CnR Wild Steelhead Mortality and NOAA 4%

Discussion in 'Steelhead' started by Chris DeLeone, Apr 8, 2011.

  1. I really appreciate that perspective Mr. DeLeone. I would never have viewed it in that manner. I would pay more in license fees. Hell, I am happy to pay much more to fish BC. If that bough political clout it'd be well worth it. Of course we all know that campaign donation bring political clouts along with a well organized voting base. It seems as though we have groups that can provide the organized voting base. Maybe a PAC is in order.

    I do believe that commercial fishermen should pay a lot more than they presently do for their privaledge to profit off this public resource. How much is a guide license these days?

    3-1 Rays (6th),
  2. License fees are not even the half of it, it should be much more sophisticated of a licensing process, weed out the Temps and part timers. Washington does not even require insurance on drift guides.

    As for profit,,,,, whats that?
  3. Profit these days is defined as a bobber with a bead hangin under it.
  4. Topwater -
    I agree that the importance and value of wild steelhead has increased dramatically over the last 30 years. I think it would be fair to say that the ball started rolling in regards to wild steelhead began in 1972 with the report prodcued by Lloyd Royal for the old Game Department where many of the issues that we consider key in hatchery/wild discussion were first layed out. In the later half of 1970s the foundation and startup of several key studies were begun by the Game Department (the Skagit studies, Snow Creek life history work, the Kalama hatchery/wild interaction work). It was that work that help lay the ground work for the changes we have seen the last 3 decades.

    I'm sure that as I have grown older both my memory has become more addled however it is my recollection that at least here in Puget Sound the Department of Game/Wildlfie/Fish and Wildlife drug we steelhead fishers kicking and screaming into wild steelhead management. At the time of the Royal report steelhead management stool was supported by 3 legs of management - 1) the recreational fishery could not over fish steelhead, 2) a steelhead was a steelhead (hatchery and wild fish interchangeable), and 3) steelhead escapements were not all that important (see 1 & 2) and only a redd/mile was needed to seed the avaiable habitat. By the mid 1980s we saw wild steelhead release (selective fishery), establishment and management for wild steelhead escapement objectives, Catch and Release fisheries, recognizing the need for and the onset of fledging hatchery reform, etc.

    While today we recognize all the above changes as no brainers the fact is during the 1980s there was little support for those changes and in some cases significant opposition (WSR etc). All those changes started with agency staff and I would agrue that without such actions as clipping hatchery fish (took a two year battle with PFMC to get approval) and spring CnR seasons (which intially had virtual no support from the anglers) we steelhead anglers would have little appreciation or understanding of what wild steelhead are all about. It would not be much of a reach to say that those changes in the 1980s were key in the formation in wild steelhead advocacy we see today.

    Tight lines
  5. interesting perspective curt. it does fit with what i still see, that the majority of sport anglers are not concerned with wild fish.

    one reason why fully funding wdfw from license sales is a serious double edged sword. the pressure to manage solely for license sales and the revenue will likely not be favorable to wild fish management.
  6. we will know when actual, real progress is made if: the sport angling community is put on an equal footing with the tribal and non-tribal fisheries regarding quota cuts by %age as well as fee increases. what i see today is cuts to sport angling while harvest quotas for the other two groups are maintained or barely reduced. that is a clear indication that the sport community is not an equal consideration in the deliberations of WDFW and simply further reinforces their goal of MSY. the same sort of 'logic' seems to flow each and everytime there is discussion of raising fees for the sport community. i can't remember when raising fees for the commercials was included in that same discussion.

    the sport management issues are all over the map simply because the sport angling community is all over the map. there is a significant sport constituency who simply wants to kill more fish which in their minds means more hatchery releases. so far as i can tell, this lobby has taken control of the debate.

    but, unless the WDFW takes some reasonable and prudent action, we won't have much to discuss in the near term.
  7. one reason why fully funding wdfw from license sales is a serious double edged sword. the pressure to manage solely for license sales and the revenue will likely not be favorable to wild fish management.

    With the over spending that we have seen from our elected officials over the past decade or so - Not fully funding but gaining a higher percentage of "self funding" may be the only avenue we as sportmen have of not seeing such huge budget cuts. We all know when we put fishing or hunting funding up against education, single moms, school lunch and many other entitlements - WE LOSE.

    I think we have seen more of a shift (not a total shift) of the angler supporting wild fish and wild fish management. I talk to many young gear anglers that are like me and love to fish for our wild steelhead and have no problem with CnR - From my discussions they enjoy/support that type of fishery over the cookie cutter hatchery fishery - like many fisherman they may be looking for the 20 pounder that they will not get in our hatchery runs here in PS. As the old gaurd dies off and stops fishing we need to start the process of education of younger anglers on the up side of being able to fish for our wild steelhead. It will be a long process and but over time we could make a real dent in how and what fisheries our anglers would support.

    Lets hope.

  8. hey, i resemble that!!! :)

    my very first steelhead was a 'B' fish of 26#, haven't seen one that big since. some of us old timers have had our licks over decades of supurb fishing. what many of us see, right now, is the demise of the last remaining stocks. so while we can argue that we need time to make a change, i would counter that we don't have much time left. the difference here is i have catch records of an embarasing number of steelhead simply because they were there to persue. i have stopped fishing for steelhead at this juncture but do my very best to kill every hatchery salmon i can lay my hands on!

Share This Page