If WT is so into saving wild salmon, then why does your group accept money from these groups?
1. Indian tribes, including the yakima nation which knowingly nets endangered spring chinook on the yakima river and the Skallam tribe which most likely nets more than a couple of the ESA protected chinook that WT is suing to protect.
2.BPA and Seattle public utilities, both companies own Damns that harm both wild and hatchery salmon. (and they both have hatcheries which they are requied to pay for by either state or federal law )
So where your agenda truly based, saving runs or ending hatcheries?

This is not a flame post, I want to hear the logic behind this?

I have to sigh, so give me a second. It is a very difficult and frustrating excercise to engage people who -- I'm sorry -- don't seem particularly predisposed to listening. But you asked fair questions, and I will try to address them fairly. And I'm sorry if this seems a trifle paranoid, but that's where I expect the fairness to end. So I'm going to try and make this complete, so I don't have to post about it again.

First I want to say that I find your questions more than a little ironic. On the one hand WT is unfairly and without basis accused of simply jumping into court as part of some type of get rich scheme, without ever trying to constructively engage or cooperate with organizations or entities we disagree with. Then when it turns out that we have been constructively and cooperatively engaged with some of those types of entities, that seems to suggest to you some new form perfidy. We have also in the past accepted money from and worked with WDFW, NMFS, the US Fish and Wildlife Service, Weyerhauser Corp, several Tribes in addition to the ones you mentioned, Jefferson, King, Snohomish, and Island Counties. Please, make of all that whatever you will. WT's record of committment to wild fish preservation and recovery speaks for itself to anyone open minded enough to research it.

OK. The Yakimas net spring chinook in the Yakima (Yakima spring chinook are not actually listed under the ESA), and they are also running anexperimental spring chinook hatchery that WT is very concerned about. We serve on a peer review panel that monitors the performance of the hatchery, and are trying to keep the Yakimas honest over the hatchery. I don't think we make them all that happy. I don't think we accept any money from them for this, but maybe I'm wrong, or maybe you're refering to something else that I've missed. We were I believe contracted by the Sklallams and Jefferson County to carry out field research in Jefferson County to determine what small streams in the county still held fish, and collect other data, including the presence of fish-passage barriers, so the Sklallams and Jefferson County could develop and prioritize a habitat protection and restoration plan for listed chinook, summer chum, and other depressed fish poulations.

BPA is under federal mandate to provide funding for scientific research into, among other things, the current state of wild fish populations throughout the Columbia Basin. We applied for and recieved funding to conduct a multi-year field research project to identify and catalog the remaing resident trout populations in the headwaters of several sub-basins throughout the drainage. One of the accomplishments of the project was to extend the known range of native westslope cutthroat farther west in Washington than had previously been recorded. Under contract to Seattle Public Utilities, WT carried out similar research to the Sklallam/Jefferson project within the city limits of Seattle (that didn't keep us from challenging the adequacy of Seattle's Habitat Conservation Plan for the Cedar River watershed, or to push for the best possible mangement --including decreased production from proposed levels -- of the proposed Cedar River sockeye hatchery). We are also continuing to do annual spawning surveys for SPU in Seattle's creeks. Our data contributed to uncovering the problem of pre-spawn mortality in Seattle's creeks due to degraded water quality. You may have read about it in recent issues of the Seattle PI.

WT gets these funding awards and contracts because we do good work,even though the entities who award us these grants and contracts know they can expect no favoritism from us as advocates if we see a need to challenge their policy decisions, on an entire range of issues, from land and water use, to fisheries, to hatcheries.

I hope I've answered your questions. I'm sure many on this board will be able to glean from this response new evidence of my dishonesty, and WT's distortion of the system toward some nefarious end. I surrender to their tender mercies. You obviously did enough research to find out where we've recieved some funding. I hope you'll take the trouble to research the facts I've presented here before deciding for yourself whether your satisfied with my answers.

Ramon Vanden Brulle,
Washington Trout

Thanks for the reply. I have never thought you guys were in it for the money. I still personally would have moral issues with accepting money from any group that knowingly goes against what your group is trying to accomplish. Its a kin to the NAACP taking money from the KKK.
By taking this issue to court, you are alienating a lage group of possible supporters.
The majority of fishermen want there to be better habitat and more wild fish, but not at the expense of having no retention fisheries. flyfishermen and steelhead fanatics (put me in the second group) appreciate a C n R fishery as much or in some cases more than a kill fishery. That being said, WFDW won't make anough money from C n R guys to pay for the saving of wild fish.
i would say put your battles else where, try and make the ESA apply to all fisherman (native americans). Work to get the and dams out of the rivers, then see about ending hatcheries.

C'mon Ramon.

I appreciate your eloquece, but cut out the martyr routine. You act like you are some sort of longsuffering advocate for fish who takes all this abuse for no reason. You have a job. That job is to defend WT in public and represent its views. Your job puts you in conflict with many (most? ) of the people on this board due to WTs positions against angling. You shouldn't be surprised some people don't like you.

If you don't like being attacked for espousing WTs views, at least take comfort in the fact that you get paid for it. I don't know of anybody else that posts here to make their money.

You could always express some of your own personal views instead of the WT company policy; maybe people would be more receptive to that.

Although I disagree with the angling views they take. I really disagree with their stance they took against the consumptive users of this state when they decided to endorse an Animal Rights Organization (HSUS/PAC) to take away a mangament tool from the WDFW that managed varmits and predators that also was a revenue producer. Now we pay for the exact same practices except for we get to pay for it.

Thanks Washington Trout! Take a revenue producing activity and cause a very expensive expendature!
Do ya see a trend here?

It is interesting that WT can have contracts and working relationships with these different parties and still remain so unbiased in its work. Is there a conflict of intrest here or do the tribes and BPA hope to avoid court confrontaions with your group by establishing working relationships with you that would pretty much eliminate the possibility of ending up in court? Sometimes paying the bully a protection fee is cheaper than the cost of getting beat up. I don't see any reports of you doing "consulting" work for the WDFW......

"The implication of that statement is that the Yakima's are not honest."

....or it is an expression used in common every day language to indicate a relationship where the presence of both parties strikes a mutually beneficial balance.

AuntyM the victim...not a card I'm used to seeing you play. I see no personal attack here...I suppose if one wanted to they could try to twist Ramon's words into a personal attack....all I see is Ramon taking the time to answer the question.

As for the 'conflict of interest' angle to this conversation....wake up! You can make all the extreme comparisons in the world...instead of using the KKK you could have used the Nazi's and Jew's and made an even more inflammatory argument. If you are taking seriously the argument that WT's credibility is somehow negatively affected by what could be interpreted as a conflict of interest then I hope that, especially those of you that consider yourself Republican, APPLY THE SAME STANDARD TO YOUR PRESIDENT WHEN IT COMES TIME TO VOTE!! See surecatch's post about 'This Republican Got It Right" if you are not surte what I am tallking about.

Wow. That didn't take long. Every time I think I'm out, they pull me back in.

"Keeping them honest" is a fairly common figure of speech. If Aunty thinks it was poorly chosen, fair enough. I apologize. It was late. I actually don't believe the Yakamas try to intentionally decieve anyone about operations of their hatchery program. (And thanks for the spelling correction too, people deserve the respect of being called what they want to be called.) WT disagrees with them on the interpretation of some data, and we advocate for our interpretation (shared by others on the panel). That's what I meant. Again, I apologize for the flip use of language. It was wrong.

If you'll indulge me, I'll try to anticipate what's coming and admit that I have on this board accused WDFW of being misleading, and other posters of mischaracterising WT's mission and some of my remarks. I stand by those statements. I believe them to be true.

I don't mind doing my job. I do object to unfair mischaracterizations of my remarks, and attacks on my personal character (please, Aunty, I'm not referring to your present post). It seems to me that nobody should have to like that, whether they're getting paid for it or not. (I will also note that several regular posters on this board seem to sign themselves as representatives of various commercial enterprises or other types of organizations, so I don't know that I agree I'm the only one.)

At any rate, thanks for the opportunity to clear up my misstatement, and the usual attention to the substance of my remarks.

Ramon vanden Brulle,
Washington Trout

This hole discussion about WT has gotten way out of hand. How many people that don't like WT have gone to a meeting or met with someone from there group to really see what they are all about? All anybody see's is the issues of taking someone to court, yet they do a lot of habitat restoration and things of the like that will hopefully someday will bring more fish into our rivers. These kind of ***** fests are and will be the demise of sportfishermen. We seem to fight amongst ourselves and nothing ever gets done. It's in these times that we need to band together as anglers and outdoorsmen to save salmon and steelhead.

Just pointing out that you are portraying yourself as the victim here....

"I am tired of having a target on my back"...

I didn't say that....did I?

BTW, if you are going to start a conversation including respect, try spelling the name of the tribe correctly as a starting point.

Oh my gawd! there is a spelling bee cop here!

This is a GD message board!

Pow!!

Nobody ever said I can't take my licks...

Aunty,, YGM on your earthlink addy