Bob,

I don't have the book in front of me right now, but I'm sure you'll be able to look it up in the RCW's...the law states that it is illegal to create a blanket ban on bait in state waters. Bait bans must be specific to an area and have a specific reason to back it up...i.e., bait is banned on the summer in the Snoqualmie to protect the small run of wild Tolt River summer runs.

Fish on...

Todd.

Todd
I could not find anything under the Title 77 RCW: FISH AND WILDLIFE.
What other RCW would such a law be listed under?

One would think that it would fall under the game codes in RCW 77.

Cowlitzfisherman

Cowlitzfisherman,

It's RCW 77.12.010

Limitation on prohibiting fishing with bait or artificial lures.
The commission shall not adopt rules that categorically prohibit fishing with bait or artificial lures in streams, rivers, beaver ponds, and lakes except that the commission may adopt rules and regulations restricting fishing methods upon a determination by the director that an individual body of water or part thereof clearly requires a fishing method prohibition to conserve or enhance the fisheries resource or to provide selected fishing alternatives.

Thanks for the information!


What this tells me is that the "Commission" could close 99% of the streams for bait use and still leave the lakes open for bait use if they choose to do so. In effect, it could literary close down almost every stream that contains anadromous salmon or steelhead and leave all other none anadromous streams and lakes open to the use of bait.

Cowlitzfisherman

The RCW's addressing of both bait and artificial lures also brings into question sinktip's allegation that, "There is a current ban on the banning of bait in this state simply because one of the bait companies greased the skids of the legislature some years back."

Todd, Plunker and Cowlitz,

Many thanks for saving me the time to look the RCW up. Yes Cowlitz, I do believe that you are right in that the commission could take this step although it would probably need be done one system at a time. I suspect this is an unlikely outcome though and would certainly prove greatly devisive among user groups. While I personally think there are instances where limiting bait makes management sense, I would not want to see a statewide ban.

Plunker,

Perhaps Smalma or another of the well informed members can confirm or refute my claim of the bait companies involvement. It was told to me from two credible sources that Pauztke's Corp., of Balls of Fire fame, spearheaded the push to get the above mentioned RCW passed. This may just be hearsay and if false, I apologize for passing it on.

sinktip

Sinktip,
You're right on. In 1988 the WDFW considered a bait ban in order to manage the small existing populations of resident rainbows as well as to reduce mortality of steelhead parr and smolts during the summer season. When word got out, Pautzke quickly lobbied the law in question through the legislature.

No one else will say it so I will.. All wild and mixed stock fisheries shoule be single barbless artificial period.. end of story.. time to come out of the stone age and think about more than filling your freezer. The day of harvesting wild fish is going away and should have been done away with decades ago. Who cares what any law states. If you care about being able to fish next year you should be fishing in such a way now as to minimize your impacts/ single barbless artificial is proven to do that.

Whoa, this boat on releasing all wild steelhead is getting full, but I'm in too, especially since I can't seem to catch one anyway, I would sure like to see my chances raise. Ha ha.

You gotta be kidding! How come they were doing so great before the boldt decision? and so terrible so quick just after?

I agree with no take for wild steelies as long as they are that particular rivers true genetic stock.

No I am not kidding micro!

What is so great about wild steelhead anyway? Where did the hatchery fish come from in the first place? I don't think they pulled them out of a magic hat. Genetically they are the same fish, it's not like they turn into a cutthroat when the egg hatches inside the hatchery. Here's another thing to consider, the hatcheries don't clip all the fish, only about one in four. So, there is no way to know if a fish was born in the hatchery or born in the river. It doesn't really matter to me, the fish can be traced back to their "wild" ancestors anyway. The only benefit I can see for wild fish to spawn in the river, is that their carcasses are used by the smolt for food. Then again, steelhead can return to the ocean so that isn't such an issue.

These biologists have their own agenda when they release their research findings, alot of them would like to see fishing shut down altogether. They hide behind science all the while pushing their insane environmentalism on the public. I'm sick and tired of the government telling me what I can and can't do and that doesn't stop with fishing. I buy a license only because it works as an insurance policy against the game nazis. I keep fish when I feel like it. I'll fill up my freezer with fish and when it's full I'll release fish because I can't use them. Unless I'm being watched closely, I'll keep any fish I catch with no regrets because I know it's going to be put to good use.

Ocean conditions affect the amount of fish returning more than any one thing. As long as nets aren't strung across rivers for long periods of time there will always be fish coming back. The sport anglers will never have the capacity to destroy a run of fish as long as there are reasonable daily limits. There are too many days during a fish run where the conditions of the river are not conducive to catching fish, yet the fish continue up the river to their home.

My beliefs are based on common sense and logic and not rooted in emotion. Many of you may think I am insane or just some outlaw. More power to you, I could care less, but I just wanted to put out another point of view that I hadn't seen much written on.

Good Luck....rip some lip!

Oh. Oh now ya did it!

Ah come on, you really are kidding arent you? If you really believe that sportsfishermen are responsible for the decline of steelhead and salmon you really need to talk to a few of my friends who fished the same rivers you do before the boldt decision. For instance them canyons you fish on the skok my buddy everett used to catch and release up to thirty steelies a day in there, sometimes when he ran out of eggs he caught them on burlap from his gunny sack! my granpa and great granpa fished all over the place used to slay them in the lower river and in many other rivers. They were there fishing before and after the masacre!

what concerns me about these kind of issues is that they could become permanant. i think the current type of rule we have now(e.g. WSR unless noted) works alright, we just have to figure out which fisheries can support harvest, we just need a better way of determining these areas.

what i would like to see are "test rule changes", where a regulation is put into effect for a period of say, 10 years, just to see how it would work. if some day the wild steelies return like they're chums, reopen the meat fishery on them. i was around to witness the slaughterhouse on the nisqually in the late 80s, and really doubt that could happen today. i mean, let's get this straight, the department of fisheries actually _raised_ the limit on wild fish after the fishery became popular and people wanted more! today it would have been the opposite, and who knows, if the run was managed with a little intelligence, maybe the fishery would still be there.

were the tribes responsible for the chum fishery that's allowed so much commercial fishing in hood canal? seems that had more of an effect(especially on big hood canal coho) than the boldt decision ?

Micro,
The canyons on the skoke that "I" fish have alot more affecting them than the rest of the canal tribs,the boldt decision being one of them.

I am refering to the three north of there with limited androminous reaches.

Edit: We should hook up and do some steelhead fishing this fall.compare some notes.Hell see if you can drag Ben off of long lake and bring him too!

There is no room for harvest on wild steelhead in the state of Washington. No exceptions!

WSR is the beginning and a good start but there are other issues that also need to be delt with before things can recover.

There are some tribes that like to cheat a little. In many different ways. I have seen it first hand and saw it for almost 4 years. The truth is they do what they want the rules they put on themselves are not enforced or followed. Some are better than others.

Rich G If there is no room for harvest of wild steelhead, then there is no room for catch and release on wild steelhead. No exceptions! Catch and release angling kills and stresses the fish.

Statements such as yours only divide anglers and reveal them as hypocrits. If you truly were advocating for conservation you would advocate to shut the fishery down. It appears your only playing on conservation to re-allocate more fish to yourself. Very selfish.

Fair Hooker..you have just made the most sense of all of these people. Why should we touch the fish if they are so much in danger of extinction? Or is this about "bonking"? What a hypocritical crock.