The state supreme court ruled thursday that the state game commission does not have the authority to prohibit fishing from boats equipped with motors.
The ruling stemmed from an appeal of a 1974 fishing regulation stating that it "shall be unlawful to fish from a boat or any other floating divice equipped with a motot during the supplemental steelhead and whitefish seasons." The regulation listed 11 Western Washington rivers.
The high court noted that the question was moot because the regulation covered the 1974 season and was no longer effective. But the justices said thay would rule because the case presents matters continuing and substantial public interest.
The Game Commission contended that its action was proper and was authorized under state law giving it the power to set regulations to preserve and perpetuate game fish, animals and birds.
The high court held, that the prohibition against use of motors was unrelated to the commission's duty to preserve game fish.
"Indeed," said the court, "the respondents conceded that if its (the regulation's) purpose had been related to conservation it would be valid."
The Supreme court ruling affirmed an earlier decsion handed down by Thurston county superior court judge Gerry Alexander.

Double Haul, I guess you'll have to ask F&W why they are wasting your time by putting something on the table they have no jusrisdiction over. Let me know what they say.

Fishhead5

[ 11-15-2001: Message edited by: fishhead5 ]

Interesting case. I suppose the result is that we now have to go through out politicians if we want to regulate the use of motors unless it can be proven that the motors are a detriment to the fish.

Very interesting indeed! I hadn't even heard of this case. So if fishing from a boat equiped with a motor isn't related to fish conservation, I suppose the Commission also cannot adopt regulations that prohibit fishing from a boat - a rule that is in place on a few rivers and lakes. The narrow view of the court could prove very restrictive of the Commission's ability to regulate a fishery.

What's next? Can the Commission prohibit the use of bait, barbed hooks, treble hooks, snagging, dupont spinners? None of those technically relate to conservation either. The Commission can always just close a water to any fishing, if they cannot prohibit certain methods, to achieve their authorized conservation objectives. I think the court had its head in a vise on this decision.

Sincerely,

Salmo g.

In a vise?

I was thinking their heads were somewhere else.

Fishhead5, It seems like you've done some research on one end of it. It would be interesting if also you research it with the WDFW to get both sides of the story. Maybe the truth will fall out in the middle.

[ 11-15-2001: Message edited by: Double Haul ]

Re-read my thread and I should clairify that this was in court in 1975.

Double Haul, didn't have time today to talk to F&W today. Will try tommorow.
How many people emailed F&G were worried about fish? Most were worried about having 2/3 of both rivers for themselves. What's going to happen when the bankies get together and get the drift boats banned so they will have some of the river for themselves. If this was truly for the benefit of the fish I might have a little different attuide. Just for the record I have both a 14' sled and a drift boat. I fished above the west branch (in my sled) last year 3 times for broodstock. Each time late in the afternoon so all the driftboats would be gone.
Anybody that has fished with me will tell you that I go way out of my way to be polite to everyone on the river.

Fishhead5

[ 11-15-2001: Message edited by: fishhead5 ]

Gotta agree with FishHead5 about divvying up the rivers....where does it stop? There's no conservation issue so whats left? Safety? Well there's laws already in place making boat operators responsible for their wakes and other actions. Kinda a like gun control ...what good is further laws going to do when the existing ones aren't being enforced? Experience someone operating in an unsafe manner call it in. Too many people on the river? Gonna happen even if you ban one group. Almost a basic law of physics.
What are we headin for....well how about limited entry rec fisheries?

BTW: fished with FishHead5 and he's one of the most courteous fisherman I've ever fished with. To bad we can't write a law and put some courtesy police on the waters? :p

Anyway feeling fiesty with the flu mostly gone...bring it on!

"Best of the Best"
Team TopGun
Gooose

AuntyM Thanks for the wisdom.


If I'm traveling from point A on a river to point B on a river and only fish from the bank at point B am I fishing while travelling between the two points?

If I'm travelling from home with all my duck hunting stuff to a point of hunting am I hunting while travelling?

What? No? Both the navigable waterway and the highway fall under the jurisdiction of the counties or WSDOT....not WDFW when it comes to specifically transportation. WDFW can specifically control the method/mode of fishing...such as fishing from a floating device..motorized or not. On certain waters completely surrounded by WDFW lands such as lakes they control vehicle use just like their uplands. On waters not in their jurisdiction such as rivers they can negotiate an agreement with the appropiate jurisdiction to control vehicle use on land or water. Example is the nonmotorized hunting areas owned by timber companies. A waterbody example is Pass Lake which falls under the jurisdiction of State Parks.

Another issue is handicap access...but that's a whole nother can of worms.

"Best of the Best"
Team Top Gun
Gooose

Mike G.,

While I still think it best not to have sleds running up into smaller sections of crowded rivers, I hope the opposition to this doesn't try what you mentioned - banning motors on boats where it can be proven they are a detriment to the fish. That would open a whole can of worms, big time! Could the bankies then prove that scraping driftboat oars in shallow water is a detriment to the fish by harming some redds? And peeing in the river instead of the woods? Then in comes PETA to finish all of us off with that line of litigation by contending bank anglers are a detriment to the fish because they wade right on redds, they leave a lot of lead in the watershed, they poop and semi-toxic trash in runoff areas, and they snag fish more than the other two user groups combined. Need I go on?!?

Think twice about it before you try to 'eliminate the competition' in such a way! Let's just hope that common sense and courtesy prevail. To me that would include not running sleds in smaller rivers and smaller upper river areas of bigger rivers. They can drift or bank it in those pristine areas, and thus cut the crowding and safety concerns. Likewise, the drifters and bankies can give in a little to allowing sleds to backtroll and sidedrift in wide areas of lower rivers. Use you heads out there.

RT

Actually, there is allready a bill floating around the Washington State Legislature that put a test ban on certain types of activities in a certain rivers. I believe it was effectively killed, so I am not too concerned with it, but it would have removed all sleds, wading, anchoring for drift boats, virtually anything that messed with the river bed.

So its been tried before, but luckily there have been just enough anglers in the legislature to block these things.

I really don't have enough knowedge to have an opinion of the sled issue. It seems as if the majority of anglers here want to se restrictions on how far up in a river they are used. I just metioned what I did because it will now be elected people who would have to be contacted if this were to be pursued. Personally, what I would recomend, contact the county and see if signs can be put in place. Just something that said, "Please, no sleds upriver from this point". It does not have to be a law, just a little education will probably help with some of these issues.

Can anyone tell me if this is a recent decision or an older one. If a new one, any updates on how the restrictions of motors on lakes and rivers will be administered by the WDFW?

Thanks...

Giz..

goose,
Thats interesting.The last time I ran into a warden was in my boat fishing the chinook bubble fishery out in bremerton.Not only did he check for barbs and such but he also did a safty check on my boat.lifepreservers horn flares etc.I had no life preserver.He did not give me a ticket but gave me a free lifepreserver.

I always wondered why because this guy was not a nice guy.(he tried to trick me into believing that I was fishing outside the weight restriction boundary with too much lead}Do you think that he did not give me citation because it was actually none of his buisness or do they have agreements with the coast gaurd to enforce such matters?

Fishhead, I also fish for the Broodstock program, And I am in favor of what our boss says, No sleds above Cook Creek, But on numerous time's sleds 16-18ft have been all the way up to the slot right below the "S" Curves on the East fork even with flows in the main river down to 2k. Two much boat for so little of water. As was the case last weekend on the Nooch when a sled ran 3/4's of the way to Schaffer with a lower river reading of 900cfs. Fish head for the bushes and lock up tight. Just my thoughts, They do have rights as I do. But with lower water they should stay lower in the system. just my .02

And the issue of the sleds on the Satsop and Nooch is being looked at by the county and will have a decision in late april to early may. The concern is not from fellow fishers as much as adjacent property owners, erosion, and the noise from the sleds early in the morning. Call the county commision for more info....

Gotta agree runnin in that kinda water in a sled is definitely not a good idea.....but here's what it still comes down too. Fish diggin into the bushes and becoming lock jawed is not a conservation issue therefore WDFW has no jurisdiction. Now if it's a boating safety or traffic issue then 1. Washington State Parks & Recreation Commission is the state agency responsible for that issue at the state level, and 2. the counties may regulate vessel traffic on its waterways to some small degree.

These proposed regulations were generated from outside WDFW....from within our sportfishing community. Maybe they should make all of us equal...no boats except for ADA situations.

gooose

Hey I'm all for this on the Skagit. Have you ever tried fishing a BIG river without using your motor? The only other option is dragging an anchor which is just plain stupid if you have any concerns with spawning beds. Most of the Skagit is big open water and I do have the choice of working the oars but than I can't fish as hard or at all. What's the difference in the eyes of the Game Department if I use my oars or my motor? Only difference to me is I can't fish nearly as well if I'm working the oars but my guest gets the same drift if I'm on the oars or on my motor, doesn't make any since! I think on the big rivers running a motor should be allowed since bar access is very limited on the Skagit. On the smaller rivers it's a whole different story.