Has anyone read the new proposal from WDFW for the 09-11 season setting?

Essentially it will make anywhere where a Non-Buoyant lure restriction is in place (essentially every river with a salmon season, except the Columbia) single hook only and only salmon and steelhead hooked inside the mouth may be retained.

Wouldnt this eliminate the legal use of standard two hook sidedrifting rigs, where the corkie is in between two hooks, in any area with a non-bouyant lure restriction?
And make illegal some of those fish that take a swipe at hardware and are hooked from the outside in or under the chin?

It seems doubtful that this will really eliminate snagging, just further restrictions on sportfisherman, another chance to impose regulation while gillnets continue to choke the mouths of all major river systems.

Comments on the proposal can still be submitted until November 7th-

it will be a lot of fun running single hook prawn and herring rigs. What a joke, this is a broad brush stroke to a complicated problem. Most snaggers use a single hook where trebles are outlawed anyway so what would it change? All this rule does is give gamies more reasons to write tickets where they are not warrented such as a trolling bait presentation. There is also a rule proposal to go to a 2 fish salmon or steelhead limit which I do not agree with.

Have they given any thought to enforcing the existing regulations?

+1 on the ability to write more tickets.

Hey bouys and gulls....cheer up...it's not about the fish. It's about the potential revenue. Everybody must become an outlaw in order to ease the budget crisis. With reduced enforcement, we need more outlaws...and guess what? You're it! Say Hello to General Fund.

my thoughts exactly. it won't change a damned thing, except make it harder on honest fishermen.

if the existing regs were enforced, we wouldn't be having this complete breakdown of angler ethic on our rivers. there isn't a single river with a salmon season i can think of that i can escape from the snaggers any more.

Not all rivers have non-buoyant lure restrictions at this time, are you saying that all rivers are going to be placed under the restriction. I know that the Kalama and the Elochoman were real snagfests and this rule was done in part to help those rivers. That being said, I saw a lot more compliance with the law on the Skok, and the Cowlitz this year. Still a few that dont get it though. Friend of mine that will not knowingly break any fishing rules was on the Cowlitz recently when the warden came down for a visit, caught some guys that had not punched their fish, and then came up to my friend and said someone had seen him keeping a snagged fish. He couldnt believe what he was hearing, and told the warden to ticket him and prepare for a day in court. To bad a warden from Longview feels he has to do that to write a ticket. My buddie is going to visit fish and game enforcement in Olympia and complain a bit.

there goes the neighborhood is a way of putting it next thing you know they're gonna put a limit on leader length and hook size ,I have to say though I definitely agree with many of you on the fact that one impose more regulations if you can't even enforce the ones already existing to the degree that is necessary. *shakes head and just wanders what it's all coming to *

Last weekend Vhawk took me to the Skok.

After going back there after 10 years, and seeing it was as bad if not worse, since only nasty, white 90% dead boots were in that hole-- seeing those tools with 4 inches of pencil lead 2 inches below their 3/0 hook, and NO other tackle used, I wouldnt mind if the snagging mofos were shot Chinese Style:

EDITED BY BIG_DADDY:

PHOTO REMOVED!

NO MORE CRAP LIKE THIS......PERIOD

I for one would welcome that change.

However if you have concerns you could actually provide some input into regulation process - see

http://wdfw.wa.gov/fish/regs/rule_proposals/index.htm

Or you can continue to set on the sidelines and bitch.

Tight lines
Curt

Is this new law considered a "revenue stream" or a "stream revenue"? Just wondering.

The regulation will only keep honest people from keeping questionable fish. The rule was in effect on the Green (off toutle) this year and didn't stop 90% of the people from keeping what ever they wanted. Nothing changed. On the skok people fish with bare hooks and keep whatever they hook, regardless where it is hooked. I thought I wanted this rule, but now I think it is pointless. I have hooked spinner caught fish, herring, and eggs under a bobber where the fish definitely hit the bait but were hooked outside the mouth. This will just make most of us more pissed off if we have to release the only fish we caught all day while all around us the snaggers are walking away with 4 fish limits. More enforcement is needed, not more laws that aren't enforced. If, this rule was coupled with 10 times the enforcement, then I wouldn't mind. As is, I see no point other than to make it look like they are doing something while actually doing nothing. Oh yeah, another year is coming to an end, countless days on the river, not one enforcement agent sighted.

What better ways could you come up with?

Single barbless with hook restriction size? Leader length restrictions?

Honestly I could give a rip what it may be, I'm sick of the snaggers taking over the good fishing areas where the fish are concentrated. It makes it tough on the guys that are doing it legit!

Perhaps they should make some stretches of river bobber fishing only?

Keith

Anyone have any idea where they are getting the future law/restrictions plan on the WDFG website. I would like to read it.



and I give a little shout out "Amen" on that one!

Thrasher

Now if someone would just introduce some new law that relieves us of the need for an attorney each time we go fishing.........Cant anyone just simplify the regs........PLEASE..................

Here's my complaint(s) about this reg. It's not going to stop snagging or flossing. Simple. The fish that are dragged in backwards, sideways, etc. are obviously snagged and it hasn't been legal to keep such fish that I know of in quite a number of years. So the guys that keep those fish may catch fewer, but that's it. Those same always kept obviously illegally hooked fish, so nothing's going to change there. And since a flossed fish looks like a legally hooked fish, unless closely inspected, my guess is most of those will be kept if otherwise legal. So what does it accomplish? It does keep legitimately hooked fish, i.e., fish that strike, from being legally kept if the hook doesn't penetrate the mouth from the inside out.

Here's another thought concerning bank fishermen. Since you can only drag a fish out on the bank if you are going to keep it, that means that you must inspect not only whether or not the fish is clipped, but also whether or not the hook entered the fish's mouth in the proper direction.....all on a single, barbless hook. Do you think the fish might just flop loose while all this "inspecting" is done? You might get around some of the problem by packing in a net. Handy.

All in all, I give this reg the one-finger salute.

Of course all of this is a non-issue if you turn all of your fish loose, which is probably the most reasonable solution.

Back on topic:
It's like the gun laws - only the criminals will have them. As pointed out above the snaggers will snag law or not.

I missed the part in the new regs where the hook is required to be barbless?

Good Catch! Barbless is NOT mentioned.
There is a simiar rule on the Quilcene (perhaps others as well) where barbless IS a part of this same rule. Prepare for a correction since this whole idea is to be more fish friendly, I would guess. It follows that if snagging is the issue, barbed hooks do a lot more damage, single or otherwise.

If this were to actually help prevent snagging and flossing I'd give it a thumbs up. But, like its been said there are existing rules on the books.

But, they complain about not having enough funds for enforcement so the enforcement on this will be minimal as all our laws are.

If they would stop siphoning off license and ticket revenues to the General Fund and other pet projects, then we would see real change. Until then, its more complications and rules which don't do much in the long run other than frustrate everyone that follows these laws.

Just my 2 cents. :-)