Action alert from CCA - FYI

Discussion in 'Fly Fishing Forum' started by Citori, Dec 12, 2011.

  1. Evan Burck

    Evan Burck Fudge Dragon

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2007
    Messages:
    6,578
    Likes Received:
    1,954
    Location:
    Duvall, wa
    Home Page:
    At the expense of wild fish? I don't think Ringlee's the one missing the bigger picture here.

    If both hatchery reform, and habitat restoration happened; harvest of wild fish might actually be possible by sport fishermen.
     
  2. Ringlee

    Ringlee Doesn't care how you fish Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2005
    Messages:
    1,830
    Likes Received:
    49
    Location:
    Somewhere you don't know about, WA
    Chris,

    In previous emails from CCA, they proposed funding specific hatchery projects that did not meet HSRG standards and needed funded to complete these improvements. Some plans were costly and the question of continuing the hatchery needs to be a serious question compared to other options. With the State fiscal status, I feel it is important that CCA lays out what are "important hatcheries" as many are being questioned to not only effectiveness but being able to meet HSRG standards without pouring a lot money into them.

    The same hatcheries that provide people that opportunity to bring fish home, also allow commercial and treaty fishing to happen. People on this site blow up about issues regarding treaty and commercial fishing in Washington and need to realize that hatcheries are more than just sport angling opportunities.
     
  3. Citori

    Citori Piscatorial Engineer

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2006
    Messages:
    1,225
    Likes Received:
    143
    Location:
    Auburn, WA
    Perhaps Mr. Hunter does not recognize that the $ available in the WILD system account came from people buying licenses and tags - recreational users. The "penalties" are those $ paid by the recreational users that will NOT be paid to the WILD system contractor because they failed to make required changes to the system.
     
  4. Evan Burck

    Evan Burck Fudge Dragon

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2007
    Messages:
    6,578
    Likes Received:
    1,954
    Location:
    Duvall, wa
    Home Page:
    Or, he could be trying to mislead us.
     
  5. Jeff Sawyer

    Jeff Sawyer Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2011
    Messages:
    573
    Likes Received:
    436
    Location:
    Tacoma WA
    iagree

    If feeding your family is the goal, and it's an honorable one, then maybe fish for something that's not an endangered species. Or something that doesn't require hatcheries in order to do that; Bass, Crappie, Bream/Blue gill are all delicious when battered and deep fried.

    The science is there; one study after another comes out showing that hatcheries harm existing wild polulations. I just hope this sinks in to the powers that be before it's too late for the wild runs.
     
  6. Chris DeLeone

    Chris DeLeone Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2004
    Messages:
    534
    Likes Received:
    136
    Location:
    Monroe, WA
    At the expense of wild fish? I don't think Ringlee's the one missing the bigger picture here.

    If both hatchery reform, and habitat restoration happened; harvest of wild fish might actually be possible by sport fishermen.

    Evan,
    Would you support wild fish harvest on rivers with stong populations of wild fish? I would hope we have moved away from that mind set with what we have seen over the past 100 years or so. i would hope and I think you would agree that with reform wild fish harvest would not be anyones goal.

    Not all systems are going to be able to support a wild fish population - I think the coast would, and a limited number of systems in PS (the skagit) come to mind but many are lost to urban development and poor management. This mind set that all rivers here in WA can have a wild fish population is in my opinion mis-guided and we will never see funding for that kind of habitat restoration and in trun those wild fish returns.


    I think its important for anglers to catch fish and take a few home with them. We all need to understand that this is a "sport" fishery and really no one is feeding their family off of fishing - I hope. But if we don't have anglers on the water we as a group, we will loose our voice, the department will loose revenue and thus the areas where wild fish could come back will not get funding because no one is using the resource. Not everything that goes with hatcheries will be good or go as we plan - I understand the risks. We have had them for years. I think (and this is just me) we need a little of both - systems like the Cowlitz that anglers can wack em and stack em and we fund those hatchery programs and systems that we manage and fund for wild fish CnR and no harvest - to Evan's point habitat.

    We in the angling community will never come together if we are on the exstreem side of all native or turn it to all hatchery - the commerical guys (tribal and non-tribal) have more money, a defined agenda and are in the pockets of science and our goverment.

    I go back to the Wenatchee river - that system has been open a couple of years now, guys really like having that fishery - it was closed for many years and you never heard anybody except the real old guys talk about it - now its been open not because of years of no anglers and the wild fish came back - but its open because the state wants to get the hatchery fish out of there and we are a management tool - that all the sport fishery is to the state - a revenue source and managament tool - for our community to get a better voice we need to have more anglers fishing and rivers opened to be able to do that. This thought process of anglers stopping their fishing and hoping wild fish come back to that system will be our downfall.

    I would love to see organizations like CCA, WSC, NFS and many others come together and present a hatchery plan and wild fish plan to the state - this the CCA said this and the WSC did that is not getting us anywhere
     
  7. DimeBrite

    DimeBrite MA-9 Beach Stalker

    Joined:
    May 7, 2007
    Messages:
    1,197
    Likes Received:
    788
    Location:
    Marine Area 9
    I turned in my letter today. I can't believe that anyone is making an issue of this CCA cause, they are protecting sportfishing fee dollars.
     
  8. Salmo_g

    Salmo_g Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2004
    Messages:
    8,635
    Likes Received:
    2,982
    Location:
    Your City ,State
    I don't think this specific discussion should include hatchery fish/wild fish. This is about the Gov. proposing to take sport generated money from the Wildlife Account and spend it elsewhere. BTW, the subject hatcheries mainly provide salmon to the commercial fishery and a small percent to sport fishing. I think the central issue is to inform our elected officials that sport anglers don't want their money used to subsidize commercial fishing, PERIOD! Sport fishing interests take enough hits as it is. We don't need the politicians who work for us stealing our money for other purposes. <-- As if that wouldn't be obvious.

    Sg
     
  9. Evan Burck

    Evan Burck Fudge Dragon

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2007
    Messages:
    6,578
    Likes Received:
    1,954
    Location:
    Duvall, wa
    Home Page:
    iagreeiagreeiagree
     
  10. Bob Carroll

    Bob Carroll Member

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2009
    Messages:
    59
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Seattle, Washington
    May be moot but I sent the email anyway. Thanks for the heads up on this issue.
     
  11. bigskyx

    bigskyx New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2011
    Messages:
    10
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Bellingham,Wa
    I sent my email this morning and received a similar response. Pretty quick!

    Dear James,

    Thank you for bringing this issue to my attention.

    Since state agencies released their budget proposals several months ago, I have been contacted by many members of the recreational fishing community expressing their opposition to the proposed closure of hatcheries that was included in the WDFW budget. The fund transfer proposal was an attempt to address this issue.

    I understand your concerns that funds from recreational fishing may be transferred to commercial fishing. Since these concerns were raised, my colleagues and I have received clarification on the Governor's proposal. While the shift in funds does come out of the State Wildlife Fund into which fishing licenses and other fees are paid, it is not actually a shift of those dollars. The $1.5 million shift would actually come from a State Wildlife Fund sub-account fund balance related to WDFW's WILD online license system - specifically from penalties paid by the current vendor operating the system for not meeting requirements to improve it. $1.5 million represents approximately half of that fund balance. The money is not coming directly from recreational fishing or hunting permit fees.

    In addition to this clarification from WDFW, I would like to emphasize that this proposal from the Governor is not part of the supplemental budget being discussed by the legislature at this time. Should it come up as a proposal, I will keep in mind your concerns.

    Again, thank you for sharing your thoughts. I value the input that I receive and hope you will continue to share your views with me.

    Regards,
    Kristine

    Representative Kristine Lytton
    40th District
    Serving San Juan, Skagit and Whatcom Counties
    p 360.676.2105
    e kristine.lytton@leg.wa.gov
     
  12. Citori

    Citori Piscatorial Engineer

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2006
    Messages:
    1,225
    Likes Received:
    143
    Location:
    Auburn, WA
    I have to make a correction. The one time shift was in the Governor's proposal, but was not included in either House or Senate Supplemental Budget Reduction packages, so it is still on the table.

    CCA, WFC, WSC, HSRG and others are all represented on the Puget Sound Hatchery Action Advisory Group which is meeting now and currently discussing Wild Steelhead Management zones, and hatchery operations with little or no disagreement among them on economic or conservation issues. These are not simple issues, and there is a great deal of congruence, cooperation and involvement among the groups mentioned. Those groups have also shown support for this CCA initiative.

    CCA has also supported capital improvements to several hatcheries to bring them into compliance with WDFW Hatchery and Harvest Reform Policy, which contains the HSRG recommendations. The hatcheries in question here simply do not support recreational harvest opportunities. The $1.5 million would potentially be able to be applied to improvements, or keeping other hatcheries open that do provide for recreational opportunity. The issue isn't to have hatcheries, it is to have recreational fees support operation of hatcheries that produce recreational opportunities, not to subsidize commercial fisheries that don't pay their own way.
     
  13. Joe Smolt

    Joe Smolt Member

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2003
    Messages:
    528
    Likes Received:
    9
    Location:
    Bothell, WA, USA.
    Someone mentioned hoodsport as a model hatchery. Hard to believe all the nets I saw that commercial fishery weren't taking advantage of hoodsport fish.

    Key take home is that Citori and CCA are helping us keep informed as politicians seek to steal cookies out of the cookie jar. It is in their nature and as budgets get tougher, there will continue to be a full on assault to those that don't fight and defend. I've donated to the CCA for the first time this year and hope they continue awareness and actions.

    That being said, I always worry about the negative effects of hatchery. I know the complexity of the issue. How do we maintain enough fish to maintain fishermen advocates for our rivers. I also wonder how much hatcheries maintain a higher level of predators that attack the wild populations.

    Joe