Dan, it is pretty narrow minded to say one way of harvesting fish is better then another.
They both do the same thing KILL FISH, both have the same impact, dead fish.

This issue has been debated enough. I am just glad that the commission used common since with there ruling.

No, it's a fishing state of mind. In order to kill one fish, I can likely catch and release 20 fish. Or you can catch and kill one. The net effect is the same, but since when is fishing less a good thing?

Again.........you say tomayto, I say tomahto. Narrow-minded is simply the view from where you're standing.

OK, I'm done now.

Phishinman,

I don’t think my outlook is so bleak. It’s just a perspective about the future based on consideration of the past, the condition of aquatic habitat with the present human population, and a prospective estimate of the condition of aquatic habitat with the projected increased human population. I do believe we will continue to have runs of wild salmon and steelhead in this this state quite a ways into the future. It’s just that in most cases, I don’t think they will be particularly large runs, since runsize is dictated in large part by the quantity and quality of habitat.

The OP steelhead runs remain as good as they are, not due to fisheries management, but due to the several rivers that are headwatered in the national park and the atrocious weather that knocks the rivers out of shape often enough to maintain significant spawning escapements. But for those two parameters, what makes anybody think those runs would be in any different shape than the other Washington State steelhead runs? (There is one other factor; that is the coastal rivers seem to be enjoying higher smolt to adult survival rates than Puget Sound and Columbia River tributaries, but the only management difference is WSR on most rivers, and we’ve heard repeatedly that isn’t a driving difference.)

As the human population increases, and habitat degrades, and fishing pressure increases, and WDFW supports the harvest of every calculable surplus fish, the OP runs will gradually be worn down to the point that the Commission will no longer have the luxury of extending non-treaty harvest benefits to anglers, because there will not be calculable surplus fish.

I’ve been reading a couple books about fish and fish management, Cod and King of fish. We’ve known for 400 years how to conserve fish populations. The point is that we make choices based on greed, other priorities, and indifference that cause the collapse or extirpation of valuable fisheries, regardless of the nation, form of government, or species of fish.

Sincerely,

Salmo g.

when they outlaw netting, i will voluntarily quit bonking even if its legal and I have already shook (shaken?) my son's hand on this deal.....

too bad I'll be dead and gone (so will the fish) when the nets finally come out of the water...

hey max that's a heckuva an attitude, let's all just plunder & raoe the resource while its left...

and yeah, i also fish because the voices in my head tell me to...

Whats' everyone all worked up about?
The moratorium got rescinded. Isn't that a good thing? Who would want to manage all rivers by a blanket ban in the first place. River by River management is the way to go.

That was funny Max.

On the first page Aunty M said the right thing, bury it and move on, lets hear about some fishing not a bunch of back and forth crying about who is a dick and who isnt. Both sides won, not in a sweeping manor as each was looking for, but a narrow win to say the least, go fishing and if you believe that wild fish should go back in the water to fight another day, then keep dong as you always have.If you go the other way, then so be it, continue to look for that trophy fish, and do as you always have, but it will only be one.

just running the post count up towards 100.
KK

I too believe that if a run can't support the taking of fish that it shouldn't be fished at all (net, C&R or bonk fisheries). Why would or should you be able to kill any fish when a river is under it's escapement goal? River by river management is the only way to go.

Just curious: How many native steelhead is an angler allowed to bonk each year in Idaho? Oregon? B.C.?

Easy answer, Bonking and netting of wild steelhead is a Washington state thing.. the rest of the world is smarter than that. Funny how fishing is better in Idaho, Oregon and B.C. Your fishing is headed the direction that your hunting went

I don't care how the rule was adopted!! saving wild steelhead is too important to aquabble over technicalities!!

Harvesting a wild steelhead in the state of Washington is a stupid selfish act.. any one who performs a selfish or stupid act is by deffinition selfish and or stupid.

if you oppose the moratorium you are opposed to saving wild steelhead. Plain and simple.. You cannot say it's ok to harvest a species then say you want to see their numbers increase! harvesting decreases the population so harvest and increase are an impossible combination!

That coupled with the fact that statewide millions of steelhead and tens of millions of salmon are raised in hatcheries and released into our rivers so that people will have fish to kill and eay ( yum). There is no need for anyone at any time or in any location to kill and eat a wild steelhead. Anyone who does so is selfish and stupid by deffinition and wants wild steelhead to go extinct! Your actions against wild steelhead speak louder than your words for them!

Way to go Robert Allen I have stood back and took all this in silently. But you have spoken my thoughts perfectly.......again I sit back and just read.

Steve Ng

RobertA and Steve... I agree with you in principle and have demonstrated in practice by not having punched a wild steelhead in almost 10 years while carefully releasing many. What I disagree with is your righteous attitudes that refer to others as "selfish and stupid" for not possessing a high degree of enlightenment like yourselves. Your points are lost in your arrogance.

it's not arrogance at all! it's simply a matter of fact and deffinition...


Harvesting a wild steelhead is a selfish act.. it's taking an extremely limited public resource and keeping it all to yourself.. thats the deffinition of selfish.. BY deffinition anyone keeping a wild steelhead is selfish, thinking only of himself as he takes from the resource..

As for stupid i think if you do something that intentioanly harms yourself that classifies as stupid... If you harvest a wild steelhead you are hurting your own fishing future and is therefore stupid..
I am not calling anyone names I am only defining thoes people by their actions.. just as i would call a robber selfish and stupid..

I am simply letting people define themselves by their actions!

Or in your case RA3.... words.

I think its a nice compromise!!, I do keep the ocassional native, I can count all of them on one hand up to date... but this does not make me stupid!