Steelhead article in Seattle Times

doublespey

Steelhead-a-holic
#16
Ending a C&R season on a river never did save a run, but pretending your shit don't stink just sends a bad message to other (non C&R) user groups. The percentages may vary, but each has an associated mortality.

Being willing to put the fish first needs to be a joint effort whether you're a gill-netting native american, a C&R fly chucker, or a bait-slingin bottom bouncer.

Just my .02,

Brian
 

Charles Sullivan

ignoring Rob Allen and Generic
#17
I appreciate putting the fish first. I am not saying that our shit does not stink either. I am saying that C&R anglers are quick to accept blame when it isn't warrented. It has become a culture of self loathing that would make Senator Stevens blush.
The fact is that the C&R community is the only one affected by the recent PS closures. Every other user group goes on having a far greater effect on the runs. The hatcheries continue. Natives netting remains unchecked (Queets right?). The development community is untouched. Logging is unchanged etc. etc. Then we see an article about the Queets and there is a consern over C&R pressure. My shit don't stink, but I'm not gonna pretend it smells worse.
Go Sox,
cds
 

Bob Balder

Willing to learn anything...
#19
Thanks Eric, that was extremely well put.
I gave up fishing for Steelhead years ago, short on time and frustrated with the bonking of native fish, the list goes on and on. My point here is simple, whatever can be done to promote C&R should be done. Unfortunately, due in part to articles such as that which graced the front page of the Sunday Times, people just do not get it, they do not understand. Most folk think hatcheries are a great idea. I think it is a matter of educating everyone on just what is at stake. So...catch and release is a great start, there is a serious mortality rate if you have no idea how to properly handle fish, once again it is about education.
Everyone needs a little education.....Is it not still legal to kill native fish on some rivers? What is that all about?
That's my two pennies.
 
#20
if you have no idea how to properly handle fish, once again it is about education.
Everyone needs a little education.....Is it not still legal to kill native fish on some rivers? What is that all about?
That's my two pennies.
thus why i've been saying for years that it makes no sense to me why we don't have a fishing education course much like the one that is required to get a hunting license. i think that could do so much for fishermen who just plain don't know any better.
 

doublespey

Steelhead-a-holic
#21
Don't get me wrong, my favorite seasons are (were?) the C&R seasons on the Skykomish and Skagit/Sauk. I think it, and other selective fisheries methods, are the only way we will be able to sustain fisheries into the 22nd Century.

But we can't sell C&R to others when it may appear like it's just a way for flyfishers to extend their own season at the (perceived) expense of others.

If C&R flyfishers are really the only ones that care about preserving these fish then we, and the fish, are SCREWED!!!

The only way to save them is to build enough support with other groups that we have sufficient political clout to make significant changes. As Ducks Unlimited, the Nature Conservancy, and the Sierra Club found out - even if you don't agree on everything you can benefit from combining forces in those areas where you do agree (habitat preservation, water quality, etc). End Result = More Ducks.

I still hope to one day stand on the banks of my favorite runs on the Skykomish in March and April fishing for sustainable populations of Wild Steelhead. When that happens I'll know for sure we're headed in the right direction.

Cheers,

Brian
 

1morecast

Active Member
#22
thus why i've been saying for years that it makes no sense to me why we don't have a fishing education course much like the one that is required to get a hunting license. i think that could do so much for fishermen who just plain don't know any better.
Evan,

Great Idea! IMHO before we try to educate on the proper way to handle a fish for release, we are going to have to try to educate about the value of releasing a wild stelhead.
 

KerryS

Ignored Member
#24
What is the old saying: any publicity is good publicity? Not that I disagree with what Richard Burge said but perhaps this can be used as a vehicle to inform more people to the plight of wild steelhead. Perhaps the Times can be convinced to publish another article based on the disapearing fish of the Nortwest.
 
#25
I had heard this was going to be a 3-article series, but maybe it got nipped at the trailer stage. I think the article was a fluffy piece of junk, but increasing public awareness about native steelhead stocks is probably a good thing, since we know we need Joe Public to vote en mass for wild steelhead. Fisherfolk can't even begin to win the fight for these fish. We need the public at large to get a dose of the Koolaid,

fb
 
O

oldskool

Guest
#26
I don't get it.

I read a nice article about a guy who caught a steelhead and let it go. Good for him. Isn't this what we all do? There's a time and place for making points. This article wasn't one of those, other than catching a steelie is a blast! :hmmm:
 
#27
To All Concerned:

The WSC began working on an idea for an article on wild steelhead conservation more than a year ago. We thought it would be good to work with the same environmental writer for the Seattle Times who did a great job writing an article the WSC participated in to make the case for more Wild and Scenic Rivers in our state. The method the reporter used was to make the point through the eyes and interests of various user groups.
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/pacificnw/2008206149_pacificprivers28.html
We decided that the best way to introduce someone to why wild steelhead are special was to let them see these magnificent fish in their own environment accompanied by people who care and advocate for them.

It was our plan to do the same type of story for wild steelhead as was done for wild rivers by the same journalist. Accordingly, we provided significant amounts of conservation information. Unfortunately, the story did not communicate our message. But, could be a genuine attempt to introduce the non-angling pubic to wild steelhead --"The Lure of Steelhead." Once the reporter left the river, the WSC had no further input to the article and had no control over what was published. However, I know good information was shared and hopefully stories to follow will help our work for wild steelhead and bring more attention to their plight.

Sincerely,
Rich Simms
President
 

James Mello

Inventor of the "closed eye conjecture"
#28
To All Concerned:

The WSC began working on an idea for an article on wild steelhead conservation more than a year ago. We thought it would be good to work with the same environmental writer for the Seattle Times who did a great job writing an article the WSC participated in to make the case for more Wild and Scenic Rivers in our state. The method the reporter used was to make the point through the eyes and interests of various user groups.
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/pacificnw/2008206149_pacificprivers28.html
We decided that the best way to introduce someone to why wild steelhead are special was to let them see these magnificent fish in their own environment accompanied by people who care and advocate for them.

It was our plan to do the same type of story for wild steelhead as was done for wild rivers by the same journalist. Accordingly, we provided significant amounts of conservation information. Unfortunately, the story did not communicate our message. But, could be a genuine attempt to introduce the non-angling pubic to wild steelhead --"The Lure of Steelhead." Once the reporter left the river, the WSC had no further input to the article and had no control over what was published. However, I know good information was shared and hopefully stories to follow will help our work for wild steelhead and bring more attention to their plight.

Sincerely,
Rich Simms
President
The only thing that came out of that article was to pimp the river as a stronghold of wild steelhead. You guys danced with the devil and the devil took the lead. Both you and Jim should know much better than to just expect someone who has no knowledge of what steelhead are to somehow come up with a strong conservation message. In this particular case I can't fault the intention, but the path to hell is paved in good intentions and IMO this is one of those paving blocks.

Probably the biggest issue that's going to come out of this is the fact there is *already* an issue with illegal guiding out there. In the short term I expect this issue to give those guides more financial incentive to continue their practice.