One thing to remember guys scented artificials are NOT legan in selective gear areas that rules out the vast majority of plastic worms I know the 4 inch seducers i like to fish would be illegal Frankly i see both sides of this debate umm but it doesn'f affect me cause when i go to the penninsula I fly fish.. i guess that means i have no strong opinion either way I know thats unusual for me but thats how it is.. In all my years of fishing i have hooked very few winter steelhead on bait that were hooked deep, in fact i cannot recall any however I can recall fish hooked on spoons that were in the tongue and bled a little before release.

I think barbless single hooks are always a good idea regarless of mortlity issues, i simply think they hook fish better and are easier to deal with

As ususal Salmo is right on the money - everywhere in the state where a CnR fishery targets wild steelhead selective gear rules are required. What is there about the coast steelhead populations that would make it different?

Todd -
The Draft WSC white paper (#2) very clearly calls for more extensive use of selective gear restrictions in steelhead fishery management. This regulation proposal would seem to be a natural for WSC; especially given its position as put forth in the white paper.

Regarding the need during the spring. While hooking mortality on adults during the winter is normally not a large issue the case with kelts (spawn-outs) is an entirely different matter. My experience and that of most anglers that I know is that kelts eat bait big time with a substantial portion of them caught on bait being hooked in critical areas. It would be fair to say that hooking mortality on bait caught kelts would be very similar that of trout - that is we could expect a 1/3 of them to die.

In WSC's first white paper a whole section was devoted to the importance of kelts to the overall population. This is based on the large contribution that repeat spawning females make to the total number of eggs deposited in the gravel each spring. In addition they provide stability to run sizes.

Why is that you don't think it is important to protect those kelts on the coast as much as those in Puget Sound? Especially given that the onset of wild steelhead spawning on many of the coastal rivers is a month earlier than on Puget Sound rivers making even more likely that anglers would encounter kelts during their fishing.

Given the rheotic of WSC and yourself about the need to err on the side of the wild steelhead resource I'm surprised that this proposal doesn't have your full and vocal support. In fact I would have expected your position to be one of questioning the allowing the use of bait in the spring chinook fishery on the Sol Duc/Quillayute. After all we are talking about allowing bait to catch hatchery chinook at the risk of wild steelhead - that doesn't seem to be putting the wild resources as the primary priority.

Tight lines
S malma

My testimony will be against the selective fishery rules.

If the stocks are healthy, selective gear rules are not needed, a small amount of mortality is not an issue and the moratorium should not even be considered. If the numbers are so depressed that there is no harvestable excess it is more reasonable to prohibit all fisheries that target the wild fish.

The imposition of a harvest moratorium for conservation reasons should by default include a moratorium on all fisheries that target those stocks requiring such essential conservation concern.

Any action to create C&R fisheries or other special fisheries should be proposed and discussed through normal rule making process rather than indirectly through a harvest moratorium on harvestable stocks.

Sorry plunker you are wrong.. WDFW should take whatever steps necessary to protect wild steelhead and provide fishing opportunity.. If numbers become healthy then and only then should harvest even be brought up..
The default position WDFW should have is that harvesting wild fish is bad and that there are enough hatchery fish around that wild harvest is not necessary.

"I spend much if not most of the year fishing selective gear water only water because I prefer the relative solitude."

Every so often this little bit of reality comes to the fore. Selective fisheries are cool because they eliminate the annoying crowds of amateurs. I'm all for them. Problem is that in a huge debate like this one the solitude is a reason to prevent people from fishing if they don't like selective waters but not a scientific reason to put restrictions on a fishery.

So many crackers so few fish to keep.

Nope! You are wrong Robert!

Smalma, Todd is offering his own opinion of the issue as the WSC has not had the opportunity to review the minor rules proposal together as a board so no official position has been developed. The WSC offered you a copy of the recent white paper and is truely looking forward to your review and insights, but not necessarily on a bb forum.

Double Haul -
My only question was directed directly to Todd and not the WSC. I merely commented that given the position in the white paper support of the selective regulation proposal seem to only be a natural for WSC.

I might also comment that when the upstream sanctuaries (WSR) were created on the OP streams several years ago they all were enacted with selective gear restrictions. For Todd to imply that these new selective gear proposals were some vindictive plot is uncalled for - it is just a continuation of the very regualtions that wild steelhead advocates have pushed for in the past and consistent with wild steelhead CnR season through out the state. Sometimes one needs to be careful what one asks for.

I only mentioned the draft white paper because JJ had posted a link to it on this site and there has been discussions on various aspects of it.

I thank WSC for a copy of the Draft White Paper - it has been reviewed and comments sent to the authors.

Tight lines
S malma

YAPR - Yet Another Parker Restriction!!!

Thank Glub for my fishing alter egos! Opher and Bone can easily make up for whatever restrictions are put on Parker! Go ahead. Take your best shot. Restrict away!

I'd say I was sorry about catching your summer runs, but those poor fish really didn't stand a chance once they saw this coming down the pike!

Guess we all better put our noses in the air and learn to fly fish. Spey rod here I come!!!

Give the guys a few more years and they will selectivley take that rod from my hans as well.


Hacheries, hacheries, bait and BONK. YEA!!!!

Thanks for the clairification Smalma

We already have selective gear rules in place on the upper watersheds of all these streams, that's true. I'm glad. And, it's true that selective gear rules have gone hand in hand with catch-and-release in those areas in the past. But it's been for the purpose of distributing fishing pressure equally, while providing opportunity for all types of users and protecting the resourse at the same time.

What we're talking about here is the unalateral closure of the west end for a huge number of fishermen. What kind of fishery are we going to create? One in which we segregate Washington rivers into two catagories? On one hand we'll have the Cowlitz type rivers where snagging is rampent, people fish 24 hours a day and a car fully engulfed in flames in the parking lot goes unnoticed, and on the other hand we'll have flyfishing only rivers.

What about the hundreds of fishermen that enjoy floating a pink Berkely worm under a float and practice the catch-and-release ethic? I guess they can suck wind. Same with the sidedrifters and bait fishermen.

RK43 you nailed it on the head.

Its an evil plot by Sage to turn all of us outlaw bait drifting barbed hook using lowlives into snobby flyfishermen and buy their rods.

I can't believe how much the state is into micromanaging steelhead and salmon fishing. Its like self preservation so they can write a ticket for trivial stuff to pad their pockets and justify their existence. :rolleyes:

Be careful what you ask for you just may get it!

Frankly I'm suprised at some of the responses here, some of you act so shocked. You could have seen this coming from Mars.

Several posters on this forum said this would happen before they were banned.

Selective gear regulations are the norm for catch and release fisheries. Did you seriously think this would not happen???

Most excellent proposal. They should have banned it on the doc too. It will save lots of cutts and smolts.

Good post Phishinman!
My thoughts exactly.Im amazed at some of the moritorium supports posts.How could anyone be shocked by this? This is a natural step for catch and release fisherys.I wouldnt be shocked at all if the moritorium is upheld to see at least afew of these river systems go fly fish only.

The Hoh river has a targeted salmon fishery in this time frame as well, why not exclude that river with the Quil and Duc? I am sure that would relieve a great deal of pressure from the Sol Duc. The pressure on the Bogachiel is minimal and the Calawah is mostly fished by Pat and a few others, so at least open the Hoh. What about the Queets? If the upper Quinault (which is within the ONP boundary) goes selective why wouldn't the Queets up to Hartzell be selective? You did list one Queets trib already.

With the unavoidable increase in boats on the Duc just imagine how many more down river nates will suffer. I see very little difference in hookup location with fresh up river fish, when fishing bait vs. artificial but those returning down just seem to inhale bait.

And all I want is for the South Fork to be open one more month. Maybe not a fair trade off but one I can live with.

What's really bad is I find myself agreeing with Grandpa a little bit every time some new petty restriction is imposed upon us and the blatant disregard for the conservation of fish by the nets that remain the river. Why can't your boy George play cowboys and indians out west?


Sol on the Duc you might need to change your name if this sticks.

Who will be left out? It still allows drift fishing, float fishing, plugs, and hardware.
Pink worms will still be allowed, just not the scented ones.

Just being dramatic, cupo.

The truth is I favor selective gear rules. I drive a thousand miles north to fish BC's most selective fisheries every year. If it comes to pass here as is apparently proposed, it will only benifit the resourse and us anglers in time. Fishing the places that had those rules in effect prior to my frequenting them is somehow different than having opportunities that I have historically enjoyed taken away. It's difficult, thats all.

Another point about bait fishing....I believe Parker and others when they say fish they hook on bait are not typically hooked deep....but isn't this because of the style of fishing you are doing? Drift or boondogging where the bait is moving, relatively light weight and you are holding the rod and so quickly detect the bite and set the hook. I think mortality is much higher for plunkers (stationary weight, heavy gear etc) and bait divers. I'm not proposing we make the regulations even more complicated, just an observation.