I know I'm gonna get raked over the coals for this one, but just hear me out...

I think the WDFW is wasting too much money on put and take 'legal' stockers. I heard a few years ago that it cost nearly a dollar to grow a trout to legal size (I'm sure it's more now), and I read that the WDFW was planting 2.6 million trout this year. Yeah, I know, they're good for kids, ect, ect, but...

That's a lot of money, and think about how many of those lakes that they've stocked have sub-par launching facilities, docks that are falling apart, or no dock at all. Now, I'm not proposing that they stop the stocking program altogether, but I think that a hard look needs to be taken at exactly what we get out of it. It's a fact of life that many of those stocker fish are never caught by anglers, rather they disappear down the gullets of predators like cormorants, eagles, and sometimes other fish like larger trout and bass. I was out at Gissberg Ponds several times a few years ago, and there was at least one osprey there for more than two months dining on our tax dollars three or more meals a day.

IMHO, they need to cut the stocker program, even cutting it by 100,000 fish would pay for improved launch facilities at several lakes, as well as building a dock or two. Instead, they should look at improving conditions for fish that can reproduce naturally and hold up to angling pressure, which may not necessarily be trout.

Opinions?

While I agree with some of your ideas, I do see a huge value in keeping this important recreational fishery viable. This is the fishery where kids learn to joy of fishing. And we need kids starting this sport to keep out base large enought tohave any political clout at all. It is also a way the casual angler can go out and have a good time and catch something.

I have fished Tye lake for the last two days. it has no dock, a really simple launch and dozens of folks are out enjoying the fishing. money well spent in my opinion.

BTW I have often wondered what is costs us per adult hatchery steelhead caught. I bet its a ton. Anyone know?

Here's the deal. Trout are the money maker. You better believe the WDFW makes a whole lot more through licensing of trout fishers than it loses through planting!

Warmwater fish (will refrain from using my usual name for them) don't have the appeal to fishermen that trout do. Yes, people fish for other lake dwellers, however the bulk of lake fishing is done for one species: Trout.

It would be foolish and cost the WDFW to turn away from stocking trout and their policy creating lake conditions (periodic lake kills) which are favorable to trout.

You gotta pay to play. No pay, no play.

Just think of your $40 license fee as an admission fee. If WDFW did not stock lakes people would not buy licenses and vice versa.

How many people do you know that fish on opening weekend and that is it?? I know of quite a few that buy their gear and license and only fish for trout a day or two. Great sourse of revenue for the dept and all it costs is a couple of stocker trout.

Arklier I think your barking up the wrong tree. Trout fishing accounts for the greatest sale of licenses sold. You want access you want launches, than I think everybodys time would be better spent making sure that those taxes paid on every sporting goods sale in the country for those purposes are actualy spent to enhance hunting and fishing opportunities instead of being misappropriated into the general fund where it disappears into pork barrel projects.

The state knows how much money comes from opening day of the trout season. Did you ever wonder why a three day license isn't valid for the first week of trout season? They made it so you have to pay the full $21 or whatever it costs for the freshwater license,even if you only hit the lake on opening day.

I do think that it is a waste of money to raise 2.6 million trout when the equipment at so many lakes need repair or improvement. If we say that 50% of the people who buy licenses only fish on opening day at $20 for licenses, 60,000 people would have to be buying licenses for one day. The warmwaters are treated like the redheaded stepchildren by the WDFW. When was the last time they stocked bass or crappie? No stockings in recent history. I definitely think it's a waste to poison lakes where there is a viable warmwater fishery. Yup, it's sure worthwhile to poison a lake full of 5 pound bass so that they can have stocker trout put in that will disappear a few weeks after the opener. Yup. A lot of people fish for trout because that's all they know. I saw one guy at a nearby lake with a dead 9" trout on a stringer, and when I pulled an 11" crappie out from under the dock, he asked me "What kind of fish is THAT?". Luckily, as people have moved here from other areas, the fishing opportunities have become more diverse.

Luckily, the state knows where the money comes from- trout fishermen! Trout by far have the most interest so they SHOULD recieve more dollars than scrap fish.

Personally, I won't fish anything less than trout. Most locals, I've noticed, do not have interest in warmwater fisheries..... Soooo, since there is a lack of interest, lakes should not be developed to support those game fish instead of trout.

Incidently, I don't usually fish those lakes which are stocked heavily with 9" trout, prefering quality restricted gear lakes. Actually, I fish moving water easily 80% of the time... So, I don't get the benefit of most hatchery fish either, but definitely not want to sacrifice trout lakes for warmwater fish.

The question that should be asked is, "When was the last time Tiger Muskie were planted?" Keep those little scrap fish under control!!

Imagine, if you will. Your favorite zipper, hip deep in empty worm boxes and Pautzke's jars. Thats what would happen if DFW didn't stock trout in the lakes. You would never see another Steelhead in this state because all of the "casual fishermen" and their children would be down at the ole river, drowning worms and killing smolts. If you don't believe me, just go check out a slightly smaller version of that scenario on 1 June.

G

Don't forget about the boost the local economy gets from opening day trout fishing and the weeks following it. Some towns and businesses depend on the mad rush of 'fisherman' buying there goods and services this time of year.

I think they could do a better job of stretching out the fishing season and 1) introducing more selective lakes so the fisherman will be drawn to the larger fish that actually have a chance to grow, and 2) phasing out the stocking schedule on some waters better to extend the season.

Grumpyr

I agree with you on that. I have seen the casual fisherman hit the river before and they thought they were slaying the trout at Tokul Creek. Even aftet I told them they did not believe me.

That's funny, because I feel I've moved beyond hatchery trout. I have nothing against wild or larger trout, they are fun to catch and tough to outwit. But if I'm in a lake that's stocked, then I'm not going to be fishing for the stockers. Some people seem to like chasing the hatchery truck, though. Why not just hold a net under the spout of fish as they shoot out of the tank? It's just about as sporting as fishing for stocker trout. And what about mid to late summer when the hatchery fish are all gone?

And as for tiger muskies, I believe some were planted about 2 years ago in Green Lake to control carp, which ARE scrap fish.

I think that a lot of people who look down on warmwater fish have never actually spent much time fishing for them. It's fun to hook a smallmouth bass and watch it rocket up out of the water 5 or 6 times before coming to the boat. And those topwater strikes from big largemouth are positively addictive. And there's no better tasting freshwater fish than crappie and yellow perch. Certainly much better than hooking a hatchery fish that fights like a log and tastes about the same. And trust me, I've caught enough of them.

I agree that sales tax from outdoor equipment should go towards outdoor recreation, but as for the docks argument, people seem to forget that there are many anglers in this state who do not possess boats. A good number of lakes have no public access whatsoever except for a dirt road leading down to the water to launch a boat.

Actually, tiger muskie were introduced to Green Lake to control a few scrap fish; those being perch, sun fish, as well as carp.

http://www.washingtonflyfishing.com/dc/user_files/469.html

I've gone on guided bass fishing day trips, spent lots of time in the potholes when I was younger.. Just don't see the thrill in catching warmwater fish with such abundent quality fisheries in the NW.

A trout on a fly rod is all I need, strict c&r. Carp, however, are a blast, nothing doubles over a 5 weight quite like when one slurps up a fly.

As for access... Maybe this sounds bad, but I don't particularly like the idea of increased access on many lakes as poor access can keep all but the diehards out.

I think that it's great that they introduced tiger muskies. They improve the populations of their prey species as well by thinning out their numbers. They will not eliminate all their prey species, rather cut their numbers so that the remaining fish can grow larger. Plus tiger muskies make a great fish to go after themselves.

As for making public access easier, there are quite a few lakes that are right smack in the middle of urban or suburban areas that have nothing but a dirt road and a boat launch, yet are stocked with trout and posess good warmwater fishing. And yet they are not accessable to people without boats because there is nowhere to fish except right on the boat launch. The people without boats paid just as much as the people with boats, they should have at least some access to the fish they paid to plant.

I'm not sure the point is either trout or warm water fish but whether it is worth it to spend all that money on stocker trout. I don't like the idea of Fish and Game spending most of their money on the "gimme" trout, I don't fish for them. I want my money to go to quality trout water; i.e., very restrictive limits fly fishing water. Maybe to be fair there should be stocker trout stamps and quality trout stamps. I don't even want F&G to put their K-Mart special trout in quality trout water. Both Idaho and Washington have enough lakes and rivers to provide plenty of water for both those who want to fill their stringer and those who want to catch and release big fish. The important thing to remember is you can't have both on the same water.

I too wish there were more "quality" waters. Fly fishing only, selective gear rules, 1 fish over 20"... It is very rare to catch a native or holdover trout over 20" that hasnt been just released from the tank.

WDFW thinks everyone on the westside is satisfied with going out and plunking power bait and taking home 5. Some lakes have tons of potential to produce 7+ lb trout if managed properly. I understand we need most lakes to generate revenue with the general fishing public(catchn'kill), but there has to be more than just 2 or 3 quality lakes. Heck, trout dont even taste that great

I believe the Cutthroat and Rainbow trout were the only Native fish species in our lakes...????
Didnt Californians bring anything better to WA than high gas prices, property taxes, and BASS?

Actually, bass did not come here with the Californians. They've pretty much been here for over 100 years. Here's a quote from the WDFW web page on warmwater species:

By 1900, warmwater species were common in many of the lowland lakes of the state. Because of their tremendous reproductive potential, they were soon providing anglers with a wider choice of fishing opportunity in nearly all parts of the Northwest. A survey completed in 1986 estimated that more than half of Washington's licensed anglers fished for warmwater species. Warmwater angling accounted for an estimated 3.48 million days of recreation, or nearly a quarter of the total number of days fished for all game species combined. The amount of recreation provided by warmwater species in 1986 was second only to trout fishing in lowland lakes, and ahead of steelhead and salmon angling.

And note that this survey was done nearly 20 years ago. I'm sure more people fish for warmwater fish now. Possibly more than fish for trout. IMHO, most people will fish for whatever is biting. If the trout aren't biting but there's other fish biting, then that's what they'll fish for.

And I still think it's a waste of money to plant 2.6 million trout, some of which go into lakes that have almost no access to people without boats, and many of which get snarfed up by non-human predators.

I'm going to have to agree with your origanal post for a couple of reasons. One I can't launch my boat at the public launch here in Mineral.(the end of the launch is sluffed off) The other reason is thousands of dollars are wasted feeding the darn ospreys over here. There is around a dozen birds working Mineral Lake. Not counting the eagles. The bad thing is when they get done with the lake they come over to my house and work my ponds over and the couple other local homemade ponds around here.

So good post ak. Wish there was something we could do. Seems like the general public doesn't exist to the big wigs though.

Loco Dingo - please point me to some local lakes (eastern or western WA) were there are 'quality' trout not planted by either WDFW or one of the Tribes. The WDFW 'k-mart' trout are the same ones put in all of the Eastern WA 'quality fisheries' - lenice, nunnally, lenore, Rocky Ford, (as well as western lakes like Lone, Pass, ...)...