That is a good question and one that science has not been able to answer because no one has even studied why yet. Progress is a very slow thing. (at least this is the case for the Snohimish system not sure about other Puget Sound Rivers)

I know isn't it cool, maybe now my kids will be able to see what a Native Steelhead looks like.

I hope this is not the case but do you think they have the nads to ask for that one........

Sorry, Kurt,

I thought you were talking about the "smelt" comment...

Fish on...

Todd

Aunty,

I looked at the slide show, and even if the thumbnails are cropped, when you click on them to see the big pic, they're not.

There aren't any dead nates in any of the pics I saw, at least steelhead, but there were several that were caught and released.

Fish on...

Todd

I think the decline in wild steelhead is the Democrats fault. Bill Clinton let them decline for 8 years under his reign. Forget this CnR mortality crap..it is those damn Democrats.

Vote for BUSH in 04 and I promise you wild steelhead will rebound by 2009! really...

Just took a break to see where this thread was going!

I think that this reply may have summed it better then any of the other 431 one others have!

Read deeply into what is said!

Eventhough it will fall on deaf ears, I just have to bring up a point that Smalma brought up on another board that I am surprised has not been adressed yet in this thread...

Smalma posted:

With that said, I know the vast majority of those in support of the WSR regulation would agree with me, in that, fisheries that target wild steelhead populations that are not expected to meet escapement should be closed (eventhough the Wild Salmonid Policy allows for a C&R fishery over wild steelhead as long as the expected run size is atleast 80% of the escapement goal). Simple as that!!

Its like a drug...

...I know its bad for me, but...I... Can't...stay ...away... The second is how all fishing in the state needs to be shut down now!

Funny how the only people around interested in saving wild fish are those who actually enjoy fishing for them...hmmmmmmm.

Now I have to add just one more thing as you made some excellent points.

I believe those that are throwing such a hissy fit and proclaiming that they will just not fish for steelhead because of this new regulation, honestly do not enjoy fishing for (wild) steelhead or appreciate them.

Most us in support of this regulation and those of us that fight for the protection of wild steelhead on an almost daily basis believe that there is no better gamefish then wild steelhead. Most of us also look at wild steelhead as a maginficent creature that should be protected.

We can not imagine a week gone by without atleast spending a day on the water in pursuit of our favorite fish. However, we would not take this passion so far as to fish over fish that should not be fished over.

This discussion is more then meets the eye...deep down it is a discussion between anglers who look at a fish in two very differant ways.

I am SO sick of that term...... I was born in Washington state USA.... I am a fricking NATIVE AMERICAN.......
*sigh*

MC

Sorry Bud, but the "average fisherman" in any state dumps tons of money into F&W agencies through taxes and purchases.... Tribes do neither. Tribes only take and ask for more. Big difference. If I spend hundreds or thousands a year for the priviledge to fish, than I do like to have fish dinner from time to time.
Point I guess is, I am an "average fisherman" and I take offense to being labeled as "no better than the Tribes"......

MC

Been reading and re-reading all these posts and one thing really stands out to me..... Whether or not this new rule is right or wrong is really stupid as the Tribes can kill and sell Steelhead to the public and markets. Now just how f**ked up is that people? Really?
Since I am no longer close to home, this board is usually where I keep updated on the PS news as far as fishing. I read in another post that this "Wild Steelhead" selling thing is actually going to happen? Please tell me that I misread Dave's post....... That is the thread that needs 400 replies.... Not this one, because it will not matter how many native fish are bonked or C&R'd, if the tribes effectively build a market for their net-raped steelhead, you can forget about ever rebuilding the native runs. Period. It is getting to the point where I am losing the pride I had in the fact of my son being 1/4 indian..... That is a shame.

MC

MC

Aunty,

Saying that if you get to release a fish that made it past tehn nets and release it to spawn successfully Is not an arguement pertaining to the reason the anti law change people are against it.

You people keep on arguing like people against this law are just a bunch of meat heads, but not a single one of you has been able to debate the reason we are truly against this law! I posted very strong "FACTS" that evidently people her do not want to address or cannot comprehend.

What were pissed about is that through the Stevens treaties and the Boldt decision the tribes can now petition the state for the harvestable fish that we are now not taking. I have posted the paragraphs twice. The state cannot deny the tribes there RIGHT to the harvestable fish. Those are indestbutable FACTS! That I will post again if needed. What this means is that more of those fish that you were planning on letting go anyways are now going to end up in nets, not on the end of Aunties pole so she can let them go.
Saying that we can put more pressure on the indians now is a bunch of huey. We have no leg to stand on, the tribes will always have the right to harvestable fish, And if there are harvestable fish we should have the privilage to decide whether or not to let them free or keep them. Nets dont make decisions like that.

The Take of harvestable wild steelhead has not been stopped or slowed down. The only thing that has changed is whos taking them.

CFM....here's the quote you just posted:

I still remember the mid 90's when the rivers in this state were closed to retention of wild fish due to unsatisfactory returns and I also remember the solitude and absolutely fantastic fishing I got to enjoy personnelly ,could it happen again? Man I sure hope so that is my agenda and again i say WOW, can you feel the love!!!

That is one piece of anecdotal evidence of a claim I made early on in this debate. That is that many wild steelhead advocates want C&R only because there is no question that the crowds will be cut in half. Catch and keep crowds are much larger than C&R crowds. So many on this thread want to see less fishermen on "their" river.

I don't make that point to vote against WSR..on the contrary. I just want those with agendas to look in the mirror and admit it.

Mastercaster,

Thanks for making my case for me. If you put fishing before protecting the resource you are no different than the tribes. Just because you pay for it does not make it right.

Can anyone make an educated guess on how this might turn out?

We have to start somewhere and I for one would not let this alter my decision. I am glad the law passed and I would not let the fact that the tribes MIGHT get more fish alter my decision. We must first have our own house in order before we can ask other people to clean theirs.

Get your house in order all you want but it will have absolutely nothing to do with what the tribes do. If you quit fishing all together they will still net wild fish til the cows come home.

Grandpa

Yes agreed but I wonder if they will petition the state for the harvestable fish that we are now not taking.

But MC, we really aren't Native Americans. The Indians are Native Americans...we are actually Wild Americans.