Well, we all survived the hearing in Bremerton. My informal tally showed that 59 people spoke in favor of retaining the moratorium and 19 against. The written testimony provided to us by the Commission showed 163 For, 75 against. Nobody can say this hearing was done outside the light of day!!!

A number of random thoughts:

1. Most importantly, it was great to meet and converse civilly with Cowlitz Fisherman, Todd, Hairlip Angler, Salmo G., Aunty M & Caveman, and TRBO - Bob Ball.

2. No fisticuffs!!! Only two people shouted down by the audience for trying to exceed their 3 minutes - Ramon from Washington Trout and the Mayor of Forks.

3. Real civility and respect for the opposing viewpoints. The one exception (maybe minor) was the City of Forks lawyer who threatened a lawsuit. But hey, he's a lawyer (Sorry Todd).
I wonder if the City of Forks realizes the pretty major PR blunder in labeling all who were for the moratorium as urban elitist fly fishermen??

4. The most memorable line of the day from an Aussie guy talking about the science that the WDFW staff presented at the outset. He said it was not science, it was statistics and "Statistics are like bikinis, what you can see is pretty interesting, but the good stuff is hidden".

5. I was disappointed in Clint Muns of the PSA. I believe that Clint is a good advocate for the Sportsfishermen and that PSA is a good organization (especially Grandpa's chapter). However, they are on the wrong side of this issue IMHO.

6. Even though it was an overwhelming showing by the Pro moratorium forces, like George Orwell said in Animal Farm - "Everyone is equal, but some are more equal than others". I believe that the NWIFC written testimony will carry tremendous weight. It does give new context to the infamous "backroom dealing" that we began with back in February.

7. I thought both sides did a generally good job of presenting their cases (note the caveat about urban elistist, yada,yada, yada). It always takes courage to talk to the Commission. My thanks to all who chose to get involved.

8. I was surprised that there were not more anti-Moratorium folks at the meeting. Certainly by looking at the heat generated on this subject, I expected more of the Antis.

For What It's Worth: Here is my testimony to the Commission. Nothing really new here but it completes my recording of the day's events.

Director Koenings, Deputy Director Peck, & Members of the Commission,

My name is Ed Scherer and I am representing myself. The challenges facing Wild Steelhead are numerous and well documented. Habitat, Harvest, Hatcheries, Hydro, and History are factors that have been discussed in a more scholarly fashion than I can do in these 3 minutes. Addressing one of those H’s, harvest, through this moratorium is not a “silver bullet” however, it is a step in the right direction.

The beauty and uniqueness of this fish has been described far more eloquently in both print and voice than I ever could. That testimony can stand on its own. I will take a more practical path.

I submit that there is really only one question to ask if we are serious about keeping our Steelhead resource in this state. That question is “Do you believe that hatcheries are the answer to a declining steelhead population and will offer certainty of a continued run of fish?” If the answer to that question is anything other than “Absolutely, 100% and I have the science to back it up.”, then you must take whatever steps you can to protect the gene pool that Wild Steelhead represent.

Fifty years ago and longer (or so I am told), there were strong runs of Wild Steelhead in most rivers of our State. We have seen great declines. Now we are down to arguing about 12. My perception is that the single most devastating reason for those declines is loss of Habitat. Of all the H’s, Habitat is the one that will take the greatest amount of capital, both financial and Political to solve. If we find the will to tackle the Habitat problem, we must then have a gene pool of Wild fish to reseed those streams with. For me, that is the single, most persuasive reason for a Statewide Moratorium. The gene pool is too valuable and a real rainy day fund for the future if we have a prayer of restoring the Wild fish to its previous abundance.

I ask the question again - “Do you believe that hatcheries are the answer to a declining steelhead population and will offer certainty of a continued run of fish?” I submit that no reasonable person can answer that with the 100% certainty that is required if we are serious about Wild Steelhead Recovery. With that in mind, I urge you to continue this moratorium and take steps to make it permanent.

Man I wanted to go!

Being low man on the totem pole I could not get the day off. Even though I sent in a letter I know thats not enough.

I thank everyone that went and I pray that it stands. Even if it dosent this time it is not far off now that is for sure.

Again thanks to everyone that attended.

Thanks for going over today Ed..sounds like a good meeting. I missed the PSA meeting where they voted to be anti-moratorium. I think that position has it roots in the North Olypic Peninsula chapter...and I think most of the chapters over here are for the moratorium. I always thought PSA stayed out of political fights like this one since we such an independent and diverse group of chapters. Anyway personally I think the tribes are the key once again. I hope those who are for the moratorium really want to save fish and don't just want less crowding on their favorite rivers. If the moratorium is reinstated I hope to see you and Todd and all the others who were so vocal in this fight out in the forefront of the next battle which is to stop the tribes from harvesting the wild steelhead you are so passionate to save. If that fight is not undertaken I will know that this fight was a shallow one.

I spoke with a couple of the Commissioners and WDFW staff afterwards, and they all said this was one of the better Commission meetings in a long while. Kudos to everyone for civility.

I've been trying to better understand the contentiousness around this WSR regulatory action. After all, WSR is the statewide regulation, but for these few OP rivers. I think I might be getting it. There was little objection to WSR on all the other rivers because the wild steelhead runs had either already tanked or were extirpated. People appear to be more accepting of conservation when there's little or nothing left to conserve.

However, there is conflicting evidence regarding the status of the OP wild steelhead populations. Some interpret the evidence to believe that the stocks are healthy and can support a harvest. Some interpret the same evidence to mean that the same populations are not robust enough to sustain harvests, and that continued harvests will render the last, best steelhead populations in the state as just the last, not the best.

It's an interesting contrast. Extractors tend to be more accepting of risk. Conservationists take their comfort at a lower level of risk, which explains leaving the unharvested steelhead in the spawning population as a buffer against various risks. At least that's the conclusion I drew from the body of testimony presented.

I'm a bit puzzled by the Forks representatives. Should those of us who release steelhead feel unwelcome now at Forks restaurants, hotels, and gas stations? I never heard them explain how they're different than the communities that have prospered under mandatory steelhead release regulations. I think I detected some acrimony between Forks and the National Park Service. Are the Forks representatives resentful that they are not allowed to harvest all the old growth timber that is being left to rot in the same national park that draws tourist to Forks? Tourists don't visit the OP to see Forks; I hope they understand that.

Sincerely,

Salmo g.

Thanks to everyone who showed up in support...a big BIG thanks! It absolutely killed me not to be there....

btw-Given that everyone remained civil and got along very well, I think it just goes to show that once we get away from our computers, we are actually after one thing. We just believe there are differant ways to get there.

I too thank all the pro-moratorium people for speaking up. I too was going to attend, until the Kerry guy decided to show up at the Tacoma Dome for his rally. We are just down the street and had to work, was going to put a big "vote for Bush" sign up, that would have deterred them.
Once again, thanks!

Lets get on with it!

Steve

I think we all did our part.

Let's face it, if the science supported it, the Moratorium would have been a done deal. The continued hammering of MSY and escapement goals by the WDFW staff is just their way of making it the "norm" when building runs should be the goal, not always taking "our share."

Yesterday was a political tug of war between the Commission and its supporters vs the city of Forks. We all defended the Commission and its two year moratorium against a small but very vocal minority.

It's interesting how the term "elitist" gets bandied about. I would submit that a mayor and small group of people who think wild steelhead are theirs to do with as they wish are the elitist group and those that want to save them are not.

Thanks to all who took the time to write and show up. I'm feeling very good about what happened yesterday in Bremerton.

Leland.

Sorry I missed the meeting. Had all intentions of going but had the wrong time for the meeting and since I did not get home from the Outlaws until 3:30am I just was not going to make it. Especially when Bob called and woke me up at 8am and asked what the heck I was doing in bed. Here is the bottom line on why Forks is taking such a stance on this issue. The majority of the people over here dont like having the I-5 corridor make the decisions on what we can and cant do over here. Most everyone has lost jobs over the spotted owl. Then we lost our right to run dogs and bait bears because the I-5 corridor thought it was inhumane.This also took away peoples ability to make a living. I for one am all for the moretorium. But Forks is a small town and we are a tight nit community. You know the song by Little Texas My Town. Well that is the way it is here. Our town.Hope nobody takes this the wrong way but this is what I get from people and also the way I feel.

I was one of three members of Clark-Skamania Flyfishers that testified in favor of the moratorium. I was extremely disappointed by the WDF&W presentation. It did not contain the latest catch record data and was fairly non-responsive to the topic being discussed.
It appears that some in Forks have difficulty understanding that steelhead are not a city resource.

Pat Graham that was a great show in Elma. I got 2 hours sleep Friday night. I was dead tried!

It was a fun day; hoop a ferry in Seattle spent the day with friends.
Getting to see people in a different light (not in waders, I was thinking that all my friends only had waders) speaking about something they love Steelhead. Very positive day!

I'd just commented to Leland that it was too bad Bob was in Alaska. They really needed to hear from a Forks guide that makes a living guiding anglers on those disputed OP rivers and never intentionally killls a wild steelhead.

Then there he was, hanging out in the back of the hall with the other delinquents.

It was good to see both guides and magazine publishers there (Steve Probasco took Frank Amato's spot for this meeting :p )

But it's pretty impressive for a guy to come that far to add his voice in defense of wild steelhead.

So KUDOS to TRBO - hopefully some of our thoughts registered with the Commission members and they found our support compelling enough to stand up for the 2 year moratorium.