It is getting harder and harder to bite my tongue on this thread.

Luckily my opinion of the WSC is to well know to require posting.

I will affirm that they are against any harvest of wild steelhead under any conditions and that they were organized in response to the emergency C&R closures on the S Rivers a few years back.

Apparently they blamed the harvest proponents for changing the ocean conditions that resulted in the low returns requiring the closures.

Good thinking Huh?

***sorry, double post***

Plunk,

You are welcome to affirm or not affirm whatever you want, but as you already know, you're wrong on this one. If this were the case I can tell you that our harvest policy document would not be taking so long to complete. "No harvest, ever" wouldn't take very long.

Definitely organized at that time, but completely irrelevant to this discussion.

Again, wrong...and again, you know it. You hve been saying that for three years, and the truth is never anywhere close to that, and you and I, and others, have discussed it repeatedly. Read the rest of this thread, and the other ten, to see the reasons why the WSC supports WSR...I would love for one of you anti's to actually back up your assertions with a little fact, at least now and again.


All,

This whole thread is clearly an attempt by CFM to try and discredit a dedicated organization because he has a bee in his bonnet. If you've read his stuff over the years you already know that he doesn't trust anyone or anything...every fishing group except his own has personally screwed him at some point, specifically targeting him for the screwing, not to mention every government agency.

If this weren't the case...if he were actually interested in the answers to his questions, then why does he continually tell me what the answers should be, rather than ask me, who does know the answers, and accept the answers when I give them to him? I'm not asking him to agree with me, or give up his typical windmill tipping, but to actually listen to the people that formed and operate the WSC if he wants to know what WSC policy is.

Now if he's not listening to my answers, ask yourself why. Is it because he thinks I'm lying to him? Probably not...I'd have no reason to do that, especially when the answers to the questions have been repeatedly posted on multiple BB's over a few years.

Is it that he can't understand my answers? I doubt that, too. While I do think that he sometimes says things that I find pretty incredulous, I also think he's a pretty bright guy who has no problem understanding what is being said.

So...if he truly has questions, asks the people who truly have the answers, those people give him the answers, he can clearly understand what the answers are, and then continues to needle and nitpick, swapping topics back and forth, and attempting to create the answers he wanted to get from the WSC to begin with, rather than the ones he received from them...then what exactly is his motivation?

Fish on...

Todd

CFM, as you likely know now, your registration is in lockdown mode. Not booted yet, but as I made clear in my PM to you, I'm sick and tired of coming home from fishing to see who you're arguing with ... maybe I'll change my mind down the road on it, so I left the registration intact.

There

Bugle, since you asked so nicely , I'll be happy to address your question from my point of view:

If a system can't meet escapement, then it ought to be shut down for all types of fishing ... I have no issue with that at all.

What we have on the coast right now (basically the affected streams), is a fishery that has seen a very large increase in pressure in recent years for a number of reasons.

We have some pretty special strains of fish that boot out more trophy class winter-runs than other other areas.

We have seen a slight increase in sport harvest in recent years despite lowering the daily / annual limit ... I won't talk about the "poaching" factor.

We have had five straight years of decline in our escapement, from what we've seen this year, probably six.

One river (the Hoh) has failed to make escapement approximately 50% of the time over the last 12 years ... yet with C&R regs in place, even with mortality, we would have made escapement in each case and no total closures as we have seen.

We have some left, but not even close to what we once had ... do we continue the status quo until we get to the point where we HAVE to shut everything down completely.

Or, do we reduce our impact by roughly 90-95% and continue to have long seasons with presure spread out and plenty of hatchery fish to harvest in the first half of the winter and springers late in the run.

Obviously, a pretty simple decision for me.

Frankly, given the tribes' impact and the increaded pressure, I don't think we'll be able to see this fisheries support the status quo for too many years.

I may be wrong ... we may be wrong But, will it hurt the fish to err on their side for a change? Lots and lots of anglers in other parts of the state that can no longer even wet a line might wish WDFW hadn't waited as long in their area.

We must have the fish to go fishing

Todd - I stated those three facts as I see them being true from the evidence at hand and if, after three years of intermittent discussion, the validity of those three basic facts remains unchanged in my analysis, then it is unlikely that my appraisal of history will change in the future.

Bob - You mention that without harvest, the Hoh would have made escapement validates that the stocks there are in good health. In looking at the chart for the Hoh I notice that the stock has made escapement during 6 of the last 7 years. The escapement was missed by a large margin last year due to an unpredicted and large drop in run size that resulted in an over harvest.

It appears that this discussion has come to an end but I will leave you with few quotes fromGeorge Orwell.

"Who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls the past."

"Doublethink means the power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one's mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them."

"The great enemy of clear language is insincerity. When there is a gap between one's real and one's declared aims, one turns, as it were, instinctively to long words and exhausted idioms, like a cuttlefish squirting out ink."

And finally a corruption of one of Orwell's mos famous...

"All fishermen are equal, but some fishermen are more equal than others."
(Especially when it comes to increased opportunity.)

i think its a fact that you pretty much disagree with how the state manages wild stellhead until it comes to having a targeted cnr season, why is that ? why is it not ok to bonk a fish from a river that the state says is healthy enough to handle it but at the same time when the state says a river like the skagit is 164 fish over escapment you have no problem fishing it, why is that ? how bout this, if i was at a takeout on the skagit and you floated in and i asked you how come your fishing in the cnr season killing fish (5 to 7 percent mortality according to the state), what method would you tell me that the state uses to predict the fish run size on that river that convince`s you that they know what they are doing and your not worried about it ?

Plunk ... Without the sport havest last season on the Hoh, the river probably would have made escapement or been close.

Also note in 1998 that without the C&R restrictions that went into place for the entire river, that with a normal sport and tribal harvest, we would have missed again.

Ineteresting to note too that the only years since 1991 that the river has made escapement (97 could be an exception, I don't remember the exact implementation date) was AFTER over 1/2 of the fishable water was made a selective fishery.

Odds are we're going to have more harvest here this season than projected too given the drier spring ... the river was only projected to make escapement by 40 fish, so there's a good chance it'll miss again.

All this with an escapement goal that was LOWERED in 1988 by about 500 fish.

Sounds to me like we're on the bubble here ... take as much as we can until it becomes like all the other streams that faced similar troubles in their last productive years. Let's take some action before we add another to the list

And still nobody has answered....

If they are in that much trouble, and they mean that much to you, WHY CONTINUE TO FISH THOSE RIVERS WHEN YOU KNOW WILD FISH ARE THE ONLY THING IN THERE???

It boggles the mind??? Its hard to take the pro WSR people seriously when they continue to target Wild Steelhead!!!

I've obviously chosen to go against WSR as a blanket reg. (Remember.... I'm against the way it was done, not the rule. I dont fish for Wild Steelhead, and haven't for a very long time) I think it's fair to ask how a group feels about things posted on their site... ie: the "josey" comments. Its obvious here that on this site, If Bob doesn't approve of where something is heading he stops it, I would assume it would be the same on the board where those comments came from.

Does WSC agree with shutting down steelheading in small rivers, bait bans, other blanket closures? I cant really tell from what I read on the site. (For the record, I am for the first two, not a fan of the closures, and I think people should voluntarily stop harassing wild fish in rivers where they are declining.)

Not sure I need to apologize DH, I kinda feel like those of us on the "other side" should be getting the apology. When an organization is so actively involved with such a controversial decision, it suprises me that they wouldn't expect scrutiny. Thats the way it is when you become political as a club or organization, you please some and pi$$ of others. This is a huge decision that effects a lot of anglers, you didn't think the questions would go away, or get easier did you? The comments I read there concerned me. The "pro" camp kept asking for some new questions.... "tired of answering the same thing over and over...." I asked a new question, do you as a group agree with these ideas posted on your BB? I felt it a fair question. Since it wasn't a personal attack, I'll skip the apology.

PS: As for the do something comments: I got involved, I quit fishing for them.. I highly recommend it. I absolutely will not have any negative impact on the wild steelie runs on the OP during March and April. Also involved with a couple of clubs that generally promote fishing, good times, and some legislation here on the OP. No real big political plans however, If I could I'd make it so people could only use flyrods (preferably custom sage flyrods, armed with barbless clouser minnows) while pursuing coho in saltwater. What a wonderful world it would be! Well, at least I think so.

I can't believe CFM got the boot!!

Bob ~ Isn't the upper Hoh where you do a lot of your fishing known to be a prime steelhead spawning area?

Since I do not know the answer to this question and it is not an attempt to make accusations or point fingers, but since you brought up escapement goals, I am wondering.. Do you continue to fish that stretch of CNR regulated water when escapement goals are barely reached or not reached at all and how many Anglers to you put on that stretch of water every year?

"If they are in that much trouble, and they mean that much to you, WHY CONTINUE TO FISH THOSE RIVERS WHEN YOU KNOW WILD FISH ARE THE ONLY THING IN THERE???"

I'd like someone to address this question also...

Bruce, No need to try that hard. I can't answer your question since I don't fish for wild winters.

He wasn't asking you Jerry, he was asking Bob. And it's a valid question!

Another question - Why did you lock CF's account? Because You were tired of him?

That is pretty pathetic, Bob. I thought you to be bigger than that.

,


Not just pathetic.

A great many of the people who make policy read this site. Some of them even contribute. You'll notice most of thier recent remarks seem to mirror many of the posts here. At times, word for word. Point is they are watching and listening to what goes on here. Hpoefully they read through CFM's posts, and see he said nothing to violate any rules. Because of his natural ability to get in your kitchen, he took more attacks than anyone here. Yet not once, did I ever read where a moderator(WSC) defended him against an attack. It was him against all of you. And he is more than holding his own.

If policy makers take anything from what's said here, I'm betting they see the obvious conflict of interest going on with the moderators, the WSC, and PP.


So enjoy your CFM free zone. Your stellar vision has brought the credibility of this site to areas previously unexplored.


See Ya.

I guess the timeout is kind of like you are a guest in somebodies house (in this case PP) and you are given a set of rules that you have to follow to stay. So you push the envelope a number of times over the years- right up to the line, sometimes over. So your asked to cool it a little(didn't see Bob's email to Cow so don't know exactly what it said) but you decide that you just have to be you and you push again.

I don't come to this site much...for obvious reasons now, but I don't see where CFM violated the rules...but I also haven't read any of his other stuff. Kinda BS I think to boot someone who doesn't agree with your views.

Bob, thanks for the reply.

I guess I just have a problem with the idea of using WSR to be the end all to protect fish when in reality that type of fishing amounts to harrasment and mortality also. (PETA will most definetly use this in the future) I don't think that it is wrong (WSR) and I won't pass judgement I just do not think it is the correct or fair way to manage this fishery. It may be the best for a certain group(and that is great), but it is not best for the resource or for all anglers across the state. I commend WSC for working towards saving this resource. I only wish they were saving it to ensure everyone would be able to enjoy the resource how they wish. I believe it (WSC) would be much more succesful if it approached this issue as a united group of all anglers and all users to save this great fish. By alienating anglers it is is worse for the cause. Anglers being(natives, commercials, bonkers, CNR's, guides etc.) I know, your thinking I am naive, fine think away, however we owe it to "our" kids (all anglers kids) to start looking to work together. To do anything less would be and is a great diservice to the fish. If we give up the harvest it will only be a matter of time before another much more united and powerful special interest group figures it out and works towards getting us off the river for good. They will do this in the name of harrasment. It is a grave mistake to give up the harvest and concede that WSR is the answer. A great tool yes, the answer.....probably not.

Again, my comments are not focused at any one person. It is focused on the subject and how we might come together to help these fish.

Any thoughts?

In principle, on WSR, I agree with CFM.

But his style of arguement is abrasive at best. He frequently relies on underhanded stratgies of arguement not based on facts, but rather inuendo, out of context quoatation, or putting words in anothers mouth. This can be irritating, I know personally, having butted heads with CFM on occasion.

I have disagreed with Bob on this issue repeatedly and on many different facets of the WSR. However, I have made an effort to be respectfull.

CFM has not.

CFM has needed some disciplining for bad behavior on this board for years.

Hopefully he will learn his lesson. I think he can make a vaulable contribution here. Especially where the law and fish are concerned ( CFM knows a lot about state law).

I still agree with CFM on the principle of the WSR issue, but I think Bob was clearly in the right to do what he did. In fact, he may have waited too long before acting.

Just my $0.02

Hairlipangler,
Good post and I agree with you.From what I have seen in my time here.Is CFM has had more personal attacks directed at him than anyone and I havent seen where he has broke any of the rules.I have seen where he has defended himself after someone has attacked him but thats about it.I could but wont name board members that almost always start the mudd slinging if you have a differant veiw than they do.But there isnt much use in that because they seem to be exempt for the rules.

Todd,

I hope my concerns way into the WSC's policy and stance that is being prepared. I do believe the group would be much stronger and provide more opportunties to better the current state of Wild Steelhead if it embraced more than year round CnR of wild steelheead. It would also be a group that many strong advocates for Wild Steelhead would feel better about joining and fighting if they felt they could. As it stands people that believe it is ok to harvest fish that are self sustainable feel alienated and looked down upon. I don't think this is the best way to save the fish or bring people together to better the cause....

Thanks

I am going to keep this simple With respect to both bob, cfm and everyone else.
I think we all agree on one thing If and when there ever comes a time there is enough wild steelhead to sustain a population in any river than a keep season should be established with bias. maybe a lottery so many tags such as doe tags in a lottery to be drawn or whatever.
Until then CNR of all nates should be the rule.
No B.S. No arguments we have to remember at all times what we are really fighting for!
I want my children and grandchildren to know whats its like to catch a fish! not some clone out of some disease ridden hatchery but a real fish!
Untill then I beieve that the power companys who built the dams should be responsible for the devastation of our fish runs and compensate fish for fish for the damage they have done by reducing the thousands of miles of spawning grounds for these fish.
Just a couple of other things!!! BAN ALL NETS and To **** with boldt!!! I am a native american too(I was born here) I am tired of seeing nets, in the rivers, Stripped out carcasses of hen salmon and little kids snagging salmon with trebles!!
Just my 02
Ramprat