Can you post exact directions to this hole? How about a Lat and Long for the GPS? I swear I won't tell a soul !!!

Downriggin'

I think I wasn't as clear in my previous post as I wanted to be. Killing a wild salmon is neither intrinsically good nor bad. There are wild salmon runs that are very healthy. For example, Alaska has many, Fraser R. sockeye, even Skagit pink and chum runs. There are surplus wild coho salmon in many WA rivers at least in some years, although not all. An angler's decision not to kill any wild salmon is a personal one. It may be related to the perceived abundance of wild salmon, or it may be related to something else. It's OK either way. It probably more important to understand the why of the decision than its specific ramifications, but that remains personal to the individual.

My earlier post had more to do with fishing v. not fishing and killing hatchery fish v. wild fish, which isn't exactly the same thing. Jerry G., thanks for the kind words, but there is no book. Those thoughts came from thinking about why I fish, and particularly why I fish, why I keep hatchery fish and release wild fish, and why I participate in CNR fisheries. I've been challenged by some critics to defend catching and releasing fish (obviously I like to torture animals), since it must be worse than just catching and killing the poor things. Nobody lives on this planet without impacting something, and if we're Americans, it usally means impacting the planet a lot. An earlier post described foregoing the eating of salmon as resulting in eating something else, like beef, leading to the question of where it came from and what were the impacts of its production and distribution.

Maybe it's just a feel-good exercise, but I like trying to understand how living my life affects the world around me, and how the world around me affects me. So I think I'm pretty clear about why I fish, and I offer no apologies. That's pretty good when I run into a PETA type. And it's even better to live deliberately and as lightly on the planet as I choose.

This thread has elicited a lot of thoughtful responses. Thanks to all.

Sincerely,

Salmo g.

I think that gooose did a very good job on summing up a lot of others member's thoughts on this subject! Yes, there are many true believers such as salmo, but not all believe the way that he does. That does not make him wrong, nor does it make him incorrect in his beliefs! (I think that I may have political blood in my veins now!).

CnR is almost like a religion to some members. But like all religions, many people have many different view points about it.

ltlCLEO; "Drama" was a very appropriate term to use. I for one am the kind of fishermen that can respectfully disagree with others also. I hear a lot of different opinions on this subject, and still believe that under the "right" circumstances wild fish can be harvested. After all, what biological facts support the theory that "wild" fish actually originated in the same stream that they currently strive in? That should get some of you jumping!!!

Thanks again Salmo g for being so open on this subject, and your open true opinion…I think that there is still hope!!!


Cowlitzfisherman

Is the taste of the bait worth the sting of the hook????

Jerry Garcia my personal opinions on any single person were never intended in my post nor were they implied in anyway. I gave my opinion on the subject as a whole and nothing else. If you feel otherwise then my apologies are offered for my somehow being confused about the distinction between an opinion on a subject under discussion and directing a personal barb at an individual.

As to the matter of the watersheds I referred too. There has not been a "in the river" commercial fishery on several Hood Canal rivers since around 1984. Netting in the Canal proper near the mouths of these rivers has not occured for at least a decade. There has not been a sport take fishery on chinook and coho on these rivers for at least a decade. There has been wild steelhead release reg's in place for going on a decade. But the runs of these three wild salmonids continue to be depressed or declining on these rivers irregardless of choice of ethics.

And that was the point I was trying to make in my reference to the discussion. Sorry for the confusion.

Hi Gooose, I knew right off whereof you spoke, as I have fished those streams at least once a year just for the hell of it since they declined in the late 80's, and a whole lot more before then. These little streams are horribly vulnerable to overfishing, and remain so today, but not necessarily to the fishing we all think of. Here are a couple fisheries that are still going on relatively unchecked:

1. Tribal, and even at times non-tribal, netting of chum and even other "hatchery" salmon. The early run steelhead that used to populate these rivers are in the saltchuck about the same time that many of these fisheries are going on, and very likely get intercepted "incedentally". Even if released from a beach seine or a gillnet they are dead.

2. Kids and even adults out on a summer vacation throwing a barbed hook and salmon egg in the accesible areas, especially on federal land, and "releasing trout" (ie, next years smolts), all of which have swallowed the hook and are dead on release. This is common everywhere in spite of selective fishing regulations - the ignorant crackers just don't know or care.

Add these problems to the fact that wild fish were decimated, mostly by tribal commercial fishing after the Boldt decision, but also by sportfishermen who couldn't see releasing that fish into a gillnet, by interbreeding and competition with hatchery fish, resulting in the nearly total loss of unique genetic material that allowed these fish to live in these unusually high gradient limited rearing area streams, and by the loss of pretty much all salmonids other than lower river chum and the nutrients they used to provided to the upriver rearing areas that steelhead smolts preferred, and you have a river in which the fish will never recover.

My solution - stop all commercial fishing (yeah, that means the tribes) except in the Hoodsport Hatchery zone and around the Skok. The Skoks could do this but it's kind of hard on the Port Gambles - how about they share areas with the Skoks? And stop all river fishing except for chum in the fall and total C&R of all steelhead in the winter - and maybe stop that too for awhile, although if the river was open on a permit basis, with a requirement of the permit being that all steelhead caught and released be reported, that would provide data for WDFW to track recovery. There are a very few wild fish still around, I actually released one last year, a hen that was all of 3.6 pounds - pretty, heavily spotted little thing. A few of these should be put into a broodstock program to see if these can be encouraged along. For sure stop dumping Chambers Creek stock in there - they return nothing to the fishery.

There is no reason these rivers, 98% of which are in federal lands with pristine watersheds, excellent riparian habitat except for the lower mile, with the estuaries relatively intact and mostly in state ownership, should not be producing tons of fish. Get the right fish in there and leave them alone.

H20, this reminds me of a saying of Henry David Thoreau he said "Fishermen evolve into conservationist"

Spawnout very nice reply and I agree on nearly all points you made as I have already made the very same ones on this board several times.

The one area that we may disagree on is the location of tribal netting.....except for the Port Gamble fishery at the mouth of the canal all of the remaining tribal netting has been primarily located well to the south of the rivers we both are referring to....and have been so for around 7 years.

As to the topic of this thread I stand by my comments directed at the general subject being discussed. I have a larger question of my own to resolve regarding those rivers and you referred to it already Spawnout. Sadly my decision one way or the other won't likely change the course of history for them. Thanks and let me know when you might be visiting this way.

Peace