Just like I said,we release nates so the gill killers can increase their catch. Way to go, we still have not learned from out past mistakes and continue to let the commercials out manuever us and to lead us around by our noses. If you vote and fish, then you should be outraged, if you fish and don't vote, you should be ashamed.

SSF,

Can you elaborate on the commercials' stance? Curious...

Thanks!

Fish on...

Todd

how about a link so we can see/read what as got u going.

I don't know if any one has read the little rag the PSA has put out but they are really bashing the C&R mandate. I have read several of their issues because they drop them at our shop and recently the person who writes the casting in the wind (should be farting in the wind.) Really ripped into the wild stealhead coalition (special interest group). From my perspective the PSA is only interested in whats good for them and not what's good for the resource. I will recomend that any one on this board who really belives in the value of protecting wild steelhead not donate or join the PSA.

I'm the author of that article and I stand by what I said. Firstly, I never even mentioned the WSC in that article. I didn't name any groups or persons. This has been hashed to death here on this board already but I'll say it again, this new mandate will not do any good. The runs will continue to decline long after they've closed all rivers to sportfishing and only the Tribes can net. You honestly don't find it infuriating that the commission you all were praising for making the decision is trying to allow a 200% increase in wild steelhad bycatch in the Columbia River system? Do you really think the commission or WDFW actually cares about the resource? If anything, this proves my point. They pass yet another restriction on the sportsmen (the largest economic contributers of the resource and by far the least damaging to the resource) while at the same time, while people are praising them for the decision, they stab you in the back.

W. Coyote,

Thanks for pointing this matter out. It looks like two whores fighting over the same side of the street. (comercials and PSA). my 2 cents.

Cigar

Classy remark. Divided we shall be conquered. While we sportsfishers are busy fighting amongst ourselves, the commercials and PETA-types take our sport away.

I am a member of PSA and can tell you that PSA as a whole does not share the beliefs of those articles that Jacob writes. I for one have been cringeing every time I have read one of Jacobs articles. THese are his own ideas and ideals, please don't speak for the rest of us Jacob.

Steve Ng

Just out of curiosity, what other articles of mine have you cringed at? My article on how to rig a float fishing out fit? Perhaps it was the story of introducing my brother and friend to steelheading? Or was it this month's column on how to rig a pink worm? Just out of curiosity.

w. coyote and Cigar:

You are way off the mark in your blanket criticism of PSA. I would submit that, as an organization, PSA is currently doing more positive things for sports fishing and shell fishing than either one of you would ever accomplish in your lifetimes, and more than most organizations in Washington combined. Sorry fellas but you are both way out of line. Sports fishing advisory groups are made up by and large by hard working and dedicated volunteers and most of them are PSA members. Many of the positive things evolving in sports fishing are thanks to PSA. Many other groups are very active in a positive way including WSC. No one that I know in PSA bashes WSC. Personal opinions may vary widely on the issues that WSC champions but no one and certainly not PSA as a whole doubts their passion for our fisheries.

Personally I am for WSR but totally understand and respect the other side of the issue. You two might try it sometime. See both sides, make your case and respect others. Instead you choose to bloviate , all puffed up with your own narrow agenda. You obviously do not understand what you are bashing. Positive actions walk the walk and hollow ponitificating is feeble and embarassing. Read your posts again and if you are not embarassed you should be.

The REEL NEWS is not published by PSA but by Jim Goerg who , I submit, has done more for the advancement of sports fishing than you two blowhards will ever do in your lives. The paper is a vehicle for a fee for groups like PSA to get the word out about what they do. The REEL NEWS has been honored with excellence awards in outdoor writing and was voted the publication of the year in its field last year. Hardly a "RAG. The REEL NEWS has a subscription tally of about 30,000. Every issue has a tremendous amount of fishing information you won't find elsewhere. Several contributing volunteers write about things they care about and voice a wide range of opinions. No one asks you to agree with everything but we would ask that you think before you spew.

I wouldn't be so pi$$ed if you had some substance to your argument but like so many on this BB you only see your outlook on things. Have you gotten down in the trenches to make any difference on the issues you are passionate about? Do you think that anyone who disagrees with you is stupid?


Steve Ng....Every member of PSA has a voice including Jacob. Write an editorial about your disagreement but don't worry that PSA speaks for you. Come to the board of director's meetings and find out more in depth info on what the consensus is. If you don't agree you are totally within your rights to do so. PSA is not a single issue organization but a group of volunteers looking to do something good for the future of fishing of all kinds. WSC is a wild steelhead organization and they have their agenda just like PSA does. At PSA all members have a voice.

Jacob, you have had more than one article *****ing and moaning about many things, including the tribes, the WDFW, that nothing will be done by the comission, etc. If I had the reading material in front of me I would quote you, but I don't. I do believe that you have a right to voice your opinion, but do not include "me" as part of your opinion as a PSA member. One of the reasons that I cringe is because, if I seem to remember correctly when you first showed up on this board you did not seem to know much about steelheading and now you are the "Pro", but I might be completely wrong on that. If I am set me straight and I will accept that I am wrong!

And Grandpa, I imagine that every chapter has a certain consensus on such matters, and I do not believe it is the concensus that Jacob portrays, at least not in the Gig Harbor Chapter, but then again, most of the guys down here are not steelheaders.

And BTW this is my editorial.

Steve

There were many different orgs. at the Steelhead summit last year. The consenses was to support WSR, was not PSA on board with this?
Why the slanted artical Jacob? Are you just writing for yourself or PSA as a whole?

Do you want to be able to fish (at all) for steelhead 5 years from now? Do you want your kids to be able to fish for steelhead?
I have still yet to see too many steelhead in a river. :rolleyes:

The only other thing I can think of would be a bit I wrote in the February issue where I told the story of the game warden kicking us off the Snoqualmie a week before it was supposed to close. I pointed out that there was obviously a communication problem between WDFW and the game department. I didn't realize that would be controversial. I've only written 3 articles under the Casting in the Wind title. The first one was the story and the game warden issue, the second was the one you don't like, and the third is about fishing the pink worm. In January, I wrote Plug Cuts column on how to float fish. That's it.

Steve...I think it is important to point out that there are 14 chapters in PSA and all of them are very independent. When we vote at the state board meetings it usually isn't a vote to endorse a special issue like WSR. I missed the March meeting where WSR was discussed. The chapters on the OP are against it I think. PSA does not focus on steelhead issues like WSC does so it should be no surprise that we don't take the lead on large steelhead issues like the moratorium. With a big , diverse, group we can't agree on many things. What we do agree on is moving the North of Falcon process forward with proactive measures to improve sports fishing. Also it is important to know that the REEL NEWS and the writers who voice their opinions there are not the "official" mouthpiece for PSA. It so happens that many of the people who have some standing on the sports fishing scene are members of PSA and contribute to the paper.

To respond to the ridiculous claim that PSA and commercial fishing interests share the stage. I would say that nothing is further from the truth. The WDFW Region 5 managers down on the Columbia River are the ones who petitioned the NMFS to triple the allowable mortality impacts on ESA fish. This is specifically designed to allow the commercial fleet to target more fish in the river. I think it is safe to say that most PSA members are against that.

I understand that this is predominantly a steelhead board and so anyone who speaks up against WSR is soundly bashed and shut down. Many people believe that WSR is a good idea but do not share the belief that the moratorium is the way to go. I think there is some merit to the belief that WSC is a special interest group with a narrow agenda. With that said, I would rather have them doing what they are doing than not. I think there is a lot of anecdotal evidence showing that alot of supporters of WSR and the moratorium support the plan because they believe that catch and keep fishermen are a low form of life and wish they were not on the rivers. WSR will reduce the crowds of those undesirable "crackers" so it is good for that reason.

This board resorts to personal attack alot and it is tough sometimes not to respond in kind. People here have crushed opposition to the WSR policies. To me it is unfortunate because there are definitely two sides to this story. Apparently only one is welcome here.

Grandpa,

I do not feel that my oposition to WSR has been crushed. Far from it. Certainly I have been argued with, but none of these arguements led to a clear superiority of the WSR position(scientifically speaking). The fact is that WSR is the law of the land for the next two years. In two years, the arguments will resume in earnest and more data will be present. I do not think, if science is the prime consideration, WSR will be reinstated.

Certainly the majority of the members of this board do not agree with me, but that's ok. Right nowm, WSR is not forever just two years.

I think respectfull dissention is an important part of any discussion group. In fact, a respectfull hashing out of differences may help to bring us together as sportfishers. We could certainly use more unification.

WSC has worked very hard on WSR. While I think those efforts would have been better spent on other issues, I do respect them for their dedication.

Unfortunately, it appears participating in the political/legal areana is the only way to get what you want for the resource these days. Clearly WSC and WT have learned this lesson. The angling community at large needs to learn it too. I don't agree with the way WT, and WSC have conducted their agenda's but I have to agree that they have been effective in attaining their objectives.

Maybe common anglers needs to come together and form a comprehensive political agenda (right after hell freezes over).

I got this from PSA's March Board meetings that was sent to me. So it appears to me as an outsider that PSA isn't infavor of the steelhead moritorium.
JJ

On behalf of the NOP chapter, Dave Croonquist presented a resolution passed by the NOP Board in opposition to the moratorium on retention of wild steelhead and asked for support from the PSA State Board. The resolution was read and the Board passed it unanimously. Dave also indicated that a letter was being prepared to send to WDFW Commission Chairman Will Roehl. Copies of the resolution and letter follow.
*****************************
North Olympic Peninsula Chapter
March 4, 2004

Mr. Will Roehl, Chairman
Washington Fish & Wildlife Commission
600 Capitol Way North
Olympia, Washington 98382

Dear Chairman Roehl and Commission Members:

The North Olympic Peninsula Chapter of Puget Sound Anglers (PSA/NOP) does not support the imposition of a statewide moratorium on wild Steelhead retention. We would like to make the following comments about the moratorium:

• Process – The process that resulted in the moratorium was flawed and not consistent with your normal approach to regulation setting. It appears that a specific interest group had an agenda and used the system to obtain their goal. Their goal was not subjected to public or Co-Manager query and was in conflict with staff recommendations.
• Wild Steelhead Declines in the Strait of Georgia and Puget Sound – The moratorium does not address the problem (cause) and helps hide the symptoms. The WDFW and the Commission should work proactively to complete and implement the new Steelhead Management Plan.
• Sustainable Fisheries Act, 1996 – A goal of the Sustainable Fisheries Act was to ensure sustainable fisheries and permit harvest on healthy species/stocks. A statewide moratorium on wild steelhead retention is counter to the stated goal of the Act, given that the Co-Managers have identified harvestable stocks of wild steelhead, many of which are indigenous to the Olympic Peninsula.

The PSA/NOP Chapter requests that the Fish & Wildlife Commission modify the applicable regulations based upon WDFW staff and Co-Manager recommendations to permit wild steelhead retention in watersheds that have been determined capable of supporting a wild steelhead fishery based on scientific evidence of wild steelhead populations in excess of the numbers needed to sustain the run in a river or river basin.

Please understand that PSA/NOP chapter leadership and members are conservation activists and are members of many WDFW Advisory Boards. Our primary goals and involvement are directed towards:
• Conservation of species/stocks for future generations
• Habitat restoration and protection
• Science based management of resources
• Sustainable fisheries for recreational, commercial, and Treaty fisheries

Sincerely,
Tom Duttrey, President
Puget Sound Anglers, North Olympic Peninsula Chapter
84 Windsong Ln.
Sequim,Wa. 98382
360-683-0681

Pasting errror here is the the second half.


The North Olympic Peninsula Chapter will be requesting PSA State Board support for the following resolution:

Whereas the Wildlife Commission has placed a two year moratorium on the retention of wild steelhead from rivers of the state where the scientific data as prepared by WDFW staff indicates that a harvestable surplus in excess of escapement needs exists and:

Whereas there are concerns over the process used by the Wildlife Commission in presenting and passing the Wildlife Administrative Code regulation without full public discussion and:

Whereas there will be an economic impact on the communities and businesses in the vicinity of the rivers and streams that are closed:

Therefore, let be it resolved that the member chapters of the Puget Sound Anglers organization are presenting their opposition to the Wildlife Commission moratorium on the retention of wild steelhead from those rivers that have a harvestable surplus in excess of needed escapement goals and respectfully request re-consideration of the action pending scientific proof that such harvest would be a detriment to the wild steelhead population in the affected rivers.

******************************
Clint Muns read a letter that he had prepared for the City of Forks to help them in their presentation to the WDFW and Commission concerning the moratorium. The PSA Board approved Clint’s actions on behalf of the PSA Board and chapters. A copy of the letter follows:
PUGET SOUND ANGLERS STATE BOARD
To whom it may concern,

The organization of Puget Sound Anglers, currently representing 14 chapters throughout Western Washington, has held a position opposing ‘statewide non-retention of wild Steelhead’ for several years.
This type of regulation ties the hands of the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, in effect not allowing the Department to manage the resource based on science and maximum benefit for the people of the state of Washington.

Many rivers, having been under this type of regulation for a number of years, have shown little or no sign of recovery, calling into question the claim that this blanket regulation would help the recovery of wild Steelhead.

Tribal harvesters may take advantage of ‘Forgone Opportunity,’ effectively neutralizing any possible saving of wild Steelhead.

To deny citizens the opportunity to harvest a wild Steelhead, when harvestable numbers exist, is to cater to a minority, elitist view, not representative of the average sportfisher in Washington. What are our efforts to recover this wonderful icon of Northwest culture for, if not to allow us our traditional heritage of harvest. Are we to treat our natural environment as a museum (look but don’t touch), or should we be able to interact and enjoy what nature provides?

It is our belief that science based management should prevail, not emotional idealism.


Clint Muns
State Board President
Puget Sound Anglers

I dont feel anyone has crushed the opposition, rather they just keep typing the same thing over and over without really answering any questions raised..... Then they get nasty. I am still upset that CFM was booted. We rarely ever agreed, and even had a few bouts. But people like him are necessary. Our country is based on the ability to question those in power. Its what make us great. Its sad that it is being squelched here.

Why don't we really sit down and look at the impact that we as angler do to the systems that we fish? It's about looking at yourself and saying why you are against WSR. Some people have not been around long enough to see the implact that anglers can have on a system and the fish that are in it. Lets stop pointing the finger at the indians and the netter and say the real reason that you want to keep fish is for yourself and eating them. I can respect that stance. The excuse with the indians stance is that all those fish that we kill have already go through the nets and will spawn if you let them go. Sorry for the rant but lets be honest if you are killing wild steelhead because someone can then you fish for different reasons that I do. Go to a trout pond and kill all you want.

Tight lines

Kevin

From the letter above
"• Process – The process that resulted in the moratorium was flawed and not consistent with your normal approach to regulation setting. It appears that a specific interest group had an agenda and used the system to obtain their goal. Their goal was not subjected to public or Co-Manager query and was in conflict with staff recommendations.
• Wild Steelhead Declines in the Strait of Georgia and Puget Sound – The moratorium does not address the problem (cause) and helps hide the symptoms. The WDFW and the Commission should work proactively to complete and implement the new Steelhead Management Plan.
• Sustainable Fisheries Act, 1996 – A goal of the Sustainable Fisheries Act was to ensure sustainable fisheries and permit harvest on healthy species/stocks. A statewide moratorium on wild steelhead retention is counter to the stated goal of the Act, given that the Co-Managers have identified harvestable stocks of wild steelhead, many of which are indigenous to the Olympic Peninsula."

1. from above"Their goal was not subjected to public or Co-Manager query and was in conflict with staff recommendations. " Is this to mean that PSA always is in agreement with WDFW staff recomendations.
2.from above"Wild Steelhead Declines in the Strait of Georgia and Puget Sound – The moratorium does not address the problem (cause) and helps hide the symptoms. How the hell can having more wild fish on the redds "hide the symptoms. It would seem to me that harvesting the fish might hide the symptoms.
3.from above"given that the Co-Managers have identified harvestable stocks of wild steelhead" You mean the trbes and WDFW? The ones that you say are going to use foregone oppOrtunity and net the rivers? Now their advice is good enough?