Free: Contests & Raffles.
...pretty much ends recreational steelhead fishing on the Snoqualmie River. Boooo....http://wdfw.wa.gov/news/apr0114c/The Skykomish will be the only puget sound river getting hatchery fish.
Quote from: jackelope on April 25, 2014, 09:17:52 PM...pretty much ends recreational steelhead fishing on the Snoqualmie River. Boooo....http://wdfw.wa.gov/news/apr0114c/The Skykomish will be the only puget sound river getting hatchery fish.Not seeing anything about a settlement in that link...
I must be missing some thing, i don;t fish so excuse my ignorance.In order to raise steel heads didn't they just use harvested eggs for steel head in the area, then raise and release them? Are they really genetically different?On a separate note, wasn't there a program that tried to spread salmon carcases on the rivers to help promote cadis fly growth?
"WDFW will pay the Conservancy $45,000 for litigation expenses"... That's the real ball-slapper here. You can sue the WDFW and get us to pay for it. Not Right. Not one bit.
Thank you Bigtex for clearing this thread up. WDFW has been waiting for years for the permit to show up.
So they wait for years.... That sounds to me like ineffective management. If I order something and I have to wait for years I take steps to fix it. If I were the WDFW and I knew that the future of steelhead fishing for all young people in Washington State would be eliminated or at least reduced to basically nothing if I didn't get that permit, I might think it was important enough to do whatever it takes to make something happen. I call this caving to political pressure because it sure seems to me that it was awfully convenient to sit back and wait, knowing it wasn't going to happen, then make up some stinkin lame weak excuse about the cost of litigation so we have to eliminate the hatchery program most places. They eliminated the hatchery program for steelhead pretty much in the late 90's. It's been so reduced compared to the early 90's and before then that you wouldn't be able to tell if any hatchery fish were released or not by fishing. This is an excuse for mismanagement. It just sounds easy to justify because you can blame NWFS for failure to manage by WDFW. That is a really weak excuse.
I was speaking to a wdfw representative on Friday about fish returns. First I expressed my sincere discontent with the raising license costs, along with decreasing opportunities/fish returns/accessible land for sportsman use. His response was, well you're touching on several different issues. Well yes because I have several different reasons to stop supporting the wdfw if they continue to misuse the sportsman dollar. He quickly attributed the decline in fish stocks to what he said was a continuing 30 year trend in slowing fish return rates. I was quick to ask him what research has been done to create a plan to reverse these results. He was quick to put the blame on global warming, changing oceanic conditions, weather patterns, drying creek beds, lack of spawning territory, ect. I again tried to redirect the conversation back to what is currently being done to monitor these conditions to start providing some kind of informational pattern to help us determine which, if not all these conditions are contributing to the diminished returns of even hatchery fish. He replied since the latest economic dip it has been hard for the department to fund these activities at full capacity. So basically we are paying more for less and they know it. Gentlemen was also kind enough to inform me that most of the revenue they receive doesn't come from license sales. Most comes from the feds. Boy this is starting to make more and more sense to me. They don't have to care about what we want as sportsman because at the end of the day we aren't who pays the bills.
You will Never see me apologize for WDFW......But NOAA made it easy for the greenies. And I'm sure not by mistake.....
Quote from: Elkaholic daWg on April 27, 2014, 10:35:06 AMYou will Never see me apologize for WDFW......But NOAA made it easy for the greenies. And I'm sure not by mistake.....I'm not trying to support WDFW on this one.WDFW truly did violate the law when in 2007 NMFS listed steelhead on the ESA and WDFW kept the hatcheries open without a NMFS permit. Legally, they should've closed it down that day and waited for the permit to arrive, 7 years later and we're still waiting. So on that end I support WDFW, they did what's right for the fish and not legally.Now what this did was essentially open the door for WDFW to get sued, and WDFW admits that.Now when it comes down to the lawsuit. These fish would've been released next month, obviously no federal lawsuit would've been completed by then. So essentially no fish would've been released this year. Now, if you really look into it, WDFW had an uphill battle to even come close to winning this lawsuit, because they simply violated federal law. So what's better, settling and releasing 180,000 or going to court and being told WDFW can't release any until they get a permit?Really the finger should be pointed at NMFS for taking forever to issue a permit. It would be like being a restaurant owner and waiting for that business license to show up, you may have submitted the paper but you can't open till you get it. Well in this case, WDFW opened the restaurant without the license.
Quote from: Special T on April 26, 2014, 07:13:07 AMI must be missing some thing, i don;t fish so excuse my ignorance.In order to raise steel heads didn't they just use harvested eggs for steel head in the area, then raise and release them? Are they really genetically different?On a separate note, wasn't there a program that tried to spread salmon carcases on the rivers to help promote cadis fly growth?The fish of concern for the lawsuit are the Chambers Creek steelies. They aren't really that different genetically. If they were, they couldn't spawn with the strains that have built up in the rivers. But they aren't the same, either. The fish stray into rivers enough that overall, they have kept themselves nearly identical along the entire west coast. It might take a thousand years to get a successful trait to spread from Alaska to California, though. It would be like asking if a blacktail from Whidbey Island is the same as a blacktail from high up in the North Cascades.