

Listed below is one of the Puget Sound Anglers response to the above letter


Ramon,

Thank you for your response. I am relatively new to the Puget Sound Anglers (PSA) and have been back in the Pacific Northwest for a couple of years since I retired. I am generally familiar with the issues revolving around salmon recovery and know that it has been and will continue to be an interesting and challenging process.

Your communication has been passed along to the PSA Board. Our next Board meeting is scheduled for October so any information that needs to be passed along to the PSA chapters concerning the Washington Trout Notice of Intent to Sue will be moot by then.

My response to you, and Washington Trout, tonight is as an individual. I am not speaking on behalf of either the North Olympic Peninsula Chapter of PSA nor the PSA State Board and its affiliated chapters.

I have reviewed the WT Notice of Intent to Sue. While I do not deny that there are issues with hatchery vs. "wild/native/locally adapted" salmonid stocks, your Notice of Intent to Sue is, in my opinion, very disturbing in its structure and if it should end up going to court - win or lose, has the potential to sound the death knell for all private, state, federal, or tribal hatchery programs. This is one issue where I cannot, do not, and will not agree with Washington Trout.

As a species, mankind has done an excellent job of manipulating ecosystems and damaging or destroying many other species. As far as hatchery production is concerned you can look at any other state or country and see the results of mankind trying to manipulate fisheries stocks "for the better". Carp, German Brown Trout, Stripers, Shad, Tench, Walleye, the list goes on and on. The releases were done because someone or some group or some agency thought that local fishing could use a shot in the arm by introducing a new or hybridized species. The WDFW does not stand alone in making mistakes with fish production and to single them out in this Notice appears to be self-serving. There are 38 other state, federal, tribal, and private hatcheries whose production is also impacting listed species, yet they are not listed in your Notice.

You argue that WDFW is not meeting NMFS guidelines in a timely manner, yet your organization is also challenging NMFS on some of its actions. It appears to me that your organization is working on fringe issues rather than coming to the table and working together with the necessary/appropriate agencies and non-governmental organizations to address the issue of habitat loss, ocean conditions, high seas harvest, and related issues that must be corrected before we can even begin to consider the modifications of hatchery
production.

Additionally, your Notice comes at a time when WDFW is in the middle of the Hatchery Scientific Review Group (HSRG) investigation into how the WDFW and the other tribal and federal agencies can adapt existing programs to help recover wild salmon and to continue the very important facet of providing for a sustainable fisheries. The HSRG recognizes the potential threats to ESA listed species and is already working with the appropriate state, tribal, and federal managers to see that the various programs be operated to minimize the risks to endangered fish. WTs stated purpose, in your press release, of shutting down all state-run Chinook hatcheries, would have far-reaching consequences, not only on any recovery projects, but also on local economies and would also curtail license purchases, thus impacting the WDFW budgeting. I would hope that WT would come to the table with the HSRG
to provide its perspective on the issues rather than trying to drive a wedge into the process and diverting WDFW personnel and money to defending itself against your Notice.

I appreciate your taking the time to listen to some of my concerns. I expect that there will be issues in the future where I can support your objectives. This isn't one of them.

Sincerely,

Dave Croonquist

Grandpa, could you please steer clear of the use of open ended character slurs (i.e.: emails about Ramone's character you can't share), that's a very unfair way to debate an issue. During the many threads about this subject you have used many different forms of innuendo to make your points .

At least Silver Hilton doesn't employ innuendo ...

Usage: An innuendo is an equivocal allusion so framed as to point distinctly at something which is injurious to the character or reputation of the person referred to. An insinuation turns on no such double use of language, but consists in artfully winding into the mind imputations of an injurious nature without making any direct charge

JG: You are correct about the "secret" emails and so I will find them and print them or I will not insinuate anything about them. I'm not sure about the innuendo. Maybe you can site examples so I can refrain from them in the future. Usually these things result from responding to the same tactic by the other poster....all just opinions in my opinion>>>

Grandpa, I consider this sentence by you about me in another thread an insinuation---------------You seem to be trying to simplify this issue as if those opposed to the WT lawsuit only care about being able to harvest more fish in total disregard for the resource. That just isn't the case.--------

I dont know much about WT but issaquah is a good place for the meeting. I caught my first steelhead on the issaquah creek in 7th grade. they are now extinct on the issaquah creek. there are millions of hatchery salmon that you cant fish the closed waters for though. when will the WDFW return the steelhead run to the Issaquah creek? they owe it to all of us! where are the bear creek steelhead? If many of you folks lived around here where there are not much fish left (except on the skycowlitz) then you would understand the position of some of these froups a little more. Everyone knows that the WDFW is managing our fish right into extinction. hatchery fisheries are a great resource and make alot of money and good times. but the hatchery fish should never ever ever be used to bolster fish populations in order to justify the harvest of both wild and hatchery fish. hatchery fish should make a great addition to a strong fishery (desert) but not be mistaken for the staple of the fishery (meat and potatoes)

WDFW's response of "well we'll just throw all the fish in the lakes then" is like the states response to tim eyemans when they say that all the police departments will be closed down because of $30 tabs. it is just scare tactics meant to create infighting among the groups that should be in coordination together.

Instead of a protest- maybe we could all go over to the sunset street brewery afterwards for an open dialoge between the groups and I bet everyone will learn somethin from the other side... Ill even buy the first round of beers...

Although I just love the thought of Aunty Em as a protestor.. dont forget to wear patchuli oil and bring drums and creative signs

I had a feeling you were lurking out there aunty em! how are ya?
Ill come out that night to issaquah. it would be fun to put some faces to the monikers on the board. I am going to call WT and see if i can go to the auction as well. I would like to learn more about them.

I probably wont agree with them on everything but I will make my voice heard where I do not agree. i am one of those people that is ususlly in the minority of opinion, no matter what the group. but I find that I learn more by engaging and debating with those that disagree with me than I do from those that agree with me.

In my opinion- the US fish and wildlife will wake up and smell the coffee the day that all of these sportfishing and conservation groups put up a unified front. the more that we fight amongst ourselves, the more we protect their inefficiency and commercial collusion.
Now is the time to make an effort between all fisheries/environmental related groups to find out where we are all in agreement and create a common front out of that agreement. ( like the US and russia in WW2, they didnt agree with eachother on politics but there was common threat to address)

If the hood canal tribs have any kind of chance of ever recovering It will be thanks to LLTK.They have been able to do what no other single group has done,get all the interested parties to work together.It is not just LLTK but the the Hood Canal Enhancement Group,the tribes,state and many private land owners,not to mention a huge amount of volunteers, to work together to make huge strides in both hatchery reforms and the recovery of our endangerd fish stocks.This ability to work together spells the success that our wild fish stocks need.

Okay, I'm sorry to admit that with all our prep that I haven't really been watching this.

I'm going to close this thread ... not because of like or dislike for WT or any individual; rather, I'm closing the thread because some of these posts are plain and simple turning into personal attacks ... that's not kosher.

Thanks for your understanding