The rumor that the Washington Fish and Wildlife Commission is considering regulations that would make the year-round release of all wild steelhead mandatory has been confirmed by a member of the commission. Those who would oppose such regulations are aware of this and are expected to mount a significant campaign against it. Here's your opportunity to let your voice be heard. Write, phone or e-mail the commission and the WDFW director and express your support for catch-and-release of all wild steelhead.

Washington Fish and Wildlife Commission
600 Capitol Way N.
Olympia, WA 98051-1091

360-902-2267

commission@dfw.wa.gov

Jeff Koenings, Director
Department of Fish and Wildlife
600 Capitol Way N.
Olympia, WA 98051-1091

360-902-2234

director@dfw.wa.gov

Thanks for this posting.

I am not for killing native steelhead. How ever this is just another attempt to white wash the real issue. It will not only take native release but no netting by gill netters and native americans alike, curbing devlopment and resposible and effective habitat management. Until these other issues are met I cannot get behind this measure.All this does is to make it seem like the commison is doing something ,appeasing the bigest lobbys and its cheap.

I also belive that the meat fishermen have a right to their rights as well.The best way I know to keep a "meat" fisherman (which I am one)from keeping a native is to have so many hatchery fish around as to fill our bellies and our fill of the action as not to want to kill one. I've seen It time and time again people that would not normaly keep a native do so becasue thay haven't seen a hatchery fish in weeks.The game department just keeps on closing hatcherys?

i pay for this resourse just like the next guy but it seems its always us that get the bad rap and the fishing restrictions imposed. The commision can impose restriction on gill netters without a vote of the people, they have that power. The native american issue that's another story.

Untill we get our act together They will continue to dump on us.

Thanks

I don't agree with the way they manage our fish but somthing has to be done maybe this is start...We need to voice our concerns to them....Release all wild steelhead!!!

------------------
Row Quietly and fish a Catraft
( formerly Steelheader boy) ----<'))>>{

[This message has been edited by Osprey (edited 05-18-2000).]

I support this a start, I agree there are small improvment that need to be made and this is one. I would guess that the nets could be next. This could also be an indication that the commision is realizing that wild fish are not recovering and the limited number of nates is extremely important to preserve.

In the thick

I AGREE WITH RON BOB, WHO IS THIS REALLY GOING TO AFFECT OR NEED I ASK, IT HAS ALREADY BEEN DONE WITH KINGS & SILVERS AND WHO AND ONLY WHO IS IT AFECTING THE SPORT FISHERMAN I AGREE SOMETHING HAS TO BE DONE,BUT IMPOSING THIS DOES NOT ADDRESS THE REAL ISSUES

So I guess what some of you are saying is, "if we can't solve EVERY problem, let's not solve ANY"? Kind of weak if you ask me. Not keeping natives isn't "harming" sport anglers. Are you really going lose sleep or is your health going to suffer if you can't bonk a nate?

I see this as a start. And you have to start SOMEWHERE.


Fish on........

We have to keep in mind that conservation or restoration is a process--a process of steps, a process of decisions. This is an appropriate step in the process to retore wild steelhead runs in the State.

The Commission is highly sensitive to salmon politics. I believe that the recent show of support for wild release and not increasing the wild keep policies on the Olympic Peninsula may in part be behind the Commissions stance. Just treading new waters to see if anything will bite them before making a decision.

I for one am pleased and somewhat surprised of the stance. I had thought that with declining license sales and a smaller general budget (passage of I-695), that the Commission wouldn't want to further jeopardize the income stream generated by license sales.

I think this represents the fact that perhaps a majority of anglers either want native release or won't mind if the entire State becomes native release (i.e., will buy their license anyway). I believe this should be viewed as a tribute to the changing culture among steelhead anglers to allow all of these fish to spawn.

Although I do have a concern as to what would happen with tribal allocations if such a rule were passed. A State-wide native release rule should not in reality mean that these same fish that are not bonked on the head would wind up in gill nets.

Bottom line, its an appropriate step in the right direction of a pretty long road. It should be supported and will need support because there will be opposition to it.

[This message has been edited by obsessed (edited 05-18-2000).]

I'M NOT SAYING I WANT TO BONK A NATE OR FOR THAT MATTER EVER KEEP ONE, BUT WHAT KIND OF PROBLEMS ARE YOU GOING TO CREATE BY JUST ELEMANATING THE SPORTFISHERMAN, AND NOT ALL. YES YOU HAVE TO START SOME WHERE,BUT BY NOT TAKING CARE OF THE REAL PROBLEM ITS JUST A MATTER OF TIME BEFOR THE SPORSMAN WON'T EVEN HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT IT, I BELIEVE A GOOD PERCENTAGE ALREADY PRACTICE CATCH & RELEASE

How does imposing catch and release restrictions on Wild steelhead state wide eliminate sportsman...it just leaves a lot of room in the freezer for Brats,come on guys look at the big picture here.

------------------
Row Quietly and fish a Catraft
( formerly Steelheader boy)----<'))>>{

[This message has been edited by Osprey (edited 05-18-2000).]

MAYBE I WORDED IT WRONG, LIKE I SAID A GOOD %OF SPORTSMEN ALREADY PRACTICE CATCH AND RELEASE AND A STATE WIDE BAN ON NATES WOULD BE GOOD BUT UNLESS YOU BAN THE NETS NOTHING HAS CHANGED TO TO ANY DEGREE

I agree a small percentage of sportsman practice C&R but there are still the ones that beleive if the state says it's ok then they will keep nates...I agree that NETS ARE A MAJOR PROBLEM both commercial and Indians all you can do is you're part for now... short of dropping a hay bale off you're boat( I would never recomend this...not yet )

------------------
Row Quietly and fish a Catraft
( formerly Steelheader boy)----<'))>>{

Doug, first stop screaming! What are your suggestions? You are staing that this isn't a place to start, well where should we? I would gladly pay more for a catch and release lic. for nates. I don't know what the catch stats for nates was state wide the last season but I'll be it was more than 10,000 fish that would be or have spawned by now.

thick

If the Commission believed that such a rule would eliminate anglers, there is no way they would entertain it. Steelhead anglers don't have much clout, but we do shell out each year for our cards. If this revenue were eliminated in an already resource poor budget, it would be counterproductive. This stance is banking on the notion that most steelheaders would welcome or not mind such a rule and continue to buy licenses and use available fishing opportunities.

Although a lot of anglers fish native release year-round, there are still a lot of nates bonked. You can see this particularly on streams that have early native keep seasons like the Green and Sky. The run comes in during March and April after the rivers go C&R or close. The gene pool of early arriving nates has been severely diminished. With year-round native release, it would be hoped that the nate runs will expand seasonally. I'd love to have to use line heavier than 8 lb test in December.

Essentially anglers and tribes are the only users of steelhead (not including by-catch by commercials). If one of the users no longer harvests, conservatin and restoration concerns can put additional pressure on the remaining harvester (tribes). This is why the tribes were against I-696 even though it didn't affect them. I believe year-round C&R can have positive affects on the remaining steps that need to be taken to restore wild steelhead populations.

[This message has been edited by obsessed (edited 05-18-2000).]

I agree with all posts except the SHORTSIGHTEDNESS (AND YELLING) OF DK's posts. Large numbers of sportfishers are very capable of putting a significant impact on native steelhead runs if allowed to (and unfortunately, guys willing to bonk nates if the reg.s allow are NOT in short supply). That's why the ODFW put in C&R on nates state wide in Oregon a few years ago; and it has been accepted by sportsmen and is HELPING to recover nate populations. For those (such as DK & Plunker) that try to sell the ludicrous premise that since other factors are killing more of the nates then why not let us bonk many of the remaining numbers is appalling. It could make the difference of run survival by allowing as many nates that make it back thru the other negative factors (seemingly beyond our control) to propogate! Pull your heads out of the sand and "do the right thing"! - Steve

Obsessed & reel truth,
It's good to see your point of view. Time has come for the State of Washington to implement C&R on all wild Steelhead. My hats off to the commission if this is true.
After years of being down on Native American netting of Wild Steelhead I've come to realize that State wide we sportsmen probably kill as many wild fish or close to it as the Natives kill. How can we get them to think differently if we sportsmen are killing so many fish state wide. There is hope that more tribes will pick up on the fish trap idea, (some are looking into it).
IF we could get sportsmen and Native Americans to stop the killing and the fish did not return in strong runs then identifying where the problems lay would be so much more easy to find.
One more note: Years ago in Montana many of the rivers went catch & release, there was a lot of yelling by many but soon after the yelling stoped and fishing became better than it had been for 30 years.

It's about time. Now let's all send let the commission know that we're behind them on this one.

(And Doug, writing in ALL CAPS is equivalent to SHOUTING on these bulletin boards and in email. I see you're a smolt, so we should give you the benefit of the doubt.)

sorry didn't realize it ment i was yelling Im not saying i don't support catch & release, and insight of the shortsightedness that's why i'm on this board talking about it trying to gain info and never once said its ok to bonk any remaining nates

being as tho i am also fairly new to steelheading it was my understanding keeping nates was dead wrong, and thought 99.9% of sportsmen practiced catch & release thats why i didn't think the sportsman was a big issue guess i was wrong,

I do not mind the C&R of nates I have done so with out being told to do so. This may be a starting point. I do not want to see it stop with the sportfishermen. Talk to me about nets and the native american fishing also. Fair is fair. If we all go in to this with the same type of thinking it will go a long way. Tell me what type of follow up will be done as far as the nets go. I believe that all of us sport fishermen want to see what is good for the fish but we still want to be able to go get some table fair when needed. If this means makeing the season shorter for us it falls short of a good idea. Give us something like (no more nates but we will put 10,000 more hatchery fish in the river for you ) and I think I will support this. Give me a good reason. I like to fish and I will put my full support behind what I belive in. Give me a good reason that has been thought out and I will give my full support.
KEEP THE RIVERS CLEAN!!

------------------
dank

The fact is that way more people kill wild fish than will admit it. I think that letting them live at your level is the least you can do if you actually care about the future of your sport... I'm not gonna stop if they don't make them stop sort of attitude is going to be the end of it all.. Thats not addressed at any of you but the subject as a whole.

It won't be easy. The real reason our goverment won't pull their heads out and fix it is because of all the poop they will have to comb out of their hair.