The following was taken from the current issue of Fishing and Hunting News:


Fishing and Hunting News has just published the first part of a two part conversation with state WDFW commissioners Cahill and R.P. Van Gytenbeek. In the first installment Cahill says: "The issue has been fermenting for years, I would call it a culture war between the catch and release fly fishermen, and people who want to take home a fish. It has been a pretty viscious war, They call each other names, yell at public hearings." The article says of Van Gytenbeek> " The proposal to ban wild retention was made by commissioner R.P. Van Gytenbeek of Seattle, an avid fly angler." " He initially proposed a permanent ban. When that failed to pass, however, a six year ban was proposed. When that failed, Commissioner Russ Cahill of Olympia proposed the two year program, which passed by a 5-3 vote." Cahill said of his decision to go along with the compromise: " I think a two year moratorium is a conservative approach, a deep breath, while the WDFW gets the science put together, Then the decision can be made again. That's why I voted for this particular version."

Comments from WDFW went like this: "While wild steelhead moratoriums have been in effect on rivers where steelhead runs are in danger, about a dozen streams on the Olympic Peninsula as well as King County's Green still allowed keeping wild fish. That's because runs on rivers such as the Hoh, Bogey, Calawah and others are at all-time highs, according to Bob Leland, steelhead program manager for WDFW., In fact, WDFW staffers seem to be surprised , if not shocked and dismayed, at the cecision by the commission. If these rivers are in such excellent steelhead shape why the ban? Moreso, why the ban now, when WDFW is still at work on a two -year steelhead stewardship management plan for these rivers?"

And the debate (and BS) goes on.......

I will tell you Grandpa that the WSC is not a flyfishing group. There are lots of gear guys(Todd and I included) and we believe that wild steelhead need more protection because the runs are in trouble.


"That's because runs on rivers such as the Hoh, Bogey, Calawah and others are at all-time highs, according to Bob Leland, steelhead program manager for WDFW., In fact, WDFW staffers seem to be surprised , if not shocked and dismayed, at the cecision by the commission. If these rivers are in such excellent steelhead shape why the ban? Moreso, why the ban now, when WDFW is still at work on a two -year steelhead stewardship management plan for these rivers?"

How can the Hoh be at an all time high when it won't make escapement this year? The Quillayute system is declining for the 6th year in a row and according to WDFW's own numbers are not at an all time high. Frankly I don't trust some of what I hear from Bob Leland and Bob Gibbons(they did speak at a WSC meeting), if steelhead numbers are declining under their management plans then maybe they are wrong.

JG..remember..I am gathering opinions from all over and posting them...not necessarily agreeing with them....

We will get a new governor but Gary GridLocke might appoint the next two commissioners before he leaves. We have high hopes that we will finally get a sports fishing advocate on the commission as the mandate that created it promised.

Grandpa: I do not know all the commissioners, but I do know Pete Van Gytenbeck (although I am not sure how to spell his name) Pete is a lifelong sports fishing enthusiast. I have fished with Pete several times and can tell you he is an honest, decent, concerned, sports fisherman. Let's not paint them all with the same brush. And yes I think Locke appointed him. While I am not at all happy with many of Locke’s actions or inactions, I fear a right wing, trickle down, free enterprise governor will pack the board with, small businessmen i.e. commercial fishermen.

I would think that if a commissioner's goal were to promote/support small business', he would want to maximize sport fishing.

In a way, each angler is a small business unto himself, not to mention all the small business' he supports in pursuit of his hobby.

Very Accurate. Short and to the point.

I do believe that most of the name calling, at least on the internet, has come from the mouths of the C&R zealots.

Couldnt agree with you more Plunker!

I just read this doing my morning thing.And I say HOG WASH PURE HOG WASH.

Yeah right - it's all selfish elitist C&R flyfishers behind WSR. Just like it's a bunch of ignorant redneck fishkillers against it.

If only the lines were so clear - Good and Evil, Progressive vs Antiquted. Seems both sides are a bit guilty of painting the opposition into convenient stereotypes.

And FYI - i'm for WSR but realize that there are good arguments against a statewide ban as well. There are thoughtful, concerned sportsmen on each side of this "Culture War".

And I'll bet the Commercial contingent is lovin this - one more issue causing hate and discontent among the sporties.

Something to think about - who (or what) is really the biggest threat to your fishery?

My .02,

Brian

Don't throw rocks if you live in a glass house.

Many of us are very passionate about our beliefs and people on both sides of the issue have resorted to name calling or cheap shots at one time or another. However some people choose to resort to the name calling and cheap shots more than others. Some people even seem to do it on a regular basis. Probably because they enjoy the controversy and just get a thrill out it.

Everyone needs to step back a take a deep breath before they decide to make personal attacks or take cheap shots.

C'mon, Plunk.

Dan you are one of the few that I haven't seen using such antics. I wasn't refering to anyone in particular. I've seen it on both sides and I've also been guilty at times. Sometimes its hard not to respond to attacks or cheap shots with attacks and cheap shots. Lets just leave it at that.

I don't know where all the stereotypes come from, but I certainly don't fit them.

1. I haven't gear/baitfished for steelhead in 17 years.

2. I flyfish single barbless for steelhead.

3. I have never in my life killed a wild steelhead.

4. I think blanket WSR is a very bad idea.

I certainly fall into the seattlite yuppy flyfishing camp judging 1-3, but I think WSR is a bad idea for many reasons (obviously this is a rehash):

A. Its going back to the stoneage as far as flexible managment is concerned. The precedent set by WSR for other fisheries managment issues is appalling.

B. It was justified by weak science. The data support habitat/marine conditions being the limiting factor on wild steelhead production not harvest for most WA rivers.

C. Its a resource opportunity grap by elitist flyfishers (like me) from fish bonkers. It is wrong for one group to run another off the river.

I'd sure would like to think that I'm in the no name calling camp.

,


Hmmmmmmmm.

Geoduck,

Either you and I are spies for "the other side", or Cahill's comment, which is echoed by many, many anti-WSR folks (not all, especially you), including the Mayor of Forks, is a load of BS.

I don't even flyfish for steelhead...and only about 20% or so for salmon.

I guess you and I, Geoduck, should just bow out of the discussions, clearly the only people who should be involved are the "urban elitists" and the "logger rednecks", as not only are they the only ones that have a stake in the argument, they're the only ones who ought to be in it at all.

Plunk,

I know that you're too smart, or maybe too savvy, to actually believe some of the stuff you say. I hope that your last comment is one of those. There are other folks who say BS like that and believe it, but I think you just like to stir the pot...especially after a discussion has been started.

I've posted three times as much as you on these topics lately, and I'm sure, without even looking too hard, that I could find at least two or three times more inflammatory things that you've said with no factual basis, and name calling, than I have.

And completely incorrect statements like this coming from the "steelhead program manager", of all people, doesn't make any of you wonder "what the hell is going on down there in Olympia", even a little?

I guess the controversial nature of WSR is pretty intrusive...it's managed to dominate almost every other topic lately.

Fish on...

Todd

Hairlip..........shhhhhhhh!

I admit.......I've been known to slip over the edge into the realm of insulting someone personally. But I try not to.......because when you resort to those tactics, people respond with hostility instead of listening to your point. I guess that should be expected.

Maybe I spoke to soon Dan. But I don't recall you throwing mud at me

Dan S. & Hairlip -

I don't even own a flyrod!

You are funny Bruce

There was a report published by the Quinalt tribe that concluded that there were too many steelhead in the OP rivers. It stated that if we didnt harvest fish, then there would be too many fish competing for spawning gravel and that none of the fish would be able to spawn. In the SAME article, they also said back in the day (50's and 60's), that 60,000+ steelies a year were harvested in the OP rivers.
How can those two statements come from the same article? Doesnt that contradict itself?
Where are those fish now?

My opinion on the matter is that we need to manage the rivers for maximum returns of fish, not maximum harvest of fish.

"My opinion on the matter is that we need to manage the rivers for maximum returns of fish, not maximum harvest of fish."

Please take a minute to think about what that means.

Thanks for the replay.
I couldn't have said it better.

I tend to consider anyone who seeks gratification at the expense of others to be scumbags. Hence the name calling in a moment of anger. I have felt bad about publicly using this word to describe the members of the WSC for some time so, even if they fit the bill, I hereby apologize for the public outburst.

The WSC was formed primarily to protect steelhead from the fishermen who they wrongly blamed for the sudden declines in the Puget Sound rivers due to what science indicates to have been adverse ocean conditions. Over-fishing was a part of the equation only in the minds of those anti-harvest individuals who seek to impose their feel-good ethic upon the world. This is a mean-spirited and greedy attempt to exclude the majority of steelhead anglers from participation.

Although it was the Commission that acted illegally it has been the WSC who has taken the torch as campaign leaders for this restriction and their guidance towards the anti-harvest mentality from the fly fishing community. The Federation of Fly Fishers and the fly fisher dominated Trout Unlimited have long been the primary promoters of the anti-harvest agenda and the unsavory stereotyping of those that would catch fish to eat.

It is hard to disagree that Russ Cahill was right on the mark in his observation that, "The issue has been fermenting for years, I would call it a culture war between the catch and release fly fishermen, and people who want to take home a fish."

Well, Plunk, maybe I spoke too soon in the above quote.

I guess you're just as welcome to your opinion as the next guy...but it sure would be nice if you had any connection to reality when you give it up. I know it's not as fun to have a real discussion that uses things like facts, or even logic...you really seem to like to just continually say things with no factual basis.

Mean-spirited? Yeah, I'm out to getcha... :rolleyes:

Flyfisherman dominated TU? Maybe on the East Coast, but around here? Come on Plunk, that one stretces even the farthest bounds of believability.

Come on...bring something other than your hate to the table...and do not speak for me or anyone else at the WSC anymore.



Fish on...

Todd

Whatever Todd,

your credibility has declined to negativity.


Fly_Guy,

I'm pretty sure you got your information second hand.

What I read is that if there are too many fish competing for the gravel then the overall spawning would be less effective. A fish spawning on top of a previous nest tends to cancel the original effort and the disturbance can subject the exposed eggs to disease that might spread to the secondary overlapping nest. Disease can be a big problem with spawning and many speculate that the reason salmonids spawn in a group of separate nests, called redds, is to avoid losing an entire years effort to disease if it consumes one of the nests.

Obviously, the best way to maximize harvest over the long haul is to maximize returns.
The best way to maximize spawning numbers is to prohibit fishing altogether.

This is public information from the WDFW web site. I found it interesting to see who our commission members are. Maybe you will too.

Commission Staff:
Susan Yeager, Executive Assistant (360) 902-2267
Nancy Burkhart, Office Assistant (360) 902-2449

Will Roehl, Chair

Will Roehl was first appointed to the Commission in July 1997 and was reappointed to a six-year term in January 2003. Roehl served as vice chair from January 2001 until he was elected chair in January 2003. He is an attorney with a commercial practice in Bellingham. He and a brother own a customs brokerage business that facilitates importation/ exportation of chemical, petroleum, fish and forest products. He is co-owner of a business based in Eugene, Oregon. He attended Whitman College (B.A. Economics) and the University of Puget Sound School of Law. He held elective office in Whatcom County, including service on a 1978 Board of Freeholders and 11 years as a member of the Whatcom Co. Council. He has served on boards of numerous non-profit organizations and devoted time to various civic efforts. He is committed to restoring Washington's salmon runs while avoiding conflicts between commercial and recreational fishers. Roehl and his wife Kelli Linville live in Bellingham. (Roehl's current term expires in December 2008.)

Ron Ozment, Vice-Chair

Ron Ozment was appointed to the Commission in September 2001 to serve a six-year term and was elected vice chair in January 2003. He is a dairy producer and cattle breeder who owns and operates the 200-acre Riviera Jersey Farm north of Cathlamet. Ozment served as Wahkiakum County Commissioner from 1989 through 2000 and, while holding that office, was the County's representative on the Lower Columbia Fish Recovery Board, the Water Resource Inventory Areas 25/26 Board, the Southwest Clean Air Agency, and the Cowlitz/ Wahkiakum Council of Governments. He also is a former member and chair of the Wahkiakum County Planning Commission and a former member of the U.S. Agricultural Stabilization and Conservation Committee and the U.S. Farm Home Administration's (now the Rural Development Administration) Agricultural and Housing Loan Eligibility Committee serving Wahkiakum, Cowlitz, Clark, and Skamania counties. Ozment and his wife Anne live in Cathlamet. They have three children and six grandchildren. (Ozment's current term expires in December 2006.)

Members

Russ Cahill

Russ Cahill was appointed to the Commission in April 1998 to fill a five-year vacancy and in December 1999 he was reassigned to fill a one-year vacancy. He was reappointed to a six-year term in September 2001. He served as vice chairman from January 1999 until he was elected chair in January 2001 for a two year term. He retired in 1997 after 40 years of work, mostly in the fields of natural resources, parks, and law enforcement. He has been a trustee and board chairman of the Washington Nature Conservancy and a trustee of the National Parks and Conservation Association. He has served on the boards of several Washington State and local conservation organizations. An avid fisherman, hiker, and bird watcher, he has walked, cross-country skied, and paddled over most of the state. Cahill and his wife Narda Pierce live in Olympia. He has three children and four grandchildren. (Cahill's current term expires in December 2006.)

John A. Hunter IV

John was appointed to the Commission in July 2003 to serve a six-year term. John brings both private industry and public service experience to the Commission. In the private sector, John’s BA in Economics and Business led to a thirty plus year career in sales/marketing and distribution management focused on the post harvest needs of the tree fruit industry in the Pacific Northwest. During his past fifteen years public service involvement, John has served as Councilman and Mayor of the City of Cashmere, and as Chelan County Commissioner. John has served as a volunteer and on the board of directors of numerous private and public entities involved with improving our social, economic, and environmental living conditions in Washington. John is committed to a balanced approach in the maintenance and enhancement of our natural resources for the enjoyment and appreciation of all Washingtonians. John and his wife, Renee, have an empty nest as their two children and two foster daughters now make their homes in various locations within Washington State. (Hunter’s current term expires in December 2008.)

Lisa Pelly

Lisa Pelly was appointed to the Commission in January 1994 to serve a five-year term. She served as vice chair from January 1996 to January 1997. She served as chair from January 1997 to January 1999, the first woman to serve in that position. She was reappointed to a six-year term in February 1999. A lifelong resident of Washington, she has a deep and passionate commitment to the state and the protection of its natural resources. She serves on the board of directors for Washington Conservation Voters, Farming and the Environment and the Washington Wildlife and Recreation Coalition and is the founder and past president of the Northwest Women Flyfishers. She enjoys spending time outdoors, hiking and fishing. Pelly lives on Bainbridge Island. (Pelly's current term expires in December 2004).

Fred Shiosaki

Fred Shiosaki was appointed to the Commission in February 1999 to serve a six-year term. He was a member of the all Japanese-American 442nd Infantry Regiment. He graduated from Gonzaga University in Chemistry and attended the University of Washington Graduate School. After working as the Spokane City Chemist, he set up the Spokane County Air Pollution Control Authority and served as its Director and Control Officer for 11 years. In 1978, he was hired to manage the Environmental Affairs
Department for the Washington Water Power Company and retired from there in 1989. For more than eight years he was a member of the Washington Ecological Commission and served as its chair for seven years. His professional applications have been the Air Pollution Control Association and the Northwest Electric Light and Power Association. He is a member of the Exchange Club of Downtown Spokane, Trout Unlimited, Disabled American Veterans, and the Inland Empire Fly Fishing Club. He has been a flyfisher for more than 30 years and is involved in his clubs' educational and conservation programs. In the recent past, he trained springer spaniels and hunted birds. Shiosaki and his wife Lily live in Spokane. They have a son, Michael and daughter, Nancy. (Shiosaki's current term expires in December 2004.)

Bob Tuck

Bob Tuck was appointed to the Commission in April 1998 to fill a two-year vacancy and reappointed to a six-year term in September 2001. He is a private consultant, providing technical and program assistance on a variety of fisheries, habitat, and water activities and projects in Washington and Oregon. He also provides technical coordination and assistance for an environmental education program involving numerous school districts in Central Washington. Tuck and his wife Lynn live in Selah. (Tuck's current term expires in December 2006.)

R.P. "Van" Van Gytenbeek

Van Van Gytenbeek was appointed to the Commission in February 1999 to serve a six- year term. He is the publisher of Fly Fishing in Salt Waters magazine in Seattle. He has more than 30 years of management experience in the private sector, is a retired artillery captain, and has authored two books on trout and streamside conservation. He is the former executive director of Trout Unlimited and has held various board or board memberships in a number of recreational organizations, including the International Fly Fishers Federation, American Museum of Fly Fishing, the American League of Anglers, and the Trout and Salmon Foundation. Van Gytenbeek and his wife Elizabeth live in Seattle. They have three children and one grandchild. (Van Gytenbeek's current term expires in December 2004.)

Plunker
Do you think if there wasn’t a problem WSC and FFF and TU would ask for 2 years moratorium.
You think its all Ocean problem?
What about Habitat in the Rivers itself!
There are 5-H’s

Do you think if there wasn’t a problem WSC and FFF and TU would ask for 2 years moratorium.

Yes..

You think its all Ocean problem?

No..

What about Habitat in the Rivers itself!
There are 5-H’s.

Keep up the good work in this area Homer.

Homer - YES
They, FFF and TU have been asking for they release of just about all wild fish for over 30 years.

Dave - I haven't had time to read your volumnous post. I might get back to you on it this evening or tomorrow. Then again... I might not.


Didn't your mother warn you about trying to think?
Sometimes it's better to keep your mouth shut and keep people wondering.

Ummm… I wonder what they might wonder about?

That is about enough on this topic for me for now so have at it.

:rolleyes:

If steelhead are so plentiful on the rivers on OP
Why are they not all making escapement goals?

Remember Bruce & Plunker you can get the numbers yourself from the Bob’s.

Repeat after me:

NETS

NETS

NETS

NETS

I think that these are a few things we can all agree with...

Sportfishermen are not all that great at filling in their punchcards.

Poaching is a problem on the OP.

Sportfishermen catch and harvest more fish than are reported.

Tribal fishermen catch a lot of fish, too.

Their reporting isn't all that good, either.

The reported catch of wild steelhead on the OP is higher for sportsmen than it is for the tribes.

Now we can have a pretend argument all the day long about how we aren't as bad as them...and if they were here, they'd say that they aren't as bad as us.

It doesn't really matter...the fact is, several thousand steelhead per year are reported as being harvested by sportsfishermen each year on the OP rivers.

There is no way that NETS NETS NETS is the only answer as to why OP steelhead runs are declining, so long as we "sportsmen" are harvesting just as many.

I know...I know...the nets are bad, and they are underreporting our catch. I also know that we're bad...we've all seen jerks running fish back to their trucks and keeping over their limits in the harvest seasons...not to mention catching and keeping them in areas/times where it's not open.

Either way, it adds up...and sport harvest is part of the problem.

If folks want to blame just habitat, or ocean conditions, or whatever, then that's fine. As soon as any harvest becomes part of the problem, then we are part of the problem.

Fish on...

Todd

Amen, Todd although you do seem to have clouded the issue with facts.

Anyone who wants to harvest wild steelhead in the state of washington is wrong and by deffinition does not care about the future of wild runs. No matter what other conservation issues they may be involved with.. The purpose of saving wild steelhead is NOT so that they can some day be harvested. it's so that they will exsist for as long as possible..
harvesting them is an act of stupidity.

Todd

I hate to say this, but I think your right!

IMO, CnR mortality is more realistic at 10% or more, not 3.5%. With all the grand ideals about this glorious fish you seek to keep from others, CnR still adds to harvest. How any fishermen, CnR or not, can say he's not part of the harvest is dishonest at best. So how does anyone not see this as hypocritical? It's beyond me. Take all the CnR fishermen in the state, total the fish caught and the mortality. Your only saying your numbers are more acceptable than sport harvesters. We say our numbers are acceptable, where's the difference?

Crap, or get off the pot!

>>Your only saying your numbers are more acceptable than sport harvesters. We say our numbers are acceptable, where's the difference?>>

Difference is amount of sport fishing opportunity.

,


It's still hypocritical. It's lost opportunity for the majority, and more opportunity for the hypopcrits.

I think hooking mortailiy on wild steelhead is more like less than 1% among CnR anglers.
here is why.. hooking mortality studies done in BC indicate that the largst amount of mortality came from loss of blood due to deep hooking. NOT due to the stress of being hooked. In fact studies have shown that the vast majority of hooked and released steelhead survive with NO ill effects.
Wearing a steelhead out to exhaustion or stressing them beyond what their bodies can tollerate simply is a red hearing and seldom or never happens. Hooked and released fish die when they have massive blood loss.. such blood loss comes from barbed hooks, multiple pointed hooks and bait that is swallowed. CnR fishermen rarely use trebels barbs or bait..
therefore CnR'd fish rarely have sever blood loss due to hooking injury and therefore survive at an extremely high rate.

Now would you like to explain why you think it's more on the order of 10%???

Simple answer to not returning punch cards. Idaho has a deal on hunting tags that works pretty well. If you don't fill out a harvest report for any big game tag you are issued, you can't buy a new licence for the next year. This applys regardless of if you shot something or not. I assume your licence and tags etc are computerized, so would be easy to implement.
Would help with your counts etc

RA,

Less than 1% hooking mortality is ridiculously optimistic.

Hooking mortality studies show ~3-5% hooking mortality on adult salmonids in the river. However, these studies are generally carried out by expert anglers and fish handlers (ie fish biologists and guides).

Given that most CNR fishers don't have this high level of expertise I would expect mortality to be higher. 10% seems like a conservative estimate, as I have certainly witnessed lots of wild steelhead handling that was less than gentle.

Maybe this keeping the fish in the water reg will help with that. . .

BTW do you feel the same way about wild steelhead as you do wild chinook. If not why not?

RA3,

My point is not really about the actual percentage of CnR mortality. I was refering to Todds comments, that actual harvest numbers probably are higher than reported. Not all CnR fishermen are card-carrying experts like you(I think your card says PETA at the top). So I expect CnR mortality is higher than you think. There are plenty of threads to see the commennts of experts here, I'm not looking to discuss percentages.

This may very well be a culture conflict. You said:

,

Rob, I dont know how to tell you this without making you cry, but that is the biggest bunch of crap I've ever read. If this is what your position believes, then it is a culture problem. It's a fish. If harvesting them is legal, some of us will do what man has done for thousands of years. We will eat them. And if you ever again say that I or anyone who bought a license to do so, is wrong for eating a fish, your going to hear from me.

WSR is proof to me if you dont participate, you better lubricate. Your view is the minority. I can respect your passion, I can support improvements in our management of fisheries. I cannot see your hypocritical need to treat these fish as pets, and expect everyone else to do the same.


Hairlip.

Rob -
It might be well to remember that very few anglers have the extraordinary angling skills that you have so comparing what your impacts may be to what those of the general angler population's might be would result in grossly underestimating the impacts. My limited experience and observation would seem to indicate that the Canadian estimates of hooking mortality are in the ball park.

I would agree that on waters managed with selective gear restrictions the hooking mortality would likely be lower than those with the general regulation. However agian remember that nearly all the waters to be managed under no wild fish retention are not selective gear waters. Again my observations are that most anglers are fishing with bait, barbs, and/or trebles.

If one truly cares about wild steelhead and wishes to error on the side of the resource than assigning hooking mortality imapcts in the 5 to 10% would seem to me to be prudent.
At least until such times as all fisheries are managed under selective gear restrictions and anglers have demostrated that they will handle the fish with the needed care.

Tight lines
S malma

Todd says:

"There is no way that NETS NETS NETS is the only answer as to why OP steelhead runs are declining, so long as we "sportsmen" are harvesting just as many."

Todd ...You are so focused on WSR which is good but merely a pinky in the dike that you may have started believing some crazy stuff.

Sportsmen catch just as many fish as the tribal nets??.....Man you gotta believe in the tooth fairy. Since no non-tribal person is allowed to monitor the tribal catch and the tribes have been proven over and over again not to give a crap about conservation of any kind be it fish, game or fowl or shellfish do you honestly in your heart of hearts believe their nets do not catch the most fish? You also have argued that most wild steelhead are released now anyway by sportsmen so how could you believe that the gill nets don't out kill every one else when it comes to wild steelhead?

You don't seem like a naive kind of guy usually but I am starting to wonder.

Now heres a list of things we should focus on... work on improving a couple of these to start with, and build on that. Make punchcards lke hunting tags, dont send them in, you dont get a new one. Demand better enforcement of our CURRENT rules, work on a more reliable system of tribal reporting, and go from there... I like that list Todd.

grandpa,

I'm not trying to say that anyone is catching more than anyone else...I do know that both sporties and tribes are catching a lot, and that the reported numbers for both are probably not very accurate.

My point was that if we are going to hold harvest up as a reason for the decline of steelhead, then the several thousand killed by sportsfishermen are part of the problem, too, regardless of how many the tribes are catching.

Sorry for the misunderstanding...

Fish on...

Todd

I am all for harvesting steelhead.. thats why the state spends millions each and every year to produce millions of fish secifically for that reason... There is excellent opportunity to harvest hatchery salmon and steelhead throughout the state nearly year around.. If all thoes millions of hatchery steelhad are not enough for you then well you are selfish.

If my position seems radical to some of you i am sorry but i am not gonna sit around and watch the last great steelhead fisheries in the state of Washington be destroyed by an bunch on "people" who'd idea of a landfill is dumping their refuse off a bridge on the Calawah. or use the Olympic national park as their personal garbage dump without raising a stink about it.

Wild steelhead release statewide forever would be a great thing Even if every river recovered to full capacity. I am all in favor of any no kill regs on wild salmonids no matter how healthy the run or how the regulation came to be. I don't care if the reg is legal or constitutional I want it.. I would support a constitutional ammendment saying no harvest on wild steelhead forever.

Of you guys had grown up on rivers rivers like the Washougal where the wild run was destroyed by sport harvest you'd feel exactly the same way...


The absence of harvest opportunity is not the same as lost fishing opportunity!!!!

As far as fishing for wild steelhead it should always be done by single barbless baitless hooks. I like drifting eggs as much as anyone but it's just not wise over wild fish..

RA3,

You obviously care very deaply for wild salmonids.

How in good conscience could you ever fish where they are present, you might kill one by accident?

geoduck single barbless no bait and gear heavy enough to quickly land and release fish.
nearly all hooking mortality comes from blood loss due to a fish being deeply hooked.
avoiding deeply hooked fish is extremely easy and any novice can do it. you just can't do it with a sandshrimp or a gob of eggs.

Rob ... I'll disagree. But it's conditional. Bait can be deadly to both upstream and downstream fish fished certain ways. I've been fishing a bit of shrimp the past few years in a newer style for us and well in excess of 90% of the fish are hooked in one place: smack in the snout, over and over. Of all the different methods I fish, never have I seen so many fish hooked in the exact same place.

Just an FYI

A culture war.

Perhaps.

Elitists.

Perhaps.

But when all the anti-WSR folks whine about the loss of "opportunity" for them, remember this as fewer and fewer streams have healthy runs and viable fisheries:

WSR only forces an angler to change one thing, harvesting the fish.

On the other hand, harvest-based fisheries have infringed upon many's "rights" by forcing the fisheries into complete closure.

Naysayers frequently point out the lack of turnaround a number of areas. It's true. However, I believe the Nisqually thread that is currently undergoing discussion shows how slow a steelhead stock can be to rebound even with no fishing.

Thus my drive to protect what is left becomes even greater knowing that when things finally collapse, it's a very long climb to get back above the clouds.

Steelhead are not salmon, the life histories are too diverse and I belive that's one of the reasons we've had so much difficulty in their management.

I believe it's also the reason that their road to recovery has in nearly all instances, taken much longer than most salmon species.

Educate us Bob. That's sounds very interesting. I'd love to hear the details. I have issues with using bait in WSR areas for obvious reasons that I'm sure your already aware of, but maybe your new method can change my thinking about it.

"harvest-based fisheries have infringed upon many's "rights" by forcing the fisheries into complete closure."

Bob are you refering to harvest-based sport fisheries? If so I really think you are way off base. I think that it would hard to come up with some facts showing that a harvest-based sport fisheries has ever infringed upon another sport fisher by creating a complete closure.

thats not true.

Ya gotta booka trip to learn all my little secrets Bruce BUt I'll give you a hint ... it involves floats

Ok

But I would think that it would be a good tip for your board and it should make you feel good knowing how many wild steelhead you'd be saving from all the swallowed bait.

Boater1, please pass along the other things that change.

Bruce ... two instances of complete closure on the Hoh in late season because we were not going to meet escapement based on the returns / harvest up to that date. Had the sport impact been reduced by 90% (giving a generous 10% mortality on the fish that were harvested that would have been released) ... we would have made escapement and the fishery would have remained open.

There's two specific examples that affected me directly.

Now on the the 100+ rivers that are now closed in this state, you're going to say harvest didn't play a role in the decline of the run in a single one of them?

If so, you've lost every bit of credibilty you may have been clinging to

How come I expected that very comment from you Bruce? :rolleyes:

But then again, they might learn to hook ten times as many fish and play them on light line and kill them that way, so I won't

Bruce harvest fisheries made for the complete closure of the columbia river spring chinook fishery for 20 years. Harvest fisheries led to the closing of the Wind river summer steelhead run. Harvest fisheries caused a spring closure on nearly all the lower columbia tributaries march- April and some til June 1.
harvesting wils steelhead is flat out greedy there is no viable reason why anyone ever needs to keep a wild steelhead. EVER. I am all for keeping people from doing it by any means necessary.

Thats not what I'm saying Bob. Of course harvest has an impact on our fisheries. I'm just not convinced that a "sport harvest" has such an impact that it cannot be managed to sustain a fishery. Now fish harvested using such methods as gill nets, thats a different story. There may even a rare case where sport harvest were a main factor of a run decline. I can't think of one and I think it would be a rare case.

you used harvest wrong , this wsr rule says you cant retain a wild steelhead, it says nothing about not being able to harvest them.

WSR IS A HARVEST FISHERY. IT JUST EXTENDS OPPORTUNITY FOR SOME PEOPLE.

WSR will only be sucessfull at improving runs when over harvest is the main cause of the declining runs.

Okay, I see ... this is just a game

Have fun! :rolleyes:

I don't think it is a game at all Bob.

Was refering to Boater1's comment Bruce.

Your latest statement is supposed to be news to us?

Of course it will only work in streams that are seeing too much harvest.

In the remaining 11 streams that are open to harvest and are affected by this ruling, harvest is likley the #1 factor in impact to the fish. Most drain out of Olympic National Park and have pretty good habitat. Hatcheries are an influence to some degree (more reason for WSR so that stacking fish don't hold early wild fish headed for upstream that would normally go through quicker).

Now some will blame only the nets and say that sporties don't count. BS.

Plus, how will sporties ever approach the tribes to decrease netting when we are continuing to directly harvest them (is that a better term for you?)? That'll go over like a ton of bricks, especially given the track records of the Hohs and Quileutes!

"Plus, how will sporties ever approach the tribes to decrease netting when we are continuing to directly harvest them (is that a better term for you?)? That'll go over like a ton of bricks, especially given the track records of the Hohs and Quileutes!"

If we're going to take this stand then lets be clear about that. I would have much less of a problem with that than I do with so many guys pointing fingers in other directions (like at any sport fisher who wants to keep a fish). Also, as you and many other have stated in the past. You would not support the harvest of wild steelhead ever for any reason. That mentality concerns me.

what was such a "game" about my last post ?, the state cant ban the harvest of wild steelhead, if they did all fishing would close.

Hmmm, Just read on another thread about the nisqually and the 14 years of no fishing due to sport over harvest... at least that is what the locals have said has happened...

If it is going to take the peninula rivers half that long to recover from over harvest then maybe it is time for WSR before it's too late....

Don't believe everything you read on these fishin boards Piper. Believing everything posted on a fishing board can lead to a serious state of depression. The outlook is so grime and bleek, its almost enough to make a person join PETA or quit fishing or something stupid like that.

Or even release a wild steelhead...