Irresponsable walleye guide practices

[plugger]

I and everyone else that fishes walleye in the Moses lake area on a regular basis is getting feed up with a particular guide working out of this area. He says he leaves it up to his clients to keep or release fish. I don't have any problem with fish being kept to eat but it needs to be done in a way that does not rape the resource. To sit there and say you practice or encourage  CNR then not only kill your clients limit but your limit also is STUPID!!! (Posts pic's of activity)  To harvest hatchery fish in such a manner is fine, but naturally spawning fish is not. I don't see how anyone trying to make a living guiding  for these fish could not see the harm in over harvesting. Stupid Stupid Stupid. I think its time to see what can be done to keep guides in this state from fishing and keeping there limit while guiding. Its sad that again one bad apple can possibly effect the rest of the good, responsible guides. 

[WSU]

I feel the same way about guides on the OP that let their clients kill the last few remaining wild steelhead.

[sumbeech66]

I thought I have read here the last couple days that the state has actually increased catch limits on walleye to thin them down a little?

[snowpack]

I feel the same way about guides on the OP that let their clients kill the last few remaining wild steelhead.

Quite a few of them do, wanting the return business I guess being the main motivator.  I've heard WDFW has been trying to close it to retention for a while, but the Forks mayor went to the director and said it would end up devastating Forks--loss of fishing tourism and that local fisherman need that fish to survive the winter  .  One fish per person will supposedly feed someone over the winter....not to mention most of those fish come in spring, and most of the town doesn't fish anyways.  But all the hatchery steelhead that return to the traps and have been stripped are trucked to a lake and released.

[Skillet]

I thought I have read here the last couple days that the state has actually increased catch limits on walleye to thin them down a little?

That's in the Big C only.  Irrigation canal reservoir and lake limits were left as-is.

Im a huge walleye fan, dont get me wrong - but I hardly think the exploitation rate of the walleye in Moses is even close to hurting the population.  This based on commentary supported by the wdfw netting studies, however.

[sumbeech66]

ok. understood. 

[bwhntr350]

I feel the same way about guides on the OP that let their clients kill the last few remaining wild steelhead.

Quite a few of them do, wanting the return business I guess being the main motivator.  I've heard WDFW has been trying to close it to retention for a while, but the Forks mayor went to the director and said it would end up devastating Forks--loss of fishing tourism and that local fisherman need that fish to survive the winter  .  One fish per person will supposedly feed someone over the winter....not to mention most of those fish come in spring, and most of the town doesn't fish anyways.  But all the hatchery steelhead that return to the traps and have been stripped are trucked to a lake and released.

 Huh?

 The better part of the amount of people that I still know in Forks fish for steelhead.

 You guys all act like there are only 12 fish left in the rivers over there.

 You're fighting the wrong battle

[Houndhunter]

 

[tmike]

When was the last time the Hoh made escapement?

[Sitka_Blacktail]

Walleye are an invasive species. Would be better for native fish if they were all gone.

[bearpaw]

If certain waters have a retention season why should clients of a guide not be allowed to keep fish when other fishers keep them? Just saying what's fair for one should be fair for all. I can see pros and cons regarding a fishing guide himself fishing while serving clients and have not formed an opinion on that particular issue.

If someone chooses to only catch and release that's fine, but I think it's unfair to expect fishing clients not to keep fish if there is a retention season open.

[Dan-o]

I'm always hesitant to blame someone for NOT breaking the rules.

It's a pretty slippery slope when  sportsmen start bashing other sportsmen for doing what is legal - but not being done the way they like it.

These things just seem to divide sportsmen.

What if I don't think variable power scopes are OK on high powered rifles?   Or any scope?  Or mags that hold more than 1 round?

IMHO, we as a community will be better off when we learn not to single out somebody who doesn't do it our way (as long as it's legal).     Kind of like all of the sportsmen who didn't really like hound hunting so it didn't bother them to lose that ground.   I'm not a hound hunter, but it bodes bad for us as a whole.

[snowpack]

When was the last time the Hoh made escapement?

The national park recently shut down all the hoh in the park, even the park's section by the mouth to ALL recreational fishing, until fall.  Can't even fish for trout.  Said Chinook escapement is way too low and there's too much incidental by catch.  The state's section of the river is open for hatchery Chinook....but there's no plants on that river, just a few that get lost looking for other rivers.
[/quote]

 

Huh?

 The better part of the amount of people that I still know in Forks fish for steelhead.

 You guys all act like there are only 12 fish left in the rivers over there.

 You're fighting the wrong battle

There are lots of folks in town that still fish, but I would say that most of the town doesn't anymore.  Probably at least one person in nearly every family does, like a dad or uncle but for the most part not the rest of the family--just kind of what I've been seeing.  Mostly, I was just kind of pointing out what the mayor said about how the town needed the fish to eat (one fish), but they truck tons of steelhead over to a lake and release them.

[bwhntr350]

If certain waters have a retention season why should clients of a guide not be allowed to keep fish when other fishers keep them? Just saying what's fair for one should be fair for all. I can see pros and cons regarding a fishing guide himself fishing while serving clients and have not formed an opinion on that particular issue.

If someone chooses to only catch and release that's fine, but I think it's unfair to expect fishing clients not to keep fish if there is a retention season open.

  ^ So accurate.

 Years removed from Forks and steelhead fishing that was once a huge part of my life. I now bass fish. Way more laid back and relaxing and way less pressure. With that, I understand how people are concerned for something that they love, don't get me wrong. I do not kill them, but I have killed many, and when I go fish over there, which is rare, I plunk down on the Quillayute River. Directly across the river from me is a guy that I used to work with. Over a two day span, two years ago, I seen him catch and kill at least 7 fish.

 So, between the outlaws and, in my opinion, the nets, there are other places to wage a battle than towards the guy that pays more than his fair share to have the right to take one fish home to his family.

[jackelope]

I don't necessarily have a problem with clients keeping fish. I do have a problem with guides allowing clients to keep limits for everyone in the boat though. If there's a guide and 2 clients, then there should be 2 limits. I also hope they know enough to release the big breeding females.

[Bullkllr]

I don't necessarily have a problem with clients keeping fish. I do have a problem with guides allowing clients to keep limits for everyone in the boat though. If there's a guide and 2 clients, then there should be 2 limits. I also hope they know enough to release the big breeding females.

Throw in the fact that while maybe 1/2 or less of the non-guided anglers actually punch their one wild fish, but some guides/clients punch a limit day after day. And there are a ton of so-called guides- way more than 10-20 years ago when all the guides were locals well known to everybody.

[bearpaw]

Guides are good for local economies and provide good outdoor opportunity for less active fishers or hunters. Some states do have laws preventing hunting guides from hunting while they have clients, I'm not sure if there are any similar laws regarding fishing guides with clients.

[Knocker of rocks]

Walleye are an invasive species. Would be better for native fish if they were all gone.

 

[snowpack]

Guides are good for local economies and provide good outdoor opportunity for less active fishers or hunters. Some states do have laws preventing hunting guides from hunting while they have clients, I'm not sure if there are any similar laws regarding fishing guides with clients.

Some states have laws that a guide can't retain a personal limit while hired.  The boat can bring in a limit for the number of customers.  The guide can still fish though.

[Sneaky]

If there was a problem with low walleye population they would reduce the limit... people retaining fish that are legal to retain is not an issue 

[BigGoonTuna]

about the only thing worthwhile about walleye fishing is eating them.  they're light biters, they fight like a wet dishrag, and they're non native.  i can't see why anyone would want to fish for them for CNR.  i keep every legal one i catch(within the limit)

as for the coastal steelhead situation, that's a different ball of wax.  those are fish that keep declining in numbers every year, and most of the guides around forks aren't locals(most come from seattle and tacoma, and there's been oregon and montana guides showing up the last few years).  they're kind of like sea lions, the numbers need thinning to protect the fish.

[walleye1]

Yeah let's get rid of all walleye and bass there both non native. Then we can all catch test tube trout, salmon and steelhead.

[Dan-o]

Yeah let's get rid of all walleye and bass there both non native. Then we can all catch test tube trout, salmon and steelhead.

       Finally some common sense.       

[WSU]

I'm always hesitant to blame someone for NOT breaking the rules.

It's a pretty slippery slope when  sportsmen start bashing other sportsmen for doing what is legal - but not being done the way they like it.

These things just seem to divide sportsmen.

The difference is that continuing to bonk wild steelhead in a declining population isn't good for the resource.  Shouldn't sportsmen advocate for healthy populations and better management, even if WDFW says it's legal (we all can think of many examples of WDFW mismanaging our resources)? 

Or, should we treat them like the buffalo and sit quietly while others continue to kill them until they are gone, all in the name of not being divided?

[plugger]

I'm talking potholes and Moses lake, There are no native fish in either lake I'm aware of. Potholes didn't even excist   Walleye are there, they draw big crowds, there good for the local economy. So how is the seabass and rockfish fishing in the sound and eastern straights, Oh that's right, there is no fishery (Over harvested) Well you have your sturgeon, Oh that's right that's disappearing to. (Over harvested) Salmon, ditto. Halibut you get your week of that. Do you get the point yet. Why destroy a viable fishery. It amazes me that people don't get that when you over fish one species, people switch to the next till there gone then they find something else and so on. Well were running out of things to switch to and its up to us as sportsman to protect as best we can what is left weather its your target species or not. It will effect you in the long run, that I can guarantee

[Button Nubbs]

I feel the same way about guides on the OP that let their clients kill the last few remaining wild steelhead.