A "handfull" is an intentionally undefined amount, mainly because I don't know the exact numbers.

What I was getting at was that of all the fishing guides in the entire state who fish for steelhead, only the guides on the OP who allow CnK on their boats will be affected.

I figured that compared to all the rest of the guides in the state, that number would be about a "handfull".

Everywhere else where guides and their clients can't keep wild fish, the guides have no problem booking clients. Why the big fear that the "handfull" that do allow it are now going to go out of business. It's BS, is what it is. Not only will they lose little or no business now, think of how much more they'll get as the runs improve.

Fish on...

Todd.

P.S. Still waiting for your response to the answers I gave you for your questions reagarding the mix-stock fisheries, and others...

I think that as a group, there are a lot of knots!

Have one for me

Fish on...

Todd

Bob
I was thinking of addressing your case in my post - but I didnt. I havent ever fished with you. I am sure you are a nice fella, but I havent wanted to joing you on the river precisely because of your views on C&R. I am not a club wielding neanderthal, but I like knowing when I put the fish back in the water it is my choice to do so, not because my guide would have an issue if I didnt. I am pretty certain your clients are most all of the same mindset. I agree, you will not be affected. But it is selfish of you to imply that none of the other guides on the river will be affected. I know I will not be back next year, and will focus on rivers elsewhere. Want to say I am a special case and not representative? Go right ahead. I know how I feel, and I suspect I am not alone.

Todd
It is a shame you missed the point about the taking of photographs. Let me do a better job of explaining the irony and farce. Obviously many on this board are keen to pose and take pictures of big fish. Well, so along comes a law that instantly means your views are outdated and obsolete. You are now a neanderthal for having posed with a fish, gasping and sucking air instead of water. Suddenly, what you thought was okay isnt. Suddenly, you have become a harmer of fish.

In your post you dismissed the new stay in the water law as being not that useful. Hello. What exactly do you mean by that? Do you mean you dont think it applies to you, or do you simply mean you dont think it will make a difference. If the latter, how can you say that? Arent all new restricive fish laws good laws by definition? Careful with your answer here. It has EVERYTHING to do with this thread.


You said 'If going from 30 to 5 didn't reduce harvest, why would going from 5 to 3'? If what you say is true, then going from three to zero wont make any difference either will it?

You said 'The rest of the guides in the state, the other 85% or so, already can't keep natives in their boats.' We arent talking about the rest of the crappy rivers in this state. We are talking about the good ones that have strong enough returns to support a harvest, and should continue to do so as long as the numbers support some level of it.

I think this is very very bad. Dont ask me or expect me to chill when I am pissed. I am being honest - not disrespectful.

Well, there is one group that is going to go away, and that is the bubbas out on the OP that catch and kill way more than their 5 wild steelhead allowed per year, using creative methods like picking up an extra catch record card when they accidentally "lose" thiers, filling their first card with salmon and getting a second or third with, how about that, a whole clean slate of steelheard spaces on it just begging to be filled with the obligatory 5 wild fish and then be "lost" before it's time to turn it in, and being forgetful of things like pens, or pens that work, or who have an inability to figure out how to write in the rain with a pen, you know, all the sorry excuses for not dropping everything and punching that fish. Good riddence to you bubba - now if you have an adipose clip on a steelhead anywhere in the state you better be carrying a fresh receipt from your local tribal member - oh yeah, another creative idea, crap, should have kept that one under wraps, now there will be a run on receipt books, doh

Matt ... I'd say it's about a 50-50 split from what I've seen in the guide crew here. Many feel it didn't go far enough and want to see the elimination of bait in the fishery.

You mention all the other crappy rivers ... how do you suppose many of them go to where they are now?

Healthy? Who says so?

Over 90% of the streams that were "healthy" in this state 20 years ago no longer are ...

Might last year's big drop in fish #'s here been the start of our decline?

Has the Hoh not had total sports closures in recent years already??

Where are the early season wild fish? Have you heard of Snider Creek brood program, the reason it exists is to try to keep early numbers going to some degree.

I'd be lying if I was disappointed with your remarks of fishing elsewhere. Many of us have grown tired of seeing the harvest continue on these fish as we've become one of the few places to retain them and have watched the people looking to kill them follow them here.

Surprising enough, much of the support for this amongst local guides comes from some of the oldest ... they know what we once had and can see the writing on the wall if we don't act now.

You known Spwanout......even the best of us screw up once in a while!

People sometimes do forget to punch out a fish on their card and the sky shouldn't fall down on them when it happens! I guided for 11 years, an yes, a couple of time I forgot to punch out my cards too.

Not everybody screws up intentionally!

Cowlitzfisherman

Matt,

I've heard from some of the folks who proposed the new fish handling rule. It is intended to stop people from dragging fish up on the bank, having them flop around in the sand, and then get kicked back in the river.

There's no way to stop that via rule other than do it the way they did, and doing it the way they did also stops people who treat fish well for pictures, which I think is about 90% of the people.

Will the rule help? Maybe, maybe not. As I've noted before, it still doesn't prevent people from sticking their hands in the fish's gills, or standing on the fish's head in two inches of water to yank the hook out.

I'd say it's overinclusive, in that it prohibits too much perfectly safe behavior, and that it's underinclusive in that it doesn't address a lot of the problem it's meant to address.

Holding a fish out of the water doesn't harm a fish, whether a regulation says you can do it or not. It does, however, make it against the law.

Of course it applies to me, and to everyone else, and I'll make sure I comply.

Now, besides wild fish flopping on the ground before release, wild fish face an additional problem.

That problem is the application of sticks and rocks upside their heads.

1. biologically speaking, the more that spawn the better.
2. economically, it makes more sense to have longer seasons and more fishing days, both of which are possible with WSR.
3. politically it makes sense, we have credibility to ask for concessions from other stakeholders.

The problem is wild fish being harvested...the solution is stop harvesting them. There is no balancing act to make, it's a winner all the way around.

This is an example of a regulation that does exactly what it is meant to do.

No, they're not. Ones that address problems that need to be addressed are good rules. Ones that don't, aren't.

It certainly will...there's no fudge factor with zero. If a gamie sees you with a wild fish, how does he know if you're on your first, fifth, or twentieth? How does he know you've been good and accurate about filling in your catch record card? He doesn't.

If the limit is zero, it's pretty simple. You have a wild fish, you're busted. No fudge factor, no judgment call, no room to cheat.

They're still not going to lose any $$ over it, or bookings. In the long run they'll have more fish to fish over, which can only help business. The point about other guides elsewhere not being able to keep wild fish was to point out that it hasn't hurt their business, so why should it hurt the few guys out on the OP?

If you're worried about them going out of business, why would you insist that you're not going out there anymore? Are you just not going to fish in the spring anymore? Why would you concentrate on rivers elsewhere? You've been told, not chosen, that you can't keep wild fish there, either. What's the difference?

Fish on...

Todd

Spawnout has a very valid point ... and as you mentioned CFM .. it's not about the people that "forget" to punch one ... it happens, as I well know

What I'm referring to is the crowd that is killing dozens and dozens of fish a piece a year .. there are many that fit that bill. Many fish off private property so it's harder to get checked ...

Sorry if I come off as brash Matt ... but I'm frustrated by hearing from people that don't even live with 100 miles of these streams telling me how "healthy" they are. Spend a few thousand days on these streams over the last 15 years and live on their banks and see what really goes on and it might change your point of view ...

Todd, Bob, Spawnout:

Not too long ago all the north sound rivers were supposed to have runs healthy enough for harvest. Oops, I guess not. Nearly every river west of the Cascades was supposedly able to support harvest. Not any more. So now when I'm told that we have a small handfull of rivers that can still support harvest I'm a little skeptical.

Bob
Thanks for your thoughts. You are probably correct that I have not seen the decline through your eyes. But the two new laws together are a double hit, and remove the incentive for me - I see little point in travelling all the way to Forks so I can hook a big fish, and I cannot even take his picture, let alone decide this might be the one fish I chose to take for the year. By concentrating on other rivers I am referring to Canadian waters, which I won't name.

Some said that this will solve the poaching problem. Poachers dont care about laws fellas. Only honest people will be affected by this. A better solution would have been to go to 2-3 fish per year on a card. Or one fish, whatever. Punch card problems? Solve the problem - dont issue new cards. Poaching problem? Throw the book at them. I havent seen any river wardens on the drifts. Maybe there is a clue.

All this moritorium does is put a temporary band - aid on bigger problems... such as poaching and educating the public. The wardens are just not there because the $ is not there to have them out there all the time. To many times I see the poaching problems try to be solved by just shutting down river systems or cutting back seasons on which we all spend lots of money so we can fish. I am not totally against not keeping wild steelhead...but come on, a little education on fish handling will go a long way for some 10 year old kid to get a picture with a 20 lb. steelhead!!!

Matt T. - Welcome to this BB.

For someone with a total of three posts on this BB you certainly have strong opinions. Nothing wrong with that. There are plenty of folks who will agree and disagree with your views. I'm not suggesting that having an open disagreement with the owner/operator of this BB is a bad thing; but it never hurts to listen.

For what it's worth, there are some rivers in the State that might be able to withstand additional fishing pressure on wild steelhead. However the biological risks are simply too great. As any angler knows, WDFW doesn't have the ability to monitor and regulate angling harvest on all rivers all the time. It's too easy for a river to get overharvested quickly, particularly with the increase in angling pressure the State has experienced over the past 10-15 years. Todd has summarized much of that discussion already so I won't repeat it. Suffice to say, I agree.

And I'll do ya one better. If I'm lucky enough to land a wild Chinook or coho salmon this year in Oregon or Washington, I'll release all of those as well.

So Marsha, the idea of driving more anglers off the river is appealing to you?

I wouldn't blame them if that's the case.

I am totally for 100% recovery for wild steelhead.Maybe we should all get together right now and go to the chehalis river in aberdeen and see if the quinault tribe is totally for 100% recovery for wild steelhead while they are netting there 5 days a week.Maybe if the indians still run the show for the wfdw 10 years from now we will be creating even more moritoriums and the sport fisherman will still only be doing their part. Sorry for being so harsh but when i see and hear everyone talk about this issue in trying to recover wild fish and i drive by the chehalis and see them netting it just pisses me off. i mean come on! Is the big hatchery run to all the tributaries of the chehalis going on right now? Yeah, thats what i thought!!!!

biglarfishin- Don't buy it, two wrongs don't make a right. Yes, there is a big hatchery run going in the name of brood stock programs on the Satsop, Wynoochee and a hatchery run in the Skookumchuck. There in lies the crux of the problem, the tribe is practicing their treaty rights to 1/2 of those late returning hatchery fish at the detriment of the wild steelhead currently in the system.

Double Haul

'For someone with a total of three posts on this BB you certainly have strong opinions. '

Yup. I suppose if I made hundreds of posts and thereby became a real fish instead of a little bitty egg (I gotta go hurl now) and learned to use the little smiley things that clink beer glasses together I will seem far more likeable and perhaps even blend in. But it wasnt my intent to fit in here. I wanted to express my opinion here because I know many who lurk here had a hand in what happened. They deserve straight talk from me and anyone else who wants to speak up. I dont mince words - I talk straight about what is on my mind - no games. But I am not a troll. I wont be back, since little here appeals to me to be honest.

I think a root of the issue in this discussion is that many fisherman have managed to delude themselves into thinking they are above other fishermen, and somehow their application of the sport trancends the ugliness of bashing a fish on the head. Therefore, they think their way of fishing is the only path to conservation and good sportmanship. It leads them to be advocates, nay, fanatics against other forms of fishing, and therein lies a source of needless friction, error, and laws that do little to fix the problem.

Example? I know a drift gear fisherman whose pet peeve is watching fly fisherman wading out in front of him to their waist or armpits and walking on fish reds. He delights in pointing this out to the stupid aholes, and has very little appreciation for their snobbish views on his style of fishing. He would just as soon kick their tails and get all the 'gays' off the river. I am chuckling just thinking about him.

Where was I going with this? Oh yes. Stripped to its essence (forget about the tranquility of the river and the pride in ones's skill and prowess and all the other familiar and fond trappings), fishing is jamming a steel hook on the end of a line into a fishes mouth. The fish, upon feeling the needle sharp sting and tearing of its flesh, feels the pain and rolls and thrashes wildly, leaps to shake it, and makes exhaustive run after exhaustive run, until it is finally bent in will to be grasped by the person who has made it endure this.

Someone from another planet, upon witnessing this spectacle, might argue that the person who does this over and over to different fish, for the simple pleasure in it, is the sick one, compared to someone whose desire is to bonk the fish on the head and go home. Many C&R fisherman have managed to convince themselves that it is all so beautiful. Well, not if you are a fish. Are we level set yet?

One could agree with the saying 'Fish are too valuable to be caught only once'. Or you could also agree with the thought that fish should be caught and quickly dispatched to be enjoyed as a part of nature's bounty for man. Who is right? Why does someone have to be right? Cannot both be right? I contend they can.

To fish is to make a choice. How you fish is also a choice. The key to saving fishing for everyone isnt to divide on that choice, as so many posts on this forum seek to do by insulting other fisherman who make different choices. The key is to focus on the real enemy of fish. The dams, the Indian nets, the pollution, the housing developments that create flooding and runoff.

I will close by pointing out that the thing that makes Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation so successful in land acquisition and preservation is that while there may be bunnyhuggers who are contributing members, and who never want to see elk shot, they dont create a division or seek to change the mission of the foundation. If there were, the organization would implode. See my drift here?

And now, since I have most likely worn out my welcome, I will split.

Your PETA membership application is in the mail, Matt.

They're fish. Inside an hour of being caught (or just minutes in some cases) they'll bite again. It's because they're stupid animals with a pea brain.........and here you are describing being hooked and landed as if they're human.


Do I feel bad about landing and releasing one because it might be traumatized by the expereince and require counseling? Nope........just like I don't fret too much about stepping on an ant. I don't do it on purpose, but I don't lose any sleep either. The stupid fish won't even remember it was caught in a matter of minutes, if care is taken in releasing it.

If someone offered me free beef for life to stop fishing, I'd tell him to stick it in his ass. Fishing's not about food to me, it's about fishing. I'll whack a hatchery fish in a minute because I like fresh steelhead and salmon, but the thought of converting a nice wild fish into a turd just doesn't sit well with me.

If you don't want to fish for something you can't eat, then stay home. But don't give me some PETA-like description of C&R fishing to support your position. They're stupid fish......but extremely important and awesome stupid fish. Do you get all bent about horse racing and rodeos too? That's another one that PETA likes to tell the Martian story about......you know, how they'd come down and think we were barbarians for doing it. So now we worry about people from other planets? Please.

I'll worry about the fish on this planet, and my ability to fish for them, thanks.