Not sure why a double post happened sorry.

JJ

So with overwhelming numbers of supporters of keeping the Moratorium, better arguments/reasons to keep the Moratorium that would only last 2 year (come on people, 2 years is NOT THAT LONG and it would be BETTER FOR THE FISH) and the Commisions still backs out of it's decision because a few, small amount of people want to kill some of the last wild steelhead?

No wonder our fish stocks are almost non existant. :rolleyes:

Do I see over hundred post on this??? 21 posts in the last hour

Because I don't fish for Wild Steelhead it doesen't bother me with a 1 fish limit.Now if I do get one worthy of a wall fish I have that chance.
Now that WDFW is in overall agreement that the runs need to be managed individually that sounds alot better to me than a blanket ban.
The back door has been shut Zen and will be a little harder to stick there foot in

Hey, look at it like this.. If every person thats registered on this site kept 1 wild fish a year from the rivers in question.. there would be " none".. left. The thing that is so perplexing about the whole deal is you are talking about such a small number of fish all total.

Suspect next time this issue comes around it will be in the form of an ESA listing which means you can just put your rods away

I'll go and spend my money over in forks and tell them that they did a "hell of a job" with this moratorium. Was against it from the beginning. If this sort of strategy worked, then all of the north end rivers would be streaming with fish. Where are they? Nets don't release fish and until that gets resolved there will be no real change on any of our rivers............................Fishy...........

They could have at least exempted tiny streams like Goodman Creek from the kill list.
I'd like to hear more on the involvement by the AG.

How does this effect the tribal netting

If the tribes get to net during the wild runs, then we should be able to fish.
Stop the nets and I will gladly stop fishing during that same time.

SoMethingsmellsfishy>>>Right ON brother!

It's a done deal and it's a fair compromise. I can live with it.

As for punishing Forks... Sorry, but I won't support such an action. There are many people that don't deserve the aniomosity and loss of business. Give em a break. They did what they felt they needed to. Surely we would expect our own Mayors/communities to fight that hard for us.

Time to bury the hatchet and move on.

The Mayor of Forks needs to realize that the wild fish belong to everyone now and in the future not just the people of Forks. Anyone that advocates killing wild Salmon,steelhead or trout in NW rivers in this day and age has no concept of conservation.

The King, you need to be more civil on this part of the board. You know what I edited out and I don't want to see that again!

AuntyM,

I won't spend money in Forks until they get rid of their mayor. I was fine with Forks and their opposition to the moratorium. But when the mayor started putting me down because I chose to use a fly rod is when I decided not to support the town. I can't vote in the Forks mayorial election but I can certainly boycott the town for their choice of mayor and I will. I am not an urban elitist fly fisherman. Hell I live in a small logging community not to different from Forks and if our mayor had made some of the comments the mayor of Forks has made I would damn sure not vote for him or her either.

Wow a little MOD action Please!!!!!Calling names after the fact aint cool.
NEWS RELEASE
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
September 2, 2004
Contact: (WDFW) Craig Bartlett, (360) 902-2259
(Commission) Susan Yeager, (360) 902-2449

Commission reverses wild steelhead ban, adopts annual one-fish rule on 12 rivers


OLYMPIA – The Washington Fish and Wildlife Commission today reversed a measure it approved last February that imposed a two-year moratorium on retaining any wild steelhead caught in state waters.


By a unanimous vote, the nine-member commission instead will allow anglers to retain one wild steelhead per year on a dozen rivers – all but one of which is on the Olympic Peninsula – affected by the moratorium.


The new annual limit for those rivers, which takes effect Oct. 3, is more conservative than the annual five-fish limit in effect before the moratorium was enacted last spring, said Will Roehl, commission chair.


“For all the discussion about what the annual limit should be on those rivers, any long-term decisions about steelhead management need to be based on the best available science,” Roehl said.


Toward that end, the commission has directed the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) to update its comprehensive plan for managing steelhead throughout the state. That plan, now being developed in conjunction with treaty tribes and other interested parties, is scheduled for completion in late 2006.


Rivers and streams affected by today’s action by the commission include the Bogachiel, Calawah, Clearwater, Dickey, Goodman, Green, Hoh, Hoko, Pysht, Quillayute, Quinault and the Soleduck.


Anglers must still release any wild steelhead caught on all other rivers and streams throughout the state. Hatchery-bred steelhead, which represent the majority of the annual catch statewide, are not subject to that rule, but are managed according to daily catch limits established on a river-by-river basis.


Citing scientific recommendations by WDFW for the 12 affected rivers, Roehl was one of several commissioners who questioned the biological need for a an outright ban on wild-steelhead retention. Others expressed concerns about the lack of consultation with treaty tribes and the public before the moratorium was adopted last February.


“This time, we got the word out and had plenty of public input,” said Roehl, noting that the commission received more than 800 letters, e-mails and petitions on the moratorium today’s vote, which followed a public meeting dedicated to the issue Aug. 28 in Bremerton

Jerry,

Would you look into Ron's complaint? Thanks.
Zen

I was working for money guys and dealt with it as soon as I saw it.

Let's keep a cool head about this people. I think the compromise that the commission came to is OK. We have gone from 2 fish per day, 30 fish per year in 2001--- to 1 fish per day, 5 fish per year in 2002--- to 1 fish period in 2004. I would call that progress.

I knew this was going to be a bad day!

This was not a compromise one a year is just as bad as five per year. We wont see any drop in the overall harvest nymbers.

We got screwed by the state again.

Everyone in the WDFW deserves to be fired. They have done nothing positive for our fish and wildlife. Between the state and the tribes they will have it no other way than to bonk the last wild steelhead swimming in washington state and replace them with hatchery fish.

I mean what I just said Not one single individual working for the state has done any justice in my mind. In the back pocket of the tribes and comercials is all I have seen.

Thanx Jerry ,I think that people can get a bit to excited and say things that arn't to kind.

Nooo... REALLY?

The day just is getting worse. Ruined my day at work and now I just toasted a box hear while setting it up.

Rich while I think that a lot of the people in the department related to steelhead have never build enough if any buffer into rivers, ie the Hoh and some deserve to be fired but some of them do work very hard and do do a good job. I won't throw the baby out with the bath water here. I tell you what if over the last 10 years here working at a big software company all but 12 of my projects failed when they numbered in the 50s I would be gone a long time ago an we would have tried something different.

JJ