The charts that the WSC used in their discussions with the commissioners are now available on the WSC web site-- middle of the page. Remember these figures are all from WDFW.
http://www.wildsteelheadcoalition.com

so you guys use the info from WDFW that you agree with but shoot down the info you don't. That is what science is all about. Make the data say what you want.

So pimp, what didn't we use? Or is that more idle chit-chat?

Pimpinshrimp

Welcome to the "SPIN FACTOR"


Well Jerry

One has to ask the question….If this information was so sound, why wasn't it made available to "all " the pubilc to review before the gang jumped on the Commission in those meeting?

One would think that such "scientific" information would not have been held back from others unless one was using such information as a "sucker punch"!

I hope that was not WSC intension to hold those charts back, when the public was told that there would be no more public comment on this issue!

One has to question why those charts were not used in the "public comment" period prior to the cut off date when the general public was told that this proposal was not coming up for comment.


Cowlitzfisherman

You keep asking for the sceince and when it's offered to you, you "spin" it into something else. Somehow I'm not surprised. There's no spin to those charts unless it was spun by WDFW first.

Pimp,

Their data is not the problem...it's the interpretation of it.

They look at data that shows the populations going down, and say that it's not a big deal, even though that's what has happened all over the rest of the state, and look where that got us.

We look at the same data, and say "whattayasay we don't manage the fisheries into oblivion like we did to the rest of the state?"

CFM,

Same answer: Not a spin. You'd do well to stop saying that every time something comes up that doesn't follow your thinking.

Fish on...

Todd

Todd- Jerry

Read my edited post above.

The info was under development and was ready for the commissioners about a month before the commission meeting. A sucker punch, eh!

Cowman,

All I did was ask for it.
WDFW sent it to me!

How's that Cow

Can you please say that again in English?

I don't understand what you said?

Ask for what?

Cowman,
I ask (WDFW Bob Leland) for the (steelhead) numbers on the rivers in Washington (on the west side of the mountains) and they sent them to me.
I type slow as I could. Just for you!

CFM,

There's no need to hide any of the information, it is and was just as available to you as it was to the WSC, or to anyone else.

WDFW had and has all the numbers, it's all public information, and lots and lots of non-WDFW people have it. All it takes is a phone call, or even a search on their website.

***edit: You've been asking all along to see it, there it is. Please don't try to find a conspiracy in posting public information that you've been asking to have posted for you. If you really wanted it earlier, ask WDFW for it. They've had it all along...they're their numbers.***

Fish on...

Todd

Todd

You almost make me feel like Mel Gibson!


Cowlitzfisherman

CFM,

You make me feel like______________!

I'll let others fill in the blank for me!

Fish on...

Todd

Well I hope you feel better soon Todd! ... take two of these and you will feel better someday

But can you please answer my original simple question without all that other BS ?

Please stay with the issue and answer this simple question. The cross is a heavy one to carry. (Mel 04 et al.)


Cowlitzfisherman

Ok, I looked at the graphs.
As a scientist (non-fisheries). These charts paint an ambigious picture at best. Maybe for the puayllup the trend is one of clear decline (where WSR was already in place well before the ban), but for the rest there is a lot of up and down without any clear trend. Certainly all the charts show a dip the past few years, consistent with the poor marine survival.

The case for wsr based on the science is weak at best and certainly the weakest for the OP streams.

Anyone that says this arguement was won on the basis of strong scientific evidence needs to go back to and take remedial biology. This arguement was won based on a political maneuver and clever arguement.

BTW, the places that need help the worst (ie puyallup, cedar, etc), how do they get helped by this blanket WSR policy?

I think now taht the dust has started to settle, the WSR champions need to think a bit about what they have accomplished. I think the precedent of blanket approaches in fisheries managment are a very bad precedent to set. Similar blanket approaches on chinook maybe next . . . eliminating much fishing opportunity.

You don't agree with me? Lets look at the numbers again in two years and then it will be much clearer.

CFM,

As Jerry noted above, we had the raw data, but had not developed the charts until the weeks before the Rules Adoption meeting. We did present the raw data, but it didn't have much impact without seeing it visually...besides, it was the same raw data that the Department had. They interpreted it one way, and we put it on a graph rather than in list form so that the raw numbers had more meaning.

For the life of me, even if we had them for the last year, I can't think of one single, solitary reason why we would not have shared them with the whole world, as we are now.

What could we have possibly gained by hiding information that completely and utterly backs up our position?

Ok, Mel...you asked a question, again, and I answered it again. End of story.

How about you answer the questions I just posed?

Fish on...

Todd

When our free labor got the charts together and gave them to the WSC it was approximately 1 month or so before the commission meeting where they adopted the rules(Feb 6). If you would like imput on how or why the WSC does different things send us $40 and become a member.

Geoduck, All the streams except the Quillayute system show a decline over a 20 year average. Most of us non scientists think that shows a trend, a trend we are not comfortable with. And the Quillayute is about to have it's 6th year in a row of declining wild fish numbers.

These are natural cycles. WSR will not change the ebb and flow of natural populations. Much more drastic swings in fish population get no managment response at all. Why this should be so big a deal is a mystery to me. Sure steelhead populations have declined for the past 5+ years but they only increaesd the 10 or so years before that. Neither has much to do with catch rates.

Besides if you are really so concerned about wild steelhead and fishing impacts, why not just close the spring fishing and let the fish spawn in peace?