Steelhead Moratorium Cancelled

Some good news.

The Fish and Wildlife Commission today voted to honor the petition by The City of Forks, Cowlitzfishermen, et al, to allow the proposal due process including public comment this summer as part of the ongoing Rule Peoposal Process.

In simple terms the moratorium is cancelled.

The people will be heard.

Wow, that was fast.

Nice,

The people will be heard indeed, but now I doubt they will be listened to.

It is over welming that the majority supports WSR but some people only care about them selves and want to make sure they can take every last one untill there arnt enough to fish for anymore.

WSR will happen even if it dosent hapen now. I am affraid a war has been started.

Where's the proof? Nothing about it on the WDFW site (yet).

Not that I don't believe anyone on the internet, but, well, Ok, I don't believe anyone on the internet....

"No one knows you are a dog on the internet."

If it's true, that's too bad. Might as well just start kissing your fish and fishing opportunities in the future goodbye. Hatcheries ain't the solution, boyz.

I wonder what people are gonna say in a few years when Ocean conditions are no longer favorable, and the fish just stop returning ?

Oh yeah, I forgot. Blame the indians. Silly me.

Rich,

You really think everyone against WSR wants to bonk native fish???

Some of us (probably most) just want the rules followed by all involved. The WSR regulation was pushed thru on a "backroom deal".

I for one am glad to see that wrong undone.

Let the WSC people follow the proper rules like the rest of society.

It would also be nice to see certain members of the commission that were involved in that backroom deal removed and replaced with people given more to following rules.

Do you have any valid statistics backing up your claim that the overwhelming majority support WSR? To me, it seems like the majority of this board does, but the vast majority elsewhere is against it. Again, that's just a perspective, not a claim.

Plunk,
Could you please post a link to this.

If there is no link, how about a source?

RL

Keeping my fingers crossed that it is not true.

This is the news release


NEWS RELEASE
WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE
600 Capitol Way North, Olympia, Washington 98501-1091
Internet Address: http://wdfw.wa.gov
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
April 29, 2004
Contact: Tim Waters, (360) 902-2262
or Susan Yeager, (360) 902-2267


Public hearing, formal rule-making process
to be held on wild steelhead moratorium


OLYMPIA-- The Washington Fish and Wildlife Commission today voted to hold a hearing this summer to take public testimony on the commission’s recently imposed two-year moratorium on wild steelhead retention.

The 5-1 vote came after the City of Forks filed a petition with the commission requesting that a formal rule-making process be initiated on the moratorium issue. Such proceedings require a public hearing.

Commissioner Bob Tuck voted against initiating the formal rule making process. Commissioner Lisa Pelly was absent from the meeting.

Following the public hearing, which is expected to be held in August or September, commissioners could let their earlier decision stand, or they could modify or rescind the decision.

Commissioners voted 5-3 in February to impose the moratorium, which takes effect May 1. Wild steelhead retention already had been permanently banned in much of the state, but was still allowed on several Olympic Peninsula river systems where stocks are relatively strong.
Following the moratorium vote this winter, officials with the City of Forks and others voiced objections to the commissioners’ action, saying the ban would pose economic hardships for their community, a popular destination for steelhead anglers.
# # #


I kind of read it as the moritorium stands until the hearing this summer. I don't see where it says the moritorium has been resinded. The WSC will be there to provide testimony. Some of you should think about becoming a member and helping to carry the load as it is alot of work.
Since the whole WSR thing on this board we've had 15 new members sign up, I think mostly because of the absurb arguments put forth by those wishing to allow harvest of wild steelhead. CFM said the WSC was a dying organization but I sure don't see it.

The war has been started?????? I thought this was about the good of the fish? Not the fisherman. I've been against WSR from the get go for several reasons

1. Where has WSR worked on a major system that is netted by Native Americans?

2. It had no input from the tribes (without their partnership nothing will revive wild stocks)

3. The way it was pushed through without input from those that would be impacted the most i.e. city of Forks business owners.

4. The input and opinion of every WFDW employee that I have spoken with was discounted by the commission.

5. Provided fishing opportunity for a few that feels C&R mortality is ok where there should be no sport fisherman mortality or threat of mortality in a river with threatened wild stocks. (close the rivers for feb, march, april, may.

I pose little threat to wild fish anymore because I don't target them. I fill my freezer with hatchery brats and that works for me. There are plenty of other opportunities out there. So let's get back on the same page and work to curve the decline of wild stocks not divide our numbers.

No one who truly loves fishing and the experience would think this is a good thing.

Oh you mean the crackers that buy a license, get out once a year and can't even tell the difference between a Nate and a brat.

Boy the good news just keeps rolling in today!!

People--- Think.

If the Bush thang goes thru-- this will go way, way beyond Steel head. Game and fish are looking ahead. and covering there collective ARSES, You push WRS or WCR or whatever it is called thru now you can kiss off fishing in the state of WA.

As Momma would say- Be careful of what ya ask for-- You may get it.

"I am affraid a war has been started"

Meaning when it comes the the rules process and testimony.

WDFW's own numbers show WSR support is the majority.

I have heard that the Hoh is expected to fall 1000 wild steelhead short of its escapement this year. It was 800 fish short last year. Since the process is going to be held this summer the actual numbers should be in by then. How long can the Hoh be healthy and support harvest when it is only getting 2/3rds of less ecapement?, (The lack of harvest would have made all the difference).

Acording to the numbers the Quileute system is healthy and has not seen the affect from the huge amount of harvest. Seems that the Sol Duc is holding that one together for now.

Like Parker said wait until ocean conditions change for the worse agian. It seems that many of our "healthy" systems are right on the edge or just under and any drastic change could cause colapse. Combine bad ocean conditions with over harvest droughts or floods and what do you get? You get the todays Hoh that turns into todays Puyallup the next cycle, and todays Puyallup goes extinct. Then the next cycle the Hoh goes extinct and the Quileute system turns into the Hoh of the last generation and so on.

I only fear that pollitics may make the decision this time around, and not science.

"Commissioner Lisa Pelly was absent from the meeting"

This gal needs to canned or voted out of office (however it works).

I don't think so Rich.

Ocned all the dangleing CHADS are counted.

Ya'll got it thru when on body was a lookin, but it ain't gonna happen a second time.

Again, As Momma would say--- do it onced and shame on you, do it a second time and shame on me.

Im starting a new job soon but I will do everything in my power to be at the rule process for this.

I am very interested to see what type of reasoning, science and compassion will be behind the anti WSR side.

Will they ignore the history of what has happened under current management? Will they say, "the tribes and WDFW say current management is good and there is no reason for WSR so we should listen to the tribes and WDFW. Will they say the city of Forks needs all available fish for harvest so they can keep making money? Will they say we should alow harvest untill escapement's show there arnt enough fish anymore and then change things?

The history is there, we know what is going to happen if things keep going the way they are. Why should we ignore what history has already proven?

Should we ignore what the future will be because 30% dosent want to change or dosent want someone else to tell them they have to release wild steelhead?

Again we speak one drainage. WCRSRA(or what ever) means STATE wide. No one drainage but blanket coverage.

So let me ask you this. Is the drainage in
Forks in better shape than that of the Green River (Auurn)?

That's ment to be Auburn. Damn I wish i could type--- and spell.


Rich- Firstts off--- what we got now don't work do you agree?

For all of you arguing that WSR has not helped to restore any ailing wild runs of steelhead, consider this:

Timing is everything. A tourniquet can stop a life-threatening hemorrhage, but only if it is applied before the dying patient has lost a critical volume of blood.

The problem with reactive fisheries management is that historically nothing gets done until the problem reaches a crisis level from which there is little hope of return.

Isn't it high time for a little pro-active strategy?

Yes we agree, what we got now does not work!!!

Yes the drainages are different, all are different.

It has been said by nearly everyone that supports WSR that it is not the fix all. It is not going to change things by itself, runs will continue to decline due to massive tribal harvest and other factors. But we will have far less impact then we do now. Hopefully WSR will give the wild steelhead some time and alow the runs to hang on for that much longer so management can be changed.

If we continue things the way they are eventually the runs on the OP will be in the same boat as the puget sound and we will have no fishing for wild fish at all.

I am looking towards the future and although I am selfish and want some type of opportunity I am willing to give up harvest to to keep the runs healthy a little longer in hopes other factors can be fixed or curtailed.

Sport harvest is the one factor we can control as anglers and as an angler who wants to continue to enjoy the recource I want to do what I can to continue to enjoy wild steelhead.


Yes we could stop fishing all together and where warranted it should be done. But if we are not fishing at all what voice will we have for the resource, how many would lose interest in the conservation of wild steelhead. What more would the resource be then a subsistance source for the tribes when there is no one out there to enjoy wild steelhead.

Back room???? What a crock of **** WSR has had a ton of opportunity to be heard in public. at least twice during schedualed comission rule proposal meetings Saying the public had no time to make their voices heard is absoluty false. You anti WSR guys are just whining because one decision didn't go your way. If you oppose WSR regs they you shouldn't be allowed to fish..

Next time around i am proposing a new reg. Wild steelhead release state wide without exception forever!


When WRS is on the table the ends justifies the means... Wild steelhead are more important than your piddly little egos..

"Next time around i am proposing a new reg. Wild steelhead release state wide without exception forever!" "When WRS is on the table the ends justifies the means..."

That sounds like something my son the tree hugger would say. Of course, you know he's a member of PETA. The other one is cool, he's what I'd call a thinkin man. Then again he's a Dr. (almost ) of (in) marine Biology. You wanna here some healthy debates ya outa be around when the two of them is together.

Robert,

When the stuff hits the fan remember you said "Back Room" not me. I think my words was "when no body was lookin"

To all my fellow supporters of the Moratorium:

Today was nothing more then yet another minor road block in the path to what we think is best for the fish. Two and a half years ago we came out in force and showed the Commission it was what we wanted.

We can do that again this summer/fall as we will we have to as those who are opposed to statewide wild steelhead release will be louder then ever as they now see that WSR is a possibility.

Do not give up. Do not get discouraged. And keep up the good fight!

Be carefull what you wish for is right. To those anti-wild releasers

>>Provided fishing opportunity for a few that feels C&R mortality is ok where there should be no sport fisherman mortality or threat of mortality in a river with threatened wild stocks. (close the rivers for feb, march, april, may.>>

Let's close any and all rivers with any ESA species listed, right now. Obviously the fact that C&R mortality is 10% tops, and kill is 100%, we should make no distinction. Kill or closed, no middle ground for sport. ESA Bull Trout are present in all OP streams, we catch them "accindentaly" so following the anti-C&R logic, all rivers on the OP should be totally closed, right now. Be carefull is right. Let's close them all. If any species is present that must be released, close the river. Close em all down forever. Why not?

I'm not as patient as a lot of my fellow WRS guys here. I frankly am sick of people who are so engrained with catch and kill that i don't care what regulations limiting harvest come along. People who kill wild stelhead intentionally flat out don't deserve to be on the river. Such disregard for the welfare of our fishing future just bugs me. Finny thing is these are the same people who complain any time you wanna change anything in a hatchery operation to help wild fish.

I've had enough these people are worthless to converse will. All they seem to care about is their ability to kill whatever thwy want. The idea that they oppose the moratorium because of some bad procedure of the commission if just flat out bogus. its pure retaliation out of malice for the concept of WRS nothing more nothing less. They just want to be able to kill and don't care about the consequences.. Thats what their actions tell me.

FishNphysician, that was said nicely,and i agree. The one thing that i do not agree with is that the sportsman should not shoulder all of the burden. If these systems are to be listed, close them for ALL fishing. No netting, no C-R, Nothing.
Everyone else, I guess that I am the onely one that gets PO'd when I see "Wild" fish advertised for sale! Knowing that I cannot go and catch one, but some one with a net can......Fishy

"If you oppose WSR regs they you shouldn't be allowed to fish.."

Rob..If you don't vote for George Bush you should be deported....


Anyway, please understand that some of us oppose the way the commission makes blanket decisions and sets them in stone for long periods of time. So many times in the past they have done so in direct conflict with public sentiment and their own scientist's recommendations. The process is important and not just when it rules in your favor or against you.

Amen Grandpa... let's deport Rob. I think he was a Dean fan.

Rich you made a good point about escapement not being met on the Hoh.

I'm courious how many members here fished the HOH this spring?

If you did, then I don't think you care about the fish as much as you do about your own opportunity. I know lots of Nate for the plate bonkin types did I read the stats in the paper and thats tragic. The river should be closed to all if the escapement isn't going to be met period.I also know of some members here that did fish the Hoh, but I'll let you speak up.

Grandpa I do not believe you. I think you just wanna be able to kill whatever whenever. If you did care about wild fish you'd never harvest them, be for changing hatchery practices and eliminating many of them.
as it stands i think you just wanna be able to kill them.

FishN-doc. What you say is very true somethin has gotta be done but it brings to the fact the if you don’t put the tourniquet on the right way you might save the Patient but you’ll lose the limb. And a tourniquet is only a temporary fix.
Which brings to mind when I was a young man I fixed flat tires at gas station. These were the days of inner tubes. There was this one ol’ boy that was in at least onced a month getting his tires patched up. It got to the point where the tubes looked like a checker board. For $12 he coulda bought a new tube that was safe. But not this Ol’ Boy. Just do a patch on it that’s only $2.50. There had to be maybe 50 bucks worth of patches on any given tube. But, they still held air.

The point—It’s time for a total revision not just a temp. patch. And to tie that in with what Somethingsmellsfishy said.--- I won’t do any good to get a new tube if there is no valve in the stem.

Robert my man,

You're gonna pop a blood vessel. You should chill dude.


Just cause folks aren't in agreement with you don't mean, they is wippen out all the worlds fishes.

You and I would get along great-- but we'd have to get in the way back machine and go to Chicago year 1968

I did.

Why can't I care for the fish yet value the opportunity to fish, at the same time?

I don't bonk natives. However, I do fish on the Hoh. I carefully release all the steelhead I catch on the Hoh (unless it's a hatchery fish, or salmon). I'm willing to accept the 2-3% mortality rate. I personally don't buy that statistic, but I'm willing to live with it.

I'm also able to sleep at night knowing that I "harmed" some fish, buy putting a hook in it's face. Call me a fisherman, I guess. That's what we do.

What good does closing a river do, if the problem just isn't harvesting? You seem to be forgetting the rest of the fishes lifecycle. What happens on land, in the rivers, and out in the oceans are just as much of factors as the harvesting part is.

Take the Skykomish, for example. The spring native run has been in decline (not making escapement goals), so the state shutdown down that fishery. The fish are still declining, yet no one is fishing for them in the rivers. Sadly, this is happening on many of our Washington rivers.

Why is that?

I'm speaking.

Unfortunately, saving our wild fish just isn't as easy as imposing a 2 year WSR moritorium. But, it's a start.

There are a lot of interesting views out there to the question of "Why do you fish?"

Some on this board fish for food, some fish for sport, some fish for entertainment at the fishes expense, and some probably don't fish at all.

In all honesty, I do all of the above. I will bonk fish when appropriate, I fish because I enjoy the sport, I C&R fish, knowing that 2-3% will die, and I have stopped fishing some rivers because I know that they should not be supporting an existing fishery.

I care for the fish, yet I care for my fishing opportunity, as well. I will fight for both.

Parker,

I like your sentiment.

Sincerely,

Salmo g.

And whos ego is being stroked when wsr is instituted on five rivers that are scientifically determed to have sufficient numbers for harvest?

I may have an ego but at least its just a piddly one!

Dont bother threatning me with a permanent moratorium. I figure you aimed for that anyways.

Thanks for speaking up Parker

here's my feeling on your responses to my questions this is just my take on things so no hanging parties please.

Quote from parker
"Why can't I care for the fish yet value the opportunity to fish, at the same time?"

There are other opportunities out there parker in fact there are other rivers near there that are going to reach escapement.

Quote from parker

"I don't bonk natives. However, I do fish on the Hoh. I carefully release all the steelhead I catch on the Hoh (unless it's a hatchery fish, or salmon). I'm willing to accept the 2-3% mortality rate. I personally don't buy that statistic, but I'm willing to live with it."

I'm happy you release all wild steelhead everyone should. as for accepting the 2-3%(I don't buy it either it's more like 5% when you take in account for the different skill levels and fish handling ability. The fact you take care when handling is great but will the next person do so well?. If A river is in trouble don't fish it let's save every fish we can.

Quote from Parker
I'm also able to sleep at night knowing that I "harmed" some fish, buy putting a hook in it's face. Call me a fisherman, I guess. That's what we do." now that's funny

Quote from Parker
"What good does closing a river do, if the problem just isn't harvesting? You seem to be forgetting the rest of the fish's lifecycle. What happens on land, in the rivers, and out in the oceans are just as much of factors as the harvesting part is."

Your right Parker, but we can make an impact right now by closing them down stop fishermen's impact. The ocean conditions and river conditions will take more doing and time.

Also With a river that is closed you can bet that the wardens will be more effective at enforcing laws and catching poachers. I'm all for that.


Quote by parker
"Take the Skykomish, for example. The spring native run has been in decline (not making escapement goals), so the state shutdown down that fishery. The fish are still declining, yet no one is fishing for them in the rivers. Sadly, this is happening on many of our Washington rivers.

Why is that? "

There are going to be examples for all arguments if you look hard enough like how about the Wenatchee which has been closed and now is getting increased numbers of wild fish return

as for fighting for fishing opportunity I'm with ya bud but I'm looking more at future fishing opportunity. Thanks again for responding Parker.

based on what i have seen out on the river. if we go with 5% then careing anglers represent about .01% of that. 4% are people who are simply pissed that they have to release wild fish and end up throwing ot kicking them back to the river. and the remainder people who are just ignorant of how to handle fish.

"Grandpa I do not believe you. I think you just wanna be able to kill whatever whenever. "

Rob I try to be civil but you just keep coming up with more and more ridiculous comments. I don't ever have to answer to you for what I do or don't do but you are so far off the mark as to be just plain dumb.

Grandpa it's because i see no legit reason to oppose the moratotuim.. The BS about it being a decision somehow made without public imput is just BS. WDFW had just had a regulation meeting where this issue was discussed in depth. much to the dismay of the commission. The two year moratorium was a compromise and you object to it just as you object to every compromise!!!!!
What way is left for me to respond?? you will not settle for anything less than getting everything you want... That leads me to believe that all you care about is being able to kill what you want when you want... I think that a horrible attitude for a sport angler.


Micro

they are politically determined to have enough fish to havrvest. MSY is a political tool not a scientific one.. MSY is what governed harvest thoughtout all the state of WA and it has failed evrywhere. If it were not for ONP the forks ares streams would be failing worse than they are. good habitat goes a long way..

A permanent moratoruim would be intelligent and should be the goal of everyione ewho cares about wild fish.

Rob, education is something that never stops, you weren't born with the views you have now, they were learned. Have some patients for those that are in a different place than you. Nobody can learn with somebody shouting in their ear.

Once again Plunker shows us he full of crap

Mr Allen! Such fire, such passion! you are turning me on!

All kidding aside, believing that everyone that fishes a river or doesnt agree with the WSR is a heathen or an ignorant imbecile is not the way to get your point across (this goes both ways). After reading your posts, I for one (being ignorant and not belonging on the river) would never ever entertain your ideas or thoughts because you have no room in your mind to expand and listen to the other side of the coin. All people hear from you after a while is like the teacher in the Charlie Brown cartoon "wahhhhwahhwha wah wah". Try fishing beside one of these "ignorant" people on the river and see how gently they release a wild fish (even if they can keep it and arent mandated to release it). See the respect that some of these fellow fisherman show for the resource and their surroundings. I think you would be able to share the river with them if you did that.

Im not trying to change your thinking, but just letting you know that not everyone is wanting to bonk a fish, hell, I have even been known to release hatchery fish because I know there is gonna be a bigger one later...even if it doesnt show up, I keep on hoping!

You mean the same science that has led to closures on most other rivers? And the same science that has lowered escapement goals on some rivers when the original escapement goals weren't met?
You really want to trust the future of steelheading to that science?

Cupo,

Uhhhh, ya that science. Why keep fishing during the run of a severly depressed wild stock when catch and release still causes death of all be it even a few fish.

Also,

If a river is closed to fishing during the bulk of the wild run there is no qoutas to be met by either side because there is no harvest by either side. If the river is open to catch and release the indians can complain they are entitled to 3 to 5 % of the fish, and they would definetly have a legal leg to stand on.

Rob....In the interest of hope I will keep responding to you.

First of all, I have said many times I have never kept a wild steelhead. So does that make me special in your book? I also carefully release 99% of all the fish I bring to hand. Does that make me an icon? Someone to be looked up to? Probably not.

I have worked for fishing issues for many years , even when it was not so popular. I have testified before the commission many times from the days when it first started. I have written about fishing and taught fishing and helped kids fish. Does all of that make me better than the average fisher? Probably not. It does give me a place at the table where I certainly do not belittle those who do not agree with me. I may think they are stupid but I don't tell them so in an attempt to get my own way. Sure its frustrating to try to sway a group of people who don't listen to you. That would be the WDFW commission. They put on a show to include the public but they don't like it. They would exclude all of us if they could , in my opinion.

Recently the commission has come around a bit and is responding to the incredible pressure from sports fishers. They still make decisions that are not fair in my opinion. They are being forced to follow a strict framework of public comment and the WSR decision was made outside that framework in the opinion of alot of smart people....these are not idiots. These are people capable of seeing the big picture who are willing to take a step back for two steps forward. People who are sick and tired of decisions being made changing sports fishing rules for periods of years without adequate and thorough public comment.

So, in conclusion, whether you can mature to see that you are out of line or not is up to you but I submit that you should apply your passion for your position in a much more palatable fashion so some of the important people out there actually listen.

Grandpa I thuroughly disagree. The issue of wild steelhead release has been hashed over time and time again in public testimony. The comission should not have to have a special comment period to let people hash it over again.

I believe that killing a wild steelhead is wrong and worthy of criminal status and the law should read that way. I don't care if that means no one ever gets to keep a steelhead ever again.

when i say somoene is ignotant i do not mean it as a belittleing statement . I mean it just as the word is defined. Someone who doesn't know what they are doing due to lack of knowledge or skill. That's all I don't mean anything else.

I have said several times and believe it whole heartedly that with all hatchery steelhead in this state which are pleanted in nearly every stream in the state that no one needs to harvest a wild s teelhead let alone 5 per year.
I think keeping one is an act of greed. I think being greedy when the future of your sport is in danger is a stupid thing to do. If we keep doing it, i say we because the people who do it make all of us as sport anglers collectively guilty, then all rivers are gonna be like the Washougal in very short order. It's already starting to happen..

again I don't think anyone should ever keep a wild steelhead ever again anywhere regardless of how healthy the run is, why?? because we have hundreds of thousands of hatchery fish made specifically for that purpose.

Grandpa.. I apprecciate whatever work you have done. I just have yet to hear any explanation for being opposed to making everyone release all wild steelhead..

The reason I say things the way I do is because no one listenes. until they have to.

It took us 10 years of begging , pleading,yelling screaming and writting to get the Washougal closed to wild steelhead harvest. WDFW wouldn't listen not until the rivers summer run was in total collapse runs of 200 fish or less were common. through the late 70's and 80's. I fear that happening on the Penninsula. Sad thing is it's already starting to happen. again were it not for ONP they'd be there already
I guess in short I am yelling and carrying on because you guys apparently don't see it happening because you still got good numbers up there. when i look at the skagit and see it is supposed to have 6000 fish i just sit back and wish the top 10 rivers i fish had 6000 among them. with so much other pressure on these fish why would an angler who cares about the future want to harvest one or stop a law that would end harvest from happening?????

I agree that if a run is severly depressed it shouldn't be fished on. But requiring the release of wild fish on other runs before they get that bad seems like the responsible choice.

If the available science claims there is a harvestable surplus, can't the tribes net them, regardless of whether or not we can fish at all?

Those of us in Region 5 and in other areas of Washington have willingly supported wild release for years now, and we are finally starting to see wild fish rebound. We kill hatchery fish and release wild fish, and things get better.
Forks, however, still wants to manage steelhead the same way they managed old growth timber. Shame on the commission for caving in to them on this issue.

I have remained silent on this issue because I don't fish for steelhead and believe those that are most passionate should be on stage, but one thing jumps out at me, RA3 gets away with comments that are totally denigrating to those that oppose his views while others are banned for expressing their "non-approved" opinions.

Bob?

I too have remained silent, and not bcause I don't have an opinion.

But I have yet to see anything good come from this sort of thread.

Does anybody know anybody whose mind or opinion was changed because of all the hours spent arguing.

Calling a human being a cracker, or stupid, or not as ethical as yourself, always seems to be the only thing that gets accomplished.

We all have opinions, and mine are more
easily changed or altered by pulling on me than by pushing me. Oh ya... but the easiest way to get me to see it your way is to call me stupid, unethical, and a cracker! Oh ya... and if I'm still not seein it your way, call me trailer trash! That'll get my mind right!

I think it has to be the internet! Nobody (unless they are in politics) says those kind of things or argues that way in public! Not with an IQ that gets them in out of the rain.

I wouldn't kill a native steelhead on purpose now, because I really believe they are special fish, and the wdfw says they are at risk. I hope it helps their survival. I never was any threat to them anyway! I'm the cracker they're talkin about! All else pale in coparison to me!

So as I see it, from what I've learned on this board. 90% of the fish are caught by 10% of the fisherman. So the simple answer to the problem is for the state to pass wsr for 90%of us, and the other 10% should quit fishin for steelhead. Now the incidental kill is negligible, and majority gets to fish for steelhead! We just have to release the nates!

See how simple it is!

No problem fixin that!

herm

good points herm..I listened to Russ Cahill, WDFW commissioner, on KJR's Call of The Wild show yesterday and he commented on the debate over WSR. He basically said what Rob demonstrates....Mostly fly fishers have been at the forefront of pushing the wsr issue and both sides DO yell at each other and insult each other at meetings. Very little science enters the argument but lots of personal insults do. The issue has been on and off the table for a few years and neither side has budged.

By the way Russ mentioned "dueling scientists". He pointed out that both sides trot out "experts" to support their opposing views. I think I see why the commissioners hate the public comment part of their meetings.

Amen Grandpa,

The problem with the whole WSR debate is that it has been based on emotion, rather than science. I realize steelhead provoke emotional responses, but still we are supposed to be rational beings.

The WSR folks maintain that impacts are too high. Fine, there are lots of ways to reduce impacts. WSR is one. I have previously proposed an alternative that would allow some harvest, but produce no more impacts.

There are many options that could yield the same reduced impacts. I think the debate should be about how to reduce angler impacts. Not WSR, no WSR. THere are many options.

The amount of disrespect board members show to each other on this topic is astounding.
Multiple board members have been banned due to their disrespectfulness. Judging by some of the above posts, more bans may be in order.

Please, people, lets be civil at least. If we are to convince non-fishers to do anything for fish, it would behoove us not to act like raving lunatics emoting everwhere.

If we disagree, at least be civil, please!

ET, Herm,

Calling you guys stupid trailer-trash crackers won’t win your hearts and minds either, eh? Funny thing is, I’m certain that CFM, Bruce, and RA3 all know that, yet they couldn’t refrain from personal attacks. Unless I miss my guess, RA3 is hanging in here because he isn’t directing his attack at a specific person, just all those who don’t see eye to eye with him.

The WSR issue is far more emotionally charged than I would have guessed. I wonder if a single reader has had his or her opinion influenced by the several lengthy threads that have discussed it. Maybe WSR threads shouldn’t be allowed, as we’ve lost otherwise productive members who couldn’t refrain from attacking specific members they disagreed with. I’m personally opposed to censorship, however, and wouldn’t care to see significant topics placed off limits.

Grandpa,

I find it interesting that Cahill reports that fly fishers are at the forefront of the WSR advocacy. I’ve heard that fly fishers comprise about 10% of the state’s angling population, and I would have figured that most fish for non-anadromous fish. The number of fly fishers pursuing steelhead exploded in the 1980s, but I wouldn’t have guessed we number even 10% of the steelheading population yet. Of the rivers I fish, only the Skagit is well numbered with fly rods. If fly fishers are such a small proportion of the steelheading public, I would think they number too few to significantly influence a statewide policy like WSR. I’m of a mind to believe that it is steelheaders with a strong conservation bent that have exerted the influence to persuade the Commission to temporarily extend WSR to the remaining OP rivers. If I’m wrong, I’d be really interested in what, specifically, informs Cahill’s opinion that fly fishers are the primary proponents of WSR.

As for dueling scientists, is that surprising? Facts may be facts, but many a conclusion is inferential, or opinion, based on personal interpretation of a set of facts. I see the phrase “best available science” every day at work and have to laugh. Who, with an IQ that would get them in out of the rain, to eloquently quote Herm, would admit to using less than the best available science to support their opinion? If the phrase ever had any meaning, it’s long since lost.

Herm & Geoduck,

It might seem as though the issue is one of reducing impacts to wild steelhead. However, fisheries management is more than biology and ecology. If it was just those, the solution is simple: close all fishing. Period. Management has always had two other major elements other than natural science. They are social and economic elements, social science if you will, and the yardsticks for measurement are different from the natural sciences in important ways. And there are often more than one way to achieve an intended outcome, hence the debate and arguing about which are the best alternatives to attain the desired outcome, which is effective conservation for most of us - I hope.

As has been stated repetitively here, WSR is not the one key action to recovery, even tho the antis just as repetitively respond as tho the advocates have insisted it is the silver bullet. Smalma has reminded the group that WSR contributes to recovery only when over-harvest is limiting productivity. Assuming we know all that we need to know for effective stock management, that is true. The one thing WSR will do on every river is put more spawners on the spawning grounds. On some rivers it will have no effect on productivity. On others, it likely will make the difference between making escapement and not. And on still other rivers, the effect simply won’t be known because there remain too many unknowns about those stocks.

Reading these threads has been a lot like observing personal management and investment philosophies. Some are conservative, and some are risk-takers. Some would harvest only when they are certain that conservation is assured. Others would harvest until it was certain that harvest was the direct and certain cause of loss of production, at which point they would forego harvest. The former wish to avoid repeating the errors of past management. The latter insist that every error be repeated, at least once, or they don’t see it as an error at all; it’s just the dynamics of the management style they prefer. Some folks stick with Blackjack; some prefer the roller coaster ride of craps and roulette.

Sincerely,

Salmo g.

Salmo....I think what I got out of listening to Cahill on the radio was that the fly fishing groups have been the most vocal at the meetings. I know the meeting in Port Townsend which I attended had a lopsided presence of fly fishers and WSC members. Ok by me but I think Cahill was saying that the arguments never change and minds are never changed it is just which group is most persistent. He also said that Koenings is the trump card when it comes to science...He expects more fact based info to be introduced the next time this is discussed.

One of the elements of this debate that doesn't get much play is the motive of some of the advocates to clear the river banks of the "crackers"....NO question in my mind after seeing opinions from across the board for months. Many WSR advocates make no bones about how things would be much nicer with fewer fishers on the water....No quibble there. Sure it would be nicer. There are so many people taking part in every fishery we've got that I can't see how we can sustain this level of pressure.

Yesterday I went out in search of ling cod and saw a massive participation...same with shrimping a couple of weeks ago..massive pressure.

Maybe we should give up and turn over the fisheries to the indians. They could run the whole state like the Quinault. No native guide no fishing. That would cut down the pressure and get us out of the fish recovery business. Let the tribes handle every body of water in the state..set all the policies and seasons and limits....Charge say $150 for a permit to fish for a day anywhere in the state....lakes too. And they could enforce it too....$5,000 fine for fishing without a tribal permit. Fly fishing permits would cost $500 a day so only the guys with the fancy waders and Sage rods could participate. That would really cut down on pressure...So the ones who could afford it would have the peace and quiet and the quality experience they long for. Why not? The tribes pretty much control things now...

Everyone here I wish we could get over this Fly Fishers thing. I did a count at a WSC meeting a few years ago and I don't think much has changed. Concerned gear fishermen 60 % of the membership, Fly 40 %.

In the end it's all fishing.

LT,

That's been posted here...repeatedly...but it's kind of fun to bash flyfishers as elitists...and it's easire to bash the WSC if you call them flyfishing elitists. I can guarantee that no one on this or any other BB has ever seen a flyrod in my hand when going after anything but hatchery summer runs, or the occasional salmon trip.

grandpa...if this is what it means to be popular, I'm sure I don't want to see what "unpopular" is!

Fish on...

Todd