By "special interest", you mean people who don't agree with you, right?

Or guides who aren't really guides?

It seem the tribe has the state doing what ever they want. The current Lake Washington issue is going to tell if we are getting anywhere with the state. At least we force a meeeting. I hope the tribe stays off the wild Chinook in the Lake

Special intrest?

You mean people that actually give a sh-t about wild steelhead. WTF, why are you so hell bent on killing wild steelhead?

For someone that is so proactive on stopping logging in the Tillamook state forest for fish habitat, and for someone that has preached for fish on every board in the N.W. Why are you for killing wild steelhead on the Umpqua?

That run is nowhere what it was 50 years ago. From all of your rants on other boards in the N.W. this is a complete 90 degree turnaround.

So spill it....WTF are you really getting at?

I have an idea....just curious if you have the balls to admit it.

Doubt it.

No offense there syco, but your just not getting my point.
And that is ODFW manages wild stocks with the goal of eventually having some harvest.
And that is actually what they have done, if you feel that their science is junk, then show us where it's gone wrong.

Why not just let the native run rebuild?

Or is this thinking the first step in eliminating hatchery steelhead on the Umpqua?

I believe that the only hatchery fish present on the North Fork are strays, Ms. Jackson said that they were around 5%.
So most of the hatchery stocks would be headed for the South Fork.
If guides are worried about competition, perhaps a limited entry system could be arranged, instead of lobbying for rule changes that would cause the infrequent angler to stop fishing.

I dont believe for a minute that a few guides are just trying to eliminate some competition in the area.

From what I have witnessed, it would be in their favor to harvest wild fish. Maybe....Just maybe, they are legitmatly concerned about over harvest on lean years.

I know I am, and for that reason I dont want to see retention of wild steelhead coming back anywhere.

That is not what I'm hearing, it is in fact a red herring perpetrated by the guides in order cut down on the fishing pressure.
A similar situation occurred on the middle Rouge River with Sept-Oct bait ban.
All in the name of conservation, but the real reason was cutting out some of the competition.
I talked to a ODFW employee who attended the Roseburg meeting, and it is common knowledge what is going on.
It also looks like the bogus two month Rogue bait ban will be resined as well.

Funny....Thats not what I am hearing.

Done with you.

Your not worthy.

Give me a friggin' break Barney and you should know this. ODFW is just trying to sell licenses and they will try to do so on the backs of wild fish.
I do not trust one word they say and have been to plenty of meetings to justify that lack of trust.
Leave the wild steelhead alone.

So it's a ODFW conspiracy to rid the rivers of wild steelhead? Give me a friggin break Stew.
If you can come up with any facts other than what has already been brought up, mainly hairy eyeball individual opinions, then let's see them.
Is it your believe that ODFW fisheries management needs to turn away from science?
Laying off all those idiots would really make their budget crisis a lot easies to solve.
Do your homework Stew, you'll sound a lot smarter.

No, it's my belief that their science is garbage.

It's the same science that was used to mismanage fish in Washington and Oregon to their current state.

Put your f'n science to the test, freespool. Predict a run size. Then do it again when ocean conditions change.

Then be ready to admit the "science" in fisheries isn't like science everywhere else where people expect accuracy, abitlity to make predictions, and testability.

Look around you. Look at all the rivers that used to have "harvestable numbers of wild fish" according to WDFW and ODFW. How many have harvestble numbers now? That's called a proven track record of failure.

So stop making false accusations, stop peddling bullsh!t C&R mortality figures, and stop blaming "special interests" when your own interests are "special interests" and then YOU'LL sound a lot smarter.

To me this thread is beyond ridiculous. Has anyone even looked at the runs over winchester over the last 10 years? THE NATIVE RUN IS NOT IN TROUBLE ON THE UMPQUA.

Take a look: http://www.dfw.state.or.us/fish/fish_counts/winchester/2008/april.asp

The north alone averages nearly 10,000 natives/year. Besides those, ODFW figures all the lower tribs of the mainstem support at least that many or more. Add those to the south umpqua and you're talking about 20-30K/year. All the lower maintstem tribs are closed to fishing.

As freespool already pointed out, ODFW is, and should be, trying to manage our fisheries to recover to a point that allows sustainable harvest. Native fish advocates were up in arms (and still are) about the broodstock program on the nestucca. Some said the run was big enough to allow limited wild harvest rather than let the broodstock program go through. The run is estimated at around 10K (which is probably optimistic). This situation shows what native fish people are really about... If we cant have a limited harvest on wild steelhead on the umpqua then every coastal trib should be closed to harvest of any species. God, what a utopia that would be. The Native Fish Society could finally rejoice and all the fish would be saved, forever, and for everyone.

Oregonians should be proud to have a river like the Umpqua that is healthy enough to allow harvest. Washingtonians should remember we dont have indians running around trying to kill the last steelhead and try not to act like experts regarding a river they know nothing about.

Dom

Thanks Todd.

Added my name to the list.