Discussion in 'Fly Fishing Forum' started by Gertie's Pa, Aug 19, 2008.

  1. Citori says it well for sure, but Salmo g, never sell yourself short. I for one seek out your posts in the search tool because I generally get what you are saying and I like how you say it.

    Oh, and thanks to Dr. C for your personal message about some of my own questions. I'm excited that the Kitsap chapter is in the pipeline. I'm ready to poop, I'm not much for sitting around on the pot or anywhere this ferry waiting line that has gone on now for nearly two and a half hours.
  2. much has been made of why sportfishermen cannot unite. while there are many differences due to the way we wish, what we fish for, etc... i think this thread (and pm's) show another reason.

    the pro-cca people make a valid point of starting off with small bites, but fail when some (citori) call people questioning cca uneducated (via pm), use insults and believe that any dissent of cca positions is the same as no support of fish recovery.

    on the other side are the people who will not join anything if they do not go after all netting (or whatever their pet issue is), which ignores many of the other problems facing our wild salmon and actual gains that can be made. i think many of us have a foot in this side of the debate. passion often breeds this, and unfortunetely passionionate people is what our fish stocks need.

    there is an all-or-none nature in these discussions that imo are the root of the fragmentation of sportfishing. there are many different views on how fisheries should be managed, and there will always be differences that make joining together tough. i'm as guilty as many on this.

    luckily, there are people like josh root, hookedonafly, and salmo g... who realize that discussion about cca, especially people bringing up reservations, have the ability to make the organization stronger and bring more people into the organization. bringing up issues does not make the mission of cca harder, and the infusion of ideas can only be a positive. seeing them join even with strong reservations about some of the positions has given me a new perspective about cca. this is a positive and will do more good than the "join or you're just a whiny b@#$ who doesn't care about fish recovery."

    fyi, i will be likely be joining cca thanks to the rational discussions.... luckily i leave personal issues out of these decisions, because being called "uneducated" via pm is not a good way to increase membership in cca. i will always have issue with some of cca's current positions on hatchery production, but that doesn't equate to a lack of support of some of their other positions.
  3. Amen brother topwater, you speak the gospel in my opinion. I think I'm joining not because CCA is spot on for everything I think needs to be tackled, but because I can hopefully help work on the big picture with some small progressive steps in at least one of the right directions.
  4. Topwater,

    Thanks for your post. I don't see ever seeing eye to eye with CCA, but I stopped worrying about that. Their process and methods have a track record of working, and I'm willing to support that. It's a tripod of Legislative, legal, and membership. What with club and organization annual dues running $30 -40, $25 to CCA is barely half a tank of gas in the Subaru. I'm willing to spend another $25 a year to help boost the membership leg of that tripod. If they are successful at one bite at the apple of fish management it will have been worth it. And with one successful bite, the probability of another success increases. Like domino theory I guess.

  5. I just recieved notice today that there will be a Kitsap Chapter CCA meeting on Thursday August 28th at the Sportsman's Warehouse in Silverdale, WA from 6:30 to 8pm. I am putting it onto my calendar so I can attend and see what I've been missing. If anyone from North Kitsap wants to carpool, just let me know. I live about 3 miles south of the land area mass infamously known as Point No Point.
  6. I still think Citori's comment is funny, and echos the frustration many of us feel with fence-sitters because we feel a bit of desperation at the fast declining stocks of salmon and steelhead and are impatient for some "wins" for the fish. Getting membership up and getting others onboard is the first step.

    Like Salmo_g and others, CCAPNW will never ~exactly~ fit my personal preferences for how to manage salmon and steelhead. Why?? Because, while CCAPNW is a essentially a conservation organization, their position on these issues is a conglomerate of the opinions of those members that show up and offer their ideas and opinions.

    What convinced me is that their main focus will be on those issues that (1) receive general agreement from the membership and (2) that will provide the most benefit to the fish and (3) that are determined by the CCA's legal counsel to be 'win-able"

    Their track record of getting their fish-friendly legislation passed into law on the East and Gulf coasts (and keeping their victories from being overturned) is what convinced me to jump onboard.

    Anyone care to name any major legislative victories for fish in Washington State? And please don't bring up the new Steelhead Management Plan. IMHO it's a nice change, but they're just guidelines for the WDFW to follow. It's got no teeth.

    Remember the initiative to ban dredge nets in Puget Sound?? Seemed like a slam dunk - these nets are trolled along the bottom and destroy everything in their path. Pretty indiscriminate.

    Then the commercial fishing lobby, who had a much larger budget than those supporting the initiative, started airing ads claiming the sporties were just being greedy and threw in a few clips of a sad mommy and a little infant crying because he was hungry. After all, weren't we taking food right out of this poor infant's mouth???

    There isn't an agency I've encountered that has ANY track record of success against the politically savvy groups with a vested interest in keeping things the way they are until the CCA came to town. So I'm gambling my $25 that they can win a couple of these battles. If so, then i'll consider my money well spent.

    Topwater - welcome back to Washington. I'd seen your boat out at Neah Bay many times in the past when you were guiding and know you've spent your time in the trenches of North of Falcon over the years as well. I think you can imagine that those of us who have lived in Washington in the years since you've been gone and watched the continuing decline of the fisheries have grown increasingly frustrated looking for something to slow or reverse this decline. Those of us who believe CCAPNW is that vehicle (and I speak for myself as well) can be a bit impatient.

    Time to go fishing!

  7. It's a good gamble. I've seen it work.

    My friends' kids on the Gulf Coast will have fish to catch down there...will yours here?

  8. when all of us look at the declining anadramous fish runs as well as the extinctions that have happened within this decade, we all tend to identify issues and problems famaliar to us. these issue and problems become rallying points in our discussions here as well as with those with whom we exchange our viewpoints. they also serve to divide our efforts.

    what is needed is a long step back from the obvious things we notice to a perspective which gets to the root causes of extinction. given a pretty short list, the next step is to ask what can be done right now, within the next year at best, to shortcut these declining runs.

    if you identified habitat improvement, great, but it won't make a hoot of difference in a 12 month time frame. you can make a similar assessment of your own pet issues keeping a very short timeframe in mind.

    when i do this excersize, only 2 things float to the top: netting and NOF.

    what needs to become common knowledge is that president clinton signed into law a major change to the ESA which allows the total closure of fishing, the re-regulation of harvest, or anything else that must be done to save and protect listed fish. yes, that change in law trumps boldt and any and all judicial rullings following that point in time. so right now with puget sound fish ESA listed, it is completely possible to institute a selective fishery, tomorrow.

    changing how NOF operates will be even tougher. getting a balanced decision making board in place is going to take some huge political kahoona's or a quick law suite, either one would work and chances are, this could also fit into my time frame.

    so my ipod has multiple tunes, but what i search for in reviewing everything we seem to know, are those pinnacle issues which can be agressively addressed to make a big difference in a tight time frame.

    is that CCA? perhaps they will turn out to be the group we have all been searching for, but actions, from my perspective, need to become public with results before i can believe their stump pitch.
  9. GT, NOF? Sorry, I don't know that one. Not knowing that does not allow me to fully understand your post. Thanks.
  10. North Of Falcon-NOF

    this is where all quotas, seasons, allocations, etc. are established. sitting at the table are the co-managers; non-native american commercial fishing interests and WDFW. sitting against the wall, mute, are the observers. they represent the sport fishing folks, among others, but have no ability to speak or ask any question of the proceedings. in fact the vetting of these folks focuses on their ability to keep quiet! when important stuff is to be decided, they are often times 'excused' from the room.

    and i should have also pointed out, when you review your own short list of issues facing anadramous fishes, with a tight time frame in mind (folks, extinction is forever and it has already happened before our very eyes and continues unabated today, tonight, tomorrow. there is no time to screw around with less important issues.), you may well come up with more viable issues than i have, that would be progress.
  11. Thank you, nice explanation. After reading this and re-reading your previous post it makes good sense to me. One of my friends actually has been at such a meeting, I wondered what he meant by sitting, could not speak and had to leave a few times. I thought he was having some social disfunction that night. Thanks again GT.
  12. ......and some wonder why there is a high level of apathy amoung the sport fishing community.
  13. Coming from the Gulf coast of Texas and seeing what CCA (Gulf Coast Conservation Association when I first joined decades ago) has done for the return of the red drum and speckled trout I have to give them a thumbs up. They have been the major force to deal with politically and financially on the gulf coast and were instrumental in getting legislation passed to stop gill netting in the bays and estuaries along the gulf coast. I fished the gulf coast for almost five years without catching a single red fish, now they are once again abundant. CCA is a member run organization and depends on its members and their commitment to get some serious and necessary things done to protect and enhance the return or costal fisheries. You can be sure that I will write the check and join the closest chapter in Washington. I encourage others to get involved on a personal and financial level as they see fit.. I may be new here in Washington but I am not new to the commitment and hard work done by CCA. Frank:thumb:
  14. Maybe one short term objective that CCA should target is to get someone representing the sport fishing sector a seat at the table? I know there are much bigger issues than that, but if many of those never get spoken from the mute group along the wall this small concession could have exponentially impacting affects. What do I know though?
  15. It is my understanding that we would be there. In what capacity, I'm not sure anyone knows yet. But, they are very aware of what goes on at NOF.

  16. Ed, having CCA being very aware of what happens at NOF is one thing. Awareness can happen on the wall of the room. Having an advocate to the recreational sport fishermen at the table seems to currently be lacking. I guess this is highly oversimplified, but that is what it seems like might be happening. If those along the wall are not able to speak then having CCA in one of those seats is not really much different than having me in the room. What can be done to get a coveted seat at the table? I think that could lead to something, maybe I'm wrong.
  17. Like I said GT, where is your organization? Get moving buddy, there's "no time" remember?

    You are running around saying stuff like "extinction is forever" and "there is no time to screw around with less important issues". But I'd love to see what exactly your plan would be for a successful elimination of all commercial net fishing. Tell me how you could accomplish that without building the political will and might needed to make change of that magnitude? If Slade Gorton, one of the most powerful politicians this state has had in the past 30 years could not make a dent in something like native treaty net fisheries, what magic do you have in your bag to do any better?A lawsuit? I guess. unless it gets tied down in appellate court by the powerful fishing lobby who extract an emergency injunction so it's members can keep fishing while things drag through their appeal process.

    I, for one, am not interested in spitting on the commercial fisheries as the heart of the problem in the PNW. That is unfair scapegoating in a situation where there is plenty of blame to go around. So quite frankly, I don't give a shit if CCA never tries to get all net fishing shut down. Mostly because I don't think that it's possible at this time. After all, it doesn't take a CCA to file a lawsuit. Why hasn't it been done before?

    I do think, given it's history, that CCA can become a political force strong enough to win battles that we would never have had a chance to win around here. And that is a mighty weapon once it is complete. But Rome wasn't built in a day. Yeah, there's "no time" and we all should have banded together 10, 20 or 30 years ago, but it didn't happen. And just because sportfishermen have waited too long to speak with one voice doesn't mean that we should blow the one good chance we have to make that happen by rushing into something with stupid decisions. Winning battles wins the war.
  18. GT,

    That came out a little harsher than I was aiming for. No insult intended to you personally, just arguing methods for a goal that we both want. More fish.

    Plus, I'm a little edgy after listening to a screaming sick baby all weekend. Screaming baby = upset wife = no fishing for me.
  19. thanks josh, my intent in beating my drum is nothing more than to encourage EVERYONE reading this thread to sit back and think about extinction. think about all of the various factors that have entered into this situation, make a list or two. then think about which of the items you have personally listed can be modified in a relatively short time frame. from that second time limited list, we may all come to see, from the perspective of a variety of folks, suggestions for pinnacle issues.

    what slade gorton tried almost 30 years ago when fish were abundant has little or nothing to do with the fish equation in this century. simply saying one person tried and failed is not relevant to right now.

    if CCA is indeed member run, than just maybe, your thoughts, ideas and lists will find their way into the overall discussion and strategy. none of us, well probably a hand full, know about the inner workings of CCA and just what they are talking about. that i believe, is a great way to run a campaign, now give them some ammunition, your thoughts and concerns, without hand wringing thrown in for good measure.

    having just survived another mega production wedding of a nephew and shlepping my invalid mother-in-law back and forth by plane, i share your edgyness josh.
  20. Nothing wrong on either side about passionate feelings for our finned friends.

    Mumbles, what I meant by aware is that CCA knows how important NOF is to us sportfisherpeople and what gets decided at that table.

    I believe there is quite a bit of power when you roll in representing a group of 6000+, in this case, sportsfisherpeople here in the Northwest. However, it means a whole lot more when there are 10-20k. You have to remember that this is an organization with 100,000 members nationwide. We need every member we can get up here to force change where it is needed as quickly as possible.

    My feeling is that netting is not going away completely ever. And, frankly, I don't think it needs to in some respects. I don't think GT is wrong though about two things surfacing quickly, i.e. - NOF and netting. The fact that some netting takes place at just about the most inopportune time is ridiculous.

    On the Gulf Coast, it was the methods of netting which were the problem...specifically, shimpers. But, that changed and there are still commercially caught shrimp to be bought, in fact, even at Vis Seafood, in Bellingham. However, the fish have seen a fine recovery there in spite of shrimping still taking place, albeit in a different manner.

    I do agree most certainly that a river, like the Hoh, should not be netted at the mouth like it so ruthlessly is. The Nooksack is another example, IMHO, where Tribal netting schedules and catch should be monitored more closely. It is my understanding that the Nooksack River at one point housed a larger run of Steelhead than even the Skagit. Try catching a Steelhead in the Nooksack's an extremely difficult proposition at best.

    A significant problem here though is the amount of optimal spawning grounds. The South Fork is pretty much shot. In conversation with Smalma, it was felt that it was in worse shape than Deer Creek ever was. If inappropriate logging operations ceased, it would take about 50 years for the South Fork to recover. The water temperatures in that fork are high enough that Chinook and Steelhead spawning efficacy has been severely compromised not too mention plain loss of good places for our finned friends to spawn.

    Then, we got the North Fork. This is labeled a "Wild and Scenic" river. You would think that this would mean, "Hey, be careful"...not. Logging operations close to tributaries of the NF where ESA-listed Chinook and Steelhead spawn have gone to the point where it too has been hugely adversely affected.

    Do I think logging should cease? No. However, logging steep slopes next to a river, stream or creek is nothing less than plain jackass stupid. So, my feeling about this, is about the same as netting practices. The way these activities are carried out absolutely must change.

    I guess my point here is that a lot of this is common sense. Some think all the nets should be immediately removed. I think that some nets should absolutely be removed while others I'm not so worried about. I don't think that we are all that far apart as a like-minded group of sportsfisherpeople.

    GT, wouldn't you love to see at least some of the really destructive netting practices go away in the fairly short term?

    It was mentioned earlier I think that it was felt derelict nets weren't that destructive. I have attached one picture from the cover of Tide Magazine, CCA's publication. The other was taken by me. I think all the ghost/ derelict nets out there cause more damage than fathomable. This is again something that we all should be able to get on board with. My thoughts about this are supported by numbers provided by Ginnie H from the Northwest Straits Commission.


    Unfortunately, the Tide pic does not come across clear; however, there are many, many fish in that net...just plain wasted. You lose a should have to fund removal of 5 nets.

Share This Page