Gotta say I find all of this really interesting.

As an angler who is passionate about wild steelhead, and who has been active in this issue from the time it was first brought to the forefront, I know this is true:Most of the pro and con I'm seeing here has been nothing new or unexpected.


Science here, emotion there...what are we really talking about?...

(I think I need to review this just to keep things in perspective.)

...Four river systems, that's what.

Four river systems out of the dozens in Washington State that historically supported steelhead. They supposedly have "healthy" runs of wild steelhead. Sport anglers have been allowed to kill wild fish because the state claims there are "enough" to allow this. Tribes net the wild fish heavily in all 4 systems, which makes management of wild fish for sport purposes infinitely more complex than it is in comparable wild steelhead fisheries that are nearly all managed for catch and release only.

Via this decision, sports anglers on those 4 systems will be required to release all wild steelhead as they already are required to do in virtually all of the other streams in Washington.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it appears that the driving motivator among sports anglers who support the decision is to allow more fish to spawn, thereby increasing the possible returns in future generations of fish, thereby allowing better angling opportunities.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but most of those who don't support the decision mainly do so because of the tribal harvest. As stated many times here "I PERSONALLY HAVE NEVER KILLED A WILD STEELHEAD, BUT..."

The fact is that there is very little either side can say or do that will affect opposing opinions. The never ending debate for the past 10-15 years will not be ended here.

And I must admit to a rather "hollow feeling" reading many of the past 150 or so posts. God, we can't ALL be right, can we? Emotions run high, but why the attacks? In the end, aren't we all on the same "side"?


These are some of the things, based on my humble opinion, that are true regarding this issue:

1) It is a great thrill to catch wild steelhead. More and bigger is even better. I want the opportunity to catch more of them.

2) I don't know what a "healthy" number of wild steelhead in a system is. No data I have seen has convinced me of this nebulous number.

3) If I kill a wild fish, it will not spawn. Less spawners= less juveniles= less potential return. Multiply this by the thousands of other anglers on these systems. Yeah, I know, carrying capacity, yada, yada, yada.

3) Comparing those 4 systems in question with others does not work very well because of the multi-faceted complexities of each specific situation. If they were comparable to the other streams even in our own state, we wouldn't have many fish left in these 4 systems in question either.

4) The reasons there are some fish left in these systems are habitat related, and can pretty much be summed up as location, water supply, and Olympic National Park.

5) Tribes will continue to harvest wild steelhead, and if by some insane policy they are able to harvest "our" share, then our worst fears will be realized.


I have questions that some of the experts out there will hopefully be able to help me out with:

1) Has fisheries science recently advanced to the point where managers really have a handle on wild fish management yet? Look at the record.

2) Is there really something that can be done to address the "foregone opportunity" thing?

and mostly

3) Why are so many apparently so afraid to try, just to try, to save a piece of what we have left?


I, for one, am willing to try.