OK...I'll bite one more time...

CFM, we did this dance last year, too, when you asked me who I was and where I was coming from...but here goes again for all the new folks that you are the self-appointed savior and benefactor for...

Todd Ripley
Sammamish, Washington
Birthday is April 6
6'3", 195 lbs.
Brown hair/eyes
Single, but very attached
85% Gear fisherman, usually bait
Bachelor of Science, Marine Biology
Minor, Chemistry
Juris Doctor, Emphasis in Environmental Law
(that's a law degree )
Former Washington State Assistant Attorney General, primary client WDFW
Vice President, Political and Legal Affairs, Wild Steelhead Coalition

I can't imagine that there's any more that you need to know...and all the important parts above we went over last year when you wanted to know who I was and what my "agenda" was. There it is, again.

Now a few notes...

Note 1:

CFM wrote: "Its only fair to kown who I am up against in this debate! Your profile does not reveal that, an you have never made it clear to me."

Last year you asked the same thing...and here's a quote, from me, from last year's thread...

"I'll post some stuff here that's none of your business, but perhaps will stop this nonsense.

1. I have my bachelor of science in marine biology, from Western Washington University.

2. I have my JD from Gonzaga University, with an emphasis in environmental law.

3. I used to be a Washington State Assistant Attorney General. The client that I represented was the WDFW. I worked with the enforcement folks at the department, the commercial licensing division, and tribal fishing.

4. I'm a vice president and the legal advisor for the Wild Steelhead Coalition, which is a volunteer position. If they were paying me, I doubt they'd pay me to spend time arguing on BB's.

5. I'm a co-owner of a business that represents an up and coming local artist. (That I do get paid for). I work in a home office, and make my own hours. Sometimes I access my e-mail accounts and all the fishing BB's from other people's computers."

That's twice...I think it's also quite enough.

Note 2:

CFM wrote: I understand why both of you (Todd, and Salmo G) continually try to attempt to "Cloud" this issue...

My writing above, just like last year, is very clear, very to the point, and exacltly answers the question you asked.

Note 3:

StlhdH2O wrote: Do you need to be an attorney to understand the law?

Of course not, Eric, and I think the stuff I wrote above is pretty clear, clear enough that almost anyone should be able to understand it.

Note 4:

Micropterus101, I understand your feelings...but when you ask a legal question, you get a legal answer. If you want to disregard that answer, that's OK. It doesn't change the law or its interpretation. By the way, cool name. I've been known to catch a few bass now and again...I just don't talk about it much...all my steelhead buddies give me too much crap for it!

Note 5:

CFM, not having a "right" to fish does not mean that you can't ever fish. It means just what it says in my initial quote from the federal court...you can fish, but it's a privilege that can be granted, limited, or revoked at the behest of the State.

The state does have a "right" to half of the harvestable fish...but you don't. If you did then there wouldn't be non-tribal commercial fisheries that catch the entire non-tribal portion of a run. The state (actually, a state compact) divvies those fish up as they see fit, and they're not violating anyone's rights if they don't let you catch any of them. They may piss you off, but they don't violate your rights.

Cohoangler hit it on the head on this one...

Note 6: Maguana, federal law has many instances where it leaves regulation up to the state...and if the state doesn't enact any laws or regulations, then the federal law applies. In a state that has medical marijuana laws, the general federal prohibition does not apply to that particular use of marijuana. If a state does not have those laws, then the federal law applies.

We have med. maryjane laws in Washington, but, alas, the federally required programs to implement the laws have never been funded by our state legislature.

Note 7: Micro101, your post about Judge Boldt, and smoking, etc., is understandable...however, you're talking about what you feel, or what you'd like. I would prefer fishing to be a "right", too, but the fact of the matter is that it's not. If you want to work to change the state of the law, then I'd support you. Until you do and are successful, it's not about what you feel or what you want. It's about what it is.

Note 8: CFM, after arguing through four or five pages of this BB now and last year that fishing is a right and not a privilege, now you're saying a right and privilege are the same thing? In the law, they are not. The status of recreational fishing in Washington is defined by the law. The law clearly says it is a privilege.

Note 9: Aunty, you're right, of course, that rights can be taken away. Commit a capital murder and you can lose your most basic rights, starting with your rights to liberty and the pursuit of happiness, and lastly your very right to life. Felons can lose their right to vote. We all have rights to access a lot of public places...unless we've had a restraining order slapped on us that takes away our right to be somewhere if certain specific people are there.

The difference is that you can't fish until the state grants you the privilege...while you have those other rights by virtue of living in America until you do something to lose them.

I think I'll join Salmo on opting out of the rest of this discussion...at least for now. Here's the link for the three page "debate" about this exact topic, with a lot of the same players, saying the same things, from nearly a year ago.

http://www.piscatorialpursuits.com/ubbcgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=008335#000016

If I see anything that wasn't covered either above or in those three pages, I may opt back in. Otherwise...it's all been said before. Either you understand the law, or you don't. Every single person has their own opinion of how they feel about the law, but they don't change what the law is.

As it always has been, my e-mail address is in my profile... c_n_r_nates@hotmail.com .

Until a new federal law or a federal appeals court overrules existing case law, the law is that it's a privilege to sport fish in the state of Washington.

Fish on...

Todd.


P.S. Bob, I think it's pretty well accepted on this and other BB's that Salmo and I are straight shooters who share our knowledge and experiences freely, free from unnecessary emotion, unfounded opinions, and groundless accusations. You should expect our responses, as your assertions are full of unnecessary emotion, unfounded opinion, and groundless accusation. You asked for a legal opinion...I'm a lawyer who works in exactly the field that your question involves...and I gave you the straight up answer you asked for.

I'm sorry if you don't like it.