Being presumptuous again I see Aunty.

Please allow me to spell it out for you:

You DO NOT know for sure that the commission is trying to implement a statewide bait ban!

Last time I checked, POTENTIAL did NOT mean absolute!

The commission is seeking information and advice on the issue. They HAVE NOT stated they they will make it policy!

Why don't we stop putting the cart before the horse on these issues?

Better yet, you could round up your group of WT haters, (the one's that were going to protest their auction) go to Olympia, and state your case as to why you think the bait ban policy is such a bad one!

Wait, I know, it's MUCH easier to stir up the hornet's nest on the internet!

I wish that I didn't fall to sleep by 8pm each night because I would of loved to have chimed in on some of these replies!

So let see, let go right down the list.

Rocklizar,

It sounds like you were trying to be a "responsible" fisherman by "not" continuing to hook and damage all those smolts! But, then you turn your back and said "my buds continued to tag smolt after smolt." And then you said; "Thought that was kind of interesting." There lies haft of our problem! If they were my "buds" they would have gotten an ear full not just an eye look! That's another reason why we don't need addition game enforcement to protect or fish; how hard would it had been to just tell your buds to quite killing those smolts? They apparently could not put 2&2 together, but you did. It could have been quite simple to address your problem; you could have simply said to your buds; thanks guys, you killed all of our steelhead here for next couple of years! Believe me; they would have gotten the message without loosing their friendship.

Sparky:
I think that I have also seen the list of expenditures that Aunty was speaking about:

-- Acquisition of the 23.23-acre Cascade Land Conservancy property in Grays Harbor County for $154,000;
-- Acquisition of the 37.92-acre Kaiser property in Clallam County for $85,000;
-- Acquisition of the 508.89-acre Trust for Public Land/Plum Creek Timber Company property in Kittitas County for $2,527,000; and
-- Return of the 0.36-acre Fox Island Net Pens property on Fox Island that had conditioned use provisions, reversionary clause in the deed.
-- Acquisition of the 40-acre Quantrell property in Klickitat County for $58,000;
-- Approval of a one-season Concession Agreement in the Oak Creek Wildlife Area in Yakima County; and
-- Acquisition of the 242-acre Miller Shingle Company property in Kittitas County for $557,000.
-- Acquisition of the 106.54-acre Larrance property in Jefferson County for $456,500;
-- Acquisition of the 181.9-acre RLF Columbia Land Holdings, LLC property in Chelan County for $700,000; and
-- Acceptance of the 118.16-acre Williams Pipeline Company donation property in Grays Harbor County.
-- Acquisition of the 15.47-acre Nature Conservancy Property in Klickitat County for $113,000; and
-- Acquisition of the 2.75-acre Heroux property in Kitsap County for $35,500.
- Acquisition of the 6.65-acre Oliver property in Clallam County for $121,200;
- Acceptance of the 6.5-acre Chute donation property in Okanogan County;
- Sale of approximately 930,000 board feet of timber on the Sinlahekin Wildlife Area in Okanogan County;
- Grant two easements on the Sunnyside Wildlife Area in Yakima County to Yakima County Public Works for $600; and
- Grant an easement to Mr. and Mrs. Bielle in exchange for title to boat ramp area on Twin Lakes in Okanogan County.
Acquisition of the 147.66-acre Gross property in Douglas County for $47,000;
- Acquisition of the .31-acre Kettle property in Clallam County for $64,000;
- Acquisition of the 11.8-acre Schneider property in Clallam County for $131,000;
- Acquisition of the 6-acre Washington State Department of Transportation Yakima River access at Thorp in Kittitas County for $30,000;
- Acquisition of the 4.44-acre Phil Olsen property in Pacific County through exchange of 22 acres of conservation easement encumbered Department land in Pacific County;
- Exchange of 1.43 acres of Department land for 1.43 acres of Joseph Curry land at Omak Hatchery in Okanogan County; and
- Exchange of .74 acres of Department land for a backup well at the Colville Hatchery in Stevens County.
-- Acquisition of the 421.48-acre Wilson property in Douglas County for $155,700;
-- Acquisition of the 120-acre Wapato Orchard, LTD property in Douglas County for $39,000;
-- Acquisition of the 826-acre JoJaco property in Douglas County for $295,000;
-- Acquisition of the 30-acre Williams property in Chelan County for $132,000; and
-- Transfer of the 1.28-acre Department property in Douglas County to Ms. Davisson in exchange for the 1.28-acre Douglas County PUD property in Douglas County.
-- Acquisition of the 21.07-acre Christy Collins property in Chelan County for $85,000;
-- Acquisition of the 75-acre WICO property in Chelan County for $362,500;
-- Acquisition of 22.73 acres in fee and 74.13 acres in conservation easement of the PCC Farmland Fund property in Clallam County for $241,000;
-- Acquisition of the .55-acre Wendy Wilbur and Lawrence Morris property in Clallam County for $81,000;
-- Acquisition of the 338.7-acre Pacifica Poplars, Inc. property in Whatcom County for $675,000;
-- Acquisition of the 15.43-acre Etue property in Grays Harbor County for $65,000; and
-- Acquisition of the 110.67-acre Rains property in Clallam County for $605,000.
I didn't add it all up but I'll bet you that she is pretty darn close to the 8 million figures that she had said was spent. Do you really believe that all that money really went to land access and habitat? There is plenty there for you to do your research on. Have you ever heard the old saying; "it's just the tip of the iceberg that you are seeing"? Well keep asking yourself this; why doesn't WDFW have any money to do all the hatchery reforms?

Maybe its time, as fishermen, to start putting our priorities in order and see just how and where our WDFW funds are being spent.

Mirco:

What can I say; you been there; you done that; and your 100% right! Would you please give some of your common sense to these people who just don't "get it"? (Sparky; Mirco is right, those little size spinners will kill more smolts then bait ever though of doing! Lets not forget, It's the nature of steelhead to attack things that pi$$ them off; even when they are not feeding, and spinner to do just that the best!)

Rob:
You say that "Banning bait on the Cowlitz id a dumb idea." Can you please explain why you believe that it's a "dumb idea"? Does that mean that banning bait is a bad idea on all rivers that have hatcheries, or is it just because you like to fish bait on the Cowlitz? Remember, the Cowlitz probably produces more smolts then any other river in the state, so why is it a "bad idea"? I think that the bait ban is a bad idea too, but I am just curious why you feel that it's bad on the Cowlitz!

Jerry:
I think you were a little bit too hard on Aunty! Aunty has proven that she has done here "homework" on WT. Even though you two do not agree or see eye to eye on WT, she appears to have factual information to support her concerns. Maybe if I had done as much research as Aunty has on WT, you might have two of us instead of just her to deal with. I usually get all the bad nocks about the "conspiracy" spin, so I guess we all have our issues.

I believe that most members truly believe that Aunty has been a reel asset to this board. I know that you have said that "you get a little tired" of several members questioning what WT is really up to, but the people who you are referring to, probably know 10 times more then the average board member does about WT, and I believe that they have put up some pretty darn good threads concerning WT.

Finally, Jerry you right about getting involved!

I believe that this board is the perfect place to start "getting involved" I know for fact, that NMFS, WDFW, and WDOE contently check in to see what is "going on" on our board. In fact, when our attorney and I were doing a public records check of WDOE files concerning Tacoma's Cowlitz Project; we found several internal memos that referred to pacific threads on "Piscatorial Pursuits". When I did public records search of WDFW records about 6 years ago, we found copies of the Friends of Cowlitz month new letters in their file also. So you can bet your last dollar that they both are monitoring this site today!

If people really want to make a difference and want to participate, and tell the Commission what they think about this proposed POTENTIAL bait ban, and they are not able to attend the hearing on Saturday, they should send them an email and voice their concerns!

You would be amazed how effective your email can be on issues like this one. All we need is the commissioners' emails numbers and we can get started sending them out today! Everyone also need to tell their fishing partner to do the same, or call the Commission at ( 306) 902-2267 and tell them that you are OPPOSED to any such POTENTIAL bait ban! Do it, and get involved as Jerry has said. You can bet your last bait, that the people who are for the "bait-ban" will be sending their emails and making their phone calls of support!

Now it's up to you!

Cowlitzfisherman

I don't know for SURE 4Salt, just like you don't know how serious they are.

But they did have a motion last January to get this enacted for the 2003-2004 season.

So they had been working on this previously. I guess I am 95% sure.

Illegal.... sure sounds like it is to me. I think I am still entitled to an opinion 4Salt, unless you've managed to get opposing opinions outlawed when I wasn't looking?

Why would you want to discourage the use of the internet to discuss this issue? What makes you think I won't be in attendance Saturday?

Perhaps Bob should be consulted on which topics I can post here, since you seem to take issue with any topic I speak out on.

I kind of lumped some of youse guys together because I type so freak'n slow. So Aunty, the liberal thing was directed at Grandpa not you[reread his post]. So I think no attack on anybodies character. driftboater, the get involved part was directed at the masses, for as you seem to know, few get involved beyond the give some money to the cause thing.

Sinktip, I see you didn't post your picture for us to judge--- smart move.


I am certainly not against discussion. It just seems we seemed to get sidetracted.

Jerry,

I do try really hard to practice what I preach.

st

Come now Aunty, you know that isn't true.

I ONLY have issue with you when you PRESUME to know ALL the facts, and then mis-represent them to your loyal following!

I went back and reread the posts and aunty didn't say anything about WT. I'm sorry Aunty for jumping on you. It was Grandpa that said

This bait ban idea is starting to stink a little. The WT supporters for the most part support C&R and usually fly fishing only. Since they argue that hatcheries are only good for producing fish for the greedy then it follows that banning bait would be next. Fly fishing only rivers, or what I call Boutique Fishing is real popular with the avid WT supporter. Now that I know that Lisa Pelly is a WT member things seem more fishy than ever. But I am a redneck, paranoid, right wing conspiracy nut so what do you expect?

I certainly was not trying to stop discussion, just the WT conspirasy theories. As you youself know this is one of the least moderated boards around.


And sinktip thank you for that!!

4Salt, Surely you can do better than that. We are discussing a proposed bait ban. Where did I state I have all the facts?

Where am I misrepresenting?

Or is it just your personal bias against me to post such comments?

Why in the heck would I not want to involve as many people as possible in these discussions? Being as well informed as possible IN ADVANCE of attending a meeting seems like a smart thing to do.

AuntyM,
I for one thank you for all the info you give.
And if others would do a little reserch they would find what you are saying to be true.
As for the few that keep bashing you just consider the source.Thanks again for keeping the board informed.

Actually CF and Micro if you see the bait mortality is way higher with bait as opposed to Arificials. So how can you say spinners will kill more fish.

Again I notice no one argues the science and just emotion.

And no I don't support a total blanket bait ban on all rivers. Does it make sense on the cow or North fork of the lewis probably not but does it make sense on other river. i think so. So if it takes a blanket to get it done then do it.

JJ

Hey 4S, or anyone else; Does any one known how many "smolts" are killed by our great and powerful dams each and every year on that "anadromous highways" from April 1 to December 1?

I'll bet you whatever you want to bet that the numbers of smolts that are killed by hooking mortally is less the 5% of what the dams kill each and every. So why doesn't WDFW do something about that? No instead, they will attempt to slip the burden off onto the sport fishermen in a futile attempt to "save the fish".

Why isn't WDFW proposing to stop all driving during those same months? How many of our smolts are being killed each and every year by all the runoff of oils from our blacktop roads each year?

Or how about our sewage that runs into our rivers, that are loaded with who knows what?

And we wonder why WDFW always is running short of funding! It's all about priorities and money . . . not the fish!

PS, 4S, yes, there is now a conspiracy between me, Aunty, and Mirco going on. How cleaver you are! j/k

I agree Aunty, discussion is a good thing! Involving everyone is even better! However:

And this:

Then there's:

If these are what you consider FACTUAL statements that benefit rational discussion... well... it's no wonder that these threads ALWAYS turn out the way they do!

Edit: Wow Cowlitz! How did you know I was a Cleaver! "Ward, you were a little hard on the beaver last night!" June Cleaver circa 1955

As usual, your point is as clear as mud!

JJ

You must be pretty new to this board, or you don't read it very often! Both Mirco and I have beaten your "science" theory to death about the hook morality thing on numerous threads. You need to do a few searches and then tell us about the "solid science" that was used to form the hooking mortality rates on fish. You may just be surprised!

Cowlitzfisherman

My cronies and I. Sheesh.... Talk about a conspiracy theory. :rolleyes:

Found the link to this story on another board.
Birth control may be harming state\'s salmon

I am not arguing emotion. I am arguing politics JJ. If you want me to sacrifice 8 months of fishing no bait, then you shouldn't mind also sacrificing YOUR fishing. Don't ask another group give up what you aren't willing to give up also. Remember, there is mortality with ALL fishing techniques.

CF I have been around long time and read a lot (I don't post much) and have yet to see you hammer the science with science. All I see is micro trying to argue the a steelhead smolt isn't a rainbow. I also see people asking for science and when it comes out that no one wants to argue that. I did a quick search and I didn't see any science to refute the the hooking mortality on parr. I just look at science. Please enlighten me.

The science supports a bait ban for hooking mortality of smolts.

AM you are right there is a mortality with any form of C and R just that bait appears to be at least 3 times higher then artificials. Can you dispute that? I love reading that science as I think that information is the key.

JJ

Should this fascist, terrorist, communist plot goes through and a bait ban becomes reality, there are some signature lines out there that will have to be modified.

Is the taste of the bait worth the price of the fine????

Give us a break Cfm, Aunty, Micro.

You are disputing scientifically valid results with your beliefs? Myself and others would like some evidence, not personal opions that back up your claims.

There are many published scientific studies that consistently report bait causes higher hooking mortalities. I have not seen any reproducible study that contradicts this. Maybe you could produce one. How about a dozen?

Do you think that just becuase a smolt swims without obvious bleeding after you unhook it that it will survive? If so you are wrong.

I have news for you. In a scientific study, they keep that unhooked fish in a livewell or tank and see whcih fish lives and which dies. Guess what, those caught on bait don't survive as well as those caught on artificials.

Unless you've done a controlled experiment, I don't see how your personal experience could refute these findings.

Do you think your personal opinions trump science?

What next? Shall we have fish managment based on voodoo, or black magic?

Just because you believe something doesn't mean its true.

Well, I did a search on the science you all say is here somewhere. Not finding it. You mind posting links to the info?

Geoduck,
I think the science will also show that there are mortalities in all forms of catch and release fishing. So are you saying the fish killed using anything but bait is exceptable? Or should we ban catch and release fishing because the science shows there are mortalities involed in that. Or maybe just close the rivers to all fishing when fish are present that would solve it.

What I'm saying is that as sportsfishers we are allowed a certain impact on wild fish. We can either use that impact by harvesting adult wild fish or by killing wild smolts accidentally while fishing. If we don't fish bait in the summer, where wild smolts are present, we will reduce our impact on wild smolts allowing more wild audult fish to return to the rivers as adults. This will give us larger wild runs ultimately allowing more harvest of wild fish.

I think bait fishing for sturgeon should be allowed, I seriously doubt stergeon anglers catch many smolts.


Aunty,
There are lots of threads on hooking mortality on this board with lots of links and references. Just search under mortality and start looking around.

Here is a quote from Smala, a reputable and accurate source of information regarding fish biology.

You might also ask Salmo G.