Would you stop fishing? (Steelhead)

Discussion in 'Steelhead' started by Panhandle, Feb 6, 2008.

  1. Panhandle Active Member

    Posts: 4,103
    Selkirk Mountains, Idaho Panhandle
    Ratings: +23 / 0
    Hypothetical question here with certain intent:

    If saving native steelhead meant closing down all river systems for 20 years, would you be willing to make that sacrifice? Look at it in terms of no steelhead fishing what so ever, not even for brats.

    I ask this, because we often talk about making sacrifices for the better good, but we're also human, as well as selfish steelhead junkies. I would be interested in getting honest answers. It would be a very tough one for me. I support hatchery programs because of my selfishness, but also know that this selfishness is detrimental to native fish health. So.....
  2. fatguide fish or DIE

    Posts: 93
    Corvallis, Montana
    Ratings: +0 / 0
    Pan;

    I feel like you just punched me in the stones, I'm going to have to think about this one.

    Great soul-searching question Adam.
  3. LD Active Member

    Posts: 1,042
    Spokane, WA
    Ratings: +72 / 6
    Yes with a few if's,
    - stop gill netting
    - have the government team up with some outside interests to make sure things are going the right direction.
    - better enforcement, I so not want to stop so poachers have more fish.

    Also do not think that it would take 20 yrs if the got with the program.
  4. Tyler Sadowski Member

    Posts: 451
    Kirkland, wa
    Ratings: +3 / 0
    i would stop fishing. it would suck but if it meant that one day i could fish for a healthy run of natives or if my kids could fish for them it would be all worth it. hopefully it never comes to that but somethings got to be done.
  5. chadk Be the guide...

    Posts: 5,057
    Snohomish, WA.
    Ratings: +41 / 0
    In a heart beat. But then I'm only in my mid 30s so I should be around to see the opening and I'd be happy to wait.

    Some assumptions:
    * salmon, trout, and other fishing wouldn't be directly impacted
    * this is part a multi-faceted aproach that includes: working with the tribes on netting, closing down the sale and export of all wild steelhead from WA, habitat focus, fish passage issues, no hatchery steelhead unless part of rebuilding wild fish brood stock program.
  6. Steven Hendrickson Member

    Posts: 130
    bellingham washington
    Ratings: +0 / 0
    Yes but I dont think 20 years would be the right amount of time maybe 3-5 years. Thats just my uneducated opinion.
  7. PT Physhicist

    Posts: 3,490
    Edmonds, WA
    Ratings: +648 / 1
    No. I'd move.
  8. Ryan Nathe Member

    Posts: 836
    Seattle, WA
    Ratings: +7 / 0
    I would stop fishing for them if it mean't that natives recovered.
  9. rick matney Active Member

    Posts: 1,302
    Bozeman, Montana
    Ratings: +3 / 0
    No. but I could cut back if the powers at be would support my saltwater addiction. Just saying i'm selfish and we have already fubared it up so bad already 20 years wouldn't do it in my opinion.
  10. PETI Member

    Posts: 211
    Battle Ground, WA
    Ratings: +8 / 0
    Did it on the East Coast for stripers with good results, would here also. The beauty with rivers is you could shut half down and fish the other half filled with brats.
    My bet is the me/mines would nix it and rather fish them to extinction.

    Peter
  11. SeaRun Fanatic Member

    Posts: 395
    Northwest, WA
    Ratings: +16 / 0
    Would said rivers be closed to ALL FISHING during this period? Seems like the only way to reach the desired goal without waaaaay to much wiggle room. And is there data to say that taking such action would be significantly more effective than a 100% C&R ruling for the rivers in question?
  12. Freestone Not to be confused with freestoneangler

    Posts: 2,217
    .
    Ratings: +935 / 0
    Yes, for as long as it would take if it contributed to rebuilding healthy, self-sustaining populations. Sure, there are plenty of other things that also need to be done but if this is how I could help save even a few fish, I'd do it in a heartbeat. The fact that other user groups need to make changes too doesn’t mean I have to wait for them to do their part before I do mine.
  13. Tim Cottage Formerly tbc1415

    Posts: 1,642
    Outer Duvall
    Ratings: +215 / 1
    Yes. I have already done just that. I was an avid steelheader longer than many of this boards members have been fishing let alone flyfishing. I could no longer justify contributing to the decline of native fish just because it gives me pleasure to catch them.
    I was not going to wait until so and so did such and such. The buck stops here not over there.

    TC
  14. Sageman Member

    Posts: 609
    Yakima, WA
    Ratings: +9 / 0
    I'd hate to see it close down for that length of time. I've always wondered about a rotating system where you divide the steelhead rivers up into 3 groups and then rotate them on a 3 year schedule. Open for 3, closed for 3, etc. Problem is that it would drastically increase the pressure on the ones that were open.

    I also would not at all hesitate to agree to buy a $200 (or more) enhancement endorsement, assuming the money actually went to enhancement. Heck, I'd pay $1000 if it would improve the fishing.
  15. TomB Active Member

    Posts: 1,620
    seattle,wa
    Ratings: +56 / 0
    Yes. I would then direct all of the time I would have spent fishing over the next 20 years toward raising hell with managers, comanagers, and the feds to ensure that other harmful practices were stopped.
  16. Freestone Not to be confused with freestoneangler

    Posts: 2,217
    .
    Ratings: +935 / 0
    Tim, I made that decision too. It’s pretty hard to maintain the illusion that C&R is ok when you hook an endangered steelhead deep and it bleeds to death in your hands and it's all you can do not to puke or cry in front of your friends. Really puts things in perspective fast and puts you off ever wanting to risk contributing to their extinction again...
  17. mike doughty Honorary Member

    Posts: 10,110
    the uinta's
    Ratings: +5 / 0
    even if i fished for them onn a regular basis, absolutely. there are other species to fish for
  18. WaFlyCaster Tricoptera

    Posts: 464
    Fife, WA
    Ratings: +1 / 0
    Yes.. I have the same feeling. Also would want all the money that went to hatchery steelhead put towards improving habitat... removing passage barriers... dams.. etc. as well as eliminating potention pollution sources... and stopping the crazy developement of businesses and housing developements that are WAYYY too close to rivers.
  19. HauntedByWaters Active Member

    Posts: 2,718
    Bellingham
    Ratings: +67 / 0
    I feel you man, this has never happened to me but it would really mess me up.

    However, isn't it crazy that you felt that way about your mortally wounded fish and yet there are nets in the river fishing for them...and that you can order them and eat them at a restaurant in Seattle.....Doesn't that make you 100X as messed up?

    Like I say it has never happened to me but the things mentioned above mess me up BIG TIME.

    I changed my opinion from yesterday, I would happily give up fishing for steelhead under the right circumstances (some of the ones mentioned above)....but those circumstances will NEVER occur.
  20. Steelie Mike Active Member

    Posts: 1,600
    Camas, WA
    Ratings: +24 / 0
    Yes, but I think I would have a hard time fishing for carp with all of my spey rods and gear.