I know this flies against the grain on this forum - but here's the letter I wrote to the WDFW on the issue of the Steelhead Moratorium.

Whether you agree or disagree however is not as important as letting the WDFW know your thoughts on the subject.

-----------------------------------------------------------
Dear Commission Members,

In regards to the Moratorium on retaining any wild steelhead, I would ask that you reconsider your position.

I should first say that I have not kept a wild steelhead in years, and plan on doing my personal part for the fish by not doing so in the future. I would venture that a huge percentage of steelhead fishermen in Washington feel the same way.

However, a state wide moratorium flies in the face of scientific management. Whether or not wild steelhead are kept in any given river should be determined on the strength of the run in that given system. If a wild run is healthy, or becomes overabundant, in a given system it only makes sense to give anglers the opportunity to harvest some of the fish form there.

Another wrinkle has to do with the definition of wild steelhead. From an anglers point of view, whether a fish is wild or not doesn't have to do with whether or not it was raised In a hatchery, but whether or not it has a clipped adipose fin. In some river systems (The Wenatchee is an example), hatchery fish do not have their fins clipped. The reasons for non-clipping vary, but sometimes it appears to do with how much money is available for this function in the WDFW budget. To deny an angler the opportunity to keep a non-fin clipped fish from a run that is experiencing an healthy or overabundant run of fish in this case would be simply unfair.

All of us want wild steelhead to make a comeback and be healthy in the rivers of our state. However, imposing a blanket moratorium on retaining them is not the answer. Instead, I would ask for careful management of these fish (to include limited or no retention where warranted) on a river by river basis.

Thank you for considering my opinion on this matter.

Blah, blah, blah. Once again, once the steelhead are gone, they are gone. Why not err on the side of conservation? There is NO good reason we should be allowing the killing of wild fish. There are plenty(and I mean plenty) of hatchery fish to kill and eat. Come on now. I filled my freezer with hatchery fish this year, why in hell would I want to kill a magnificent wild fish? Just because I can? There are lots of things I CAN do, but don't because they are stupid, immoral, or just wrong. I sure hope this is upheld, or I will be truly dissappointed with our system(once again).

So.... how could a run of wild steelhead be " over abundant ".... Give us an example of a place where there are too many wild fish ????

Funny how most of the people who are against WSR also claim that they themselves have never killed one

In the unlikely event that "scientific management" can be quantified in an objective measure of fact, void of political and economic influences, perhaps a few wild fish could be killed. Unfortunately that day is never going to occur. Release all wild steelhead.

But santiago, "don't you know that WDFG employs some of the brightest and most gifted minds in wildlife management?"

santiago: "But of course. I just can't help remembering when some of the best minds in medical surgery removes someone's right kidney when it was the left one that was diseased."

JMHO, I know nothing.

Conservation sure has done "wonders" here on the puget sound rivers, they are just overflowing with abundance on "wild" steelhead...................Fishy.........

I'm more than satisfied to just be able to have an opportunity to catch and release a wild steely. If I'm lucky enough to hook one and play it to the bank or boat, I don't need or desire to bonk it. These are magnificent fish.

Knowing how few of these fish return to our rivers, it seems to me that if we allow the stocks a chance to build back up there might just be some around for our kids and our grandkids.

If sport fishers give up the "right" ( for at least the moratorium period ) to keep any wild fish it surely will put the focus soley on the tribes as they will be the only ones taking these fish. Wouldn't it be great, for future generations, if EVERYONE sacrificed a little to improve this situation a lot?

Like Steeliegreg said, "once the steelhead are gone, they are gone."

Release a wild fish......it feels sooooo good!

I thought the letter was very well written.
You are correct in asking about the definition of wild steelhead ie the Wenatchee river and others where hatchery fish are not clipped.
The problem is if they give any leeway in the regulations. Who's to know for sure (other than a biologist) if you have kept a hatchery or a wild fish.
We need to set an example as sportsfishermen to the Indians and the commercials that We will not condone the taking of any wild Steelhead in this state.
Will the comercials still hide wild steelhead under boat seats and give them away to friends and neighbors? Probably.
Will this keep the indian nets out of the water when the wild Steelhead are running? Nope.
Will this give us us some political clout when we set the example? Most definetly in my opinion.
The only way out of this mess is for all of us to work together!
Ramprat

"If a wild run is healthy, or becomes overabundant, "

an over abundance of wild steelhead has never happened in any river a any time in the history of the world..

Hey, I'm starting to know what it feels like to be a worm under a bobber in an overpopulated bluegill pond! Oh well - I knew it was coming with the posting.

Having said that - I use the words "overabundant" and "healthy" with an eye as much towards the future as towards the present.

We do have a few healthy runs of steelhead at present.

Some of these runs are in Eastern Washington in the tributaries of the Upper Columbia. These fisheries have been severely limited or shut down to to ESA considerations since 1997 - despite record or well above average runs for four years ina row.

Re. overabundance - anglers were told to go fishing on the Methow last December to harvest hatchery fish that were crowding the spawning grounds there. Unfortunately, only a minority of the hatchery fish were clipped, and the run was closed days later when an estimated number of wild fish (defined as both wild fish and hatchery fish without a fin clip) were caught and released with a 5 percent mortality rate.

So at least in one case - we did have an overabundance of fish on the spawning beds.................though perhaps this story needs to go on a whole other topic.

As usual...I ramble...and I'll pay the price for it in the sharp dissecting posts to follow I'm sure.

sorry ramprat but setting good examples will not get you the political clout it takes to change anything to do with fisheries. Sports fishers have sacrificed the most and set the most good examples and have gotten the brown end of the stick every time. Mass marking of all hatchery fish is the only way this is ever going to work. Things are moving in that direction thank goodness. If the moratorium makes you feel good because you are doing your part and setting a good example then fine but the tribes will catch so many wild steelhead that their actions based on catching because they can will trump anything you could ever do to save the wild steelhead. You really have not solved anything but damn you sure feel all puffed up and proud now don't you. I'm afraid that the final decision will not be made based on how many feel good speeches are made at the next meeting but it will be made on the best available science. Had that been the case the first time around we wouldn't be having another meeting now would we. One thing that will really have no effect at all is the name calling rants that we get a small glimpse of here.

noobs

So basically what I'm hearing is that WDFW has the best available sceince. So nobody can take the facts that WDFW has assembled and come up with a different answer? It certainly appears that the HSRG(hatchery sceintific review group) disagreed with some of the practices of WDFW as their sceince relates to hatcheries.

NWmallard,

Good letter and nice to see original thinking.

Everyone has to make their own mind up on how they stand on this subject.

Bill W

Ban all nets / Release all native steelhead.
Good luck,
STRIKE ZONE

I have never understand why, when we lack a consensus as to what is "good science", people think it's acceptable to err on the side of our recreational activities. Haven't we got enough proof that we can screw things up, even with good intentions?

Cut the fish some slack. It's got to be a hell of a lot easier (read=cheaper and less strain on resources) to eliminate wild c-n-k fisheries statewide than to *accurately* assess each individual run's health, particularly since it's a moving target with so many variables.

I do agree, though, that all hatchery fish should be marked.

Great Letter.

Seems that alot of the people that want to hang their hats on WDFW's best available science as it relates to wild steelhead are some of the same ones that question the numbers for Lake Washington sockeye. puget sound crab and Hood Canal Spot Shrimp. Same WDFW science.

Grandpa
You are right I agree all hatchery fish should be clipped.
And what you call feel good speeches will only work if you are running for president.
And you are also right in realizing that all decisions will be made by science.
The same science that has helped and hurt our fish runs.
I also agree that us sports fishermen generally get the brown end of the stick.
So? what do we do?
Personally if there ever comes a time when I can't keep a fish then I will hang up my rods. That is what hatchery fish are for.
If they close the hatcheries and don't let us keep any Steelhead I will have some real nice rods for sale!
Well maybe not There's always salmon (so far anyway)
Ramprat

The tribal netting I have seen out on the OP is sick. The hellwith those idiots. Let them rot with their idiotic practices like a moldy salmon on a hot beach. I support the moratorium and if anything give the tribes some cash to subsudize their murder of native steelhead, and maybe throw in 100 cases of milwaukee's best ice for good measure. What a waste of a lot of good things. Not satisfied with the filthy practices of the OP tribes well go out to the canal for some good old murdering of salmon, crab, oysters, etc.

A caution about scientific management and the "best available science." The best science allegedly has been used to manage Atlantic salmon for over 200 years and now the species is extirpated or extremely depressed in over 90% of its original range. The best science allegedly has been used to manage Atlantic cod for the past 400 years, and now most of the world's formerly best cod fisheries are extirpated or severely depressed. No more Grand Banks or Georges Banks fisheries. The best science of its time was used to manage the Columbia River salmon fishery into 10% of its former self. Just like the best science was used to manage wild steelhead from harvestable numbers in most west coast rivers of the lower 48 to, if we're lucky enough for today's best science to be correct for a change, a small handful of rivers containing harvestable wild steelhead.

Science - good, best available, or what-have-you, is a composite of many things. Precision and accuracy have proven to be elusive more often than not. I wouldn't count on science alone to demonstrate that a few remaining OP rivers have wild steelhead in such abundance that harvest is sustainable. History alone indicates such a belief is a delusion.

I am a scientist, and I approved this message.

Sincerely,

Salmo g.