Discussion in 'Steelhead' started by jason.allen, Oct 23, 2013.
Evan, where's your link?
Right here, Alex:
Hey old man, you on the Facebook?
be careful of what you wish for. for every well intentioned fly angler there are 10-20 (or more) harvest oriented fishermen. who will sign up for the "master anglers" that would teach any non-internet based class? it wouldn't be the fly anglers (look to their terrible turnout at any meetings regarding conservation), it would be the harvest oriented anglers who may not be as "enlightened" as you would want them to be.
education doesn't cure the stupid that infects poachers and snaggers. the boaters ID card hasn't helped the morons who monopolize boat ramps or imo reduced stupid behavior on the water... why would we expect a class on fish handling to work any better? caring is a prerequisite of handling fish properly and following the rules.
jethro will take the course, pass, and then continue to poach and clip fins on the river.
Chris D above has what I consider some great ideas. If that's what eventually comes out of this, I'd be happy to come along for the ride.
Is a conservation mindset exclusive to fly anglers only? Are all fly anglers conservation minded? From my experience, neither of those is particularly accurate.
You're also underestimating how much of this happens out of honest ignorance. I've experienced this many times while on the river. Good people making mistakes because they just weren't aware.
Most courses only teach people how to pass a test. Look at how we get a drivers license. A person learns how to pass a test but has no freaking clue how to drive a car. How would this be any different?
All things that would be discussed and figured out before moving forward, if moving forward is the right thing to do.
Posted rules Montana style would be a good use of that money and signage is fairly permanent. Also helps the ignorant folk.
Or they are playing dumb. You really think they would admit to doing it on purpose? Sure some might but the average person would play dumb.
Speed limits are real obvious on most roads yet people will still try to play dumb to cops. It's no different here
A class would help there's no doubt about it but I think a lot of you are overestimating how little shits some people give, class or no class, fly or gear, etc.
As Bellows points out, it takes more than just have a conservation mindset. The people who treat the fish with respect are almost always people who have spent enough time on the water to learn how to handle fish in the first place. Handling big fish with care and ease doesn't usually come until a person has done so with hundreds or thousands of trout, bass, salmon, steelhead or whatever. Just like a driver doesn't really know how to drive until they've put 10's of thousands of miles on their car or a pilot hours in a plane. I still don't see how this will do anything other than drive a wedge between those who just want to go out and fish for steelhead, and those who think steelhead were made on the first day of God's big plan.
The answer is never black and white. Some don't care because they don't know the importance... some simply don't know, and some simply don't care and know what they're doing. From the number of photos I get emailed to me for my company's photo contests, I know there are a LOT of anglers out there who think holding a to-be-released fish up by the gills for a hero shot is okay.
Then put something in the regs stating how to handle the fish. Just as they did with saltwater fishermen. It worked. And, didn't take another course to achieve.
I'm making no claims that I believe an education course would solve all our problems. I think it can only help, though. I still have yet to see a downside to requiring education. Besides "I don't want to be inconvenienced" and "you can't fix stupid," what is a valid argument against it? Since things like cost and all that are hypothetical, let's look for other things.
Costs are a fact ...not hypothetical
They're hypothetical at this point in the discussion because the actual proposal and what it would cost isn't even put together yet. The costs could be anything from negligible to very high. You can't know that until you really do a thorough analysis. Thus, saying it would cost a ton is baseless conjecture at this point in the discussion. Further down the road, when actual costs are calculated, then it moves past the hypothesis stage.
This worked. A little education in the pamphlet and on the WDFW website and its policy now. No course needed. Common sense worked here. I don't see why something similar wouldn't work again. Simple, straight forward, no added BS.
Handling Rule: in Areas 5-13, it is illegal to bring
a wild SALMON or a species of SALMON aboard
a vessel if it is unlawful to retain those SALMON.
"Aboard a vessel" is defined as inside the gunwale.
Not really. The public would learn that the money made from selling those fish is going back to funding the hatchery programs that made them. That makes a lot of sense from an economic standpoint.
I have worked as a fish tech bonking surplus fish in Marblemount for sales and I don't think anyone there saw selling those fish as anything but a way to pay the bills for growing more fish including some stocker rainbows for lake fisheries that will never see a river or provide nutrients to anadromous fish.
In addition, to declare that the few fish hatcheries have in surplus is a significant portion of the in river nutrients is a stretch. The monumental humpy runs definitely create at least a couple orders of magnitude more nutrients on rivers that support them than any hatchery fish. And the humpies feed very little within river ecosystem. Humpies are actually incredibly valuable for this purpose and more of them is a good omen for in river nutrients. If only they ran every year.
There are far greater "travesties" than selling a bunch of ripe surplus hatchery turds.