collapse

Advertisement


Author Topic: wild fish advocates  (Read 2916 times)

Offline plugger

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Scout
  • ****
  • Join Date: Sep 2011
  • Posts: 491
  • Location: moses lake
wild fish advocates
« on: January 18, 2016, 06:52:49 AM »
Well, there at it again. Now there going after Columbia river hatcheries. Article in the Spoksman review. They filed a motion to sue. So where will they dump all those hatchery smolts when they cave to there demands.  :bash: :bash: :bash: :bash: :bash: Maybe its time to turn all the hatcheries over to the tribes. Good luck suing them. Find a way to transfer the funding to them.

Offline bowtech721

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Longhunter
  • *****
  • Join Date: Feb 2009
  • Posts: 856
  • Location: Oakville WA
Re: wild fish advocates
« Reply #1 on: January 18, 2016, 10:26:44 AM »
Groups like the WFC are our biggest threat when it comes to NW fishing... makes me sick.

Offline Ridgeratt

  • Washington For Wildlife
  • Trade Count: (+11)
  • Old Salt
  • ******
  • Join Date: Sep 2008
  • Posts: 5887
  • IBEW 73 (Retired) Burden on the working class.

Offline DOUBLELUNG

  • Non-Hunting Topics
  • Trade Count: (+1)
  • Old Salt
  • ******
  • Join Date: Mar 2007
  • Posts: 5837
  • Location: Wenatchee
Re: wild fish advocates
« Reply #3 on: January 20, 2016, 05:06:11 PM »
One of the VERY few things with higher standing in federal law than the Endangered Species Act is treaties.  The Mitchell Act hatcheries are critical to providing salmon for tribal harvest, and courts to date have affirmed that the federal treaty obligation includes ensuring an adequate quantity of fish for treaty fishermen in their U&A areas.  The WFC may be able to affect HOW the Mitchell Act hatcheries produce fish in the interest of ESA listed species, but I don't believe ESA can undermine the obligation to produce hatchery fish for harvest.
As long as we have the habitat, we can argue forever about who gets to kill what and when.  No habitat = no game.

Offline j_h_nimrod

  • Non-Hunting Topics
  • Trade Count: (+1)
  • Sourdough
  • *****
  • Join Date: Aug 2011
  • Posts: 1597
  • Location: Humptulips, WA
Re: wild fish advocates
« Reply #4 on: January 20, 2016, 05:47:08 PM »
 :yeah:

They would be hard pressed to reduce production rates and about the only real direction they could push things would be modified release practices or timing.  The tribes are the Columbia hatcheries best friends right now.  It sucks how much carte blanche the tribes have for hunting and fishing, but they know how to protect their treaty rights and any any infringement on them. They are pretty much peeing up a rope here but they will likely cost the public many $$$ in this ridiculous threat of litigation. 

Offline plugger

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Scout
  • ****
  • Join Date: Sep 2011
  • Posts: 491
  • Location: moses lake
Re: wild fish advocates
« Reply #5 on: January 20, 2016, 07:28:10 PM »
Didn't the state dump all the steelhead smolts for the Puget sound streams for the same reason. They trucked them to the East, put them in rock and sprauge lakes among others? Just the threat of a law suit was all it took.

Offline Ridgeratt

  • Washington For Wildlife
  • Trade Count: (+11)
  • Old Salt
  • ******
  • Join Date: Sep 2008
  • Posts: 5887
  • IBEW 73 (Retired) Burden on the working class.
Re: wild fish advocates
« Reply #6 on: January 20, 2016, 07:32:19 PM »
They also dumped a huge numbers on the west side. Green lake had a 10 fish limit on them. I can't remember all the lakes but it was a batch.

Offline j_h_nimrod

  • Non-Hunting Topics
  • Trade Count: (+1)
  • Sourdough
  • *****
  • Join Date: Aug 2011
  • Posts: 1597
  • Location: Humptulips, WA
Re: wild fish advocates
« Reply #7 on: January 20, 2016, 09:19:59 PM »
IIRC those were all fish intended for non- Columbia rivers and waters not covered by the Mitchell Act. It was also blue to a bunch of spineless legislator crapping themselves at the threat of another ridiculous lawsuit.

 


* Advertisement

* Recent Topics

GROUSE 2025...the Season is looming! by EnglishSetter
[Yesterday at 11:41:55 PM]


New Bow by high_hunter
[Yesterday at 11:23:05 PM]


Game trails to nowhere? by Boss .300 winmag
[Yesterday at 09:11:26 PM]


HUNTNNW 2025 trail cam thread and photos by kodiak06
[Yesterday at 09:10:20 PM]


KODIAK06 2025 trail cam and personal pics thread by kodiak06
[Yesterday at 09:07:36 PM]


That "lake taste" in freshwater fish by Skillet
[Yesterday at 08:44:10 PM]


Pet Beaver by Fidelk
[Yesterday at 08:15:47 PM]


2024 Quality Buck coming home by MADMAX
[Yesterday at 07:56:50 PM]


June 26-27th WDFW Commission Meeting. Showing of sportsmen needed for Friday. by Dave Workman
[Yesterday at 07:09:23 PM]


New video from Sportsmen's Alliance includes some damning new records from the 4 by lewy
[Yesterday at 06:58:22 PM]


Sauk Unit Youth Elk Tips by Hunting Cowboy
[Yesterday at 06:25:12 PM]


Archery elk gear, 2025. by IFunk
[Yesterday at 05:53:52 PM]


Upland Side by Side by ghosthunter
[Yesterday at 05:46:33 PM]


UP CLOSE AND PERSONAL, COYOTE AT 1 YARD by Boss .300 winmag
[Yesterday at 03:40:24 PM]


45 Winchester Magnum by Farmer72
[Yesterday at 02:16:56 PM]


90's Yamaha no telltale? by Stein
[Yesterday at 12:34:26 PM]


Grayback Youth Hunt by jnichols
[Yesterday at 12:28:18 PM]


Sheep Ewe - Whitestone Sheep Unit 20 by jnichols
[Yesterday at 12:17:54 PM]

SimplePortal 2.3.7 © 2008-2025, SimplePortal