I have high hopes for the direction of the WAA. I am excited about a voice in my local area also. I may be dreaming, but my fingers are crossed.

Jim,

You've got my support, I signed on. That the winds of change are blowing is an understatement. I see the day in the not-so-distant future when a majority of our opportunities will be gone. It's already happening.

I've waited for years for some kind of angler alliance to take shape and this appears to be a good attempt. Like it was stated earlier, "we have nothing to lose".

This is what I've observed over time:

1) WDFW is not aggressively committed in increasing angler opportunity much less keeping what we have. They talk the talk but they aren't walking the walk.

2) Most fishing groups are limited in effecting real change because of limited numbers and/or internal disagreement on agendas. Look at the noose around Trout Unlimited's neck when they came out "neutral" on I-696.

3) Sportfishers are famous for crying like a baby when they get shafted and then doing nothing to change the situation. I believe part of the reason for doing nothing is not so much a sense of complacence but that alot of sport fishers have seen for years the attempts of smaller groups with no real effect so the "what's the use" attitude prevails.

4) The tribe's are playing their cards right(they seem to have most of them these days)and are simply going after all they can because they have the tools to do so. We cannot do the same until we have more cards in our hand.

We are running out of time. I am actually questioning whether to invest in the fishing boat I've dreamed of my whole life because I don't feel certain there will be real opportunity 5-10 years down the road. I can finally afford it and I may have to look for a new passion-it stinks!

Large numbers may not be the only way but it's a heckuva way to start. NOTHING else has worked on a long term scale for us.....just piddly little victories here and there to keep us subdued.

It IS going to take a new innovative approach and I for one am more than willing to put my name on something that wants to pepetuate what I live for.

Anyone else?

hey neanderthal, i have read this post and i see that you are being asked what or where do you think waa should look or head into a certain arena. a new group or voice needs input and not always positive, sound critisen is a positive. from what i have read from jim is he is asking to try to help lead this group with what points so we may try to be more orented towardss speficic's and build a common goal for all.
now i sent my name in last week and i hope i send back the email right. i have not belonged to a sportmans group since i was a little kid; (ha ha, never was little and a kid drinks milk funny). but i am interested in trying to help rectify our present situation, if only with may poor typing.
please, you do not have to committ to a life time support, but a voice like yours needs to be part of a new and growing group.

thanks elmtree

Elmtree is exactly right. The last thing an Alliance like this needs is a bunch of YES men. New approaches and ideas have to be tried or this is doomed to fail. I know for a fact Jim wants everyones opinion. We don't have a bunch of time left.....

thank you, yes we all need to step up and whether we are for or against is not the point, it is that we are trying to do something to help correct a bad situation. our only hope is that we can establish a firm open forum group with enough poeple to be seen as a group of knowlegdable concerned citizen's, not just me first fisher-people.

oh, yea i did not email back right the other day, but it went out 2 minutes ago.

thanks elmtree

I've been in this awhile. The bottomline is sportsfishermen outnumber the commercial and tribals combined. We have more economic impact than both. I see the main issue as the sportsfisherman are tired of being ignored and religated to third place.(hind t*tty) All I want is the voice in state fisheries policy we deserve.

[This message has been edited by Bruce (edited 03-27-2000).]

I've been scrolling through the Jim/Neanderthal debate and am usually reserved on my comments. I can see points on both sides. We do need some kind of alliance representing the interest of all sport fisherman, regardless of the species. But siding with Neanderthal, I too am reluctant to have may name used to represent an issue I don't necessarily agree with. I would have no problem joining WAA as a group, but also would like to reserve the option to back the issues I believe in.

Jim,
hello again. You have my support and all of my fishing buddies support, I will see to that! I am all up for anything to improve fishing! You have my number so if there is anything that I can do feel free to call, I have alot of contacts and would be more than happy to try to get Trout Unlimited or some other building to hold a meeting to incourage others... I am on my way right now to sign, I will pass the word on...

thanks,
Andy Matthews

I have been waiting since the first attempt to ban all nets failed for an organization such as this one that can possibly unite the sports fishermen and women together as one voice. Although Its true not everybody will agree on all issues I think its time for us to have a voice in the decisions that are made in Olympia as the commercial fishing industry (and those damn nets) and the native americans do I am signing up right now!
RAMPRAT


[This message has been edited by ramprat (edited 03-27-2000).]

I tend to agree with most of Neanderthal's comments. I am finding it difficult to jump on this new organizations bandwagon. Even with so many different ideas in the sportsfishing community, I find it hard to find one groups ideas that agree with, sportsfisherman unlike commercials or native groups can't seem to agree on anything. How can a catch a release philosophy join hands with a group such as the Wildats? When I talk to someone who tells me they killed a 18# wild hen for her eggs because they have another steelhead trip planned next week, that sportfisherman make me much more angry than any commercial or tribal fisherman. As far as the economic impact, the sportfisherman has a much larger impact. The sportsfisherman buys tackle, pays for a hotel/motel room at his or her destination, buys gasoline for the car and or boat, purchases food at the local grocery store or Macdonalds. The commercial/tribal fisherman kills the fish and sells it, impacting only themselves and the fishery. As far as a the Salmon fishery goes, I don't believe a catch and keep philosophy is feasible, not with the current population, not to mention the population growth in the entire Puget Sound area and the sad state that our hatcheries are in(not that an exceptional run or return can't be fished). I believe the heart of the problem is with the hatchery vs. wild fish debate. Problem being, the hatcheries have a adverse effect upon the wild fish, but without the hatheries there probabaly won't be a catch and keep fishery, let alone a commercial fishery. If the state could actually fin clip ALL of the hathery fish this problem might be reduced, but I understand that the tribes might have a problem with finclipping(hmm, I wonder why?)
Legal requirements? What is a legal requirement as far a fish numbers, sustainable harvest? How many fish a river can support, or the mininum #'s of fish a river can have and still sustain a viable population? Why not try to maximize these numbers instead of minimize them? For myself to agree with a club such as the wilcats will take a monumental effort by both parties. Writing is not one of my skills, I hope that I at least got one of my points across!
thanks for your time
--salmontackler

Some feedback comments. First of all, I had posted awhile back suggesting a WAA type of organiztion and then being disappointed in the seeming general complacency of Washington anglers. This WAA push & the resultant constructive comunication now taking place here is encouraging.-- What I here Jim Bain saying is that the WAA will be mostly about sportfishing general interest representation by needed fish bio.s/lawyers/lobbyists, and importantly backed by the POWER of great numbers of members. And that the purpose will be oriented toward what's best for salmon & steelhead recovery & health, rather than for divided fishermen's self interest issues. Great! But a little reality check should be forthwith. While I believe that a large part of "what's best for fish recovery" is fighting the status quo of Indian & commercial netting, there is much more to the equation. Getting more financial commitment toward fish restoration from the electric power industry & reversing habitat destruction by such as the timber, agricultural, cattle, etc. industries is also a big part of it. The reality check for sportfishermen and potential WAA members is twofold: 1- While member numbers are very important it is also going to take money (Jim was reluctant to address that issue because it will take a lot for significant change- bio.s/lawyers/lobbyists cost). However, the more the members the less the money per member! EVERYONE joining in will be a powerful force w/o having too much cost per member!! I suggest a member pledge drive to get the numbers high before asking for the needed financial help so costs will be low when asked for. 2- The other reality is that for the future of salmon & steelhead runs, sportfishermen are going to continue to have to make sacrifices. But they don't have to be that painful. Continued manditory C&R where appropriate. Bait bans & barbless hooks where appropriate. And quite frankly, this will likely have to be for a long while in many areas. BUT HEY, YOU WILL STILL BE OUT THERE ENJOYING FISHING IN THE OUTDOORS!! WITH FISH RECOVERING FOR THE FUTURE INSTEAD OF PERMANENTLY DISAPPEARING ALONG WITH THE OPPORTUNITY TO FISH FOR THEM AT ALL! So quit worrying about selfish issues & agendas and get with the WAA. I will attempt to get support for those objectives from our Ifish website readers here in Oregon if & when it will benefit your causes. We will be faced with the same battles here, although not as urgent as native steelhead netting. Jim, after a successful WAA membership drive, how about considering an even more powerful alliance combining Washington & Oregon sportfishermen (how does Northwest Sportfishing Alliance or similar sound?). And don't forget about likely substancial financial help from NSIA (Norhtwest Sportfishing Industry Assoc.- read the Feb./Mar.STS mag. article by Buzz Ramsey- they sell tackle, not bait). Another likely candidate for financial help would be the fishing boat industry. There are other candidates. Good luck & keep after it. - Steve Hanson

[This message has been edited by Reel Truth (edited 03-28-2000).]

I can understand the skepticisim of some of these post. Hopefully as the WAA moves forward it will prove to be an organization ALL can support. I'm sure you all know the web site the WAA is hosted at, at this time. Check in for meeting dates and try to attend. If unhappy with the dirrection, voice your opinion. With the intellegence on this and other boards, something good can happen...

P.S. Rumor has it a commercial fishery was asked for, and agreed to, in Willapa bay for 50% of harvestable Sturgeon...

see this is why we need a group like waa, sturgen fishery in willapa bay ok, 50%?
we need to be able to see what is coming, as an indivual hard, as a group with more ears and eyes and a common board we can let each other know what is going on or when to act instead of after the fact react.


my suggestion about the next meeting in lacy's library, 6:00 pm is a little early for some of us, when i do not close the shop until then. lets try to see if we can spread the meetings into the area's of most of the members. i month here, next month over near the oly/pen area. sure, i may not make it over across the water to attend, but i can still leave my input with someone and i can read minutes.

thanks elmtree

I am not a sceptic and for myself it's not about selfish agendas. I would just like to get a feel for the position WAA is going to take on a few of the big issues. It's as simple as that. Do all of you sign on to organizations without knowing what position they are going to take on issues you care about? Reel Truth brought up a few. What position is WAA going to take on these?

My guess is, and again I'm not speaking for the WAA, The organization would favor the direction the membership wanted, as long as it made good sceintific sense.(as well as common sense). One could be a Democrat or Republican and still not agree with everything a party does but sides with that party because they more closely align their ideals..Everyone will not agree with everthing, but if FISH are the focus, recovery, and/or enhancement, could take place. If for no other reason, having a voice at the "table" would be beneficial....Again just my opinion.....

Yes -- ReelTruth raises some excellent points, especially the need to influence Big Industry in all its forms, and the benefits of working with NSIA. Industries virtually "own" our politicians, so they continue to trash our waters to the extent that they can get away with it! That will continue as long as we sit around as individuals with no clout. (Or the tribes will have to use their clout, in the courts,under their treaty rights.)
I'd only differ with ReelTruth in the makeup of WAA. In my opinion, warmwater anglers should be included too. We have more in common than we have differences, and I see no major problem in cooperating. It's in all our interests to have a variety of sport fisheries in the state. Or would you prefer to have all anglers fishing your already crowded river for your already scarce fish? We should "celebrate the differences."
There have been some isolated cases of cooperation between the larger WA cold and warmwater fishing organizations, which worked well for both sides, but it should be an ongoing process. Call it "politics" if you like, but that's what makes this world turn.

Absolutely we need the collective clout of all interested participants. In numbers there is strenght and we need that 800lb gorilla......

I think this thread, or at least my part in it has started going around in circles. The only thing I will add is that the Republican and Democrat partys have a party platform as a base so people can get a fair idea of where they stand.

Jim, I have posted questions to Kurt Krammer one of our WA fish biologists about wild steelhead and thier future. All I get back is the run around and excuses. Will this new organization get through to these guys? If anyone is interested in reading Kurts response go to Johns guide service home page and check it out. thanks

A good reason to join this group is the ability to voice your opinion, and help be part of the decision making process on which issues to take on. This Is why I joined TU when they started up in my town, If you are part of the group you can make sure the issues that are important to you are heard.