Beware of Washington Trout. Their lawsuit which is already filed in federal court seeks to eliminate hatcheries in the Puget Sound region. WT believes that ALL hatcheries are bad. WT is NOT a fishing organization as you mnay think they are. WT is not a feel-good catch and release fly fishing fraternity. WT is a political group opposed to hatcheries and probably in the long run opposed to you fishing at all. Like PETA, Washington Trout disguises their agenda in the public eye and changes their stated view to suit their audience. The lawsuit against WDFW alleges that the hatchery practices of WDFW damage the ESA listed wild Chinook in our Puget Sound Rivers. The WDFW proposal submitted to NMFS may stall the lawsuit. To make my point that WT is opposed to hatcheries of any kind, I cite their threat to sue over the possible permanent Sockeye hatchery on the Cedar River. The Sockeye run in Lake Washington was imported here and in no way is a "wild" run worthy of any ESA-type listing. Yet WT is opposed to enhancing that fishery which could occur every year in the future should that hatchery become a reality by 2005. So be educated on issues and beware of strange bedfellows like Washington Trout. JOin the Recreational Fishing Alliance today.

If they get around to suing over the Cedar River sockeye hatchery, I'm pretty sure you'll find out that it would be because of the hatchery's impacts on listed PS chinook, not anything to do with the sockeye, per se.

I'm interested in hearing what their gripe in partiular is, as I haven't heard yet.

Fish on...

Todd.

grandpa first of all you don't know what your talking about.

Washington Trout is very much a fishermans organization. Started by fishermen, run by fishermen. Hatcheries weather you like it or not have negative impacts on wild runs. That fact is extremely well documented. The Puget Sound hatcheries in question under this lawsuit have been needing to come into compliance with ESA for years. WDFW has absolutely failed to even come up with a plan for such compliance they are over a year late for having developed such a plan. Washington trout has tried working with the department through all other channels to get them to address the issues regarding puget sound's ESA listed chinook salmon. The department absolutely refuses to do what they are required by law to have done. Not only does WT have the right to sue the department they are legally and morally right to do so it is the right thing to do. no matter how much you dislike it.
To care about fishing and ro be a responsible angler you MUST first care about the fish. If not you are just a user plain and simple. Washington Trout understands that as anglers it is their responsibility to fight for thoes fish that would otherwise go extinct (as Puget Sound Chinook are now doing). If you had not noticed that is what an ESA listing means.. It means they are going extinct! Frankly i could care less about the non native runs that you are referring to just like i don't care about the walleye in the Columbia. There is NO difference. if shutting down thoes hatcheries is what is required to keep a native species from going extinct I am absolutely all for that. However that is NOT what WT wants!!! They want the hatcheries to be operated in a manner that complies with ESA.. They want WDFW to stop breaking the law! and stop killing listed species.. I don;t see how anyone who cares about the future of the sport would have a problem with that.

I am a little confused, how could a hatchery have an impact on wild stocks? What are the hatcheries doing that does not comply with the ESA listinngs?

Regardless of WT or not, a sockeye hatchery on the Cedar would be STUPID and just an excuse to start damaging natural lake spawning areas by bulkheading the shoreline and building docks, and damaging the river by armoring it to control floods and erosion, when what really should be done is getting people to quit building in the floodplain and stay away from shorelines Hatchery supplementation of a healthy self-sustaining population like the LW sockeye would start the locally adapted stock on a downward spiral, like it has in every river with every other species that this was tried on over the past century. Here are some of the things that can go wrong: Hatchery fish spawn with wild fish and the run timing gets screwed up, because every hatchery manager wants to be sure to make their egg quota and so takes the majority of their broodstock from the early part of the run. Subsequent fish spawn too early and eggs get washed out by the first fall flush. Confused hatchery fish also try to spawn with the lake spawners, who have developed seperate genetic codes from the river spawners, and reverse the genetics that make these two distinct spawning adaptations successful. Hatchery gets a disease and infects all the wild fish. Hatchery takes a big chunk out of wild spawners (have to put a wier across the river of course) and then have one of those perennial distasters like the "alarm didn't work and nobody noticed" incedent that just occured a few months ago on the Nestucca. I could go on and on but by now you should have the picture - and an ugly one it is WT or no, we should all oppose this stupidity

Hey Spawnout and RA3 you've come up with the solution .....let's move all of the inhabitats of Seattle to a reservation down on some unused nuclear testing facility desert in Nevada....you guys are the scintillating brainbstormers of solving all our fish problems. Sorry Ra3 but I was in on the ground floor formation of WT back in 86 thru 90 in a flyfishing club....that group and WT has zero connection to the common fisher...hey join them if you can afford to fish Argentina or New Zealand for guess what.... non-native Brown trout.

not here to fight about that Gooose. I am a fly fisherman and a fly fishing club member. I am as connected to the "common" angler as it gets. You'd be hard pressed to find anyone in the leadership of WT who has been to Argentina or NewZealand or who could even begin to imagine being able to afford such a trip. Some of the leading members are very close personal friends and almost as dirt poor as me. not all fly fishers are the suburban driving white collares yuppies you believe them to be. and Damn few steelhead fly fishers are that way.

Having said all that.... That is not even remotely the issue here. The issue here is that WDFW is killing lots of ESA listed chinook salmon with no plans to lessen the problem even thought they were told to over a year ago. They are by their actions telling the federal government, puget sound chinook and me and you to go to hell! They are doing it with so much foreknowledge it can only be intentional. From that I can only draw one assumption. The managment of WDFW does not care if Puget Sound chinook go extinct!!!!! That is exactly what thier actions show!

RA3,WT has gone to pains to point out that it is not a fishermens organization on previous threads.They claim to be an environmental group.
I think it's pretty clear that they are antihatchery and are not merely trying to push the State into legal compliance.

OK guys I admit that I don't know everything like some on this BB do...I am in a learning curve when it comes to Washington Trout. I do know a few things though and have been around long enough to smell a smoke screen. Washington Trout appears to me to be an environmental-type protest group seeking to eliminate ALL hatcheries. Washington Trout appears to be issuing contradictory messages about their purpose or "cause". I am no big fan of WDFW but I have learned that it takes time and patience to achieve compromises. WDFW has filed a plan to amend the practices of the Puget Sound hatcheries to NMFS. If approved this plan , which I'm sure is not perfect, would make needed changes to the way hatcheries operate. We will all see what direction Washington Trout's federal lawsuit takes if the hatchery plan is approved.
Concerning the Sockeye hatchery on the Cedar: The Sockeye run is an imported one so any discussion of the "wild" sockeye co-mingling with hatchery Sockeye is just misinformed. Whether the presence of Sockeye of whatever origin damages or could damage the weak Chinook presence in the Cedar is up for debate.
And last but not least, it seems that trout fishermen always show up in the debate discussing salmon in the rivers. I'm not slamming fly fishermen at all since I partake in that sport too. It just seems to me that these trout groups ,sometimes in alliances with environmental extremeists, always complain about salmon issues. Is it because if we had no salmon in the rivers the trout fishing would be better? I honestly don't understand. Personally I think a Sockeye fishery in Lake Washington helps bring more people to the sport of fishing....AAAA maybe that's what WT and the trout fishermen don't like: All those OTHER fishermen on THEIR river, lake or stream???

Yo Gramps,

I think you're way, way off base.

With all the interests aligned against Washington's fish - from dam operators to irrigators - you're barking up the wrong tree in declaring that somehow WT is the enemy.

Are they extreme? Let's hope so! 'Cause that's what its going to take to preserve Northwest salmon. The fishing organizations, to date haven't been up to the task. Then people like yourself criticize those who do step up and fight for the fish. With this sort of backbiting and infighting it's no wonder Washington's stocks are circling the drain.

I will throw my vote into the fray. My vote is for hatcheries, the Indians, and the federal government. Without these last two groups we would be screwed in many regions of Washington ( the Columbia River comes foremost to mind). The pundits in Washington DC think it is cool to see Indians fish and so they send money. The Indians take this money and turn it into fish, via hatcheries, and we get what is left over. Better than nothing. The fishing pressure on the rivers is too strong to be supported via natural production. It needs to be supplemented via hatcheries. The state appears to be getting out of the business of fish making, and so we are left with the federal government and their hatcheries.

I started this dialogue about Washinton Trout to see what others think , not to pretend to be the world's foremost expert on the subject. Some of the people posting here express their opinions as if they are chiseled into the law of the land and anyone who doesn't agree with their posting is a pitiful moron. WOW.

I am aware that Washington Trout has been an ally in the past. The simple truth is that if they get their way there would be no fishing in Puget Sound at all. For two reasons. Their initial lawsuit that is now settled got them one of their goals which is to get the "ZERO FISHING" option on the table in the North of Falcon process. Secondly if all the hatcheries were to close the fishing as we know it would close too. There are simply not enough "wild" fish to support fishing at all. And forget the catch and release argument. WOW Trout and Steelhead come from the hatcheries too. Let's hear some substantiates facts for a change boys.

Grandpa,

Started this dialogue?

Sounds more like a bash to me. Then you try to back-peddle by professing not to know everything like some on this BB. From another who definitely does not know everything, let me offer you some friendly advice. KNOW THE FACTS before you hit the 'Add reply' button. Otherwise we might get the idea that the quote of John Wayne you made in an earlier thread is autobiographical.

4 Salt:

Oh wise one...Exactly what are the "Facts" about Washington Trout? I'm all ears...

Do they oppose all hatcheries? If not which ones do they advocate?

Did they push through the "zero fishing" option for Puget Sound?

Did they threaten to sue of the proposed Cedar River Sockeye hatchery?

Please explain to us how Washington Trout is a fishing organization. Not just started by fishermen and run by fishermen. A fisherman could start any kind of political advocacy group.

How can you positively tell if a fish is wild?

What exactly is the "documented" harm done by hatcheries?

Do I have the right to oppose Washington Trout's lawsuit without being branded a moron?

If you applaud their lawsuit and support it are you smarter than those who oppose it?

Just the Facts...Just the Facts

4salt forgive me here for jumping in but i am gonna answer all the q's raised by grandpa

1)Do they oppose all hatcheries? If not which ones do they advocate?
Answer: They do not oppose hatcheries! they oppose hatchery practices that cause problems for wild stocks!!!!!!


2)Did they push through the "zero fishing" option for Puget Sound?
Answer: I don't know but if a stock becomes listed allowing targeted fisheries on thoes stocks is illegal and it wouldn't matter if WT pushed for it or not!

3) Did they threaten to sue of the proposed Cedar River Sockeye hatchery?
Answer: Again i don't know but the state spending any more money on a nrew hatchery program is stupid when they don't have the money to run the hatcheries they already have!!!!!

4) Please explain to us how Washington Trout is a fishing organization. Not just started by fishermen and run by fishermen. A fisherman could start any kind of political advocacy group.
Answer: Is Ducks Unlimited a hunting group??? I suggest that instead of assuming things about the group that you actually get to know some of WT's members. You'll find that 99% of them are avid fishermen who want increased angling opportunityjust not at the expense of the last of the Puget Sound Chinook.

5)How can you positively tell if a fish is wild?
Answer: 1. a fin clip 2. a rubbed dorsal fin 3. in some cases the physical charecteristics
4. life history can be determined through scale samples 5. ever day WDFW bio's tell not only what fish are hatchery and which are wild but they can tell through genetic testing exactly who the parent fish were and where they spawned in many cses.

6)What exactly is the "documented" harm done by hatcheries?
Answer: if you are sincere in wanting this info I can e-mail you as much as you want.

7)Do I have the right to oppose Washington Trout's lawsuit without being branded a moron?
Answer: yes of course as long as I have the right to disagree and not be branded an anti-fishing radical enviromentalist wacko

8)If you applaud their lawsuit and support it are you smarter than those who oppose it?
Answer: NO absolutely not maybe better informed and or differently motivated but knowledge and motivation does not translate to intelligence

One question RA3: Considering the unavoidable truth that any hatchery would have some impact on naurally spawning fish is there any hatchery that you or WT wouldn't oppose?

Gooose No one on this board wants it filled with the scientific documentation he requested nor would anyone read it. If he really wants it i'll mail it to him, if you want it i'll e-mail it to you too.

If you would notice they are only opposing thoes hatcheries which have a negative impact on the wild stocks!!! There are a fewhatchery programs in Oregon that have had no negative impact on wild stocks you don't see any groups complaining about them....

I think most of the people here should be interested in the facts about the WT lawsuits and their stand on hatcheries. Most of us on here don't want to be told to stop fishing. That is a possibility if the hatcheries close.
I am going out now to find a WT member and introduce myself. I will visit the hatchery that his group is in favor of and report back.

Here is my 2 cents worth,
Ever since the Bolt Decision our State (You and I) have suffered the consequences. Take a look at our recreational fishing ports, i.e.; Westport, Sekiu, P.A., Illwaco, Tacoma, Seattle etc; they are economically devastated by the results of this Decision. Throw into the mix the ESA now WT and a basket full of other Federal decisions and anti fishing groups and bingo hardly a fish left for the sportsman to CR or CK.

Take a look back at the fees we used to pay for fishing salmon and steelhead they have gone way up with not much if any benefits to the fisherman paying those fees. Tacoma's Point Defiance area used to have the best year round fishing in the State with Winter being the best season with abundant Chinook feeders through out the Winter, now... maybe 1/8 the fish we used to have from the mid 80's back.

In my opinion the WT and PETA among other NON FISHING ORGANIZATIONS ARE THE START of the END to eliminate all of the recreational fishing in the State within the next 3-8 years.

In this thread their have been some assumptions about the Cedar river hatchery that are not correct. See
http://www.cityofseattle.net/util/CedarRiverHCP/Fish.htm