Dear Sir or Madam:

I had the pleasure of fishing for steelhead on the Olympic Peninsula this fall. It is a beautiful area and holds many good memories of lovely, healthy wild steelhead for me. Those fish, though went back in the water and I suspect are the ancestors of the fish we angle for today. Please note that I said "fishing" instead of "catching"... the only fish that I saw in two days of fishing was a dead wild fish that went into the cooler of a commercial fisherman. Other than that, even in good conditions with an excellent guide we did not hook a fish.

I am disturbed that after making the courageous and far-sighted decision to close the coastal fisheries to taking of wild steelhead that the commission would even consider rescinding that decision so quickly. I would like to see the science or even economic data to support this proposal. I say this for several reasons.

First of all, every serious study that has looked at catch and release fisheries has indicated that the benefits to the local economy are both greater and more lasting. High-pressure kill fisheries tend to cause roller coaster effects with short stretches of "hot" seasons followed by years of recovery, emergency closures and waning interest in an area. What do the merchants and hoteliers do in the lean years? Walk down the street in Forks
and count the empty buildings.

Secondly, my background in biology makes me question the concept of harvest even when the supposed escapement goals have been reached. If only just the right number of wild fish are present to occupy available spawning habitat then the process of natural selection is stunted. Weaker, less hardy fish will not be crowded out by fish that would be stronger and more capable of
surviving the challenges of river and ocean waters. Nature does a very good job with selection of the best genetics while human selection, in general, has a very poor track record. In addition, it stands to reason that the most aggressive, and therefore strongest feeders and survivors in the ocean are the most likely to be caught first. Yes, there is a percentage of mortality with released fish but with proper handling the great majority of these fish survive to spawn. On the other hand, hooking mortality in a kill fishery (or
in a fishery that is closed to all but poachers, another issue altogether) is 100% and retention of a large, hardy fish more likely as a trophy or table fare! Thus a kill fishery tends to remove the most desirable genetic strains first.

With all the potential man-made and natural hazards that these fish have to survive, I don't believe that there is such a thing as "excess" wild fish. Things happen to the watershed: soil slumps, toxic spills, improper roading and development, even the weather (re: recent Sauk River Flood), all impact the ultimate spawning success of a given run of fish. Even with enforcement of the laws, the paltry slap-on-the-wrist to the forestry and development interests make it just a minor part of business overhead and the damage is already done. The no-wild-kill rules on the interior and Puget Sound Rivers
have only gradually begun to show some, albeit erratic mprovement in returns. They probably were too-little-too-late and will take years to show lasting effects, assuming the watersheds can be protected. The no kill fishery on the Peninsula was a wise and prescient start to help prevent a similar fate.

Finally, the concept that the current national administration is trying to foist upon us, that wild fish are expendable and that we can somehow go back to a hatchery-based production on into the future is simply an arcane, machiavellian stroll into a past policy that has not worked. I reference Bruce Brown's Mountain in the Clouds (1982 Simon and Schuster). It is a careful study of the very watersheds in question. It clearly shows the weakening of stocks and unsustainability that over-reliance on hatcheries can produce. In fact many of Brown's concerns have been addressed by the science and policies of the last two decades and I suspect that this is the reason that some of the fisheries on the Peninsula have remained strong. But even the best hatchery system needs the genetic resources to combat inbreeding and limited diversity. That is something that only a wild run can provide.

Do I think a few more wild fish in the boxes this spring will make a huge difference? No. However the reversal of the progress that has been made in the minds of the fishing public is a very serious error. The bass fishing community caught on to this one years ago and their sport is healthy and growing. In addition, I don't think anyone that reads or hears this statement has to catch fish to eat. We are not talking about groceries, but rather experience.

I have taught my children how to handle and release fish with care and respect. I have laden fishing lessons with understanding of the wild creature and the ways of nature. I would like to teach my unborn
grandchildren to fish, not tell them stories about the good old days while they watch virtual-reality video files on the steelhead that once returned from their thousand mile journeys. Please, look carefully at this proposal. Demand hard facts and honest projections. Put aside personal and political prejudices and gains when considering this move. I and future generations of fishermen will appreciate
it. In fact, so would the fish, truth be known...after all survival is the
real point here.

Thank you, for listening.

Sincerely,

Steven D. Aguilu
East Wenatchee WA.

Dennis,

I received an email from "someone' suggesting I follow a link and send an email supporting pending legislation to repeal the Wild Steelhead Moratorium.

Rather than do this, I send the following message supporting the moratorium.

Details of the proposed legislation, which is apparently being driven by the City of Forks and "concerned sportsmen" can be found at http://www.gamefishin.com/cgi-bin/moratorium.htm.

Comments are apparently due sometime in August.

You may want to put some info on your website?

Regards,

Ken

----- Original Message -----
From: Ken

Gentlemen,

It appears there is an organized effort on the part of some "sportsmen" and short sighted DFW officials to scuttle the Wild Steelhead Harvest moratorium.

This is to let you know that I, and many others, fully support the present Wild Steelhead Harvest moratorium.

I oppose the "proposed Rule Changes", WAC 232-12-619 and WAC 232-619, that will restore Wild Steelhead retention to the rivers.

postamble();

Regards,

Ken

  Home | Fishing Report

Dennis Dickson Fly Fishing Steelhead Guide