The "laugh test" I was referring to was not whether or not it would do what it says, which is reduce some angling pressure...the laugh test I was referring to was that it wouldn't go anywhere near accomplishing the goal of increased spawning escapement...we're all willing to accept restrictions that have tangible benefits...the only tangible benefit I see from this one is that if you prefer to fish off the bank you will not have to see so many people fishing out of boats around you.

The gain to spawning escapement, if it's even measurable at all, will be negligible...the loss of opportunity to gain an at best negligible benefit is not negligible, if it's your opportunity.

Fish on...

Todd

P.S. If you want have a geographically limited "no fishing from boats" area, put it downstream where there are 60 trailers fishing in a four mile stretch of the Sol Duc nearly every day, where it's open to actual kill a wild steelhead, and where all the guides fish. That will have an actual benefit to the fish.

What Todd said.

As much as I enjoy fishing from my anchored pontoon boat, I could live with such a regulation, though I am more uncertain as to the potential precedence it sets for future regulations to be imposed. I can appreciate providing fishing opportunity when possible especially while minimizing impacts to the resource.

The first item addresses a biological issue; the impact to juvenile mykiss and should lead to better survival. The second item is addressing a social issue, which can be more difficult because people react with emotion and there may or may not be any rationale behind it.

The area we are talking about on the Sol Duc is...

1. Remote, and difficult to row, and likely has less than 5% of the traffic of the stretches below it.

2. No bait, barbless hooks. No worries about bait divers and the like.

3. CnR for wild steelhead, so no direct harvest.

The shorter stretch downstream I alluded to above is...

1. Easy to row, and you may have to park 1/2 a mile from the launch parking lot during peak times to launch there...60 boats in a four mile stretch is not an exaggeration.

2. You can use bait, with barbs.

3. You can bonk wild steelhead.

So tell me again which stretch is the one that would make the most sense to close to boat traffic?

Oh, that's right...the one with little boat traffic, no bait and barbs already, no direct harvest, and few good bank spots.

Math out for me how many fish this will save...you can probably do it on your fingers as the final number will probably less than the amount of fingers on one hand.

Fish on...

Todd

Todd paints a pretty clear picture for the Duc. The other rivers may not be so cut and dry. I'll have to look into those a bit more.

Tiger woods should be banned from golf.....like Kobe should be banned from Lakers, and last but not least, Earl Anthony should of been banned from bowling:) ..........dont strive to dominate,you may be banned by haters!!!

.....and probably why we haven't heard more guides chime in on this one.

It's also why it's the wrong crowd of "boat fishers" to go after...find some that are actually having a measurable effect on the fish spawning.

Fish on...

Todd

That's a start. We've come so far as humans, and as a culture. I think it's time that we free them of their indian-ness, their entitlements and claims. We have done nothing but throw trillions of dollars at them for everything from housing to fish and what do they have to show for it? Nothing. They want to be sovereign nations, FINE! Then they shouldn't vote in our elections. Whoa nelly that would shake up the politics in this state more than any other. All that sweet sweet indian gaming cash to the candidate who promises to keep things exactly the way they are would be gone forever. They get to have cake and eat it too, and I am sick of it.

If you think breaking some sacred treaty promise made nearly two centuries ago is a big deal then you need a history lesson. This government hasn't upheld the language in any treaty, ever. If you think we should honor them then why don't we just go one further and give them everything west of the Mississippi River because there's a treaty that guarantees them that. The bottom line is that we need to focus on being americans, not separatist nations. But hey, they want to be the separatist, fine, we can refuse to trade with them because their fishing practices are so disgusting. We could impose tariffs on their imports to OUR country from theirs, and they could be exceptionally high on endangered species like wild steelhead. If they don't like it they can raise an army and go to war with us although that didn't work out so well for them last time around.

I hope that doesn't sound racist. I have a degree in native american studies and have spent the better part of my life thinking about this stuff.

I agree with the proposals but understand and agree with much the opposition says.

It seems that we always try to be accommodating to others when proposing regulations. The compromise is made before the regulations are proposed. We should press for more. WDFW will likely set up a no fishing from boat section on the least intrusive stretch of river, and then sit back, pat themselves on the back on what a great job they are doing in protecting wild steelhead.

While the back-patting goes on, the bait fishing and kill goes on (the WSC is proposing a year-round no-kill on wild steelhead fyi) and on certain rivers a huge % of the run will be caught and released.

Historically we have been slow to recognize our impacts on fish. We will likely look back in a few years and wonder how we could have thought that unrestricted guiding and catch and release would have no impact on spawning success. Unfortunately we will be looking back on only memories of what fishing for wild steelhead in the spring used to be like. We will point the fingers at everyone one else except the person looking back in the mirror.

If we waited to do something until everyone and everything else behaves perfectly nothing would ever get done.

Ding ding ding...we have a winner!