Last Friday, we were fishing the ocean out of Illwaco. The bite was good with a variety of shakers, wild and hatchery fish and we eventually limited out on hatchery silvers. However, I ran into a puzzling situation not once but 3 times that day.

We had 3 very nice silvers to the boat that had healed over adipose finclips WITH a tiny(and I do mean tiny) fin re-generating and growing. The regenerated fin was maybe a quarter inch tall and half an inch long. We let all 3 go not wanting to chance a ticket even though these were clearly sloppily marked hatchery fish.

We've caught enough wild fish in 20+ years of fishing to recognize a true wild fish adipose fin so don't lay into me about not knowing wild versus hatchery.

According to the regs., "only fish with a clipped adipose fin may be retained".......well these fish had a healed over clip AND a puny, re-generated fin. So, what's a guy to do?

These were nice fish. I don't need a fish that bad to risk a ticket and the question is more one of curiosity than true frustration. I'd just be curious to hear a game warden's take on the situation as a case could be made for both keeping and letting the fish go.

Anybody else run into this?

as I understand it those are legal fish. I had a biolgist at NB say the same as he was looking at some partial clips. By the way those fins aren't regenerating... just didn't get all the adipose fin on the clip.

kill it and grill it. stab it and slab it.

The fins are a crappy snip job.

We ran into the same problem in Neah Bay. We asked some gammies at the dock about it and they said as long as it looked like they were clipped, with maybe a little bit of the adi there, you can whack em and they wouldn't write a ticket.

I can clearly tell the difference so I keep them if there like that. I've been on the 'nootch and multiple times have kept fish before that had the same thing (clearly hatchery fish) and had people tell me that they were wild and turn they're noses up at me. Dumba$$es.

Bonk!

There used to be a bit of a hole in the regs, I'm not sure if it's been addressed yet, but a hatchery fish was defined as a fish with the adipose fin removed and a healed scar, while a wild fish was one with a "fully formed adipose"...

It seems like half an addi doesn't really fit in either category.

Fish on...

Todd

I've been in the same situation.I ended up bonking them knowing that the clip job was not up to par.Good luck,
STRIKE ZONE

I also have caught a few partial clipped fish on the nooch,I released them.I won't take a chance on a ticket.It would be my luck that I would run into that a-hole gammie that is pen happy.Another thought is trying to explain yourself in court to a judge that doesn't have a clue on the regs.Better safe than sorry.And I am never that hungry,go to jack in the box on the way home.

Wack-em and stack-em! We did it on Lower C. springers this year. We had lot's of tiny "tails", but they were obviously clipped fish.

I hereby offer free (well, maybe you'd have to take me fishing) legal services to anybody who gets a ticket for bonking such a fish.

My interpretation of the regs is that an adipose has to have a healed scar. IMHO, a new fin growing from that scar is not a violation of the regs, and I think you'd be hard-pressed to find a judge or jury who would disagree.

Of course, it's unlikely that you'd find a game warden unreasonable enough to write you up either, tho we've got a guy over here in Tri-Cities who would ticket his own mother for it!

Had the same thing happen at Westport earlier this month. The fin was partially clipped as well. The skipper was petrified of WDFW and showed me a chart that Sgt. Cenci of WDFW enforcement had given him.

It was amazing, it had drawings of various types of clipped adipose fins. ALL were clipped. The ones in Oregon were allowed to be longer but the Washington partly clipped fish had to be right next to the back. It was ridiculous.

When I was out of LaPush a few weeks ago I must have released 150 fish in four days. I know what an adipose fin is supposed to look like. Well, I was cleaning fish at the station on the gas dock and I noticed that not one but two of the four fish we brought back had the smallest adipose fins I'd ever seen, along with a healed over scar. I quickly finished my job but I was pretty nervous about it.

I let go a king about 18 pounds at Sekiu in July that had a partial clip, and this one did appear to have regenerated a bit. It looked like a mini-adipose with a healed scar in front. I didn't want to take the chance. At Cathlamet in April I also caught a springer with a partial clip, with no sign of regeneration, and this one I kept. Both were clearly hatchery fish, with frayed dorsals. Later I asked a friend who is a state biologist about it and he said its a gray area in the regs. Most fish cops would not cite you for keeping a partial clip, he said, but there had been cases of at least one agent who did cite people down at Bonneville in spring for keeping partial clips. He said it's up to the discretion of the agent, but that of course you could always take it to court and fight it and probably win. I'd like to see the issue addressed by the commission and somehow specified in the regs.

After keeping a few of those "healed scar" fin clips last week at CR bouy. I was talk'n to a guy at the fuel dock(Ilwaco) that had been checked. The game warden had warned them about the fin thing and was gonna let them ride for having a fish with what was obviously a miss clip. Until another guy in the party started to mouth off about how he didn't appreciate being harassed about such a trivial thing. The warden then asked for all the paper work (that he had just given back)back from the owner of the tagged fish. He then proceeded to write the $500.00 ticket that one gets for keeping a wild fish.
So needless to say for fear of an added $500.00 expenditure to the trip, I reluctantly released all partials.
Bonk'em only if your feeling lucky!

I don't have the regs in front of me but the term "fully developed adipose" is what comes to mind when talking about a wild fish. I've caught many fish that had deformed adipose and those have tasted mighty fine on the grill. If it's not a fully developed adipose it is a bad clip job as a juvenile. Keep it.

Straight from WDFW



From the highly recognized dictionary.com



The release definition is a bit sketchy, but the definition of wild says intact fin,

I say bonk em

Nivtup,

That's the same stuff I was talkin' about above...I guess the discrepancy hasn't been fixed yet.

There's a lot of room between "intact" and "missing"...but it seems pretty clear that if it's not "intact", it's a hatchery fish that had a poor clip, or a partial regeneration.

Fish on...

Todd

I seen this happen two years ago over on the Hump.. Fish cop nailed a guy with two silvers he said wasnt cliped.. I just happen to walk up to the same spot to fish and the guy asked me what i thought and the fish cop told me since i wasnt involed it was none of my business and to move on.. I still took a look and said that they were a clipped fish and they didnt do a good job of it AND then i moved on...

He said hymen.

Well, he posted it.

Pretty funny.....and elightening, Mr. Putvin.

Ahhh..The talented Mr. Putvin. Why only 13 posts? It seems you would have good things to say.

Based on the definition of "Intact" posted by Nivtup you can clearly define Wild. If it aint wild then ... and I guess you can ignore the definition of hatchery ... But this kind of loopholes keep lawyers fat :rolleyes: