Discussion in 'Steelhead' started by Zen Piscator, Mar 9, 2009.
That's a sad little lie propagated by the WDFW.
Because there are sick basterds out there who take this stuff way too seriously that show up on peoples doorsteps and start shooting. It's not worth it unless you are here pimping your products or services. You may say something that is relativly innocent by nature, and if one of the millions of people who access this "globally" facing website turns out to be a wackjob that takes what you said the wrong way... well you only have yourself to blame when he skins you and wears you like a coat. Call me paranoid or the like, but... :beer2: You are not sitting at a bar with a couple dozen people shooting the sheit. You are talking in front of any asshat on the planet with an internet connection. :thumb:
lets just say that the fish was actually gill hooked and was deemed to be dead shortly after release. Pretty much any one here is going to keep a fish that is bleeding from the gills, but I think it is the bigger picture that isnt even being brought up hardly at all. This man, fish a two handed rod just like most people here do, successfully hooked a giant wild steelhead and landed it.
Another dream of everyone here. Except he hooked it in a sensitive place in a certain way that will happen eventually if you hook enough fish. And the fish is now dead, whether because he was hooked in the gills or the angler bonked it. The point is, that fish would have reproduced and created potentially more giant steelhead if that fisherman wasnt fishing at all.
If the number of wild steelhead is so low that an internet hate-a-thon has exploded, then they should not be fished for in questioned waters. Simple as that, and when the populations rebound everyone will be there to angle for them. Which if that was to happen, would be one of the greatest conservation-sportsman successes if not the greatest.
We all know how genetically superior wild steel are, and how they are some of natures finest and most pure specimens.
So why not give them 10 years to see what a small, depressed run of native steelhead can do when they are unpressured totally. I believe they are fully capable of rebuilding their popluations but not when there are gill nets greeting them. Then if they get by those they have to resist beautiful, bright colored, fluffy flies and jigs. there is some serious action to be taken here both by the anglers on the rivers as well as the current regs being adjusted.
The other problem is hatchery fish, they need to be removed and that is where anglers can help and most already are. It seems some type of regulation where hatchery fish must be taken whether or not that was the intention. That paired with closures in places where runs are least stable during prime spawning months, and setting the bar with the "if wild fish are caught, they must remain in water at all times and released promtly."
A big thing would be to go barbless, as that can really make a difference in fish that get hooked in the tongue or other sensitive areas.
The amount of internet press for this fish is impressive, and it is simply overwhelming unless you sit at a computer all day. If you look at it like Jerry Jones, any press is good press.
on that note, all anadromous fish are hurting, and they are the number one trace element distributer in the world. Meaning they are liely responsible for many of the beings and animals on dry land. losing them could in way be good, and that seems like that could throw off some serious shit in the longrun.
This is a fucking joke. Zen, beat the dead horse until it shits digested hay all over you. Worse yet, make a shitty essay about it. Why doesn't everyone bitch at the guys who take numerous wild steelies from OP streams every year without writing them in on their cards? Because as much as everyone likes to pretend it doesn't happen, it does. While the guy has some serious ethics issues, it still doesn't bring that or ANY wild fish back by publicly bitching at how much of an ass he is in a poetic manner. Why does this case get so much attention? It was a buck steelhead, think about how much worse it would have been if it were a hen over twenty pounds. That would have been astronomically worse for the run. There's still plenty of steelhead jizz in the Hoh.
i may not be the only one missing the whole reading comprehension thing. i do not want people to be less passionate about wild fish, but put their efforts into things that will actually help, and not hurt those who work hard to get the rules changed. i have spent a lot of hours in front of the commission, wdfw, state senate and have a tiny idea about how people react to threats and irrational behavior... however right it might seem to those worked up.
as for what i do in colorado, it sounds like about the same as you.
as for the violence, i understand being upset... but will threatening violence really make a difference? no, it never does. we need to stick to the facts, because that is where our case is strong and we will win on the facts. these juvenile threats of beat-downs, drownings etc. are COUNTER PRODUCTIVE. get it, it's not about telling people to "stfu" about wild steelhead release, it's about telling them to "stfu" when threatening violence and death of a human for the legal harvest of a fish... and stick to the facts and science behind wild fish restoration. it's a better argument and won't make people who might be on our side recoil from the juvenile, petty, and lame threats of killing a man.
and i was giving you the benefit of the doubt, and i missed this gem:
yeh, this is the tone i want in the fishing community.... FEAR. fear that someone on a bulletin board on the internet might possibly see you harvest a wild fish and come and threaten your life. seriously, you want the riverbanks to have that attitude?
I'm sitting on the crapper...and reading this. When I'm done I'm going to flush them both away and hope when I open my eyes that there will be something less abrasive to read. Three threads and some 350+ posts later it still smolders hot as hell. Plop...time to...
If the only thing this comes from this heated debate is A little more awareness. Then I think that its all good. I think it will get the point across to the majority of the steely hunters. And save a few lives.
I agree, it did bring about awareness. But for me, it also brought to my attention the lengths people are willing to go to blast a guy who was following the law. What a chicken shit thing to do, slam a guy who caught a fish. Really, contact someone who can make a difference. Don't give 25 bucks to a conservation group and call yourself a conservationist. Fuck, anyone could do that. Makes me wonder how perfect these people have been in there own lives, regarding fishing. Or even in other areas of their life? I highly doubt they are the saints they think they are. Let's just keep it real. We are all imperfect, period. The guy did what he thought was right. Where I sit remains the same, if I catch a fish and it's legal (and I want to keep it), then I will. No doubt I realize now, that there is always someone that's going to argue that. Oh well.
BTW, I once, coming up from Cali., caught a hatchery fish, and let it go! HA!~
And Zen, I got no beef with Chew. I respectfully see you started this thread to bring up the issue again, good job.
you crusty old fart,:rofl: you!
I can't believe I read the whole thing!
I agree that the fish should have been released, theres a 99.99% that I would have released it too, but until I land a 30lb steelhead I couldnt say as Ive never done it and probley never will. As for the guy killing it, I think it was wrong but Im not gonna sit here and bash him through my computer screen as what he did was completely legal and was a personal choice. Ive read and learned much from a lot of good rebutles from some who can explain their logic through facts and/or science but Ive also read some assclown type posts. I have no comment on the essay except for I cant believe I even wasted my time reading it.
Why go there.. Just read all this garbage. It becomes garbage after a few posts on the subject. But 7 pages worth.
The fish is dead and there is nothing you all can say or do anymore. Let it rest.
Dude, you just convinced me never unlock my doors, or to go outside again.
Just curious, what makes this guys 1 huge steelhead being killed any worse than the 5 or 6 natives I saw killed on the hoh within about 4 hours recently.
Honestly I feel the 12 - 20 lb'ers are just as significant as the one 30lb'er but this one fish seems to be worthy of a memorial whereas the guys slaying the smaller fish are not given any grief.
It actually seems the smaller fish would be healthier and more apt to produce healthy fish.
To me, at least the 30lb'er was a once in a lifetime catch (and from what I have read was the only native fish to be killed by this angler in 10+ years) and possible world record.
My curiosity is true and I am just trying to understand some of the logic here.
It's not any more significant.
Look at it this way. Every week, people go missing in the US. Occasionally, a hot white female goes missing, and suddenly it's a media sensation. Years go by, the media continues to drag the drama out, and eventually some legislator utilizes the media furor to pass some law that helps all those other missing people.
Without the sensationalism its just noise. We've latched onto this poor dude because he's made it easier for us to do so. If the details would have remained obscure like the four you saw today, this would have died weeks ago.
Right or wrong, it's a means to an end. Some people aren't willing to sacrifice their perceived principals to shout about a guy who's done nothing different than countless people do every day. Others are more willing to make amends for a perceived greater good. It's a simple question with a difficult answer; does the end justify the means?
Fair enough, I guess I just saw this as the more legitimate of the native kills I have seen recently yet the most criticized.
If this would do something to preserve the species and the OP fisheries then I am all for it.
Fellow irates, the irony of all this is that this guy is one of the founders of Zegrahm & Eco Expeditions, a "respected" adventure travel company. Guess he forgot that Eco was in his company's name.
Their website is http://www.zeco.com/about/guides_a.asp for those who would like to cancel trips and let them know why.
I think i'll just take his word for it. If the spey guy says he would have relased the fish, had it not been bleeding, why not just take his word for it.
I have an extremely hard time believing that the fish was bleeding from the gills if it was hooked in the mouth. Also, has any serious steelfacer here ever fought a steelhead for over 45 minutes?
Bottom line: this fish should not have been killed, regardless of where it was caught. It is unfortunate that people do not realize the importance of carefully releasing wild fish. While the fish is dead, learning from this incident can continue, which is why people are so worked up. This is an important issue and the horrible bonking of this fish will hopefully be the turning point in wild steelhead management on these OP rivers.
It is the responsibility of every angler to know the regulations of the rivers he/she fishes. It is just as important in my opinion to know the significance and issues surrounding the fish one targets. This "conservationist" should have known the dire situation surrounding wild steelhead. The fact that he is labeled as a "conservationist" is a disgrace to all people who work/live in ways that support conservation.