I'm glad dustin bootz chimed in. Now the circle of assholery is complete. are you as tough on the river on your buddies sled. i find most tiller jockeys of the asshole type are real tough till they have engine trouble, then you get offered schmidt ice and the like for help. i generally help after they struggle a bit with their beer guts and tools, but i love schmidt ice. they have taste if anything.
cite your references. haha! like it's a scientific review.
learn to read dustin. i said of the asshole variety. if that you then embrace it, if not then so be it. I'm sure you are a swell guy and could give me many tips on free dragging bait or which power bait/trout gravy combo really cleans up on stockers. but right now I'm more interested if anyone knows where to get the schmidt with the leaping musky on the can. all i can find is the deer or ducks. I'm trying to complete my collection. I've looked real hard for cans downstream of your buddies sled but no luck. I'm serious though about wanting to find the musky one. it's a little hobby of mine.
It would have obviously been "i heart hey", DB. Please do a better job of spell-checking next time, you are embarrassing yourself. On a similar note, ellipses only require three marks of punctuation, your fourth is extraneous.
Quite astounding, the jackanapes allowed on the inter-tubes these days.
if you are not in it for the fish for the sake of the fish instead of your own playtime then you are just another user group, maybe your use is less harmful than everyone else's but just a user none the less.
want to be a force for change? go get your doctorate in fisheries sciences and get hired by WDFW and work your way into an important position. WDFW only listens to WDFW.
I'm trying to feel bad about being a user group, but I just can't. If my "less harmful" use is not affecting the future health of the run, then why not do it? I want to enjoy steelhead, up close, in person, with a hook and line. For that use I will gladly jump on the conservation bandwagon.
Conserving steelhead just to be conserving them and not allowing any "users" access to them in any way shape or form is going to be a mighty tough sell. And of course there is always the question: At what point can we consider them 'conserved'? Saved? Recovered?
How will we know when it is safe to fish for them again? Maybe it is safe to use some methods right now?
Not sure why folks continue to ignore the fact that fishing (direct and indirect fishing impacts as well as productivity loss due to hatcheries) represent only a very small portion of the user impacts/take. Uses like hydro, irrigation, logging, agriculture, urban sprawl, etc. collectively dwarf the impacts of from fishing.
The major reason that Puget Sound steelhead are only 3 to 4% of historic abundance is those non-fishing user impacts. Yet somehow folks(I assume that most here on this site are anglers) are more than willing to continue to make fishing the bad guy. If today was 25 years ago asking to the steelhead fishers to step up to the plate would make sense but today the reality is that we have and there has been significant reductions in overall fishing impacts on Puget Sound steelhead (and elsewhere?). So much so that even the complete elimination of all hatcheries and all fishing (which is rapidly becoming the norm for Puget Sound waters) has not resulted in measureable improvements in the status of the wild steelhead.
Even marginal improvement in the negative wild steelhead impacts by those other users would result in significantly more wild steelhead.
because in this day and age every single wild fish that makes it back to it's home river is extraordinarily important.. every single fish needs to spawn, there is no room for hooking mortality in a lot of cases.
who kills more and who kills less is a stupid argument to have.. no one should be killing any intentionally or otherwise.
if you kill ten and I kill one it is ignorant and stupid of me to suggest that you shouldn't kill any but i still get to kill my one.