Because I was unable to find that picture of the dead horse, I decided to start YET another thread regarding wild steelhead.

My question is (and I asked this in the past on The Board but I recieved a lackluster respsonse)...What are you going to do? What is your plan?

I see all these opponents of WSR which is great, you are entitled to your opinion. I also see those who will not support the WSC. Again, you are entitled to your opinion.

BUT, if you are going to attack WSR and attack the WSC, I would love to see what your involvement is in wild steelhead conservation/preservation. ...and sitting back and not fishing does not count. Nor does *****ing about the Indians.

The WSC is heavily involved in other issues pertaining to wild steelhead. There are also other organizations that spend countless hours and money helping to protect wild steelhead and/or their habitat.

There are also certain members on this board who spend countless hours on watershed committees. Homer2Handed nearly exhausts himself fighting for habitat and protection of the Stilliguamish basin.

I am not claiming to be the savior of wild steelhead but I am involved...why arent you?? Imagine if we put just half the effort we put forth *****ing on this board into wild steelhead issues. I think the fish would be much better off!

i`m going to buy you a set of golf clubs and send you a link to a golfing forum

I'm going to pitch in a few bucks on the golf clubs. and continue keeping an eye on you so that hopefully we don't get anymore stupid rules like your fish out the water rule.

"That's gonna leave a mark. "

The last three posts exemplify your point to a tee, Sparkey.

THEY HAVE NO PLAN!

Just the worn out Neanderthal attitude that if the tribes can kill 'em, then by golly, we sports ought to be able to kill 'em too.

Will the guy that bonks the last wild steelhead that finally puts these stocks into the irreversible spiral of death please turn out the lights? I really don't want to see that.

Reading most of the post on this BB and others
Not to many of us work on Habitat
Don’t you think this is a big ISSUE?
Better habitat, More FISH right?
Go to your local Watershed Meetings!
Most of the question would be answered right?
How do you know if you don’t ask?

Don’t answer my question with more for the nets.

Sitting back and not fishing doesn't count? Why not sparkey, because you wont make that sacrifice for a fish you supposedly care so much about? Are you saying that if people did voluntarily stop fishing for wild fish, it wouldn't help? Or are you saying it doesn't count because it doesn't suit your needs??

All along you and others have tried to make it look as if everyone who is against WSR decision is a rednecked fish bonker.... I obviously pose a problem to your belief system.

I also dont care for your in the water rule, its a waste of the paper it is printed on... completely unenforcable. Now I suppose you'll assume I drag my fish up the beach and have a 5 minute photo shoot... sorry to nip that one too, but I rarely take them out of the water even for a photo.

Nice stereotyping doc....

Are you still fishing for em too??

Hey Homer-
You still going to Sage tomorrow? Is you-know-who still giving the tour?

Is it too late for me to join you. If not, email me! I might have to wrestle myself out of bed early for this one!

Just like WSR is not the magic bullet, neither is hanging up your rods. If were to all hang up our rods, this downward spiral would still continue.

Like I mentioned in my post, if you do not support WSR fine, if you do not support the WSC fine but sitting around doing nothing and/or *****ing will not help matters.

fNp-
My point exactly!

Im not a Neanderthal... Im Neanderthal like....remember that


Heres the point...what if some one from the town next to yours came into your house and told you hey your cutting your grass east to west and his town cuts there grass north/south....and he just submitted a bill that it would be against the law to cut your grass from east to west. you wernt happy with the law in fact you were very comfortable cutting east to west and infact you always made sure that your grass continued to grow and gave it the care and attention that you would give something that you thought highly about.. (jeez I just mentioned grass and high in the same paragraph and wasnt talking about wacky weed) anyway this law passes and the guy who is now forcing you to do things HIS way just cant go golfing or buy new pumps at the mall he pops onto the grass growers web pages and trys to keep his name in the lime lite for what a great thing hes done.

and ask stupid questions like why doest anyone respond to my post etc...it because sparkey we dont like you....

back to the topic.... but its been pointed out
"Hey lets not make this a fly fisher against a bait fishermens war"....but heres the problem...(and yes I have a couple fly rods) there are people who get out fished with one lure or method (on both sides fly or convential) then instead of switching gear they would just like to see that method outlawed....well mandateing release techniques is a step towards the fringe getting a hand hold into way you conduct your own business. I do agree that some people needed to be educated on how to release fish I have seen the guys who just kick it back in etc....but education is the way to go not more laws.....how about I submit a law that outlawed flyfishing within any creek or river when there are conventional fishermen around or boats in the river. my argument would be that conventional fishermen and boaters going by are indanger of lossing an eye from the thrashing about of the flyfishermen (more movement = more chances) or better one let the fly fishermen fish but make every one else wear a helmet and goggles, yea thats much better...so does any one else see my point.....its education not laws that protect fish infact I dont think the poachers are worried about the way they land there fish....

now as far as a plan I have lession guides and instructor guides (and have posted there availibility here in the past) there are tons of youth programs out there that one can volunteer time to....I do 4H, boy/girls scouts teaches when ever they call.....teaching ethics is a big part of my program........


did you know Neanderthal men often stalked game around watering holes and would sneak up on things with nothing more then a rock or a stick.......DJ

sorry, there a law against that now

For the first time I am going to have to agree with a few of the things the anti WSR guys are saying. I am a fly guy when ever its the best option. I used to be a fly only guy. As I got older I started to realize that many serious fly fishermen do hold themselves above the average man. I'll give you an example. I used to be very active in T.U here in Idaho. The meetings were sort of stupid. They seemed really concerned about making a bunch of ponds in urban areas great fishing holes... like who cares about the management of hatchery trout in a pond down at the local city park.. what a waste of my time.

I do agree that wild stocks need protection from harvest. I don't agree that fly fisherman are the only people "worthy" of that cause. The fish out of water rule is way stupid. Idaho has a solid track record of taking care of wild fish ( no harvest, not by the tribes, not by sportsmen ) Can you take a fish out of the water ??? sure can.

So whats my point ??? I don't think fly fishermen are the reason that WSR is a fact now in Washington state. Its a lot bigger than that. Education is the answer to the proper release of any fish. WSR however is a different issue. Letting wild stocks go in the year 2004 is not something that should be an option in the current situation these fish face.

Just to be on record I support catch and release (wild fish) on rivers that have LOW runs...just dont tell me how to release my fish. the bans should include netting both tribe/commercials

So if we stop fishing for them the downward spiral would continue, but if we continue to fish but with WSR, it will help them? Please explain?

In an earlier thread you said the NEXT step is to close the rivers to protect them if WSR doesn't work. Doesn't that mean stop fishing for them....

Statements like these confirm that this hasn't been thought out very well.

I would vote for a strong hatchery program. In Eastern Wa. they have such a thing and people fish for steelhead from July @ Drano Lake through through January @ Ice Harbor Dam. What they do is follow the fish as they slowly make their way to the Dworsak National Fish Hatchery and other hatcheries on the Grande Rhonde and Salmon Rivers. Some hard-cores over there catch 150 or more steelhead a year. They have fun.

Sparkey.... better check all the sides of this argument. There's more than just two...

What did I ever do to you???

What's the old saying,

"Opinions are like A$$holes, everyone has one".

Why some of us seem hell bent on getting everyone to agree with our own opinion is beyond me. Like any other ideal, believe what you want, don't ask me to believe it too. Why do we keep resurrecting this??????????????

Zen Leecher - you are right - ask 10 fishermen and you will probably get 12 opinions. Here is the issue for me - please stay with me, I'm going to go pretty far afield but I will come back, I promise.

Fishing is one of the activities that confers upon the fisher "expert" status when we are good enough or lucky enough to catch the fish we were targeting when we were targeting it. What a lot of "experts" (including me) do not get is that just because you can catch a fish, it does not make you knowledgeable about habitat, hatchery interaction, effect of hydro, Wild Steelhead Release, etc. And I think that plays into the arguement we are having now.

Everyone on this board knows that I am in support of the WSR moratorium. I would like it to be permanent. I would like it to apply to all salmonids in our waters. I go out of my way to not fish rivers where the predominant fish is wild steelhead. I don't like the idea of having hooking mortality just to get my string stretched. Although I own a fly rod, I very rarely fly fish and have never thought about this issue as fly guys vs. gear chuckers. My point is this:

Steelhead in this state, both hatchery and wild, are having problems in returning sufficient numbers to reproduce themselves. It is a huge problem for Wild fish because the survival percentages from egg to smolt are so low. I do not believe that the hatchery practices currently in use provide an acceptable safety net in case the wild fish goes extinct. Therefore, every wild fish and the genetic cargo they carry is very valuable. We know that straying is a common occurence for steelhead. If we have to restart the wild fish population in the entire state from fish that grew up and returned to the Bogy for instance, we need to have that option available. Or we need to create hatcheries that preserve genetic diversity and offer the closest possible alternative to the wild fish. I don't think we are there yet, maybe others disagree.

WSR is the best option available for dealing with harvest while still allowing fishing opportunity. I think that it is clear that it is not the magic bullet. It is also clear that we have not found the magic bullet to get the tribes to stop harvesting the way they are currently harvesting. We have huge problems with Habitat. In some places, we have huge issues with Hydro. Only a coordinated approach to all of these factors will insure the survival of the wild steelhead. There are huge political, social, and cultural issues surrounding especially the Habitat and Hydro problems. They will not be solved overnight. My hope is that with WSR we will keep some wild fish around until we have found the will to attack the other, bigger problems.

This is all old ground folks, but if the Commission accepts Forks' petition, then we will go beyond the process of enacting the moratorium to discussing the validity of enacting a moratorium. I would hope that all sides could come to the table with the idea of preserving the wild steelhead as the most important and central point. If we as a sportfishing community can do that, then we will have the basis for common agreement and common actions. If not, we will fiddle while Rome burns. The distractions of us vs. them, fly vs. gear, Urban vs. Rural just strokes our egos (our expert egos?) and doesn't get us to where we need to be. And maybe we will decide that the wild fish is not worth the cost of saving. That would fill me with sadness and guilt at the legacy that I leave behind.

If you have got to this point, thanks for listening.

First of all, I do not know this suddenly turned into a gear vs. fly arguement. At times, a bait ban would be beneficial to the fish. At others, a bait ban would do no good and may do more harm (bait=more hatchery fish to the bank).

Anyways...

elkrun-
My contention and its been my contention all along as well as the vast majority of those in support of WSR is that if there are not enough fish in the river close the river.

Closing the river will not suddenly put a halt to all the other problems facing wild steelhead BUT it will allow more fish to reach the beds when every fish matters.

Under WSR, you can not tell me the Hoh will not benefit. That poor river has experienced an aggresive over the last decade and has missed escapement numerous times because of the kill. If the Hoh was under Wild Steelhead Release it would of made escapement all but just a couple times...so yes, WSR helps.

Take another river, the Bogey who experiences very heavy fishing pressure in November and December to target the hatchery fish returning. At the time you are also allowed to kill to wild steelhead...the early component of that run is doing very poorly. WSR allows for very heavy fishing pressure while still providing protection for that early component.

And again elkrun, I ask you, what are you doing? Everyone has agreed that there are many other more pressiing issues facing wild steelhead in this State. What are you doing to deal with those issues? Like I said earlier I have no issue with those who do not support WSR and the WSC, especially those that are working their tails off when it comes to habitat, commercial netting etc. etc. but for you to sit back and do nothing does none of us (nor the fish) any good!

Well, sparkey you obviously assume (once again) that I sit back and do nothing.... You misunderstand that choosing not to pressure wild fish in itself IS doing something, mainly because you dont want to make that sacrifice and thats fine, but to keep saying were all doing nothing..... thats just idiotic.

I really dont need to justify myself to you or anyone else....but I'll humor you, Lets just say that I am very involved in my local fisheries, a former board member of a fly fishing club (we do many projects up here), and I spend a lot of time educating others on our resources... I spend many days a year cleaning habitat on an local watershed with my club, collect data and monitor a local stream, volunteer to teach youth how to tie flies, cast a fly rod, and generally teach them how to respect our resources, and will be helping run a local youth fishing derby this weekend where again we will be volunteering our time to introduce local youth to fishing. There are other monitary contributions I make but dont advertise, nor will I disclose to you. My club generally doesn't try to pass legislation to influence how other fish, or hold fish for that matter... I think by promoting the sport of fishing, and teaching how and why to repect the resource will go a long way to help save it in the future.

Another assumption down the crapper....

elkrun-
I apologize that I singled you out and nobody should have to prove anything to anyone regarding their efforts.

But I will still contend that I see lots of negative comments, *****ing etc. from so many of those opposed to WSR and/or the WSC but I have yet to see any pro-active alternative to WSR or the WSC for that matter.

Okay, I'll chime in. First of all I know very little about fish unless it pertains to fishing. I have bonked a wild fish years ago before they were in so much trouble. Now I am all for WSR. The fish are in trouble and need any help they can get. You as fishermen should be glad to help in any way even if it means letting them go. It may not help as much as stopping the comercial netting but it will help. It may be the difference between sure extinction and barely escaping extinction. On the flip side I would love to see populations healthy enough that a person could keep a wild fish once in a while like they were and did years ago. I can recall standing in a river and having wild steelhead swimming between my legs or stopping to rest in the still water behind my leg as they moved up the river. The fishing was good and the wild steelhead tasted even better. If we could reach that point again then why should anyone have a problem with keeping a limited number. Isn't that what management is about?

Sparkey,
the reason you don't see an alternative to WSR/WSC is that you are convinced the problem is fishing pressure. It is not. Maybe for some OP streams fishing pressure is a small part of the problem, but not with PS streams.


Look at the puyallup. WSR hasn't helped and the reason is that THE REAL PROBLEM IS WITH HABITAT.

If half the effort that has gone into battling about WSR went into habitat protection and restoration, maybe something useful could be accomplished.

Geoduck-
I have stated numerous times that I do not believe that problem is fishing pressure. The problems arise from the 4-H's plus marine survival.

If you would of read my original post, you would see that I was implying more then just harvest. As fishermen, we can involved ourself in the other H's. My question to the Board and especially those opposed to the WSC, what is your alternative?...what are you going to do to involved yourself in issues facing wild steelhead?

Geoduck,

Check out the signature line on my posts...

The WSC is working on every factor we can that deals with recovering wild steelhead...all 4 H's, from habitat destruction on the Sauk and E. Fk. Lewis, to habitat restoration on the Stilly, to commercial bycatch on the Columbia, to instream flows/dam water flow everywhere that dams block anadromous streams, to being an active memeber of the HSRG Hatchery Reform Coalition.

Right now, as we speak, all those things are being worked on.

Sport harvest is part of one of those H's...it, too, has been, is being, and will be worked on.

The WSR issue is one that hits home with steelheaders more than the others, the one where they have to personally take some responsibility. That's part of why it is so contentious.

Of the thousands of posts on WSR, of the hundreds of folks who have chimed in on it, of the dozens of groups that have taken a stance on it one way or the other, where are all of you on...

1. Columbia River Commercial bycatch: I couldn't get one person, pro or con, to accept a free ride to Olympia to go and testify...and I only was able to get a few responses to a post containing a six page letter to NOAA Fisheries regarding this environmental/fisheries tragedy taking place down there RIGHT NOW.

2. Instream Flows: When I went down to testify on this issue, I was joined by two commercial fishermen, NSIA, TU, American Rivers, and one man from the FFF. Posts on the BB's garnered almost no response, much less any attendance or letters about this issue.

3. Sauk river habitat destruction: Some people got really angry about the guy driving heavy machinery in the river, and digging up something like 16,000 cubic yards of spawning gravel, some of which assuredly held redds from endangered PS Chinook...some folks defended him. Did anyone come up with any sort of solution to fix it or prevent it from happening again?

4. Long Live The Kings Hatchery Science Review Group: We all know we need hatchery reform if we want viable hatchery runs AND viable wild runs. The HSRG is coming up with groundbreaking ideas to have both...yet half the fishermen could care less...they just want to bonk, bonk, bonk...the more hatchery fish the better!...while not taking one minute to consider what role wild fish play in hatchery runs, or what it takes to have a good hatchery run, or how to make the coexist. Just more b!tch, b!tch, b!tch.

5. Slides on the Stillaguamish: When Homer2Handed posts all the information about getting funding to implement the Stillaguamish Implementation Review Commission's plan to fix the slides and repair miles of spawning grounds for wild steelhead, endangered Chinook, chums, pinks, dollies, and SRC...who here actually read it all, much less sent in a letter supporting it?

6. Storedahl/Daybreak Mine: Storedahl, who owns/operates the Daybreak Mine on the E.Fk. of the Lewis, is asking to mine millions of yards of gravel out of the river's channel migration zone. How many people here have written a letter, testified, or even expressed any sort of outrage that this kind of thing should even be proposed?

This stuff is all going on RIGHT NOW. Wild steelhead release is, too, but all the rest of this is going on RIGHT NOW.

There are lots of folks, on both sides of the WSR debate, who are doing nothing else about anything else than make wsr the only game in town. WHERE ARE ALL OF YOU?

Come on guys...all this stuff matters.

If you don't care about WSR, fine. If you think arguing about it is worthless, fine.

If you belong to any sort of fishing group whatsoever, bring all these other issues to them RIGHT NOW. I will personally provide all I know about all these issues to anyone who wants to get on the recovery bandwagon, and if I don't know the answer to your question, I'll send you to someone who does.

If your group won't take action on these issues, demand that they do. They are there for you, not the other way around. If they won't...find a new group. I don't care which one...join any group that works on these issues, among all the others that are out there, too.

I'm tired of reading all the statements that "WSR won't save fish" and "what about all the other things?" and "why does the WSC only care about WSR?"...because all those statements have nothing to do with saving fish...getting involved and doing something does, though.

Not everyone can make time to do everything...I know I sure can't. I do know, though, that everyone who has taken literally hours of time to post on these WSR threads could have spent some of that time writing a letter, or even an e-mail, or making a phone call, or speaking up at their group's meetings, on all kinds of other issues that also affect wild steelhead, not to mention all kinds of other wild fish.

Ok...that's my second "soap box" speedh of the day...my blood pressure is getting up from all the crap I keep reading in all these BB's.

Sorry for being so longwinded, and I'm not going to ask anyone to justify what and how much they do, unless they feel like doing it...but I do challenge everyone to compare their time arguing on BB's about stuff to the time they spend doing other things that are probably a hell of a lot more productive for our fish and our fisheries.



Fish on...

Todd

Todd-
I owe 'ya a drink!

Todd,

I agree wholeheartedly.

Originally posted by DJFISHS2XS:
and ask stupid questions like why doest anyone respond to my post etc...it because sparkey we dont like you....

What did I ever do to you???

Hmmm, let's see. Because of you and some idiotic law you authored, I now have to step on my wild steelhead or any other fish that must be released with my logging boot and smash it into the rocks on the stream bed under water because he swallowed the hook and won't hold still instead of taking it out of the water to remove the hook properly. Because I'm not allowed to bring the fish in the boat at Bouy10 in heavy seas to remove the hook to release it and run the risk of falling overboard and drowning. Because if I fish from a pier and hook a wild fish, I have no frickin' clue how to release him without bringing him out of the water when I am 15 feet above the water surface. Because of you, guys are getting their arms broken (yes, true story) and damned near losing a hand by seals stealing fish while still in the net while they are trying to get the hooks out because they can't bring them into the boat. Because you introduced this selfish law that only thought of you and your short-sighted circumstances, but didn't consider the big picture and include everyone else's circumstances.

Therefore, we don't like you.

Well then, file like Forks did and ask them to look at the law again(requires effort though)

Actually Steve, I proposed a regulation that would not allow wild steelhead to be fully removed from the water in wild steelhead release waters. The salmon portion of the law was proposed by others and the WDFW.

Therefore all the circumstances you mentioned except for 1 would NOT apply.

So the next time you accuse me of being selfish, get your facts straight!

So is it ok in your book Sparkey to pull a wild salmon out of the water?

Ok, I'm in my driftboat and cannot lift the fish out of the water to release it, yet there is not calm water near to beach the boat and release the fish in, so I must do it on the go. I stand a good chance of getting my hand broken on the rocks or falling out of boat trying to release a fish in rough water on the move.

I can still catch a wild steelhead from a bridge, high rocks, a ledge, many other places that make it nearly impossible to release the fish without taking it out of the water. Ever fished in one of these types of places?? Of course you have.

Effort Jerry? We're working on it, however pretty hard to repeal something after the fact, as the City of Forks is finding out. See you all in the morning!

Wow Ryan I didn't know you wielded such power
Keep up the good work

Bruce-
If you are going to put words in my mouth, be a little sly about next time.

Given that the state is already enacting such regulations on selective salmon fisheries, I felt no need to expand my proposal to include. Also I feel that river fishing (aside from the Columbia) allows itself to this sort of regulation and although it can be practiced in saltwater, it is much more difficult. And most importantly I felt felt that if my proposal just included steelhead, it would have a much easier time passing.

If you would take the time to read the rule proposal phamplets that were published by the WDFW, you would see that some proposals included just steelhead, others just salmon and others steelhead and salmon. The WDFW Staff passed on to the Commission a combination of the various proposals to be voted on.

Sparkey its beyond me how you could interpret my QUESTION as "putting words in your mouth".... So you don't believe in taking wild salmon out of the water either then..

Plus, in each of my examples, the fish could be a wild steelhead, I never specified salmon, I said fish.

Trust me, you were doing your best to put words in my mouth.

I support the proper handling of both steelhead and salmon. If someone can properly handle a steelhead and salmon and still remove them for the water for a short period of time, then I do not mind.

The problem is, there are too many who can not remove salmon and steelhead from the water and still properly handle that fish. By forcing people to keep fish in the water, it makes it more difficult for them to mishandle the fish.

In my opinion, my fellow fishermen shot themselves in the foot on this one. We must take responsibility for actions, if we can not, then State will do it for you.

"Trust me, you were doing your best to put words in my mouth."

Wow... Ok Sparkey.. Now I know why I don't like you...

Steve-
Hmmmmm...in many of the situations that you provided us, it would be rare to run into a wild steelhead.

And in your second set of examples...

Until you actually catch and release a wild steelhead from one of these types of situations and recieved a citation because you had to remove the fish from the water to release it, then I consider that comment a valid arguement. Given that the majority of enforcement officers use disgression, I do not forsee you having a problem. And I have already recieved word from one officer, that he will in fact use disgression...if you run into a situation like this and you treat the fish with care and respect, you will not get a ticket.

Your question was nothing more then a rhetorical question used to imply that I thought it was okay to remove wild salmon from the water but not wild steelhead.

btw-
Bruce I really don't care that you don't like me. You don't have to. But I must say I would never judge someone solely based upon their ideas behind fisheries management.

Gawldarn Steve, you make fishing sound so dangerous! Ever thought of takin' up golf?

...wait that won't work neither. Too many chances o' gettin' clunked in the head with a stray ball or run over by a cart!

Thats cool Sparkey. I don't either. Take Jerry, Eddie or ( Maybe even Todd ) We disagree a lot but I still like them.

Aunty, whats the adress to Bruce's site again??

Bruce-
I answered your question....opinions? Or are you daed set on turning this into a mudslinging thread?

Sorry Sparkey I am finding it impossible to have a healthy constructive debate with you. I'm off to a PSA meeting soon so feel free to continue on without me.

"have yet to see any pro-active alternative to WSR or the WSC for that matter."

Here's one for you:

In Alaska on the Kenai the guides were limited to certain days of the week I think...Can't remember the particulars but I bet Bob knows...How about proposing through the commission that we restrict all guides in rivers during steelhead season to 3 days a week? I don't know but I wonder if that rule , if enacted, would result in lower wild steelhead mortality and perhaps do more good for the wild runs than a blanket WSR rule. And what if management was enacted to restrict guides to three days a week and also only open the rivers to one weekend day? Then include WSR in the mix as well.

There you go..a proactive suggested solution.

You were the one that turned the debate negative. Oh well...

Interesting Sparkey....

Would you like to comment on Grandpa's suggestion I would be I dont' have time.

Actually Bruce, I think grandpa's idea could under certain circumstances have some validity, however...

The goal behind the thread was to find proactive solutions to the issues facing wild steelhead away from the basic 'how many can we kill/can we not' debate.

Plus, a guide who knows how to properly release fish and responsibily fish bait, may do less harm over an entire week then a good who doesn't know how to do either could do in a 3 day period.

Okay, this thread was just about to get whacked, but if we can stay on track here, I'll leave it open.

GP ... it's five days a week on the Kenai in king season on the Kenai for guides. The rules results are open to debate ... it's forced all the guides on an already very busy river to being on the water at the same time which has made it tough on anglers wishing to fish on their on these days. I'm pretty sure the initial ruling on this was based more upon crowding issues than it was for conservation, although it has some effect there as well.

It'll open some doors of enforcement that will blow many's minds around these parts.

For a professional guide that has some overhead, 3 days a week will not allow most to make a living. You'll likely end up with lots more of the "part-time" guide crowd with such a regulation and that may not be the best end result.

To limit guide traffic (which isn't the worst thing overall), it might be best to limit guides to a specific region only for their licenses. That would help eliminate the overflow that occurs when other streams close and the remaining open streams don't get hammered as bad.

You'd probably see the same benefits to the fishery without taking away the liveliehood of those that fish rivers in the area in which they live.

"Plus, a guide who knows how to properly release fish and responsibily fish bait, may do less harm over an entire week then a good who doesn't know how to do either could do in a 3 day period."

That is a totally unsustantiated opinion.

I think a case could be made that having so many guides with customers on board fishing in a river with wild steelhead migrating in it creates a substantial impact on the fish. Guides may know alot about fish handling but their customers don't. And it is the shear numbers of fishers that guides may contribute to the problem.

Don't worry Aunty..I am not advocating this idea but just pointing to it as a possible rule if the stocks are so weak as to require restrictions of any kind. Everyone should know by now that I am for WSR and also wild salmon release..trout release....etc. (not halibut release) I am also afraid of the tide of restrictions all over the place to stop fishing in the name of conservation....No fishing zones for example that are put in place without scientific cause but just because it is the "environmental thing to do". Spills over into politics too...very small minority groups have succeeded in hijacking the courts to force things on the majority even though the majority is against the "protection" the minority is convinced is the only right way to do things.

If harvest is the focus then why not curtail harvest? DUH....First though why not determine whether harvest is the culprit and if so what kind of harvest? and who is harvesting the most....Not some feel good rule that will not get results. If the stocks are really crashing as JG points out then maybe more drastic measures are needed...IF and only if saving the wild fish is the goal and not if the goal is to clear the rivers of the Neandrathals who don;t fish right....leaving the rivers more fishable for those who are really fishing the right way.

Just some food for thought.

Bob..let me make it clear that I have been sending up trial balloons to see what the scope of this issue is besides name calling. I have nothing but respect for most guides. All my steelheading has been with guides and I don't want to see your business regulated to death and do not think the idea I floated is a necessary one. I just want to show that there is more than one way to skin the steelhead...I am learning alot about the mindset of both sides of this issue so I can be more articulate about it when it counts.

Sadly I must open myself up to flaming by pointing out that if the nets were out of our rivers we would not be having this discussion. Maybe some day that will come true. Until then we must continue to put our little fingers in the dike.

Thanks Bob for all your insight and patience on this issue.

I hope you don't hink it was your post that had the itchy finger going GP ... you asked a legit ? and I have no issue with it being discussed. Many parts of fisheries management have been tried in other areas and we can learn from the pro's and con's of each. I happen to be one of the few that fishes a lot of different fisheries, both on my own and guiding, and have seen the results of many different rules in real life.

It's one of the issues I have with the Forks city people that know very little about the fishing industry and the impacts of closures and the benefits of world-class fishing.

I was referring to the little exchange we had going while I laid down for a rare nap that had me ready to close this until your question came up

Ok Sparky if you must know The reason I think your a smuck is for 1 of 2 reasons Im not sure which but maybe you can enlighten me.

1. You might think that you have done some great thing trying to pertect wild steelhead. But I said so before the numbers of people that misshandle steelhead has to be the lowest persentage of all the things that kill a hooked steelhead. In fact I would say a light leader on a wispy fly rod kills more steelhead then the guys who dont know how to release a fish. There are far many more people that respect and handle all fish with care. Most of the jerks that mishandle fish are lowlifes anyways that when given the chance stuff the fish under the seat and hustle home anyways.
I think that you just like the attention.
aunty m pointed out that others jumped on the band wagon but you seem to point it out every few weeks with posts like sparkys law being practiced etc....I have fished my hole life and in the last 10 years only regretted turning 1 yes I said 1 bass loose that I thought might have been hooked a little to deep on a crank bait to survive. And I have released throphys from every thing from marlin to steelhead. I have let go steelhead where I could have leagly keept them. Now you come along with your way or the highway BS and decides that everybody should do it one way and one way only. get a clue, your all about making others comply with what you think is right but when people ask you why you still fish for steelhead your not willing to go the extra mile to pertect the fish that you claim to respect. And the pic that I aquired of you holding a fish out of water and posted on this web site was pretty dark and most likely pulled off a bed. I realy think you just like to attention.

2. you have hidden agends... while alot of people fish with conventional tackle (hardware) and fly rods (as I do) we all know the snobs that purest fly fishermen can be. they want special waters with lots of restrictions just so they can catch some fish.

Right from the Conversation with the F and W commissioners article in F&H news:

Commissioner R.P. Van Gytenbeek an avid fly angler initially proposed a permanent ban on retention of steelhead, when that was shot down he proposed a 6 year ban, when that was shot down Commissioner Cahill propossed a 2 year ban that barley passed.

now van geekensmeck is from seattle and he know whats best for the people out on forks so lets just bring big brother in an make sure they comply....Fly fishermen have always for a bad rap from the few who just have to have thing for themselves they have special lakes special sections of rivers etc. you know its true. Now other agendas pop into play with all the people spatting about this the nets are still in, the streams are still polluted, the gravel is being mined. there are alot worse things then a picture taken of a fish out of water. and dont think this agenda is not about some flyfishermen wanting water to themselves.


so you tell me where do you fit in...I think you should stop fishing for them if you really think they are being hurt by catch and release...com make your stand......DJ

Aunty ...We can't simply look at fisheries with an eye on financial impacts but we must include those impacts in the discussion. If I had a business in Forks I would panic too. I would also be even more upset about the tribal netting. (if that is possible). Personally i have focused on the huge imbalance between sports and commercials when it comes to economic impacts....sports win hands down if economics were the only criteria .

OK grandpa is tired now...lots of Easter leftovers to browse through....

Keep the name calling to a dull roar while I'm gone. Thanks Bob for your well balanced replies.

Ok heres an Idea.

Have a block at the license seller that gives a county of the buyers choice $5 of every license sold back to that county to spend 50% on fishing releated and 50% anyway the county wants to. Now the pay off is people who see valid county programs to clean rivers and take care of resorces payback for their actions... let the lowest form of govenment take care of the problems like it should not some flyguy from seattle. The other choise people could make would be to give money to countys with rivers that need a little help. money talks and would do some good....it would still be a choise (kinda like a vote) to reward good programs...

DJ-
First of all, I am not constantly gloating about 'Sparkey's Law'. Yes, once, I started a thread titled "Sparkey's Law Being Practiced" but it was totally tongue and cheek.

It is yourself, and the others opposed to the law that keep referring to it as Sparkey's Law and giving me the credit for the regulation. I have constantly stated that I was just one of many who sent in a proposal regarding fish handling and I was one of many that supported the proposed regulation that the WDFW passed onto the Commission.

Secondly, I would like to know what picture you are referring to. I spend alot of time fishing summer-runs in September and October on rivers that contain long-distance steelhead. Some of the fish tend to take on a darker red-side appearence in the Fall eventhough they are months from spawning. Plus, I know the type of water the fish spawn in and I never target that type of water when spawning fish maybe around. So, please do not acuse me of fishing over spawners.

Next, I want to know what my hidden agenda is. Yes I spend the vast majority of my time fishing for steelhead with the bugrod but I also spend a good number of days every year fishing with the drift rod and many of my very good freinds spend more time with the drift rod then the bug rod (if they fish the bug rod at all).

I do believe that bait should be banned on certain rivers at certain times of the year. But, that is based upon the science that has shown the high mortality rates trout face when hooked and released with bait. Why should it not be okay to kill adult wild steelhead on their way up the river but okay to slaughter (and yes I use the term slaughter) juvenille steelhead via releasing bait caught juvenille fish in the late spring and summer. I only propose Selective Fisherys when I feel that the fish will benefit...as a matter of fact I took great pleasure last week hooking two steelhead on the bug rod right in the middle of the bait water (which I actually do quite often) so I don't need Selective Waters to catch fish, I just feel at certain times they protect them.

And lastly, if you think I have some sort of hidden agenda, I will have you know that you will never see me propose a fly-only streth of river for steelhead.

You are more then welcome to make accuisations BUT please back them up.

And regarding your comment that if I think catch and release is so harmful, then why dont I stop fishing for them???...well, I will answer that again. You can minimize the mortality rate of released fish via the gear that you use and the manner that you handle the fish. And if a river is underescaped, I am the first one to say close it.

DJFISHS2XS

I would like to ask you a question, How many rivers in th state of Washington are Fly Fishing Only Year round?

This one is for Everyone

This board is split on this issue
Some talk about 5-H (you read it right)
and
Other different things not related to the issue at hand

DJ-
If this is the fish you are referring to, I do not how you can refer to that as a dark fish. Her belly is an umblemished creamy white and she is lightly suntanned. Plus, if you take a peak at the streamside foliage, you will heavily leafed trees that are just strarting to enter their fall colors.



And along those same lines, the lower rivers righht now (through early June) will recieve spawning steelhead that come in on the tide, spawn and leave...they are chromers and you would of never of known they were spawners except for a sunken and maybe a lightly darkened belly or pinkened fins etc.

Okay, this one is going the wrong direction again. If someone would like to contniue the discussion of GP's ideas, please being them up on the thread entitled "Future Steelhead Management", Thanks!