I fished Reiter on Wednesday and left empty handed when the river had risen so high that I was fishing from the parking lot and expecting the animals to start pairing up.

I also fished Reiter on Friday morning and though the river was in decent shape by then, still left empty handed. In order to avoid the crowds I fished the non-hatchery side. I saw four or five fish landed on the hatchery side. A couple of them looked dark (chums or late summer run maybe) and a couple bright but small winter run steelhead.

Anyone else had any luck with the metal heads yet?

We picked up a few today, including these:

Nice fish, B Mac....good photos too!

where those wild fish?

I will say it before anybody else does. You cannot remove wild fish from the water anymore. Just for your FYI

Perhaps it's not a wild fish you moron. Seems like there's a lot of folks who either are too quick to play keyboard gamewarden, or don't know enough about the fisheries in this state and they spout off with a comment like the one above. It only shows thier ignorance...

Nice fish Brian!

Exactly! For all we know, those are unclipped hatchery fish off of the Quinault, Cook Creek, or the Salmon River.

Or, they are wild fish off of the Skykomish. Either way, who cares? It's a stupid law.

Nice fish and nice photos!

They look like hatchery unclips to me...

I agree with the internet game-warden comment.

Like I said before.....nice fish and pics!

First of all I wasnt trying to be no internet game warden I love steelie pics just like all of you. I was just stating that because there is a lot of people that dont know about the new rule !!!!!! I agree tthat is a stupid rule. But if you get caught by a game warden will you think it is a stupid rule then when you have a 150.00 ticket on your hands.

I loved the keyboard gamewarden comment

You can't keep native fish, we are trying to preserve the run and besides they belong to Native Americans.

Every Native fish you keep is one less fish they get to kill in their nets.

Does this REALLY make sense ?

Kevin,

TrailRat obviously got up on the wrong side of the bed. ANYONE can clearly see, from the pics, that those are unclipped fish. SO, to the "letter of the law", you are dead-on in your assessment. Yes, they could be OP hatchery stock from the Quinault...but that is an open ended thought, as the source of the fish was not reported.

As to following that law...well, I say FIE on that rule!

While the law may say you can't take them from the water for pics or ??, anyone who knows the first thing about how to handle a fish can hold it out of the water long enough to take a pic or two without harming the critter.

They (WDFW) also did not include any suggestions about how to get a 1/0 Octopus hook (barb pinched) out of a 15 lb.+ steelhead, without securing the fish in some manner, or taking it out of the water. You either have to wear the fish down to exhaustion in order to get it to sit still (which can kill the fish with lactic acid, later) , or you have to use a broomstick for a pole with 40 lb. line and just horse the fish in.

I'm no "old pro" like come of you guys, but my common sense tells me that, while the intentions are good, this is a stupid law that never should have hit the books.

Mike

Can't tell with the first pic but it looks to me the dorsal fin is clipped on the other two fish. I do beleive certain hatcheries still practice this.

DOGOFF!

Here's the exact text from the regs:

"In freshwater, (except the Columbia River
downstream of the Rocky Point/Tongue
Point line) it is unlawful to totally remove
from the water any SALMON or
STEELHEAD required to be released."


So actually, in waters where it is legal to retain wild steelhead, it would be legal based on the explicit wording in this rule to totally remove a WILD steelhead from the water for a photo.

Another thing occurred to me the other day while fishing a small river full of chums: many of my chums were legally hooked in the mouth, while others were (unfortunately) snagged. I released all the snagged fish as required by law.

However, it was difficult, if not impossible to remove a hook from a tail, vent, etc. of a snagged fish unless the fish is totally removed from the water. This is especially true if fishing from a high bank and the fish is hooked on the underside. A snagged fish is a fish that is "required to be released." So, based on the explicit wording of the law, beaching a snagged fish and then releasing it would be a violation.

This particular law, while probably passed with good intentions, is difficult and impractical to practice and enforce.

Good luck and good fishing,

Cheapskate aka keyboard gamewarden

IF they were OP hatchery stock AND caught in/on the National Park, then the "letter of the law" as it pertains to the State of Washington doesn't mean squat.
RL

Hmm....a bunch of Wild Fish in November... Once again, doesn't the dorsal fin in two of those pics look suspicious?? I've caught many of fish with clipped dorsal fins.

DOGOFF!

stlhd_dreaming isn't it predictable to hear a comment like the one below yours? Just for stating the law he said your a moron, a keyboard gamewarden, don't know anything about washington fisheries, you spout off and are ignorant. I don't get it.

When i first saw the pics i thought, here we go, lets see how many knock B Mac down for holding up a fish for a pic. Just like has happened on other posts over and over. Then i see you(stlhd) post the rule for his info incase he didn't know and to head off all the others that are going to say it anyways. And what happens? You get called a moron for it. Well i guess most of us are morons then because most of us have stated rules and mostly for info, not to flame. Yet you(stlhd) get shot down for it.

And you can only guess if it is an unclipped hatchery fish. And a guess means your unsure. If your unsure then follow the rule. Just don't pick up fish with dorsals intact and there will be no problem. Why try to make the fish legal with a loophole or rewording of the law? I agree though, it isn't perfectly clear. But we all know what it means without reading too deeply into it trying to make it work to our advantage. If there is an advantage, then it should ALWAYS be on the conservations side, not the harvest.

Nice fish though, by the way. Wish we could have more posts but less hassle,negativity and the wondering if your going to be called a moron because of your reply.

Sparkey should be fed raw potato's via the potato gun. After his last meal---a drift boat keel-hulling in some shallow rapids. This might dissuade others from such stupid ideas in the future. I might suggest the Snoopy Rod Classic as the appropriote venue.

Local;
Not one bit of your "blurt" above makes any sense.

There are some systems in which you can still keep Native Steelhead. It sucks, but its true.

The Steelhead belong to the people. All of us. Not just the Native Americans.

The next part makes so little sense that I can not even comment on it. It makes no sense at all.

So the answer is no. None of what you said makes any sense.

Well Gutz (sp?) If you lived down here (Grays Harbor) and you had the chance to share 27 days of fishing with the indian gill nets you might feel a little different.

Like the regulations about not keeping Chinook one year or not keeping Native Coho because we are trying to protect the run and then have a gill net season that allows the Indians the chance to keep every single fish they can net. Does that make sense ?

Do you get it now ???????????????

Local,
Makes sense to me!

Dogoff, they never clipped dorsals at any hatchery. The dorsals do tend to fray and are smaller on hatchery fish, apparently from rubbing on concrete raceways.

I know where he was, they were hatcheries.

B Mac,

Thanks for sharing the pictures! Whether the law about picking up wild fish makes sense and/or whether it's appropriate to inform others about the law when it's potentially applicable are certainly both interesting questions to debate but they weren't the topic that I thought we'd discuss with my original post. In any event, thanks again for sharing.

Anyone else doing any good?

Aaron

WRONG.

Study up and try again, Grasshopper.

Here's some of what we got today

What a great discussion. It is obvious to me that many of you know where my fish were caught. I ended up bringing two of these hatchery fish home with me and released the other two I landed after a quick picture. All four had their adipose fins intact!

I've seen those guys before but can't place where I've seen them (I thought the guy on the right couldn't catch a thing).

Single handed rods are the tickey h2h

Them boys aint' right!

In regards to the regulation discussion, my $.02-

Whether you agree with it or not, it's undeniable that this regulation has brought attention to the issue of better handling of the fish is an important element of responsible releasing techniques. I am the same as many and believe I handle the fish responsibly, but I can live with it.

The only bad I see is the bruising of some egos.


Homer Psst....single handed rods are making a comeback, saw some doubles at a garage sale the other day :p

Bzzzzzzzzzzt !! Hope you didn't make that a true daily double.

In fact, I've seen some really nice hatchery fish with no dorsal fin released by guys on that same river because the fish's adipose fins were intact. Musta been FNG's.

Nice fish, B. Mac. You knew somebody was going to say something, didn't you?

Oh yeah.........when you guys keel-haul Sparkey, do it reeeeaaalll slow.

Clipping dorsals? Must be tribal then because I've never seen nor heard of any state hatchery clipping a dorsal, and never caught one totally lacking a dorsal. Have caught them w/o a ventral, w/o a pectoral and w/o an adipose. Please fill me in so I can be properly humbled....

Salmonbelly: The practice is common at state AND tribal hatcheries.

Sol on the Duc, respectively suggest you're full of it. Tell me which hatcheries. The dorsals do get stubbed, eroded, frayed, whatever you want to call it, but I know several WDFW biologists (dont' hate me for it) and they tell me the state has NEVER clipped dorsals on steelhead. Tribes maybe, but I doubt it.

You're a pleasant fellow, aren't you?

How many steelhead have you caught in Washington, dude? Not many I would surmize. The neatly pruned dorsals found on the Skamania strain hatchery summer steelhead, which are planted widely all over the state are just one example.

Duc, a couple hundred steelhead at least. Tell me which hathcery?

There's a reason why we call him "Special". Too bad drift boats don't come in the "short yellow bus" variety!

Oh, and before you tar and feather him, he still owes me a dinner from the *LAST* SRC!

If he survives the day, I think Sparkey will be paying for my Steak Jalisco dinner!

Mmmmmmm.

WDFW Hatcheries mark 100% of the Steelhead and the Tribal Hatcheries will mark 100% of there Steelhead by 2005. The Quinaults were the last hold out.

Bob wrote:
“Single handed rods are the tickey h2h”

Double Haul wrote:
“Homer Psst....single handed rods are making a comeback, saw some doubles at a garage sale the other day”


Dream on guys!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Any body want to buy some single-handed rods? Contact Bob over DH.

Now, don't go being flat-out wrong twice in one thread.

The Salmon River hatchery clips the dorsals. B. Mac even included pictures to prove it.

Glad a couple of you were actually paying attention to my comment on the clipped dorsal...Hatcheries that still clip dorsals?? Can't tell you for sure but I know the Puyallup, Skykomish, Kalama and Nooch are systems which have practiced this in the past..

DOGOFF!

Duc, Dog and Dan, sorry you guys, but you're wrong. Just got off the phone with the Quinault tribe's net pen manager, and he says they've never clipped the DORSAL off any fish from any tribal facility, and that they are only marking a portion of their steelhead with an adipose clip even now, just to indicate a coded wire tag in their snouts. Also talked to the regional fish bio at Mill Creek WDFW, and he also said they've never clipped dorsals off steelhead from any state hatchery. Like I said, the dorsals do get deformed from hatchery rearing, sometimes to the point non-existence. That's why 12, 15 years ago, and recently on the Hoh as I recall, you could measure the dorsal to determine if the fish was hatchery or wild. It was never because the dorsals were clipped, because they weren't.

Read the regs on the Salmon.

Do you wonder why dorsal fin height is listed as a way to identify hatchery fish?

If they aren't clipping dorsals, then why would their fins be less than 2 1/8" high, or not there at all?

They rub their dorsals off, but their tails and ventral fins aren't worn? Do they swim upside down?

I'll just say that if I'm wrong, it wouldn't be the first time.

Dan, we've all been wrong plenty of times and that's no crime. It's not exactly certain why those dorsals get stubbed in the hatchery environment. I've heard that they get rubbed off on the concrete raceways, and that doesn't seem plausible to me either, and more recently I've heard that it might be a bacterial or infectious thing due to crowded conditions in the raceways. But what is known is that those dorsals tend to weird out on hatchery steehead, and its measurable and that's the reason for the dorsal height regulation. The state actually used to issue cards marking the height that anglers could put up against the dorsal to see if it was a hatchery or wild fish.

In a fish tank it's caused by PH of the water or a bacterial infection.

Duc, Dog, & Dan,

As best as I know, Salmonbelly has this correct. Let's try to keep this civil. I think there are clear explanations for the observations of dorsal fins we all make. State, federal, and tribal hatcheries mark steelhead by clipping the adipose fin, ventral fin, and very occasionally, the pectoral fin.

The Quinault Tribe marks only a percentage of their hatchery steelhead production, which is why many hatchery steelhead in the Quinault, Queets, Salmon have adipose fins.

Deformed dorsal fins are common to most hatchery steelhead, and are a good way to identify hatchery steelhead not intentionally marked. When tested against scale reading some years ago, it was about 85% accurate. Some hatchery steelhead do have "perfect" dorsals, like their wild brethren. Dorsal fins are deformed on hatchery fish due primarily to nipping by other steelhead in the close quarters of the hatchery rearing environment. The dorsal fins, and hearsay has suggested, that some pectoral fins are eroded by rubbing against concrete rearing pond walls. Personally, I've never witnessed the behavior. Further, the net pens used for rearing a lot of hatchery steelhead that end up with similarly deformed dorsal fins, do not have concrete walls.

Hatchery steelhead with deformed dorsals, often do have dorsal fins greater than 2 1/8". I released two last weekend. The "credit card" rule for dorsal fin height is not a very good indicator for hatchery fish, in my opinion. Small wild fish have smaller, but usually perfect dorsal fins. Large hatchery fish with obviously deformed dorsal fins may have dorsal greater than 2 1/8". The NPS has adopted a regulation that was discarded by the state about 20 years ago when they began adipose clipping all hatchery steelhead production.

TK,

Bacterial infection can often lead to fin erosion, but it isn't limited to dorsal fins. Do you have documentation for your statement? I'm not aware of pH being associated with the common occurance of deformed dorsal fins on hatchery steelhead. The pH is about the same in most steelhead streams that I've sampled (6.5 to 7.8), and that covers both hatchery and wild fish rearing environments. How do you associate it with the effect on hatchery steelhead?

Sincerely,

Salmo g.

A bacterial infection that targets one of six fins.......hmmmm. :rolleyes:

I could be wrong, although it would be the first time.

Whatever the cause of the "trimmed" dorsal is, the end result is the same: Right between the mashed potatos and peas.

Okay ... With the science input from Salmo G provided, I think we'll put this to bed.

A last comment from me ... while many think the law is stupid, I've worked with it for ten years in AK and it's not the end of the world.

I think it's a case of a few bad apples spoiling the rest. I'll tell you, I've seen some atrocious handling over the years ... saw one grabbed by the gills yesterday and thrown up on the bank until it was found out that it was a nate and not legal and then thrown back in.

I think it's more of a tool of giving enforcement some options when gross mishandling occurs ... I don't think you're going to see any tix if the fish is 1/2 inch of the water for a pic opportunity. But for those that let 'em flop around the boat for a bit or drag them up into the rocks ... you can now get one and you probably deserve it anyhow