I just recieved my 'minor cycle' rule proposal packet from the WDFW.

In it, they are proposing (if the Moratorium sticks), selective fishery regulations in March and April on all the rivers that are effected by the Moratorium.

The Sol Duc and Quillayute would be exempt from this proposal however as they have targeted salmon fisheries during this time frame. However, the Hoh, Bogey, Calawah, Clearwater, Dickey, Hoho and Upper Quianualt would all be under Selective Fishery Regs come March 1.

Their reasoning behind this proposal was so that now these river systems would reflect the Department's "management approach for wild steelhead catch and release fisheries."

No bait!

I'm a proponent of catch and release, but that sucks a lot. The key term in catch and release is "catch." Selective gear rules will definately impact my success next winter. Nevertheless, if it goes hand in hand with the moritorium, I'm for it.

Sparky,

Great news....BTW, I think you ment the Hoko river, not the hoho.

Many of us have fished the Sky for C&R nates in March-April without bait or scent with great success.

Cigar

You don't need bait or scent. Al you need are flies Or a pink worm, spiner/spoon, yarn/corkie, okie, plug, etc.

Oh yeah way to go sparkey now every side drifter on the peninsula will be in the Sol Duc. I am all for the catch and release but no bait is bull.

I'm pretty sure that this wouldn't really do much, except maybe concentrate even more fishermen on the areas with concurrent salmon season so they can use bait.

The use of bait and/or barbs has been shown to have virtually no effect on adult mortality... even in combination, are very negligible on adults.

In the summer when there are juveniles around, that's a whole different story, as bait and barbs have profound effects on them. Not in March and April, though.

Fish on...

Todd

YASP. Yet another stupid proposal.

I will have to agree with Todd on this one. I see this proposal doing very little, other than to further restrict what Washington Anglers can do.

I'm starting to have 2nd thoughts on this whole moritorium thing.........expecially if it keeps cutting the throats of the Washington sportsman.

I will be sure to write to the commission to voice my opinion against this proposal.

Some people just need to be slapped. It might actually jar those neurons in their head and get them to work again.....

:rolleyes:

I received that thing yesterday as well. I think its good because it seems that fewer people are willing to fish where bait is banned. That means less pressure for those rivers.

And now....... one of the reasons I was against the moritorium (not against WSR). The sporties were so eager to give up their rights.

Now WDFWs going to give them another stick up the....

To Sparkey it is a step in the right direction. It doesn't affect his fishing, it actually enhances it by segregating fishing techniques.

Now to Pat, might as well cut his arm off too. Being a guide, a barb and bait may be the only thing that brings a fish to the boat some days.
Those fishing techniques that will be eliminated by the regulation change may limit his business in the future.

Politics.........

Pat, Todd & Parker, well stated!

Pat, Todd, & Parker,

No bait and no barbs are standard parts of the selective fishery regulations, so I presume that's why they're included in this regulation proposal. Most of us are aware that bait and barbs are not much of an issue with adult steelhead.

I have a hard time understanding why this particular bait and barb restriction is so irritating to you. I like to fly fish for steelhead, and I do catch them, even doing quite well under good conditions. So the regulation isn't likely to reduce my catch. However, my reading of this BB suggests that you guys normally catch steelhead in circles around me, suggesting you're pretty good anglers. If so, is a bait and barb restriction really going to affect your fishing success much, if at all? I mean, isn't the proposed regulation more of a restriction of your preference for bait than a restriction of your prospective fishing success?

It's not like restricting you to a fishing method that you lack experience with, which strikes me as the more significant impact. Like if I was restricted to drift fishing and you were restricted to fly fishing, then (assuming you don't fly fish for steelhead) we'd all be at a relative disadvantage. Many drift fishermen have told me that artificial lures are just as effective as bait for steelhead most of the time. Are they wrong? Or is there something else about the proposed regulation that I'm not getting?

Sincerely,

Salmo g.

Hey, Salmo...long time, no talk.

It wouldn't cramp my style fishing at all...neither would a regulation requiring that all casting must be done with the right arm and hand. I don't even use bait or barbs when I'm fishing in March and April anyway (well...not much )

It just doesn't seem like a useful regulation in the winter/spring months, as there isn't much of an increase in mortality to the adults that are there then.

It would, however, probably reduce angler effort, and that, while attractive to me on a fisherman level, is a little harder to swallow on a fishing politics level, as I'd hate to lose more numbers when it comes to fighting for the fish.

However, if reducing angler effort were the goal of a conservation regulation, then we're talkin'. If it's just a general policy that goes along with WSR, then it might be unnecessary.

Fish on...

Todd

If I read that correctly, my understanding is that the state wants to put the recently moritoriamized (is that even a word??? ) rivers under a selective fishery regulation. Why just those rivers? Seeing how the entire rest of the state is wild steelhead release, why not put a selective restriction on *all* the state waters where there is likely to be a wild steelhead? Why stop there? Better include the fall and winter months, as I've caught native steelhead right along side the brats.

Heck, why not just put a selective fishery on the Bogie during the winter brat run? You never know - you just might hook a native fish.

Oh sure, let's start with the OP rivers now....but who can say what restriction will come next?

As a state resident who annually's pays a lot of money for a fishing license, I don't like to see unecessary regulations that further restrict my (or any) fishing opportunity. Maybe "opportunity" isn't the correct word (as you pointed out), but I am totally against restricting the one thing I really love to do - and that is to fish.

Hell, in 5 years, we will all be lucky to "just fish" at this rate.

Saving the fish is one thing, but it shoudn't be at the total expense of the sportsman.

As others have often pointed out, there are other ways to save the wild steelhead than to restrict the living crap out of the paying state angler.

Regardless of what others think, I'm putting my foot down and will voice my opinion against this rule. I don't see the need for it. It is pointless.

On those OP rivers? Probably not. Across the state? Sure, you bet it will effect my fishing success.

It's not about my success, but my anger at seeing the state reducing my fishing opportunities. I guess I use the word opportunity because if it comes down to me spending more of my $$$ to go fishing, where do I chose to go? Selective gear rules on the OP, or fishing with bait on a SW river? Odds are, bait will do better than no bait, so screw the OP, I'll go down to the SW river. In my eyes, that reduced my fishing opportunity.

I won't even bother talking about the Duc. That would become a zoo - more so than it is now.

Directly, yes. Indirectly, no.

I like to chuck bait. It is no more lethal than pulling plugs, or using spoons.

Uh, yes. They are wrong. "Most of the time" bait will outfish artificials. As one who has been on both sides of the fence, but has been a solid egg whore the last 3 years, I have hooked way more steelhead with bait than artificials. Not even close in the comparison.

Amen.

What galls me is the proposal is seemingly not for the sake of conservation, which was the cornerstone in reasoning behind the moritorium in the first place, but instead for the sake of a selective few who wish to impose their fishing methodology on the rest of us.

my kid fishes with bait.

Todd & Parker,

Yeah, long time. I know, but I don't get out as much as I'd like.

Thanks for the good answers, guys. Yeah, I see that would make the OP rivers just like the Skagit, Stilly, & Sky spring regs, and I can see where that wouldn't be the best arrangement, speaking from a fishing politics perspective, to have all rivers under identical regulations, unless for conservation reasons.

On the other hand, perhaps a Parker restriction would be useful. I'm quite sure he took home a couple summer runs I was going to catch the next day, had they still been there. [insert joke symbol]

Parker, I gotta' disagree about spending a lot of money for a fishing license. Fishing in Washington is still cheap, if you take a look around. I was looking at salmon fishing in Quebec. $50 per day on mediocre water. $100 to $400 per day rod fee on reasonably good rivers. Fly fishing only, and non-residents are required to hire a guide (a provincial guide full employment act). We got it pretty cushy here.

Sincerely,

Salmo g.

Perhaps it has been proposed by those against the moratorium to create more dissent and resentment against WSR.

It is just a proposal at this point. Beat it down.

"What galls me is the proposal is seemingly not for the sake of conservation, which was the cornerstone in reasoning behind the moritorium in the first place, but instead for the sake of a selective few who wish to impose their fishing methodology on the rest of us." Sol on the Duc----- this reg is being presented solely by the WDFW, not by those that favor the moritorium. So then somehow "their" best sceince doesn't suit those that wish to rescind the moritorium. I guess then that best sceince is relative to a fishermans opportunity.

Solely by those within the WDFW that fish how?...................

I'll venture a guess.

What best available science do you refer to? We're not talking about a summer run fishery where smolts are present by the thousands. And, in my experience and in the experience of those I know, adults are not hooked any deeper than they are using artificials w/single hook.

Don't get me wrong. I am 100% in favor of the moritorium. I spend much if not most of the year fishing selective gear water only water because I prefer the relative solitude. It's the escalation of unnecessary regulation that bothers me.

I wouldn't be surprised to see a couple of disgruntled steelhead managers attach the words "because of the moratorium" on pretty much every restrictive rule they can come up with...there are a couple of noses out of joint down there in Olympia who would love to get back at the moratorium backers by incurring the wrath of everyone by banning everything else in the name of the moratorium.

Fish on...

Todd