PRESS RELEASE
WASHINGTON TROUT; NATIVE FISH SOCIETY


Agreement Expands Public Opportunity to Comment on State Hatchery Plans

Seattle – Washington Trout, the Native Fish Society, and the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife have reached an agreement to settle lawsuits brought by the two environmental groups over WDFW's Puget Sound salmon hatchery operations. The agreement creates a new, expanded public-involvement process that will enhance citizen opportunity to help shape hatchery management practices in Washington.

Under the terms of the agreement, WDFW will make hatchery management plans available for public comment before the department submits those plans to federal fisheries managers for approval under the Endangered Species Act. The documents, known as Hatchery Genetic Management Plans, must be prepared by WDFW to meet federal ESA obligations. The HGMPs have been due since January 2001.

The department submitted HGMPs for its Puget Sound hatcheries in late 2002 and earlier this year, and is in the process of preparing others for submission to NOAA Fisheries, the federal agency charged with enforcing ESA rules for listed salmon and steelhead populations.

Typically, NOAA Fisheries would seek public review and comment on HGMPs during its own review and approval process. Under the terms of the settlement, WDFW will solicit public input on the hatchery plans prior to NOAA Fisheries' review. This agreement will expand the public's opportunity to become meaningfully involved in the state and federal managers' decision-making processes.

In exchange, the Native Fish Society and Washington Trout have agreed to drop lawsuits against WDFW, which alleged that releases of hatchery-bred chinook, coho and steelhead were hampering wild chinook recovery efforts in Puget Sound. The agreement terms also included reimbursement of the plaintiffs' legal expenses.

Washington Trout and Native Fish Society charged that WDFW's Puget Sound hatchery operations were harming and killing wild chinook in a number of ways, through competition for food and habitat, displacement, predation, and harmful genetic interactions. During negotiations with WDFW, WT proposed the comment and response process as a way to make hatchery management more transparent, engage the public, and influence improvements in current hatchery practices.

“We still believe hatchery practices in Puget Sound are causing significant harm to listed species,” said Kurt Beardslee, WT Executive Director. “But we do now hope that the department will be open to improving their management practices, and we believe this agreement and new public process can move that effort forward.”

NOAA Fisheries requires HGMPs for any hatchery operation with the potential to impact a listed salmon or steelhead population. Washington state has 13 salmon and steelhead populations with federal ESA protection. Many HGMPs are still overdue the January 2001 deadline.

Under the agreement, WDFW will publish the text of the Puget Sound HGMPs in the State Register and on its website, solicit public comment for the following 30 days, issue substantive responses to the public comments, and submit the comments and responses to NOAA Fisheries. The responses and comments will be posted on WDFW's website for public review.

The settlement also sets a schedule for the completion and submission of most of the HGMPs that are still outstanding. Of the roughly 85 outstanding salmon and steelhead HGMPs, half will be submitted within 18 months, and the remainder will be submitted to NOAA Fisheries within 30 months.

WDFW will also solicit public comment on these additional HGMPs as they are completed, and forward any comments to NOAA Fisheries with the department's response.

# # #

Ramon Vanden Brulle, Communications Director
Washington Trout
PO Box 402
Duvall, WA 98019
425/788-1167; fax 425/788-1167
ramon@washingtontrout.org
www.washingtontrout.org

So Ramon,

How much taxpayer money did WT collect for their legal fees?

Are WT's legal fees going to be available for viewing?

Lets everyone take your shot at WT. Please remember that when you have the opportunity to actually give comments on hatcheries and HGMP. Do you think WDFW wants public comments?

Let's see the WDFW are 2 years overdue on HGMP. Hum if I was that over due on a REQUIRED report at work I would be fired. But hey I work in the private sector.

Get real they did something that in the long run is helping the average fisherman have input and get some of these discussions and reports to see the light of day. Not the WDFW wants to hear it. Remember that 2\3 of the people polled wanted complete wild steelhead release and they totally ignored that.

Flame away
JJ

I'd call that one hell of a bargain! It equates to about 1/4 of the annual operating cost of just one hatchery! Now we (the fishing public) have a guaranteed voice in developing hatchery reform policy! Plus, NO hatcheries are closing!

Of course none of the positives of all of this will be discussed, only more b!tching and protesting over WT recouping money they spent out of their own pockets to exact this result!

Opening the process will put some teeth into it, not just "repeat" it. I believe you must be referring to the anticipated NMFS public-review process, that this new process will augment. The NMFS public-review process will likely focus on its own approval decision, not the individual HGMPs. It will come after NMFS will have already esentialy made its decision. Actually under the terms of WDFW's Puget Sound HGMPs, NMFS is not even required to offer any comment period at all.

Now WDFW will have to submit not only its hatchery plan to NMFS for review, it will also have to submit your challenges or comments on that plan, and WDFW's response to those comments, as part of its application for ESA approval. The real issues will be part of the record, issues that WDFW might be happier to leave out. That will make it much harder for NMFS to approve a bad plan, and easier to challenge them if they do, or at least call them on it in their own public-comment process.

This will offer supporters of the HSRG process an opportunity to evaluate and comment on how well WDFW is following, or even trying to start to follow, the HSRG recommendations, before WDFW sends its plans to NMFS for approval. This should help jump-start the hatchery-reform process, and give the public an opportunity to monitor its progress.

We think the public can and should be engaged in the whole process, not just get to comment on the finished product. This year, NMFS imposed conditions on the tangle-net fishery in the Lower Columbia that significantly reduced the impacts of that fishery on listed steelhead and salmon. NMFS based its conditions on several sets of comments they recieved from WT, TU and others, over the entire period of time decisions were being made regarding the planned fishery, not just one set they got at the end. Good public comments, based on facts and good science, if they can really engage the decision-making process, can be much more effective at influencing management practices.

Ramon Vanden Brulle,
Washington Trout

We WILL have a voice! Whether or not anyone actually listens... well that remains to be seen!

C'mon Aunty, it's over now. You get to keep fishing! Bag the sour grapes huh!

Sounds like a pretty big benefit for such a nominal cost....good work Ramon and WT!

thank you washington trout! you took a stand and made a difference. increasing public comment will help us all no matter what we feel.

I second that. THe fact that our comments get to be in the record is a great thing.

Good Work WT.

JJ

WDFW did not have to settle, they could of gone to court and fought if they thought they had a good case.

WELL, i will give my comment to hatchery reform, i would like to see instead of holding ponds, they actually make holding streams that have more current flow than the actual ponds, thus it would make the hatchery fish more enable to out run the predators and they would be over all, healthier due to more exercising and using predators in the ponds ( like a squawfish with its yapper sewed shut..lol) maybe they could come up with sumthing like that, to "educate" the smolts to what is harmful, maybe a dumb idea..but my .02

Its over now??? are you serious? What happens the first time that WT doesn't get a change they want, exactly the way they want it??? Gee, back to court maybe? I think IF WT is worth a $hit they will take "their court costs" and dump it right into hatchery reform. Otherwise all they have done is extort monies from an already financially strapped program and padded their pockets with it. WT should put its money where its mouth is.

"Otherwise all they have done is extort monies from an already financially strapped program and padded their pockets with it."

I call BS...

Money covered the cost of what little litigation there was in this case. WT rightfully recoups their legal costs as determined by the court. Period. Public comments go on the record as a result...this is a WIN for fishermen, a WIN for critics of the WDFW and a WIN for wild fish...all for VERY nominal cost.

h20-
call it what you like. a large sum of money left the WDFW and went into the hands of WT.

How can that help hatchery reform in a budget crisis? do you think Gov. Gridlocke is going to give any additional money to make these reforms, or are they just going to have to do with 58K less now???

What DO you think will happen when WT makes a suggested change based on their agenda, and WDFW and whoever else is involved in the process, disagree? Back to court....

Elkrun, Very good points

Jerry, The same could be said for WT if they had any kinda case they would not have settled out of court. They would have went after the stopping of the hatchery releases.

Elkrun,

For a guy with all them degrees, you ain't comprehendin' this very well are you?

The suit HAS BEEN SETTLED!

If you read what Ramon posted, you'd see that with public input now mandated as part of the process, where's the need to sue?

How's about we focus on the GOOD things for a change!

Oh, and if you would be so kind as to let me borrow a quote from you: You are becoming WAY too predictable also!

p.s. The State spends more than $58,000 per year on toilet paper for the restrooms in the government offices! In these times of budget shortfalls, why don't we just make State employees bring their own!

Perhaps they used the hatchery release issue as a means to get WDFW to allow for public imput, maybe stopping hatchery releases was not the main issue.

Will the public get to review the legal expendatures that WT incurred that we paid for??
Great points Elkrun! I hear ya!

Predictable again 4salt-

Anyone disagrees with you, you take it down a notch.... start the namecalling (generally a sign of low self esteem).. How can losing 58K not hurt the hatcheries? It is a decent sum. your toilet paper analogy is cute and all, but really just reflects the level you want to debate on. No thanks, Its ok that you to have a different opinion than me. later.

Jerry now you are seeing the bigger picture you better watch out.

Elkrun. WT waited for over two years on the issue before they went to court. WDFW was in breach of the law, how do you suggest you get the WDFW to comply?

This is a win for wild fish. Neither side got exactly what they wanted 100%, that is called compromise. If you can't see that then our wild fish have no hope.

JJ

4Salt

What is your ongoing problem?


Where in the devil to you come up with, or draw your whacko concluding from?

How in the world did you come up with or twist it to me saying that there was a "conspiracy here" in one of my recently posted threads? Do you not understand the definition or difference between the word "Hypocrisy" and "conspiracy"?

Don't you ever post anything other then criticism of others? How about writing something sometime that can tell us all about a new fishing trick or something like catching fish instead of how to pi$$ other people off.

When was the last time that you posted something that wasn't trying to nock somebody else down? Is that all you know how to do?

Or do you just do it the best?

You must really think that your stuff doesn't stink!

When are you going to let people say their opinion without trying to put everyone who disagree with yours down? Oh, don't forget to use your "conspiracy" argument here to!

Cowlitzfisherman

I believe this also means that sporties, who have different interests than WT on this issue, MUST weigh in and comment when public comments are requested. If not, than WT will present its view using their expertise and means, and if not responded too, their view will become the accepted positiion. This may be why WDFW didn't want all of this put out to the public. As mentioned in previous posts, sporties tend to piss and moan more than jump into the process to effect change.

When such hatchery plans go out to public review and comment, sporties will have to present a coherent position and back it up with signatures or bodies to counter any disagreeable position offered by WT.

On the one hand, WT's actions may allow a larger pool of referees when making hatchery decisions or hatchery reform policies. But on the other hand, they've created a public forum of the issue, one that they have the time, expertise, and comfort level to operate within. And they have provided us no choice but to jump in and play.

Elk,

I didn't call you any names. You responded STRONGLY to my first post, so I just returned the favor.

You've got it all wrong. I don't mind people disagreeing with me at all, in fact I welcome it.

My issue here is that even though the settlement looks like a win-win for ALL sides, some people just want to continue the bashing.

Cowlitz - Huh? If you're talking about the Hypocracy thread, why didn't you post your response there? You stated an opinion, so did I. I CAN disagree with you, just like you can me. The day you figure that out, you'll be A LOT better off!

JJ-
My point is that the issue isn't solved. All that has been done is allow another avenue for more lawsuits as I explained in my first post. I understand the concept of compromise. It is my opinion, all that was compromised was 58K. The WDFW cannot please all interest groups. I realize they are not a perfect organization by any means, but I have had the sense that they are trying to make positive changes and listen to more input from the public as it is. They are not an instant gratification type system. Changes take time. We want wild fish back now, but that wont happen. I spoke with a biologist last week after he spoke at a meeting I attended. We discussed this very topic. They have lots of great changes in mind, there are some great idealists working there. The problem is funding for these changes. SO, back to my point.... would WT like to really see some changes or is that just a platform for fundraising? Earmark that money for some specific changes that both sides agree need to be done, and give it back. Come on, as was pointed out earlier by an unnamed responder... 58K is mountain money

If thats how you see it.... I responded strongly, you made it personal.... again (the predictablilty piece). You just dont seem all that "welcoming" to me.

obsessed

very good observation… We sport fishermen must be willing to engage in informed debate regarding hatchery management and salmon restoration.


ramon vb

congratulations on the settlement… I thank you for your work on this issue

58k was their legal cost. They didn't make anything by settling, they just paid their lawyers fees. That mountain of money won't go towards anything other than legal costs WT has already incured. The WDFW agreed they were in the wrong, so they had to pay the complaintant's legal fees. Its pretty standard.

J.J. Just because I see the big picture doesn't mean I agree with all I see.
Elkrun the $58,000 was divided between WT and the Native Fish Society, and approved by the court and WDFW.

Darn typing mistakes.... I meant to type "Mountain Money" . It was supposed to be a cute reference to the toilet paper analogy typed earlier... mountain money as in TP. Obviously it would have been much funnier had it been typed correctly.



JG- I'm still not convinced this is over. Only time will tell. Sometimes court cases are settled not because of someone being at fault, but it's easier/cheaper to settle than spending for defense of a lawsuit. Especially, when its other peoples money you settle with.

OK folks,

Here's how it usually works and is probably where the "money" is going to go! This is by my own personal experience. Usually, groups such as WT have attorneys who represent their client's on a Pro-bono basic. Simply stated, that means that the attorneys only get paid for their "out-of-pocket" expenses i.e. travel, phone, fax, mailing and filling fees.

But, and it's a really BIG BUTT, almost always the deal is agreed to before hand that if the pro-bono attorney wins his/their case, "they" can collect "reasonable attorney fees" ($200+ an hour). Most attorneys keep daily phone logs and every second of that "time" that he/they "discusses" any issue of the case (might even include a fishing-viewing type of trip on one or more of the rivers involved), he will be keeping his log a running! Lets see; 8 hrs @ $200 looking over river with so and so to discuss what to do= $1600.00 + milage= $120+ meals =another $75.00 +phone calls concerning river tour another 3 hrs= $600.00 more. And when you have two "attorneys" on same trip doing it, the cost of that expositional fishing trip could easily be well over $4780.00!

I know, because I work with an attorney and get to review his billings. Even if the attorney who is doing the pro-bono work doesn't get a single penny from his "clients" that he is representing, the attorney still gets the full "tax write off" for doing his pro-bono work (anyway, that is my understanding).

So the simple fact is; if you want to take on the WDFW, make sure that your attorney is a fisherman who is willing to do it on a pro-bono basis! If you guys think that for one minute WT paid weekly or monthly payments to their attorney, then I got some real great "ocean view" property in Arizona to sell to you.

That's the Game, and that's how it is played!!


Cowlitzfisherman

If groups such as R.F.A., P.S.A.,T.U., W.S.C., F.F.F. can use science[not "I want"] to make their points within the new hatchery review process the impact could be incredible!!

Jerry,

You my friend are a genius! That's EXACTLY what should happen, and now we have the legally mandated forum to do it!

4Salt

Enough is enough!
Kissy, kissy, kissy, kissy!!!

After awhile, is kind of sickening!


Cowlitzfisherman

You all may be right about another forum for public opinion being a good thing, but I'm not convinced.

I have a sneaking suspicion that the WT lawyers will use this to their advantage to sue the state on other issues or at the very least push their anti-hatchery agenda.

I think this is part of WTs consistent legal strategy to keep a high profile. Notice the PI articles and press releases. They can trumpet from the montaintops that this is another victory for fish, but in reality this is just another $58,000 to employ some lawyers and a bunch of good press for WT to go and seek more grant money.

Nothing has really been done to help the fish. The key to salmon recovery is habitat issues.

Why doesn't WT sue bonneville over dam operation or maybe sue developers or foresters over habitat degradation?


If WT really cares about the fish, they should spend more time working on habitat issues and less suing the state or spouting off to reporters. Even if it means less publicity for WT or less money for their lawyers.

Cowlitz Fisherman,,

BINGO! on both comments,, maybe some of that TP could be used to wipe some brown stuff off of ones nose!

It sure would be fun to review WT legal fee's huh?

Cowlitz,

You tryin' to start another "dull" with me.

Didn't yer momma teach you nothin'. The only thing sickening here is your pathetic attempt to appear remotely intelligent!

How old did you say you were? It used to be said that with age comes wisdom. In your case, that is one virtue that has completely escaped you!

Na Na Na Na Na Na! :p :p

Driftboater - And we were getting along SO well! You and Cowlitz must be long lost cousins!

p.s. sorry mods, this time I just couldn't help myself.

4Salt

You have put your own "nails" into your own coffin!

Your reply only needs to be answered to show one issue, and one issue only! Whenever another man starts talking a bout another man's mother in the way that you have done, it is a non reversible down hill slope for him to climb from that point on for that person.

Well that is an older man opinion!

Cowlitzfisherman

I think judgement of the WT/WDFW settlement needs to be reserved until much more factual information comes out from those involved. Right now we have Ramon's press release which is appreciated and to the point and some initial superficial news reports . Hopefully we will be able to see the other view point from those involved in the actual hatchery review and reform process. Then we can adequately assess the merits of the lawsuit and the $58,000 in legal costs levied against WDFW.

Public comment has always been part of the process. The trouble has been that public comment from sports fishermen has been lacking and sometimes rare. Not so this year. RFA and PSA, to name only two, have been at the table big time and will continue to be for good ,solid , constructive progress in the promotion of sports fishing in our state. The impact for change has been realized by that involvement in recent times. Good things are happening to improve the conditions for our wild fish without lawsuits. I'm sure the groups that have been working hard to present recommendations for hatchery reform will weigh in on the impact of the WT lawsuit in good time. I strongly feel that progress was already being made without the lawsuit and that it will continue to be made before, during and after the next lawsuit.

I think those who call this a "win-win" deal may not be totally wrong but if you believe, as I do, that the ends do not necessarily justify the means you may want to look at this a lot more carefully before jumping for joy just yet.

The debate is not over and is, in fact, just getting started. I am hoping that WT does not take too much credit for impending hatchery reform. I hope WT does not gloat that they made all of this reform possible. So many well meaning people have been working hard, even if admittedly slow, to see positive changes come to pass.

One positive change that came of this lawsuit is that a ton of people have the micrscope focused on Washington Trout. We should all watch what they do and not just what they say.

Very good post grandpa!!

Cowlitzfisherman

This is what happens when you base your attacks on an organization beased on your preconcieved notions about that orgainization bordering in hatred. Anti WT people need to look at the historic dealings of WDFW and acknowlegde how badly they need public oversight. Thoes still badmouthing WT IN MY OPINION , prove what i was saying all along it's not about facts but keeping hatcherys open at all costs and silencing any opposition to that end..
Thank you Washington Trout for taking on this effort and seeing it through to a meaningful conclusion. and thank you for the thoudands you spent in habitat restoration on the Washougal river and the many other projects around the state.

Go Rob! Well stated, as always. See ya over at Westfly, where there is less knuckle dragging.

Back Eddy

hmmmm


Back Eddy
Fry
Angler # 4324


posted 05-14-2003 07:34 PM

I have no idea what to use for the bass. But should you be fortunate to catch any, KILL THEM ALL! There are over two dozen NON-NATIVE fish in this state, many of which live in Lake WA, and they almost all feed on salmon smolts. Mash them into the bottom of the boat, or even eat the damn things if you must.

Death to bass and all non-nates


Very well said Back Eddy....The Westfly boys will be proud of you.

Another attempt to "welcome" someone elses opinion? Did they come one too strong again, so you couldn't help but make it personal?

FYI,

On Saturday, May 3, the WSC hosted Steelhead Summit 2 at REI in Seattle. The WSC would like to publically thank all the organizations and clubs that attended and participated. We are truely developing a coalition! What I witnessed yesterday was truely a working together/collaborative relationship by diverse organizations such as PSA, Trout Unlimited, FFF, WT, American Rivers, NW Marine Trade Ass'n.

Dave Bailey, once again did great job planning/coordinating as well as support from Dick Burge and Jack Berryman. Also thanks to all the other WSC board members who participated and helped out. Dee Norton once again was our reporter on the spot and I am sure will compose a great report. We are truely developing a strong voice for steelhead!

If your organization or club is interested in participating in future summit feel free to email the WSC Summit committee atcaptain@olypen.com

Elk,

Didn't you read the 2 posts just above mine?

If not, here the are:

Originally posted by Cowlitzfisherman:

Then Driftboater adds this constructive comment:

And you're chastising me for responding to that crap? Actually I'm not surprised in the slightest.

Look, it's plainly obvious that you don't like my position on the WT issue, and you also harbor some feelings of contempt for me in general. Hey, I can live with that. But what's say we at least pretend to be reasonable and civil for the sake of the board.

Cowlitz - I apologize for the momma comment. Your constant personal attacks piss me off sometimes. I'm growing very weary of this constant squabbling.

ONE MORE TIME, let's move on! Whadda ya say?

4salt- wrong again! I actually hope your take on the WT issue is the correct one! Who wouldn't want more Natives and better hatcheries? I'm just not sure that this will do it. As for contempt toward you... Way to strong of an emotion to waste on a fishing board. Really, I'm indifferent to you. You claimed I had a "strong" response to a view you had about the WT issue and thats why you replied the way you did. I looked back at my comments and nowhere did I say anything negative about you. Constantly, you slam people, under the pretense of debate. If this were a debate, you would have been disqualified long ago. I did say you are becoming predictable. But look back at your posts, theres a pattern. Someone has a diferent opinion, you're right, they're wrong, and you start the personal crap. (I honestly dont know why the moderators let it go so long.) I do think you make a good points, when I sift through the other stuff however, and thats why I dont just ignore your posts. I will continue to state my opinion whether it mirrors yours, or conflicts with it. I only hope that you can stick to a more civil manner of reponse in the future. Moving on....

I'm only going to say this once more, and then you folks can flame and accuse to your heart's content.

Aunty - NOWHERE in this discussion did I insult you and you know it! If you think that calling me a brown noser is legitimate counterpoint on the part of CFM and Driftboater, neither of whom I directed ANY comments to, well, then it only serves to destroy the last shred of respect I had for you. (Yeah, I know, like that means anything to you. )

Elkrun - After reviewing the post that started the reparte' between us, I see where my opening statement could have been construed as patronizing. I apologize.

That's it folks! Take it for what it's worth. You are welcome to have the last word, as this BB interaction obviously occupies a much higher priority level in your lives than it does mine.

I'm truly convinced that 4Salt, Ramon, AuntyM, elkrun, driftboater, cowlitzfisherman, and grandpa (maybe even Parker) is just really only one individual with MPD.

I'm pretty sure I don't have MPD, but the voices in my head keep telling me I don't, so I must be OK.

You have way more posts than I do 4salt!
Anyway, I've been home sick this week so maybe you're right, Time to sign off for a while.

Well, I just have to weigh in here. I'm back in Philadelphia on business so have been following this all from afar. I say, on balance, good job WT. The $58K is not much money (the way the Govt. looks at this anyway) and I feel that the new requirements for WDFW response to public input puts an additional level of responsibility on that agency. And I think that is good (again on balance). Do I like the tactics that WT used to effect this result? No, not really. Do I like the result? Yes, on balance. I agree with Grandpa (shocking!!) and will quote Ronald Reagan (even more shocking!!!). What we must do with both WDFW and WT is trust - but verify. This could be a very good outcome but only if we, the sportfishing public, make it so.

Phucking-A...........

Are you guys reading the **** you're posting?

Eddie....No one in Seattle spending any money? You aren't just saying you agree with me in a sucking up fashion so I'll buy some of your wares are you. I really have my eye on that pink G-string you showed me....ooops

Back to the lawsuit settlement...nothing is out in the public eye yet so the oversight part of the agreement could be good but it could also be a paper tiger. We will soon see.

i would have to agree 100 percent.

Yea I read my posts Dan, This one made me laugh even harder reading it again..

I didnt even mention any name in my little "fun" post, so quit the snibbling 4 salt!

Grandpa - you should see what these guys out here in Philly fish for.

It may be a paper tiger, that's true - but you know me - always looking for the good in folks

Eddie ....you are the consummate diplomat in a sea of heathens....

Why does it seem like I always post after Dan? Anyway, here I go. First off WT did exactly like I said they would, settle out of court. The whole point of their lawsuit was to close or reform hatcheries that were killing native salmon. Did this settlement close or reform a single hatchery? Nope. Did it help in any way? Some say yes, some say no. But we already have public comment periods for all fishing issues. And most of the public comment goes in one ear and out the other. We have always had the right to sue and for any reason at all it seems. Even Oreo cookies for God's sake. That is why this whole stupid issue came up. WT didn't like the way WDFW was doing things. So what did this settlement do? It caused WDFW to give WT a bunch of money that could have been better spent on any fishery issue. The WDFW is given a budget each year. They do not get to pay this settlement out of the general fund. How about this. WDFW spent money to fight this suit too. If WT spend 58000, then WDFW spent at least that also. So a total of 116,000 was pissed away. This money could have been WAY better spent. I believe there are still some other suits that WT has filed that aren't included in this settlement. How much are we going to shell out then? It is time that WT face the music and realize that the only thing they are hurting is themselves and the fish. I think I may even sue WT for some goofy reason just because I can. Maybe false legal fees?

4Salt,

The problem as I see it, for whatever it is worth to you; is that you come on way to strongly to others when they may disagree with either their post or their opinion! Do we (yes that's me too) also do that? Yes, but nowhere near as offend or as much as you have been doing.

Disagreement is something that we all have to live and deal with daily. That is what makes change! But in doing so, we do not have to keep knocking other board members because they do not agree with our own opinion. You appear to be really good at writing, but not so good at knowing when you have overstepped your own voice or choice of words. Attack words are not always the "best ones" to use to prove a point.

A good debate of what we/or you conceive are the real "facts" is healthy, and it does not "ruffle" everybody's feathers either! You just need to learn NOT TO go on the "attack" mod whenever you disagree with others. Sometimes the "smartest" remark in a post is not as "smart" to others as it may be seem to be to the person who is making it!

I have been called to the line on several of my replies and I do not take offence to it. It's been a growing process in my life. Today, for a way overdue change, I took it off and went fishing for the first times in many weeks. It was great! May I suggest that you do the same, and take a day or two off and relax!

I guess we just all need to take a few minutes before we reply and think about what we are saying to each other before we print it!

No offence intended,

Cowlitzfisherman

now we are talking, lets so the bill, since we have to pay it!

Ain't THAT the truth. Our failure to organize as sportfishers jas cost us in the past, and it's still costing us.......both in dollars and resource.

But, after reading this thread, is it any wonder we can't find common ground and instead insist on focusing on our differences?

In the long term, we'll all be worse off because of it.

Ramon, you are done. You thought that WT reached a reasonable settlement on the hatchery issue, but wait for your next blast. I predict that AuntyM is gonna get after you big time as soon as she finds out that WT shut down a huge commercial river pollution operation, and is also fighting to stop tangle nets in the Columbial River.
Zoom Zoom,

ctflyfish that was a really quality comment.....sorry but not.

If we can't come together as a group and let some of the little issues slide for the greater good W.T. will be the only ones giving meaningful imput to WDFW on hatchery issues. Goodgod, if all of you put a little of this b!tching energy into fish issues you wouldn't be stressing over this crap.

Suing = Fighting dirty...

...= Hogwash

Jerry...I respect your wisdom on this subject and agree that this gets out of hand and petty but it is an emotional issue with well defined battle lines. Our fish populations worldwide have been allowed to be plundered for profit for so long without mitigation that now we are in a real mess. We are simply debating the issue of a minority, and some say extreme, position to solve the problem by eliminating hatcheries and all non-native species. There are many groups and individuals working on habitat improvements and hatchery reform ideas, not just WT. Just because some of us go a little nuts in opposition to WT's tactics doesn't mean we aren't working outside of this forum for positive change. A pretty good majority of us disagree with the gun-to-the-head method of getting our way.

I disagree. I think both are just examples of how things get done in this country.