How about wearing a button or sticker that says, "I support WSR!" And tell everybody you meet while out there.

FYI- Just to help avoid perceptions the above fish in idea is not affiliated with the WSC.

Sparkey and Others:

Several Points,

-If you people are so concerned about Wild Steelhead Survival....Quit fishing for them!
You folks are complete hypocrites!

-Stop using those light lines and noodle rods which prolong "playtime" and cause tiring of those poor fish, as well as death.

-The indians base their harvest on 50% of total escapement. WSR=escapement increase! Do the math....Now they will net seven days a week on the Quilleute system?!

-State and tribe numbers indicate healthy wild steelhead stocks on Peninsula. In light of this it seems you folks have a very selfish agenda. Why not compromise with a one fish a year retention on all the rivers. This would ensure survival of guides that rely on catch and kill patrons. Compromise it works!

-Base limits on yearly evaluations. If stocks are unhealthy, lets do our part and shut it down. Do not set it in stone. Then again??? Remember that the tribe will continue to fish! Don't ye remember when they kept fishing despite the states emergency closure in the fall two years ago. You "office dreamers" expect too much!

-Certain folks have had reason to push for this ruling. For example; (Hypothetical) I am a CNR guide. Now I become the only show in town! Hmm...good way to eliminate some of the competition. It "the ruling" doesn't effect my market niche!

-More hypocracy.....How come it is ok for all you folks to kill wild salmon? I cry every time I see one dead in pictures on this site! Perhaps "Catch and Release Wild Salmon" doesn't have the same tantric ring as the mantra "Catch and Release Wild Steelhead"! Perhaps you folks are effected largely by trend?? Trend is not always = science or truth!

- The folks on the OP know the condition of their back yard. Funny how many are opposed to this ruling. We are not neanderthals! We are not trying for the extinction of a species. Most would not consider harming anyone for their ideas contrary to your popular belief.

-Expect to see PEACEFUL oposition and protest to your fish-in on April 3!


-DB

What a great Idea the people that dont want the fishs feelings to get hust stop fishing for them....thats a start....I think old sparky has the fishing bug but doesnt have the nads to go the river by himself....safety in numbers thing...I dont thing he can muster enough people......DJ

Ya know, I have read this whole thread and for some strange reason just can't seem to get a good understanding of why everyone is concerned about a negative reaction from the folks in Forks if we go there to show our SUPPORT for them.

I would agree that the Forks residents (guides and just regular folks) are not pleased with the new rule. Can't argue with that, as their stocks are healthy, and many guides earn a living from clients who want to take one home.

But why would the Forks people be angry or upset at those of us who are willing to show our support for them? If the law holds (which it most likely will save very expensive court battles with the State) then CnR will become the standard, and like it or not the guides and all others who fish for wild fish will have to practice CnR.

Here's the rub: If a gang (gaggle?) of us head for Forks and let them know were not leaving them "high and dry" just because of some new rule, and that the guides will still have all the business we can push their way (it's still one of the top steelhead fisheries in the world!) then why be upset at us?

Not logical, at all, for them to be angry with us.

Now, if we went there and wore banners saying how we thought this (new CnR Rule) was a good idea (which its not for the OP) then I might see a reason for their anger directed at us...

But if we go there to show our support for them, let them know that, no matter what the legal rules are, we will still fish there and their community will reap the benefits of our dollars spent there, then why the concern?

And don't tell me its because they are a small town and that's just the way they are...I live in a even smaller town than Forks, and people aren't stupid or notional just because the population density is low, and they certainly aren't stupid enough to bite the hand that's feeding them and their families.

Sign me..

Mike (somethimes I just don't get it) B

Jhonny T, You have some pretty strong opinions, but where is your data to back them up? Here are some facts for you.

Something else for others to think about; there will always be hatchery fish available for harvest . Wild steelhead only makes up a very small percentage of the harvest. Why intentionally harvest them? Why can't we have the foresight to manage the very last healthy runs we have left for lower impact C&R fisheries. Maybe it will be a way to preserve fishing opportunity before they too go down the tube and close at the end of February?

Wild Steelhead Coalition
Wild Steelhead in Washington Fact Sheet
February 2004


1. In 1996 NOAA fisheries divided the west coast wild steelhead populations in California, Oregon, Washington, and Idaho into 15 Evolutionary Significant Units (ESUs), or discrete areas with similar genetic, life history and evolutionary traits. This was done for the purpose of evaluating the status of separate metapopulation units under the Endangered Species Act (ESA).

2. As of January 2004, eleven ESUs were either listed or a candidate under review for possible listing. Two of the 15 units were listed as Endangered (in danger of extinction), eight of the units were listed as threatened (in danger of becoming endangered) and one coastal Oregon Unit remained under further review.

3. In the mid 1950's, over 125 Washington rivers were producing catches of wild steelhead. Recently there have been only 15 to 18 Washington rivers open to wild fish harvest due to ESA listings and low spawner escapements. In the mid 1950's, about 60,000 to 90,000 wild steelhead were annually harvested by Washington sport fishers (harvest estimates are based on WDFW data and correction recommendations). In 2003, Washington sport fishers harvested 3,554 wild steelhead.

4. Hatchery fish now comprise 97.7 percent of the Washington sport steelhead harvest. In western Washington (Puget Sound and Coastal catch areas), hatchery fish comprise 90.4% of the sport harvest.

5. Washington's wild steelhead populations are either listed under the Federal Endangered Species Act, chronically under-escaped or in periods of recent population declines. Of Washington's 7 steelhead ESUs, 3 are now listed as Threatened, 1 is listed as Endangered, while the other 3 do not currently warrant listing. In spite of the “not warranted” status, wild steelhead have in recent years been chronically under-escaped in the majority of Puget Sound ESU and Southwest Washington ESU streams. In recent years, only the Olympic Peninsula ESU has wild returns that have usually exceeded escapement goals and are open to harvest.

6. Most of the Olympic Peninsula wild runs have been in a downward trend between their individual run-size peaks in the early/mid 1990's and the latest run-size estimates from 2003. As the Columbia River and its tributaries, Puget Sound, Southwest Washington, and Oregon rivers closed to wild steelhead fisheries and/or harvest, many guides and fishers have relocated their fishing activities to the Olympic Peninsula.

7. For the past few years, the Pysht, Quinault, Hoh, Queets, Dickey, Sol Duc, Quillayute, Calawah and Bogachiel River total runs and escapements have all been in a downward trend from their recent peak run-size returns.

8. Last year (2002/03) the Hoh River was under-escaped by 800 fish. The run-size would have easily exceeded the escapement goal of 2400 spawners, but the combined sport and tribal harvest drove the escapements well-below the escapement goal. This situation came about because of an overly optimistic pre-season run-size forecast that was used to establish the harvest fisheries for 2002/03. For 2003/04, the pre-season run-size forecast calls or 4453 fish, and the co-managers agreed to a harvest allocation of 1395 fish for the Hoh tribe and 668 for sport fishers. The co-manager's plan calls for a targeted wild steelhead escapement of 2360 fish, or 40 fish below the escapement goal! We can only hope that this year's preseason forecast underestimates, rather than overestimates, this year's actual returns, and that the harvesters fail to achieve their full allocations.

9. The Queets River has been managed for spawners below its desired WDFW escapement for the last 10 years due to tribal demands.

10. Sport catch data since the 5 fish annual limit was established in 2001 indicates the regulation change has not reduced the total annual sport harvest of wild fish. For example, between 2000/01 and 2001/02, the Quillayute escapement declined 1300 fish while the sport kill increased from 1790 to 1930 fish.

11. Harvest models have failed wild salmonids in the 20th and 21st centuries as they are too simplistic and do not account for environmental variations, the role of life history diversity in population resilience, and other factors that are critical for sustaining healthy wild salmonid populations (freshwater habitat degradation, negative impacts of hatchery programs, etc).

12. Ocean and terrestrial productivity continually changes without notice or prediction, and this has major impacts and changes in salmonid populations. The only way to plan for these changes is to manage wild stocks much more conservatively than they have been with “maximum sustained harvest (MSH)” guidelines.

13. The life history of wild steelhead is far more diverse than most other salmonids. Seasonal runs, multiple year classes within a run, repeat spawners, juveniles that spend 1 to 3 years in the river, a riverine only component (rainbow trout), and river specific genetics, if protected, will provide resiliency and stability to these fish, even during poor environmental cycles.

14. A growing majority of sport fishers clearly prefer a non-harvest plan for wild steelhead. In 1995, 42.3% preferred CnR, 14% preferred harvest, and 43.4% had mixed opinions. In 2001, 49.3% preferred Wild Fish Release, 11.5% preferred releasing all steelhead, 2% preferred to close the fishery, and 33.9% preferred continued harvest (with 3.4% having no opinion). Combined, 65% of those with an opinion in 2001 preferred either CnR or closure for wild fish, even when a river would meet spawning escapement needs.

Data Sources: Washington Department Fish and Wildlife and NOAA Fisheries.

sparkey you should go to the tavern in town there and explain why they cant keep or even take a fish out of the water for a picture, I would stay away if I was you, someone thats bored with a few stiff rum and cokes in him might make a statement out of you.

As I read this thread and this post, my head turns a little to the side, my eyes close a little and I find myself in a state of wonderment and confusion. Not really sure what to say or think about some of these comments.

Sparky makes a comment about this being discussed at the WSC meeting, then Double haul says that WSC is not affiliated with it.

Sparky says "Yes I am here because of Wild Steelhead Release" will be avoided. Huh?? Isn't that excatly why you are going there? Whats the point? What are trying to prove then?

It is a well know fact that WSC was a major player in the statewide WSC ruling. If you feel so strongly about your beliefs then why do you feel the need to put distance between WSC and the fish-in? Stand up for what you believe in! It does seem that WSC is directly involved in the fish-in, or at least a big supporter of it but at the same time they want to distance themselves from it??

Could it be that they don't want to be officially "affiliated" because they don't want to see a protest directed directly at them? Do they want to give out the appearence that this fish-in is just a bunch of "regular fishing folks"? I don't know... but I am somewhat confused about this whole thing.

Take accountability for your actions! Stand up and say "Hey! I'm with WSC and we support this ruling and the town of Forks, that is why were are here!" and all 150 of our members will be here every weekend to show our support! Get some WSC hats and shirts shirts made. If your beliefs are so right and you have so many supporters then what are you so affraid of?

I personally believe in standing up and speaking out for what I believe in and I respect others that do the same....

Bruce , Sparkey posted this thread on 3/2 the day before the WSC membership meeting. What items the WSC supports and doesn't support are discussed at the WSC board meetings. The fish-in that Sparkey has brought up was not an item brought up at the last board meeting(2/24) and thus can't be supported or sanctioned as a WSC event. Just because Sparkey discussed his idea with some people at the meeting doesn't mean that it is a WSC idea, thus Double Haul's(WSC President) comment.
The rest of your commets

It is a well know fact that WSC was a major player in the statewide WSC ruling. If you feel so strongly about your beliefs then why do you feel the need to put distance between WSC and the fish-in? Stand up for what you believe in! It does seem that WSC is directly involved in the fish-in, or at least a big supporter of it but at the same time they want to distance themselves from it??

Could it be that they don't want to be officially "affiliated" because they don't want to see a protest directed directly at them? Do they want to give out the appearence that this fish-in is just a bunch of "regular fishing folks"? I don't know... but I am somewhat confused about this whole thing.

are made up based on false assumptions. We are staying the course and will not back down .

AACK!!! It's a conspiracy. I need some of Grandpa's foil (where is Grandpa anyway?) Bruce, here's a response from Double Haul in another thread that may have missed your notice. I think it clears up some of the questions that you are asking.

Hairlip, The WSC has nothing to hide nor does it have concearns to"back pedal". You can go to the website and look over our action/business plan and our mission statement is simply who we are. We do need to update our officers, trustees and reps link as well as a few others, but that's what happens with free help =).

Bob is our Regional Rep for the West Oly Pen area.

I must of missed the inquiry for membership numbers, The WSC has approximately 150 members and many supporters, hence a Coalition. Our membership cuts across the cloth of steelhead fishers and is very diverse geographically. I believe the strength of the organization is it is an educational/learning organization that works very hard to uderstand the issues that are affecting wild steelhead. Also, for the record again, We are not anti-hatchery, but we believe in hatchery reform.

What's interesting, in light of the Forks topic, in the composition part of our mission statement it reads-
"The WSC is comprised of concerned citizens determined to reverse the factors that have negatively impacted wild steelhead, and in so doing, restore healthy and viable populations of wild steelhead to the Pacific Northwest. In so doing, wild salmon and other salmonids will also benefit. The WSC represents conservationists, recreational fishermen, businesses that depend upon wild steelhead for their livelihoods, and citizens who seek to preserve the future of the Pacific Northwest's greatest resource."

I am one of the founding board members and was the VP of Membership, now I am the President of the organization. If you are interested in becoming a member, send me an address and I will be happy to send you a membership packet. I can also email you the recent online version of the adipose (our newsletter) if your intersted.

We also host the bi-annual Steelhead Summits where diverse groups are working together on Pacific NW Steelhead issues. We are not just a WSR organization.

I am one of the few who update the website and the only thing that has been added recently is the WSC Wild Steelhead Facts Sheet, nothing else has been deleted as far as I know.

The Forks fish in disclaimer was to simply clairify to readers that the WSC is not organizing the fish in, but I am sure there will be a few members or supporters there to show support for the Forks community.

[ 03-05-2004, 09:45 PM: Message edited by: Double Haul ]
--------------------
Sincerely,
Rich
http://www.wildsteelheadcoalition.com/

" Will we allow ourselves to be foresightful & preserve the healthy wild steelhead runs now by applying fishing methods that can help preserve future fishing opportunities?"

WOW, thats what we have to do is stop fishing for wild steelhead and all of our troubles will evaporate.I fish this pristine little river on the the north end of puget sound, that has been closed down for wild steelhead retention for as long as i have been around, and the fishing there has not gotten any better. Not only that, this year the hatchery run sucked! very few made it back and the ones that did were smaller than usual. SO i guess i must be missing the point of the wild fish closure as i have not seen one bit of difference on the stilliquamish.
I think that this ruling is about special interests,some office quarter-backs think that everyone (including the tribes,RIGHT) will appreciate the spirit of the new moratorium.The tribes will, all the way to the gill nets full of wild fish, to the guides, some of whom want this to keep the rest of the publice off of their rivers and fish. Or for some guides it may be that they don't retain wild fish( or want their customers to retain wild fish) because it COUNTS AGAINST THEIR annual wild retention, thus limiting their ability to continue fishing the wild runs, and maybe it is just another way to divide the sports fishermen to keep us from seeing what is really going on behind the scenes.

Eddie....I just got back from a few days at 10,000-12,000 ft...Not nearly enough oxygen..this board is banned up there at Breckenridge because it sucks so much oxygen out of the atmosphere.

I spent a few days with a few smart people and conclude that making decisions based on measured and testedfacts is the best way to go. I may seeking a six sigma black belt and will re-engage after that. For now I'd say the most vocal minority has won a skirmish in the battle.

I am oxygen rich again and will engage at the appropriate moment free of all foil protection.

Grandpa - Any airhead can tell you that after a long run down the "Four O'Clock Trail", it's time for a whiff at the O2.

The O2 Lounge is an oxygen bar near Breckenridge has been serving the high-altitude community for more than three years. O2 is good for anyone feeling stressed or fatigued because oxygen helps rejuvenate the body when it is worn out. High altitudes cause mild discomfort, and oxygen is the best cure for this discomfort.

A good whiff can help improve Concentration, Alertness, Memory, Thinking, Sight, Muscle Stiffness, The Immune System, Sleep Patterns, Reduce Chronic Fatigue and slow the Aging Process.

I saw the oxygen bars but opted instead for the other bar across the street. Back in college before it was fashionable a friend and I were thinking of starting one called
O2 FOR YOU....never got off the ground and neither did we some mornings....aaaa the good ole days at the Uof W....sigh.....foil was used back then for making cheap bongs.

There was a spot at the UW west entrance at 43rd and the Ave called Hippie Hill. They were trading lots of foil and other "stuff" on the lawn there.

I wonder if they had any of that "stuff" that Todd and fishNphysician are trading in the other thread?

Sounds more like a trip to amsterdam than breckernridge.

...save yourself some money. Take a walk in the oxygen rich air of the rainforest instead.

...oh, don't forget your foil 'bong'.

We're gonna have to work on that 420 lingo of yours if you wanna look cool with the kids these days gramps....

Thanks for the advise h2o....didn't choose the venue or pay for it and would always opt for the rainforest over the snow covered peaks. Sorry but I skipped the hemp fest this year.