hello fellow fishermen,
how has the fishing been lately? i am writing in regards to many of the comments i have read concerning catch and release. i am not a frequent follower of this web page, however,the few times i have dropped in i am usually amazed at the number of people who feel that catch and release is a healthy alternative to catching and killing wild fish. lets start here: rainbow trout or steelhead being the anadramous form, evolved about two million years ago, a creation of divergence somewhere between the columbia river and snake river valleys, the rainbow diverged from what we now know to be a cutthroat trout. recently, work in russia, indicates that steelhead and cutthroat trout probably originated (in the evolutionary sense) somwhere in siberia, probably due to a combination of advancement and retreat of glaciers during the miocene glaciation, this is important, most american biologists currently feel that north america is the evolutionary birth place of our salmonids, this is not the case. now, further into the subject, if steelhead evolved into the form we recognize now around two million years ago then the steelhead we fish for now contain an enormous resevoir of genetic potential to draw upon. this is very important, because humans have only been scientifically researching the fish for about 75-100 years, a very short time span compared to the two million years of evolution that followed several more million years of evolution that lead to the cutthroat trout. almost done here, now i would also like to say that in russia, up to 75 % of the steelhead return to spawn twice, up to 50% of the steelhead return to spawn 3 times, and 35 % of the fish spawn 4 times, wow! and incredibly they have recorded fish that have spawned up to 8 times. this is not shocking, our streams used to have the same genetic potential to draw from, the russian studies are current, we are talking about steelhead directly across from canada that spawn several more times than our fish and have significantly higher survival rates. why? well, lets knock out commercial fishing, it takes place on both coasts and russia does not have a sport fishery, this was closed in the 1980's because of a decline in the fish population, we now know that PDO's (pacific decadel oscillations) could have played a role in the decline of fish populations. so, why do they still have fish left, well, 1. the streams in siberia are nutrient poor, even more so than our coastal streams, but, THEY DO NOT DESTROY HABITAT AT THE RATE AMERICANS DO, example: we continue to log up to stream banks and leave minimal, if any at all, buffer zones. destroy the habitat and you destroy the ability of the fish to adapt to habitat change because the millions of years of evolutionary adaptations do not account for logging! understand.
2. THEY DO NOT HAVE HATCHERIES! this is huge, the russian fish are the only salmonids not affected by gene flow or direct ecological competition from hatchery fish. ps. read article in "fishin hole magazine regarding steelhead sex" the fish are genetically unchanged from millions of years ago

3. MISMANAGMENT and this is why i wrote you BOB, catch and release is a good step for fisherman, however, catch and release is now being researched and the work indicates that a fish being caught one time and then released has a 5% mortality rate, so if we have one fish being caught several times throughout a season then the mortality rate could increase significantly, especially considering the high level of stress the fish are already under when they enter a severly degraded river system. we no longer have healthy population structures in our river systems, we have little or no jack steelhead, and the largest fish( the largest female fish carry more eggs, larger eggs and those larger eggs produce larger fry, the larger fish are more likely to survive in the natural system, the larger fish are usually more agressive also, thus, more likely to be caught, and how many of YOU GUYS out there would release a 30lb fish, not many i bet, well you better start, in fact we should close portions of the river down during the time of the year that steelhead and other salmonids are getting ready to spawn, spawning fish are agressive and already facing an enormous amount of stress and protein depletion due to the physical exertion required for survival in our streams. UNDERSTAND< CATCH AND RELEASE IS ONLY AN EXCUSE TO FURTHER DEPLETE THE ENDANGERED POPULATIONS OF SALMONIDS WE HAVE, LET ALONE JACK ASS LOCAL GUIDES WHO FEEL THAT BRINGING IN PEOPLE FROM ALL AROUND THE NATION TO HAMMER A SPECIES OF FISH WHO IS ON ITS LAST LEGS, IF YOU ARE A FISHERMAN, OR A SPORTSMAN, LISTEN, WE HAVE ALL PLAYED A ROLE IN THE DEMISE OF THESE FISH, LETS LOOK AT OURSELVES, AND THE PEOPLE WHO PAY MONEY TO KILL WILD FISH, PEOPLE WHO CONTRIBUTE NOTHING TO THE HARD WORK THAT GOES INTO CONSERVING AND RESEARCHING THE FISH, THEY ARE JUST THE KIND OF PEOPLE THAT MANY SMALL TOWNS CLAIM TO DISLIKE, BIG CITY, BIG SPENDERS WHO ARE NOT CONNECTED TO NATURE IN ANY WAY, THEY DRIVE 40000$ CARS AND USE THE MOST ELABORATE AND EXPENSIVE GEAR, HOWEVER, TO MAKE A BUCK, THE LOCAL GUIDES ARE WILLING TO SELL THEIR INTEGRITY AND HONOR TO HARASS THE FEW REMAINING WILD FISH, WAKE UP MAN.......


------------------

gotta big one!!!

Whew, Ralphy-me-boy, got yer stem up Eh? Well yer right, they should close the upper portions of steelhead streams to sport fishing, and you know what ralph? In many cases they do. And your allso right about all these sport fishermen hammering the rivers. If they would close the rivers and leave the fish alone they would do alot better. Yep, just the fish the river the poachers and the indians.I don't mean to make light of your comments, I have felt many of the same things recently. But after spending a little more time getting involved in the politics of fisheries I have come to some new conclusions. If W.D.F.W. Is going to do anything they are goning to need more money, If they close the fisheries they will get less money. They won't even connsider going manditory catch and release on wild fish. By your own admission C&R is less damaging than a kill fishery(C&R fish suffer a 5% mortallity c&keep fish don't do so well). If you look around ralph, you will see that catch and release fisheries have been very succseful in many area's with many differnt fish stocks, including steelhead. Rivers with critically low stocks should be closed to all angling, and patrolled. In rivers with stronger stocks what is the harm in opening up certain sections to catch and release only angling. It reduces the crowds and gives a person a chance at a more relaxing angling experience. And the fish a better chance at making it up to the headwaters. Are you telling me I shouldn't be allowed to release a fish even if I don't want to kill it? Or that I shouldn't be allowed to fish? Oh, yea one more thing, I have never had the oppertunity to release a thirty pound steelhead, but I released a pretty damn big fly caught native on the Sol Duc yeterday, and if he had been twelve pounds heavier I still would have. I couldn't kill a thirty pound native.

Do you think you are telling any of us anything new, man? You sound like you have a chip on your shoulder about somethin. We know that habitat is being destoyed, we know hatcheries are bad,we know about catch and release mortality. I think maybe you should look at what people here are saying a little closer. We want healthy fish runs in this state. And yes we also want to fish for them.This is what we do for enjoyment. We are attempting to find a balance.Find a balance even tho we know that our mere existence on this planet is not only detrimental to fish but to countless other things in nature. I dont know what you do for enjoyment. But i guarantee you it hurts something in nature somewhere.Somewhere, somehow between getting off our asses and restoring habitat,clamping down on logging and commercial fishing among other things, and practicing catch and release, alot of us are looking for an answer. Go ahead and shut down sportfishing, think that is going to save fish? We are among the only people who know or care about the fish (besides green freaks) Chuck

Your letter was very factual and a little mean spirited. Yes, catch and release does increase the mortality of steelhead. But, most of the programs to save or protect steelhead were originated by fisherman, who have seen changes and because there is no big money interest at stake for them, they try and do something about it. Do, you think the owner of a dam looks at the depleting number fish and says, "Gee, maybe we should tell the public about this." or maybe someone who logged irresponsibly, notices that the brown muddy runoff is slowly erasing the once gravel bottom, might say this could be affecting the spawning beds. No. Granted catch and release is not a completely safe means of "surveying", but no other means besides fisherman see so much of the water that hold steelhead. State programs are under funded and models are inaccurate. Private industry surveying is to stay within compliance and avoid fines.
Regarding your comment on guides...These guys take people who don't normally fish and show them the fishing experience. The clients get to see what a steelhead is and the habitat that the fish live in. So when an issue comes up on a ballot regarding protection, these people might understand it a little better. Now, I don't believe that most fisherman think about all of the above, when they do all the fishing activities that they do. But, I don't think that catch and release is as big as an evil as you make it out to be.
Good luck fishing---mike korenko

I have a question for you Ralph? Have you ever traveled out of "your" state to hunt or fish. I hope not, or you were an outsider. I have, and I have a few things to tell you.

First of all, to hang a tag on outsiders as fish killers is ludicrous. I don't have the privelage to live where there are steelheads, as I have moved away from where I went to high school, so subsequently, all of my steelie fishing is conducted as an "outsider". I see locals where I fish throw crap on the banks, kill fish left and right, kill suckers or rough fish that are foul hooked and thrown on the bank to rot. I've turned them in to the Game wardens for spearing steelies in the shallows at night. In this regard, I am dam proud to be an "outsider". I let more fish go than most people catch in the rivers I fish. You can bet your sweet cheeks that if I caught a 30 pound steelhead that it would be let go. I have caught many "big" fish and they are all swimming. The only mounts that are in my house are graphite, or dead critters that were shot. They haven't come up with a way to catch and release trophy deer yet, but when they do, I'll be first in line. By the way, I do pass up deer on a yearly basis, that would make guys wet themselves. Doesn't mean I'm Joe Pro, just that I like to be around these animals as much or more than whacking them with a bow, or shooting them with a rifle or black powder. I have four kids, and don't drive a $40,000 vehicle, and I save every penny I can to do the two things I love most. HUNTING AND FISHING. I am going to Alaska this spring to fish for native steelies, a dream that I have had since I was 14 years old. I'm 37 now, and I have waited long enough. It has taken me 5 years to save for this trip, and I'm not ashamed of it. You can also bet the farm on the fact that a cooler won't be part of the gear that I bring back. Pictures and measurements will work just fine. I can't wait to come to Washington and catch one of your big native steelies, and I won't keep one even if its a new state record. I don't have anything to prove to anyone. I quit having to kill fish to show people I could catch them when I was in 10th grade.

I wouldn't bash the guides too hard, because it sounds like they are doing a hell of a lot more to protect the resource than most of the people who be-little them. I don't get paid to guide, but I do take new people over to Michigan, Ontario, and Wisconsin to steelhead fish. I try to teach them to treat the fish, fishermen, and river with respect. If these people don't learn that way, how is it going to happen. I wish Bob and these guides could take all the people in places of influence and show them first hand what is going on in regards to this prescious resource. Seeing is believing.

Everyone has their own agenda. Bottom line in the real world is that money talks. Will you be the first one to stand in line to pay for a punch card that allows you to take less fish. It worked with the waterfowl a few years back, and it can work with fish. If you want the fish to rebound, pay for a liscense, and don't harvest any of the fish (hatchery or nates) for a couple of years. then you'll find out what guys really love to fish. My question to you is, Are you willing to make that sacrifice". It would not take long, and the bonkers and plunkers will be sitting at home watching ESPN outdoors and drinking beer.

All of the out door opportunities are turning back to the way it was in England centuries ago. A rich mans sport, Take some time and work through your legislature to make changes, and don't elect these bums who don't care. I can find you a million guys who are quick to point out a problem, but not many who will work towards a resolution. Be part of the solution, not part of the problem. I'm off my pedestal now.

Mr Hotmail ... why are you hiding your Olypen address??? This is all old news ... Sorry, I don't really get the point of your post ... a lot of rambling and then pointing a finger at me ... for what? I've never claimed C&R is perfect. Or are you just against fishing period? Oh by the way, I HAVE released thirty pound fish before.

hello folks,
OUCH!!
1. bob, howdy, hiding? hmmmm.....i just enjoy the aspects of free email, cheap i guess. im not against fishing, i do fish myself, however, i limit my days and times to periods of the year when i am least impacting the ecosystem. im not against catch and release, however, i see now that i didn't clarify myself well enough, 5% mortality rates for catch and release = 5% per each time the fish is caught, now if the fish is caught twice that = 10% mortality rate, if the fish is caught three times = 15% mortality rate, etc. a cumulative effect, now i imagine that most of us have had the experience of catching the same fish more than one time and sometimes in the same day, such an experience is a gift, maybe enlightenment, a window into the understanding of what we are doing as human beings. i praise you for releasing thirty pound fish, that is admirable. now, if we look at the concept of catch and release as an entirety then we can begin to see the cumulative effects of any fishery on the health of the fish population. example, when the river system becomes full of smolt and fry, there are a usually a good amount of fisherman on the river, so, these aggressive little guys are known for skewering themselves on flies, lures, bait, etc. and i guarantee that these little guys are caught several times throughout the fishing season, statistics are not exact, so i would not guarantee a fish that is caught 20 times automatically rolls over and kicks the bucket, but, do you think that fish is going to be healthy after experiencing such a situation, i doubt it, and if we think of darwin and the theory of evolution, we know that the fittest survive, right, and the fittest are usually the biggest and strongest, how do those fish get that way? well they are born bigger usually, but their aggressive behavior stems from their larger size and thus, aggressive feeding behavior is probably the norm for the genetically superior fish in the population, do you follow, example: most of us know dogs, or have had dogs, especially puppies, ever notice how the largest of the puppies in the pack dominates the food source, the same applies to nature, thus, out of the hundreds of smolts that are caught each year it is probable that the first ones to be caught(and probably several times which increase the cumulative effects of catch and release = probable death). so i hope that clears up the catch and release stats. it is dangerous, and only a few streams have responded positively to catch and release (most of those streams being in canada)

2. OUR STOCKS OF FISH ARE NOT HEALTHY, THEY ARE A FRACTION OF THE POPULATION THAT EVEN EXISTED 100 YEARS AGO, THUS NONE OF US DESERVE THE RIGHT TO FISH FOR, KILL OR CATCH AND RELEASE THESE FISH, IT IS A LUXURY!!!
3. thank you jim for your response, rivers with critically low stocks should be closed to fishing and certain streams can handle limited catch and release fisheries, however, i would not give people such as bruce crawford at WDFW another dime of money, wdfw relies upon minimal escapement levels that they believe support the bottom line genetic capacity to return the stock to its original pattern of genetic diversity, bottom line MOST OF WDFW IS RUN BY PEOPLE WHO PROBABLY WANT TO DO GOOD WORK, HOWEVER, THE POLICY PEOPLE AND PEOPLE IN CHARGE OF THE SYSTEM KEEP THE GOOD BIOLOGISTS QUIET. WDFW HAS A CHECKERED PAST AT BEST, DO WE WANT TO RELY ON AN AGENCY THAT HAS NEVER PROVEN TO BE STRONG OR INTELLIGENT ENOUGH TO HANDLE THE SALMONID SITUATION, IF I HIRE SOMEONE TO DO A JOB AND THEY NEVER DO THE WORK CORRECTLY, FOR OVER 50 YEARS, THEN I AM GOING TO FIRE THEM! COMPRENDE'

BACK AGAIN GUYS

BACK AGAIN GUYS,

okay, now back to the lecture
i think what the guides are doing on the sol duc is a good thing, not very organized or scientific, but probably beneficial to the genetic integrity of the steelhead population, so kudos to the fellas doing work on the pond.

CHUCK, IF IT ISN'T NEW NEWS, THEN WHY THE HELL ARE PEOPLE STILL VOTING FOR SLADE GORTON, YOU ARENT GOING TO HAVE HEALTHY FISH RUNS FOR SOME TIME, WHO KNOWS HOW LONG IT WILL TAKE TO REHAB THE POPULATIONS, FISHING IS A LUXURY, NOT A NECESSITY, LETS CLAMP DOWN TIGHTER ON LOGGING, MAKE COMPANIES SUCH AS RAYONIER AND WEYERHAUSER, COMPANIES THAT RAPE THIRD WORLD COUNTRIES ACROSS THE GLOBE, LOOK AT THEIR WEBSITES GUYS, IT IS NOT THE LOGGERS, NOT THE SMALL GUY, IT IS THE CORPORATE JERK SITTING IN AN EXPENSIVE LEATHER CHAIR TALKING SUSHI WHO PULLS THE TRIGGER, LET THE COMPANIES KNOW, WE HAVE SIX BILLION PEOPLE ON THIS EARTH RIGHT NOW, THE POPULATION IS GROWING EXPONENTIALLY, AND FAST, WATCH OUT BECAUSE TIMBER COMPANIES WILL HAVE NOTHING LEFT TO LOG IN 20 YEARS, LET US BE THE BIG GUYS IN THE SITUATION AND BE THE FIRST TO STEP BACK AND QUIT FISHING FOR AWHILE.

FINALLY, BOB, CHUCK, AND HAWK, ARE YOU FISHERIES BIOLOGISTS? EVEN SO, DO YOU COMPREHEND THE PERIOD OF TIME OVER WHICH SALMONIDS EVOLVED, DO YOU THINK THAT THE FISH RUNS ARE HEALTHY ENOUGH TO FISH. now let me respond to hawk, would guides provide volunteer work in an attempt to restore fish populations without a fishery, in other words, without putting a buck in bobs wallet, well i think most would, but not all, HAWK I GUESS YOU ARE AN ORNITHOLOGIST TOO, DO YOU THINK ALL WATERFOWL POPULATIONS ARE HEALTHY, HMMMM....YOU MAKE BIOLOGY SOUND SIMPLE, LEGISLATURE HAS DONE NOTHING TO PROMOTE EDUCATION OR THE NECESSARY SACRAFICES THAT IT WILL TAKE TO PROMOTE FISH RESTORATION, THE CORPORATE BUCK IS IN THEIR WALLET TOO. GOOD LUCK GUYS, I ENJOY THE BEAUTY OF THE WORLD EACH DAY, CAN YOU DO THE SAME WITHOUT EXPLOITING OUR DEGRADED EARTH, LET US ALL TAKE A STAND, WE HAVE A COMMON GROUND, WE LOVE TO FISH AND CARE ABOUT NATURE, KICK SLADE GORTON OUT OF OFFICE AND REPLACE NORM DICKS AND GARY LOCKE WITH PEOPLE WHO HAVE AN OUNCE OF EDUCATION CONCERNIONG BIOLOGY, GENETICS, EVOLUTION, ECOSYSTEMS, GEOMORPHOLOGY, ETC. BYE

(Regarding your second message)
Again you state your catch and release mortality ,5%. Yes, it is additive, I don't think the concept was that difficult the first time you brought it up. Thanks for the lesson in darwin evolution. Yes, fish stocks and genetic purity of the stocks are not the same as 100 years ago. Yes, fishing is a luxury. I guess I am having trouble understanding your point. Do you have a solution or just need to rant and rave? Should we all stop fishing? Perhaps you just need a hug.
fish on ---mike
(regarding your third message)

perhaps you should start the steelhead militia movement. you go buddy




[This message has been edited by KORE (edited 03-12-99).]

Habitat destruction is the main problem everything from lack of shade to motor oil.

They do have salmon hatcheries in Russia I believe. I am in favor of hatcheries in rivers that have no native populations left. I really don't like planted fish either. Your email address has the word Lahotan in it. Is that a reference to the introduced trout in Lake Lenore?

And C&R is better with a 5% mortality than bonking fish on the head. Thats what most people are trying to say. Sure some rivers should be closed to recover. But NO NATIVE STEELHEAD SHOULD BE RETAINED AT ALL in any river and barbless hooks should be used. The barbless hook idea may be tough on the guides though as many of their clients are inexperienced.

Hey man, hotheadedness, as noted on this board previously, is not going to take us very far. You know why people still vote for skeletor? Maybe because they arent fishermen,aye? you know none of us know how long it will take to recover fish stocks or if we ever can. It might not be in my lifetime. I am ready and have done and will do all within my power to help fish stocks. I know it's all the corporate establishment that is bringing us down man and it hurts ,man, it hurts alot. Things are going down the crapper and fast. I feel like a Roman facing the Gauls, it's all over all the good is done. You can either cry about someone's injustice or we can get our [Bleeeeep!] together and do something about it. Oh and hey sounds like there arent many bioligists jobs out there aye? Chuck

YOU'RE RIGHT RALPH,I'M NOT PERFECT AND CAN NO LONGER DEAL WITH TRYING TO MAKE THE WORLD A PERFECT PLACE. THE BATTLE IS FUTILE, I'M OFF TO GUYANA FOR MY SUICIDE COCKTAIL. IT'S EASY TO SEE IF ANY DOESN'T AGREE WITH YOU. PLEASE PROVIDE ME WITH A CLAENDAR TO LET ME KNOW WHAT DAYS I CAN FISH TO HAVE LESS IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT. i HAVE TO PLAN VACATION SOON, AND AM SITTING ON PINS AND NEEDLES.

Yo Ralph-E, So what do we do, I mean really, check it out. Slade Gorton doesn't run the show, thats what I was gettin at before. His strings are pulled by a bunch of good ole boys who got rich cuttin all the tree's, killin all the fish an dammin all the rivers. This serious resitance, no, offensive, against catch and release going on in the senate right now is those boys tryin to stamp somthing out before it gets started. If you have a better way to fish let me know, if you have a way to make the law makers listen I would love to hear. It looks to me that they only listen to money and the only money that gives a [Bleeeeep!] about the fish is sportys. O.K. we haven't got it together all that well. But its gettin a little better. Any way, if you have anything constructive to say, give me a holler, otherwise.......

You're right Ralph ... I'm not a "biologist", I'm a "... jack-ass local guide" who happens to have amassed enough fisheries credits at UW to have minored in it and has spent hundreds of days on these waters for the past ten years, in addition to the countless days I fished other waters of the NW growing up. You need to wake up Ralph, this practical experience and observations of the fisheries over the years far outweighs what additional credits I could have earned to get a little piece of paper that says "You're a biologist!" so I could go sit in Olympia in a cubicle deciding how to mess up the fisheries some more without being in the field to actually see what happens on the rivers on a daily basis.

To the point ... as of today C&R is our best possible management goal, period, without the smokescreen ... if you want to look at your argument, we will ...

You cannot compare our rivers to those of Siberia ... plain and simple ... the fish are different and so are the rivers...

The populations are not similar in terms of genetics, because the fish are very different. The majority of Kamchatka steelhead are 3/x fish (meaning they spend 3 years in freshwater before migrating) ... you can go back to old studies of the Hoh system in 1949-50 (before the introduction of hatchery fish on the Peninsula and possible inbreeding) and see that only about 5% of the Hoh fish are 3/x fish. You can't expect to see the same sort of life histories when the populations start their lives so differently. In addition, the majority of these studied rivers in Kamchatka are of gentle nature and gradient ... much easier streams for fish to ascend, spawn, and descend successfully.

You have also left out one huge difference that accounts for the disappearance of a large majority the repeat spawning fish in the Peninsula systems ... tribal nets. Are these present in Siberia? I think not. Since you're such a fan of evolutionary processes, how could you forget the fact that our strongest-gened stock are forced to run this gauntlet twice ... once going up, once going back. And what about those poor fish that spawn in the lowermost sections of river (can you remember the Quillayute mainstem hogs?) that are forced to avoid the drifted nets in that section ... these fish had the shortest distance to travel and were our highest percentage repeat spawners. It's little wonder that the repeats are not as numerous as they once were. The method in which nets catch fish also contribute to the largest members of the population being entangled, with may of the smaller, "weaker" fish able to eke through. Sports anglers compound this problem by killing the biggest one to take home to show their friends or put into one of those fish club derbies that are so popular ... the PA club is one example. Mandatory C&R would at least eliminate some of this selective harvest of big fish by one group.

As Salmo G. has pointed out before, perhaps the stocks won't fluctuate as much in areas such as Siberia that aren't subject to as varied environmental factors as our river systems, such as frequent floods ... commonplace in a rainforest locale ... I don't think quite as common in Siberia.

If you would have followed our forum a little more closely, you perhaps may have picked up on the fact that many of us feel that the runs aren't healthy enough ... why do we call for C&R in the first place?? Why do we go to voluntary measures to help these fish out and minimize our impact on them? Why have many of us changed our ways and let fish go that were once beat on the head? Why do we fish with barbless hooks? Look through my plug box ... they're all barbless! Why do I curtail the use of effective (yet potentially hazardous to fish) techniques like bait divers? Why do I turn down a number of trips a year because I have a ZERO intentional kill policy on my boat for wild fish ... you're barking up the wrong tree saying that I take "... MONEY TO KILL WILD FISH ..." Granted, there is some mortality, but keep in mind that I am one of just a couple of 50+ guides that has enough " ... INTEGRITY AND HONOR ... " to choose to do this.

Along this these same lines ... guiding in my eyes is not only about taking clients down and catching fish ... clients unfamiliar with steelhead in my boat are also taught a lot about the fish and how to properly care for them ... in the long run, I truly believe that the number of fish that are saved due to techniques and information learned in my boat will far outweigh those that die from incidental mortality ... I can think of several people that now release all the wild fish they catch due solely to what they learned on my boat. In another instance, the head chef of a fancy Seattle restaurant quit purchasing tribal-caught fish for the menu when he went down the down the Hoh for the first time. Yep, he drove a fancy car, and lived in the big city ... and wasn't much of an outdoorsman, but guess what, he learned an awful lot about the fish and the river that day ... and also caught a few ... and the tribes lost a place to sell their net caught wild fish. I am not only a guide ... I also see myself as a protector and a teacher and incorporate that into my job description.

I think I speak for many when I say that escapement numbers need to be increased. You will get no argument on that point ... I do honestly believe that these rivers can support a C&R fishery ... I have always said that I would be willing to hang up my rod to keep these runs alive. But I don't believe that the rivers around Forks are at that point yet ... although some of the state's rivers are. However, banning C&R fishing by itself WILL NOT save the fish. Eliminating a massive blood-bath kill fishery on both the sport and tribal ends will. Habitat destruction undoubtedly has some effect, but why do the runs suffer when over half the watersheds are in the Park?

Commercial fishing, targeted or not, does have an effect. Rant and rave about PDO all you want ... all the info I have found on it shows that it affects primarily salmon stocks because of the feeding ground biomass for different region's salmon stocks ... remember that salmon and steelhead in the open ocean do not share the same feeding grounds ... and its influence on steelhead stocks is not as great. Do you think that the decline in the 80's that you refer to could be due to the peak of the high seas nets in that timeframe ... hmmm, strange coincidence! Also consider the fact that the survival of the pre-migrant steelhead that you refer to is directly related to the number of salmon that return, spawn and die, and then decay in the river. Whether or not steelhead are caught in these nets, the food base for the young steelies that has been disappearing ... due to the depletion of the salmon stocks. Get the nets out and keep the sport catch at a minimal level, and presto, the little guys have all sorts of food ... and subsequently higher survival and larger size when migrating out. And don't try to say that the Peninsula salmon aren't affected by nets ... is it any coincidence that we had the strongest return of silvers that I have seen in my lifetime the first year the nets are taken out off the Canadian coastline???

Catch-and-release "dangerous","... only a few streams have responded positively to catch and release...", says who??? I happen to fish one of those Canadian streams for approximately 50 days a season ... and guess what ... it works! Angling pressure has exploded in the last few decades, yet the fish are returning in greater and greater numbers every year. And this season, with the absence of nets on the coast, and near zero tribal catch, the run was an all time record thoughout the entire region. Hmmm ... go ahead, blame it on the sporties here. This is taking place in river systems that have logging operations cutting trees over the last 50 years in a manner that makes Peninsula logging look like it is run by Greenpeace! Is it also a coincidence that there were more redds in the area rivers last spring than any other season in recent memory with the C&R regs in place??? Coincidence that many of the Puget Sound streams with full C&R are making a comeback? Give us an example of where it has failed, all I can think of are successes!

Since you like to refer to cumulative effects, imagine that at worst case, 20% of the sport catch dies as a result of C&R ... that means 80% more fish on the beds than a catch and kill fishery ... assuming that the system can support the fish (most of us feel that they can) then you'll have a much higher return the following cycle, say 20% of this higher number dies, even though more fish died, there are even more on the beds ... eventually, you'll reach that maximum number where no more fish can be supported, but this is good, 'cuz then your Darwin theory takes an even greater role in deciding which of this these will survive ... those smart enough to avoid all our evils will be the ones to make it. Where's the danger? You lost me somewhere!

I'm glad that you so much holier-than-the rest of us ... limiting and picking your days your days to fish. Tell me Ralph, most of our steelie smolts are in the river two years, and the kings and silvers also in there for some time ... where do these fish go on the days you choose to go fishing? There are spawning fish in the rivers through most of the year! Please tell me, I'll bet limit your late season fishing when the maximum number of fish are near the beds ... yes? Why ... this is the healthiest component of our run! It is the early fish that are in the most dire need of help ... that is why the Snider Program was implemented in the first place. You seem to be able to "ENJOY THE BEAUTY OF THE WORLD EACH DAY ... WITHOUT EXPLOITING OUR DEGRADED EARTH" ... I'm proud of you ... I can't seem to do it ... I own a car and I plug my computer in to an electrical socket ... I assume you have a human-powered generator that powers yours?

Bob, I hope someone will eventually convince you to "run for" a seat on your State's fisheries board. Enough said.

Hey Bob! YOU GO GUY!ALL THE WAY TO OLYMPIA!!!

[This message has been edited by posh II (edited 03-13-99).]

Ralph - As you yourself said in your last statement in your original post, you do have a big one. Between your irrevalent babbling and your certain inability to get a point across, I couldn't tell if you were a college professor, a scientist, or a politician. Darwinism, Geomorphology, Pacific Decadel Oscillations, and Slade Gorton? Good God.

I think your statement that "Catch and release is only an excuse to further deplete the resource" is probably the most absurd post I've ever read on this site - and believe me, that's saying alot.

[This message has been edited by TK (edited 03-13-99).]

Emmerson, you mention evolutionary biology and geomorphology, do you know anything
more about them than how to spell them? I makes want to hurl when
some...slower individuals babble about things they do not understand. How do
I know? Darwin's views on evolution are historically significant but not
longer considered correct by modern standards. Ever heard of cladistics?
Punctuated equilibrium? Find a book by Stephen Gould before you pop off.
Your sounding like a dime store biologist.

Hey guys- How bout' the idea that GOD made our beautiful rivers and streams including the steelhead that inhibit them. Did you know that even Darwin himself discredited his own theory before he died.