Umm? WDFW

Discussion in 'Fly Fishing Forum' started by Dehlan G, May 8, 2010.

  1. Trent

    Trent Ugly member

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2008
    Messages:
    732
    Likes Received:
    3
    Location:
    Here
    Oh. And as an after thought. They listed the boulder river as open for two hatchery steelhead now. Shouldn't that one have been closed down below the falls instead of advertised as open. Just one example of WDFW inompitance.
     
  2. Rory McMahon

    Rory McMahon Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2005
    Messages:
    1,615
    Likes Received:
    3
    Location:
    lynnwood
    Home Page:
    This is such bull$hit. The entire drainage above granite falls is now closed. Olney Creek is now closed. Some creeks i loved that were in the sultan/duvall foothills are now all closed. This is ridiculous, how many people are actually gonna follow these rules?
     
  3. Derek Young

    Derek Young Emerging Rivers Guide Services

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2009
    Messages:
    3,444
    Likes Received:
    2,000
    Location:
    Ellensburg, WA
    Home Page:
    I like the idea of a beaver patch.
     
  4. Kent Lufkin

    Kent Lufkin Remember when you could remember everything?

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2004
    Messages:
    7,183
    Likes Received:
    1,295
    Location:
    Not sure
    The absence of an operable definition of a beaver pond is indeed the problem. And it's certainly not for lack of trying that there isn't one in place today. As a member of the HiLakers, I can confirm that several club members have been tenacious in ongoing attempts to convince WDFW that a single, one-size-fits-all definition doesn't work.

    For example, while the agency laudably uses the current definition as a means to protect anadromous smolts and juveniles, there are no provisions for obvious exceptions. That repeated attempts by members like Rex Johnson have failed to convince WFDW of the folly of such overly-simplistic regulations might cause a reasonable person to conclude that WDFW apparently suffers from an willful, institutional avoidance to further define exactly what a beaver dam is.

    As an example, I know a person who was cited for fishing 'out of season' in a 'beaver pond' on the MF Snoqualmie. He attempted to defend himself in court by pointing out that the 'beaver pond' he was accused of fishing illegally was in a tributary stream that's at best no more than 6' wide, that the 'beaver dam' cited by the enforcement officer had fallen into disrepair, and that there was no sign of recent beaver activity suggesting that the original beavers apparently moved to a larger stream to construct a more suitable structure.

    He also attempted to point out that in any case, the 'beaver pond' in question was above a barrier falls (Snoqualmie Falls) that effectively precludes any anadromous fish from spawning in the upper Snoqualmie forks and using said dam as a refuge. The judge cut the proceeding off after the enforcement officer confirmed that the defendant was indeed in violation of the regulation as currently written.

    I'm convinced it's not because a better definition can't be crafted - it's because WFDW prefers a clear-cut, black-and-white (and thus easy to enforce) one.

    K
     
  5. Old Man

    Old Man Just an Old Man

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2002
    Messages:
    26,960
    Likes Received:
    5,525
    Location:
    Dillon, Mt
    Go to page 30 of this years Regs. Read what it says about Skinny water. All skinny water is open on the first Saturday in June. Unless listed in the regs. What could be simpler than that. Yes, your Onley Creek is open. And so is any other stream,river or Creek and Beaver pond. It seems that everybody tries to make them harder to understand than is necessary. If I was still there I would be having a ball on all of the small stream dumping into Puget sound.
     
  6. Plecoptera

    Plecoptera Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2008
    Messages:
    654
    Likes Received:
    52
    Location:
    Port Townsend
    I just looked thru the 2010 regs and I think the new general stream rule is a good idea. It looks like I lost a couple of may favorite places (I may propose to have them added), but a lot of lower elevation spawning streams are now protected which is a good thing. Really this doesn't change most of the upper headwaters/ tribs with resident fish. Check pg.33, now each major watershed gets its own special regs section. From what I saw, it does a good job of opening up the upper reaches (and tribs) in the usual June-Oct time frame.

    Old Man, the regs read differently this year so that all streams around Puget Sound are closed unless covered under the special regs. There is no more blanket June- Oct season. Either way, I agree that people tend to make this way more difficult than it really is. Just take the stream you want to fish, figure out which watershed it belongs to and look it up in the special regs. If its covered, it has a season. If not then its closed. I don't get why people feel this is so complicated.
     
  7. Rory McMahon

    Rory McMahon Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2005
    Messages:
    1,615
    Likes Received:
    3
    Location:
    lynnwood
    Home Page:
    Foothill streams above barriers are closed, which were some of my favorite places to fish. Yes, the snoqualmie tribs, and sky tribs are open, but to be honest, I did most of my stream fishing in the foothill and in the SF stilly drainage. Ive been trying to get a hold of someone in the WDFW who can explain to me why all these places are closed, but no luck so far. I don't think the regs are that hard to read by the way, 99% of the places i fish fall under the general stream or lake rules, so i don't think i really count in that arguement.
     
  8. Lugan

    Lugan Joe Streamer

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2005
    Messages:
    4,272
    Likes Received:
    3,705
    Location:
    Beautiful View, WA
    I just spent the time to read the new regulations and the list of streams.

    Off the top of my head, there are 4 headwaters streams I occasionally fish that are way above barrier falls but would be closed according to these rules. I'd be interested in hearing how to get those streams added to the permitted fishing list.
     
  9. Rory McMahon

    Rory McMahon Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2005
    Messages:
    1,615
    Likes Received:
    3
    Location:
    lynnwood
    Home Page:
    If it is all about protecting smolts, i would have no problem personally taking a wdfw official to barriers on certains streams that are now closed. It does feel like we should be able to request permission to fish certain streams. I understand that the WDFW can't investigate every tiny flow of water, but if ample evidence is displayed to show that fishing the creek does not harm smolts, it should be opened.
     
  10. Lugan

    Lugan Joe Streamer

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2005
    Messages:
    4,272
    Likes Received:
    3,705
    Location:
    Beautiful View, WA
    Rory - That's what I was thinking too, but I'm doubtful. If even a small number of headwaters fishermen try to get the WDFW to do that, it will quickly become a huge project for them.

    In the end, I wonder if this new "whitelist" approach (vs. the old "blacklist" of streams you can't fish) is the right approach. I can see how it might make reading the rules simpler, but at the same time, it seems like WDFW should be willing to quickly analyze and add streams to the whitelist of open waters.

    But given existing WDFW manpower constraints, my guess is that this won't happen. I just doubt that WDFW will make investigating "every tiny flow of water" a top priority. I think all they care about is salmon and maybe steelhead, and serving that mass-market fishery. Creekin' is a niche thing, and they're probably willing to take the heat from a few of us if it helps them more decisively protect their bread & butter anadromous fisheries - at the expense of closing some creeks that need not be closed.
     
  11. Kent Lufkin

    Kent Lufkin Remember when you could remember everything?

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2004
    Messages:
    7,183
    Likes Received:
    1,295
    Location:
    Not sure
    Very insightful post. The same is most likely true of beaver ponds and goes a long way towards understanding WDFW's reluctance to expand the definition to distinguish between anadromous and non-anadromous ponds.

    K
     
  12. Lugan

    Lugan Joe Streamer

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2005
    Messages:
    4,272
    Likes Received:
    3,705
    Location:
    Beautiful View, WA
    And I'll cite this thread as evidence that not many fishermen will care about a few highland creeks being closed. Only four of us replied with any passion here. If this were a thread about steelhead closures, dozens would hurl insults at WDFW.
     
  13. Old Man

    Old Man Just an Old Man

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2002
    Messages:
    26,960
    Likes Received:
    5,525
    Location:
    Dillon, Mt
    Well on another note.If all those streams are being closed why even get a fishing license. Shit everything that was enjoyable to fish is now closed.

    Now I'm glad I moved away.

    I just went back and reread the regs. And it came to mind that these things were written last year. Were those same places that you all say are closed now closed then? They only update the regs every two years. I believe that you all are missing something.
     
  14. Old Man

    Old Man Just an Old Man

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2002
    Messages:
    26,960
    Likes Received:
    5,525
    Location:
    Dillon, Mt
    I just had a brain fart. I see that they did a new regulations this year. And are they ever screwed up. They should of used somebody with brains to proof read it before they printed it up. Must of had some commercial fisherman help them sort things out. I'm glad I'm not there to try and figure things out. But if I was it would still be easy.

    Jim
     
  15. Kent Lufkin

    Kent Lufkin Remember when you could remember everything?

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2004
    Messages:
    7,183
    Likes Received:
    1,295
    Location:
    Not sure
    Word!

    K