First of all, I do not know this suddenly turned into a gear vs. fly arguement. At times, a bait ban would be beneficial to the fish. At others, a bait ban would do no good and may do more harm (bait=more hatchery fish to the bank).

Anyways...

elkrun-
My contention and its been my contention all along as well as the vast majority of those in support of WSR is that if there are not enough fish in the river close the river.

Closing the river will not suddenly put a halt to all the other problems facing wild steelhead BUT it will allow more fish to reach the beds when every fish matters.

Under WSR, you can not tell me the Hoh will not benefit. That poor river has experienced an aggresive over the last decade and has missed escapement numerous times because of the kill. If the Hoh was under Wild Steelhead Release it would of made escapement all but just a couple times...so yes, WSR helps.

Take another river, the Bogey who experiences very heavy fishing pressure in November and December to target the hatchery fish returning. At the time you are also allowed to kill to wild steelhead...the early component of that run is doing very poorly. WSR allows for very heavy fishing pressure while still providing protection for that early component.

And again elkrun, I ask you, what are you doing? Everyone has agreed that there are many other more pressiing issues facing wild steelhead in this State. What are you doing to deal with those issues? Like I said earlier I have no issue with those who do not support WSR and the WSC, especially those that are working their tails off when it comes to habitat, commercial netting etc. etc. but for you to sit back and do nothing does none of us (nor the fish) any good!

Well, sparkey you obviously assume (once again) that I sit back and do nothing.... You misunderstand that choosing not to pressure wild fish in itself IS doing something, mainly because you dont want to make that sacrifice and thats fine, but to keep saying were all doing nothing..... thats just idiotic.

I really dont need to justify myself to you or anyone else....but I'll humor you, Lets just say that I am very involved in my local fisheries, a former board member of a fly fishing club (we do many projects up here), and I spend a lot of time educating others on our resources... I spend many days a year cleaning habitat on an local watershed with my club, collect data and monitor a local stream, volunteer to teach youth how to tie flies, cast a fly rod, and generally teach them how to respect our resources, and will be helping run a local youth fishing derby this weekend where again we will be volunteering our time to introduce local youth to fishing. There are other monitary contributions I make but dont advertise, nor will I disclose to you. My club generally doesn't try to pass legislation to influence how other fish, or hold fish for that matter... I think by promoting the sport of fishing, and teaching how and why to repect the resource will go a long way to help save it in the future.

Another assumption down the crapper....

elkrun-
I apologize that I singled you out and nobody should have to prove anything to anyone regarding their efforts.

But I will still contend that I see lots of negative comments, *****ing etc. from so many of those opposed to WSR and/or the WSC but I have yet to see any pro-active alternative to WSR or the WSC for that matter.

Okay, I'll chime in. First of all I know very little about fish unless it pertains to fishing. I have bonked a wild fish years ago before they were in so much trouble. Now I am all for WSR. The fish are in trouble and need any help they can get. You as fishermen should be glad to help in any way even if it means letting them go. It may not help as much as stopping the comercial netting but it will help. It may be the difference between sure extinction and barely escaping extinction. On the flip side I would love to see populations healthy enough that a person could keep a wild fish once in a while like they were and did years ago. I can recall standing in a river and having wild steelhead swimming between my legs or stopping to rest in the still water behind my leg as they moved up the river. The fishing was good and the wild steelhead tasted even better. If we could reach that point again then why should anyone have a problem with keeping a limited number. Isn't that what management is about?

Sparkey,
the reason you don't see an alternative to WSR/WSC is that you are convinced the problem is fishing pressure. It is not. Maybe for some OP streams fishing pressure is a small part of the problem, but not with PS streams.


Look at the puyallup. WSR hasn't helped and the reason is that THE REAL PROBLEM IS WITH HABITAT.

If half the effort that has gone into battling about WSR went into habitat protection and restoration, maybe something useful could be accomplished.

Geoduck-
I have stated numerous times that I do not believe that problem is fishing pressure. The problems arise from the 4-H's plus marine survival.

If you would of read my original post, you would see that I was implying more then just harvest. As fishermen, we can involved ourself in the other H's. My question to the Board and especially those opposed to the WSC, what is your alternative?...what are you going to do to involved yourself in issues facing wild steelhead?

Geoduck,

Check out the signature line on my posts...

The WSC is working on every factor we can that deals with recovering wild steelhead...all 4 H's, from habitat destruction on the Sauk and E. Fk. Lewis, to habitat restoration on the Stilly, to commercial bycatch on the Columbia, to instream flows/dam water flow everywhere that dams block anadromous streams, to being an active memeber of the HSRG Hatchery Reform Coalition.

Right now, as we speak, all those things are being worked on.

Sport harvest is part of one of those H's...it, too, has been, is being, and will be worked on.

The WSR issue is one that hits home with steelheaders more than the others, the one where they have to personally take some responsibility. That's part of why it is so contentious.

Of the thousands of posts on WSR, of the hundreds of folks who have chimed in on it, of the dozens of groups that have taken a stance on it one way or the other, where are all of you on...

1. Columbia River Commercial bycatch: I couldn't get one person, pro or con, to accept a free ride to Olympia to go and testify...and I only was able to get a few responses to a post containing a six page letter to NOAA Fisheries regarding this environmental/fisheries tragedy taking place down there RIGHT NOW.

2. Instream Flows: When I went down to testify on this issue, I was joined by two commercial fishermen, NSIA, TU, American Rivers, and one man from the FFF. Posts on the BB's garnered almost no response, much less any attendance or letters about this issue.

3. Sauk river habitat destruction: Some people got really angry about the guy driving heavy machinery in the river, and digging up something like 16,000 cubic yards of spawning gravel, some of which assuredly held redds from endangered PS Chinook...some folks defended him. Did anyone come up with any sort of solution to fix it or prevent it from happening again?

4. Long Live The Kings Hatchery Science Review Group: We all know we need hatchery reform if we want viable hatchery runs AND viable wild runs. The HSRG is coming up with groundbreaking ideas to have both...yet half the fishermen could care less...they just want to bonk, bonk, bonk...the more hatchery fish the better!...while not taking one minute to consider what role wild fish play in hatchery runs, or what it takes to have a good hatchery run, or how to make the coexist. Just more b!tch, b!tch, b!tch.

5. Slides on the Stillaguamish: When Homer2Handed posts all the information about getting funding to implement the Stillaguamish Implementation Review Commission's plan to fix the slides and repair miles of spawning grounds for wild steelhead, endangered Chinook, chums, pinks, dollies, and SRC...who here actually read it all, much less sent in a letter supporting it?

6. Storedahl/Daybreak Mine: Storedahl, who owns/operates the Daybreak Mine on the E.Fk. of the Lewis, is asking to mine millions of yards of gravel out of the river's channel migration zone. How many people here have written a letter, testified, or even expressed any sort of outrage that this kind of thing should even be proposed?

This stuff is all going on RIGHT NOW. Wild steelhead release is, too, but all the rest of this is going on RIGHT NOW.

There are lots of folks, on both sides of the WSR debate, who are doing nothing else about anything else than make wsr the only game in town. WHERE ARE ALL OF YOU?

Come on guys...all this stuff matters.

If you don't care about WSR, fine. If you think arguing about it is worthless, fine.

If you belong to any sort of fishing group whatsoever, bring all these other issues to them RIGHT NOW. I will personally provide all I know about all these issues to anyone who wants to get on the recovery bandwagon, and if I don't know the answer to your question, I'll send you to someone who does.

If your group won't take action on these issues, demand that they do. They are there for you, not the other way around. If they won't...find a new group. I don't care which one...join any group that works on these issues, among all the others that are out there, too.

I'm tired of reading all the statements that "WSR won't save fish" and "what about all the other things?" and "why does the WSC only care about WSR?"...because all those statements have nothing to do with saving fish...getting involved and doing something does, though.

Not everyone can make time to do everything...I know I sure can't. I do know, though, that everyone who has taken literally hours of time to post on these WSR threads could have spent some of that time writing a letter, or even an e-mail, or making a phone call, or speaking up at their group's meetings, on all kinds of other issues that also affect wild steelhead, not to mention all kinds of other wild fish.

Ok...that's my second "soap box" speedh of the day...my blood pressure is getting up from all the crap I keep reading in all these BB's.

Sorry for being so longwinded, and I'm not going to ask anyone to justify what and how much they do, unless they feel like doing it...but I do challenge everyone to compare their time arguing on BB's about stuff to the time they spend doing other things that are probably a hell of a lot more productive for our fish and our fisheries.



Fish on...

Todd

Todd-
I owe 'ya a drink!

Todd,

I agree wholeheartedly.

Originally posted by DJFISHS2XS:
and ask stupid questions like why doest anyone respond to my post etc...it because sparkey we dont like you....

What did I ever do to you???

Hmmm, let's see. Because of you and some idiotic law you authored, I now have to step on my wild steelhead or any other fish that must be released with my logging boot and smash it into the rocks on the stream bed under water because he swallowed the hook and won't hold still instead of taking it out of the water to remove the hook properly. Because I'm not allowed to bring the fish in the boat at Bouy10 in heavy seas to remove the hook to release it and run the risk of falling overboard and drowning. Because if I fish from a pier and hook a wild fish, I have no frickin' clue how to release him without bringing him out of the water when I am 15 feet above the water surface. Because of you, guys are getting their arms broken (yes, true story) and damned near losing a hand by seals stealing fish while still in the net while they are trying to get the hooks out because they can't bring them into the boat. Because you introduced this selfish law that only thought of you and your short-sighted circumstances, but didn't consider the big picture and include everyone else's circumstances.

Therefore, we don't like you.

Well then, file like Forks did and ask them to look at the law again(requires effort though)

Actually Steve, I proposed a regulation that would not allow wild steelhead to be fully removed from the water in wild steelhead release waters. The salmon portion of the law was proposed by others and the WDFW.

Therefore all the circumstances you mentioned except for 1 would NOT apply.

So the next time you accuse me of being selfish, get your facts straight!

So is it ok in your book Sparkey to pull a wild salmon out of the water?

Ok, I'm in my driftboat and cannot lift the fish out of the water to release it, yet there is not calm water near to beach the boat and release the fish in, so I must do it on the go. I stand a good chance of getting my hand broken on the rocks or falling out of boat trying to release a fish in rough water on the move.

I can still catch a wild steelhead from a bridge, high rocks, a ledge, many other places that make it nearly impossible to release the fish without taking it out of the water. Ever fished in one of these types of places?? Of course you have.

Effort Jerry? We're working on it, however pretty hard to repeal something after the fact, as the City of Forks is finding out. See you all in the morning!

Wow Ryan I didn't know you wielded such power
Keep up the good work

Bruce-
If you are going to put words in my mouth, be a little sly about next time.

Given that the state is already enacting such regulations on selective salmon fisheries, I felt no need to expand my proposal to include. Also I feel that river fishing (aside from the Columbia) allows itself to this sort of regulation and although it can be practiced in saltwater, it is much more difficult. And most importantly I felt felt that if my proposal just included steelhead, it would have a much easier time passing.

If you would take the time to read the rule proposal phamplets that were published by the WDFW, you would see that some proposals included just steelhead, others just salmon and others steelhead and salmon. The WDFW Staff passed on to the Commission a combination of the various proposals to be voted on.

Sparkey its beyond me how you could interpret my QUESTION as "putting words in your mouth".... So you don't believe in taking wild salmon out of the water either then..

Plus, in each of my examples, the fish could be a wild steelhead, I never specified salmon, I said fish.

Trust me, you were doing your best to put words in my mouth.

I support the proper handling of both steelhead and salmon. If someone can properly handle a steelhead and salmon and still remove them for the water for a short period of time, then I do not mind.

The problem is, there are too many who can not remove salmon and steelhead from the water and still properly handle that fish. By forcing people to keep fish in the water, it makes it more difficult for them to mishandle the fish.

In my opinion, my fellow fishermen shot themselves in the foot on this one. We must take responsibility for actions, if we can not, then State will do it for you.

"Trust me, you were doing your best to put words in my mouth."

Wow... Ok Sparkey.. Now I know why I don't like you...