For those of you so inclined, here's a way to let your feelings be known.

Discussion in 'Fly Fishing Forum' started by Citori, Apr 11, 2014.

  1. [​IMG]
    Last week, the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) announced that in response to a recent federal lawsuit filed by the Wild Fish Conservancy it would likely stop the planned released of over 900,000 early-winter hatchery steelhead this spring. This represents over 2/3 of all the steelhead produced by WDFW in Puget Sound and would have a devastating effect on our fisheries. We understand that officials at WDFW may be in negotiations with the plaintiffs and they need to hear from you that further reductions in our hatchery production and infrastructure are unacceptable. Please click here (or below) to take action by contacting WDFW leadership.

    Sadly, this unfortunate situation was entirely avoidable. For nearly a decade, WDFW and NOAA Fisheries have failed to complete the hatchery plans required under the Endangered Species Act (ESA), leaving these steelhead hatcheries at great risk of this type of largely procedural lawsuit under the ESA. The Wild Fish Conservancy's lawsuit clearly was designed to take advantage of this inaction. Unfortunately, the recreational fishing community will pay the price.

    CCA Washington and the recreational fishing community support wild fish recovery efforts as well as responsible, science-driven hatchery production to maintain our fisheries. In fact, CCA Washington led the charge during the 2012 legislative session to get WDFW a historic $66 million investment in Capital Budget funding to make hatchery and fishway improvements. Many of these projects were designed to ensure compliance with hatchery reform recommendations.

    Our Puget Sound hatchery steelhead fisheries are at a tipping point. Since 2004, WDFW has reduced hatchery steelhead production in these programs by over 50% and implemented other hatchery reforms in the name of wild steelhead recovery. Declaring a complete end to Puget Sound hatchery steelhead production is an extreme proposal that ignores the significant changes that have been made to these programs. Recreational anglers, who directly pay for this hatchery production with fishing license fee revenue, deserve better.

    Please click here (or below) to send an email to WDFW Director Phil Anderson and the Fish and Wildlife Commission urging them to support the continuation of Puget Sound hatchery programs now and into the future through continued responsible, science-driven management that recognizes the importance of wild steelhead recovery and the value of steelhead fisheries to our state's economy and way of life. The process to send these e-mails takes less than a minute!

    License fee and excise tax revenue derived from recreational anglers is now WDFW's single largest source of funding. WDFW ought to be looking for ways to increase hatchery production, through science-based tools like wild broodstock programs and improved smolt release strategies, rather than completely shutting down hatcheries and fisheries.
    Thank you,
    CCA Washington
    Click the link below to log in and send your message:
  2. Nah, I'm good with my money not going into hatchery programs to support fisheries that are shut down on the 1st of February every year. I'm good with using tax dollars to try something new because the current conservation and recovery models have (For the most part) not been working in the Puget Sound. I'm good with the fact that WFC legally has called WDFW out for not doing their due diligence. I'm good with my money going to hire more enforcement officers to patrol S rivers so people stop getting their car broken into and poachers are fined for the infractions we all too commonly witness.
  3. uh, do realize what forum you are on? also, what science? having a bunch of guides and hatchery advocates mumble in front of a camera (hatchery & wild) isn't exactly science driven, more like 3 river alliance greed driven.

    edit: also, did not see one scientific article (independent & peer reviewed) on the CCA website. Did notice I could customize my email to WDFW though, so mine might have been something along the lines of actually following the real scientific data and to STOP hatchery plants in PS "S" rivers to actually allow wild recovery.
    Russ Kendall and Chris Johnson like this.
  4. rut row
    Andrew Shoemaker and KevinLS like this.
  5. I dont really stand with the CCA on this one. Lets get our wild fish returning, even if that means closing the rivers.
  6. Thanks for reminding me why I am not a member of CCA.
  7. Yep. Close the rivers. That will get the fish back. Not.
  8. Just because we are fly fisherman does not mean we don't enjoy fishing for and occasionally taking home a hatchery fish. I try and keep an open mind and listen to the biologist who post on this forum consistently. Two things I have taken from them are the following: hatchery fish are pretty far down the list of threats to wild fish especially chambers creek fish on the Skagit. Two, without hatchery fish almost all of our opportunity to fish in Puget Sound salmon and steelhead would be lost. I admit I don't search out articles on pro or con hatchery fish, but the only anti hatchery study I ever hear referenced is the hood river study. One river one strain of fish. I don't have the answers but I am not so quick to jump on somebody for posting an alternate choice. If you are willing to put away your steelhead rods for a period of say the next 15-20 years on the chance they may recover to CNR status then I applaud you. I think I might go into depression or worse yet become a better family man.

    Cruik, doublespey, Fishee and 2 others like this.
  9. I think ppl should go listen to the open fly pod cast and in the one of the first 3 shows they talk about what hatchery fish do to wild steelhead. I don't fish for steelhead or haven't yet but was shocked to hear how bad hatchery fish are on wild fish. So if you are interested go listen it's free on apple proctucts.
    KevinLS, Kent Lufkin and Derek Young like this.
  10. Really? This is a conservation stand? This request does not support conservation.
    Phil Fravel, Alosa and Tool Fly like this.
  11. That's not what this is about. We have a legal regime in place that is supposed to help recover wild fish. We have state and federal agencies that are foot dragging. And we have an NGO trying to hold their feet to the fire - i.e., merely trying to get them to discharge their duties under the law. In my view, WDFW's reaction was that of a petulant child . . . can't say I'm surprised. This is a very calculated reaction by an agency addicted to hatcheries to try to turn the angling community on a conservation organization that is a constant thorn in their side.

    I have to admit, fishing for Chambers Creek zombies on PS rivers is pretty far down my list of priorities at this point in my life, so it's pretty hard for me to get worked up about what WFC is doing.
    Kent Lufkin likes this.
  12. A. This won't lead to more enforcement.
    B. There will be no cars to break into because the rivers will be closed.
    C. With the rivers closed, nobody will be there to witness poaching.
  13. your assumption is extremely inaccurate, my fridge has plenty of steelhead and salmon fillets, not to mention venison, elk, and speed goat. and if you think i only flick flies, well again, very inaccurate assumption. try reading a scientific article for a change, might enlighten you
  14. Why don't you Enlighten me and post a few links for me. Oh and congratulations on your freezer full of fish and game. When you make a condescending statement when another member posts information that he or she believes might be of interest to others you only discredit yourself. That is not an assumption it's an opinion.

    not all are independent, peer reviewed articles, but enough of them are to convince me. and no, that is not all of them.

    edit: also, Jim Lichatowich's book, "Salmon, People, and Place" is an excellent read.
  16. Jake-e-boy that's probably the best post I've EVER seen on these forums. It's nice to know that others place value on SCIENCE!!!
  17. Rich Simms said:
    Really? This is a conservation stand? This request does not support conservation.

    You're right....this has NOTHING to do with conservation!!!!
  18. Another example of why I will not support CCA here in Washington.
  19. Thanks for posting Citori. CCA is a good organization and has accomplished a great deal around the USA for fish populations, habitat, and increasing sport fishing opportunity. Reform salmon & steelhead hatchery programs, don't banish them.
    xdog, doublespey and freestoneangler like this.
  20. The WFC lawsuit was a stupid ass move. It will do nothing but make the fishing community even more polarized and a bunch of lawyers, who could care less about steelhead, rich. You cannot put the genie back in the bottle. Keep your eyes peeled for some killer deals on fishing equipment.
    FLYFLICKER likes this.

Share This Page