Washington Fly Fishing Forum banner

30 lb steelhead on the hoh

25K views 156 replies 73 participants last post by  William Wallace 
#1 ·
#2 ·
Well on that thread, it says that the fly angler is from Port Townsend, not clear if he was guided or not. Not surprisingly, the nice thing about that particular thread is that it shows that choice of gear often has nothing to do with one's sense of conservation ethics (where this guy apparently had none).
 
#5 ·
To remove a fish of that age and size from the gene pool is a crime[legal or not]! Try to imagine the journey this fish experienced in it's lifetime. To have the good fortune to hook into any steelhead in these low water conditions, some skill in landing it should be all the satisfaction a person needs; gear or fly! An image that comes to mind is the fish strapped to the hood of his pickup and hitting up all the taverns on the way home! I hope he gets as sick eating it as I feel right now... and I'm no 'tree hugger', not that there is anything wrong with that!
 
#8 ·
look lets face it, catch and release is no more ethical than catch and kill, in fact it may be worse. If you are really concerned about steelhead you should not fish them and advocate for a complete closure on all angling for them.
C+R really is nothing more than wildlife harassment. You can say whatever you want about us c+r guys protecting our rivers, but when it comes down to it, it may just be the lesser of two evils. Let's enter a realm of reality here.
 
#10 ·
Hopefully the fly fishing "dude" from Pt Townsend that killed that fish will have to hide out for a while. Even the whack em & stack em gear guys over on Bobs board are up in arms over this. 30+ lb steelhead need to be on the spawning gravel not the barbecue.
 
#25 ·
Or maybe "douchesickle"?
 
#13 ·
there are plenty of reasons that people kill fish, perhaps it was injured or hooked deep and in the gills. If I caught a steelhead that was legal to keep and I was pretty sure it was gonna die upon release I'd probably keep it. Perhaps we should react to the story instead of passing judgment on internet rumors.

The good news is that something like 95% of steelhead bigger than 36 inches are multiple spawners.
 
#15 ·
there are plenty of reasons that people kill fish, perhaps it was injured or hooked deep and in the gills. If I caught a steelhead that was legal to keep and I was pretty sure it was gonna die upon release I'd probably keep it. Perhaps we should react to the story instead of passing judgment on internet rumors.

The good news is that something like 95% of steelhead bigger than 36 inches are multiple spawners.
akpowdermonkey---whether or not a fish is deeply hooked, its chance of survival automatically become 0 when it is bonked. many deep hooked fish do survive, so unless it was dead upon landing, killing it is by definition reducing its chance of survival.

also, i don't know where you got your statistic about 36 inch steelhead....that simply doesn't jive with any of the data i have seen on steelhead. The NOAA status reviews that designated the ESU's looked at many populations and found that most in WA had less than 20% repeat spawning rates (many less than 10). Regardless, studies have shown that second time spawners are more successful than first time spawners, so leaving the repeat spawners in the river is especially important (see Todd Seamons work on the mating system of steelhead for more on this subject).

-Tom
 
#14 ·
look lets face it, catch and release is no more ethical than catch and kill, in fact it may be worse. If you are really concerned about steelhead you should not fish them and advocate for a complete closure on all angling for them.
C+R really is nothing more than wildlife harassment. You can say whatever you want about us c+r guys protecting our rivers, but when it comes down to it, it may just be the lesser of two evils. Let's enter a realm of reality here.
Get in context.

Do you fish for steelehad?

There's a 24 hour grace period to repair dumb-ass remarks; I've used it many times, maybe you should too. :thumb:
 
#20 ·
I am in perfect context, if you are the rulemaker, i'll oblige and offer more.

First of all we dont know if it was native, most likely it was but still we dont know all the facts.

Frankly the facts dont matter, it is within his right to kill the fish. And by doing so, dont kid yourself that your C+R behaviour is better than this guys.

I do fish for steelhead, only in rivers with hatchery populations. And i only fish with the intent of keeping one or two when i need them, and that is not often. - goes for all species for me.

Who's smoking what here. Take some time and really really think about what thrill you get from C+R and at what expense to everything involved. It plain and simple is wildlife harassment, there can be no argument against that. I'd like to hear one intelligent point that argues that fact????

You are so concerned with steelhead that you would call - hooking one, fighting one to near exhaustion, taking it out of water, then letting it go LOVE.

Just in the realm of philosophy that is interesting to me.

Look, i will release most fish i catch but that is not my intention in the sport, i am not out there to catch as many as i can. The point i was trying to make is that we shouldnt feel more righteous than this guy, this could be the only fish this guy bonked. Maybe you have C+R 100 fish and 10 of them died as a result - who is better?
 
#19 ·
I have only hooked one steelhead in my life that I was 99% sure was going to die from the hook. That was a hatchery hen last year on the Stilly that took the hook straight down and between the gill rakers. Had she not been pumping blood out the side I would have sent her back.

IMHO the venting of anger should be pointed at WDFW for allowing people the opportunity to legally kill our wild stocks.
 
#21 ·
IMHO the venting of anger should be pointed at WDFW for allowing people the opportunity to legally kill our wild stocks.
I agree that the resource managers deserve alot of blame Jeremy, but I also believe we each are responsible for our own decisions, and if someone decides to kill a wild fish, legal or not, I don't think it is unfair to hold them accountable. With the state of wild steelhead populations on the Hoh (and most other places), intentionally killing one is, in my opinion, unethical and deplorable.
 
#24 ·
Cough, Cough, gotta remember guys where the retaining the one wild rule came from. If you don't like it you can probably head to Pike Place or to the local Haggens store and buy one. Hell at $25 a whale the 50 percent overage of catch would probably add up to $.35 Forks mayor, guide service, WA gov? You guys can figure it out
 
#26 ·
Just think about it. Had he just taken a pic and then let it go he would have been a fly rod hero. He chose to bonk it, even though its legal on certain rivers, he's become a pariah. To each his own. He made the choice to kill it. I doubt that he'll post pictures anywhere as he knows that he'll get flamed.
 
#27 ·
"I do fish for steelhead, only in rivers with hatchery populations."

Then you are the one who is causing more damage. Through solely supporting THE VERY mechanism that legally allowed/continues to allow the near extinction of wild stocks.

What I don't get is your harassment angle. Angling to kill which is harassing a fish in order to be reduced to camp meat. So that is OK? That makes you morally superior? While fishing purely for fun isn't? I will take my odds of a MAXIMUM 1-2% wild incidental fish kill. Considering the state of wild fish right now its going take a while before I kill too many of them.

The most intelligent suggestion would be for you to stop fishing. Would cause you less internal conflict. Your complete support of fish culture pretty much kills any point you had. Let alone your hypocritical "I release most of what I catch" comment.

William
 
#33 ·
"I do fish for steelhead, only in rivers with hatchery populations."

Then you are the one who is causing more damage. Through solely supporting THE VERY mechanism that legally allowed/continues to allow the near extinction of wild stocks.

What I don't get is your harassment angle. Angling to kill which is harassing a fish in order to be reduced to camp meat. So that is OK? That makes you morally superior? While fishing purely for fun isn't? I will take my odds of a MAXIMUM 1-2% wild incidental fish kill. Considering the state of wild fish right now its going take a while before I kill too many of them.

The most intelligent suggestion would be for you to stop fishing. Would cause you less internal conflict. Your complete support of fish culture pretty much kills any point you had. Let alone your hypocritical "I release most of what I catch" comment.

William
Will,
I take your points and agree with some of what you say. No doubt what i do is hypocritical, not arguing that. I should stop fishing, that would solve the ethical dilemma if i werent going to eat them. When i fish for food, i release what i first catch that i wont keep if under sized. Then stop fishing after i've taken what i need. Fishing to kill to eat is not harassment i dont get your angle on that. Fishing for the thrill of C+R is simply satisfying a strange desire not related to survival.

The very mechansim that has created the near extinction of our steelhead, as far as we know, has been logging, commercial by-catch and over fishing, and destruction of spawning habitat. Having hatchery fish in a river is an illusion of a healthy river but i am not sure how it contributes to wild stock extinction.

In BC we have very few hatchery rivers and the wild stocks may be in worse condition than the WA rivers (at least south of the DEAN).

In any case, my original point was not to argue my superiority, it was to convince that chosing C+R over bonking in general is not ethically superior. While the bonker of the 30lber maybe shouldnt have killed that fish, i dont think we can claim superiority just because we C+R as a rule, because what/you do can be just as harmful...
 
#29 ·
Manimal, my point is that based on the discussion on the gear forum which included a couple posts from folks who had seen the fish, it was wild. Now, from what I read (so far) nobody knew whether it was deep hooked and bleeding out or what... who knows. I'm in no way judgmental towards the angler in question, I wasn't there. My comment was simply that the statement
Manimal said:
look lets face it, catch and release is no more ethical than catch and kill, in fact it may be worse.
is kinda ridiculous. That's what I mean about thinking it all the way through. If you get a wild fish take great care and release it so its genes are spread - and bonk the hatcheries. It's selective C&R there is just a little more to it. And it's fishing. w00t
 
#30 ·
well, there's this whole objectionable "fish as penis size substitute" thing that bothers me.

Of course, being hung like a donkey, I am more than satisfied with little fish:D and have much less to prove than our douchesickle peninsula wild-fish psycho-bonker.
perhaps he should consider an implant of some sort...or take up a different hobby.
 
#32 ·
I'm not familiar with your fishery...how scarce are 30lb steelhead either wild or hatchery? What's the average size of steelhead? How many fish of this size would you find in the approx 1300 fish that are expected to be gill netted on the Hoh this year?
 
#34 ·
Tom I wasn't saying the person responsible is without blame. I think it is upsetting on several levels. That said, it is like bitching about a guy going 59 in a 60 zone when it is dark and stormy. Some folks may feel it's too fast and dangerous but they are within their legal rights.

I find it far more upsetting that the legal option is there, than the fact that someone actually did it.
 
#37 ·
"In any case, my original point was not to argue my superiority"... that's good because you failed at it! " it was to convince that chosing C+R over bonking in general is not ethically superior." You lost that one also.... A DEAD NATIVE FISH IS JUST THAT....DEAD, BUT IF IT WAS RELEASED IT HAD A GOOD CHANCE OF SPAWNING ONE MORE TIME! While the bonker of the 30lber maybe shouldnt have killed that fish," i dont think we can claim superiority" ...... nobody is talking 'superiority" except you....Gee, we have diametrically opposed thumbs, kinda makes us 'superior' in the animal kingdom,,, but for some that doesn't translate into the common sense of trying to perpetuate an endanjeresd specie!When the last one is gone, it's lights out, sayanora, no mas... end of the fucking road!
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top