Wouldn’t WFC leadership then be stepping on the toes or low-holing NFS leadership if they headed south to fish?
SF
2023 Skagit/Sauk season is a go
- Thread starter GOTY
- Start date
Wouldn’t WFC leadership then be stepping on the toes or low-holing NFS leadership if they headed south to fish?
SF
It would seem to me that if the NGOs want to sue over steelhead management then they would have to go after the co-managers also...because the fish are co-managed. Co-managers have more money and more lawyers and will win in that scenario. They can sue WDFW for things that are not co-managed, but they need to pick their battles carefully.
Time for a bass boat!
Paige
Wishing I was fishing the Sauk
I think that any discussion about the personality or peer groups that .org leadership belongs too won't help much in changing the groups. They may or may not be of the same tribe as me. I have spoken to some of the leadership at the .org's and by and large they are fine people. Some can be a bit moralist for my taste, but I don't think that their intent is really connected to their impact. There leadership's place in society does inform the direction the groups go in. That is true of all leadership. It is their directions and decisions themselves that I prefer to discuss.
I see the Wild Steelhead Coalition (WSC) as being a bit different from The Conservation Angler (TCA) and the Wild Fish Conservancy (WFC). In the case of TCA and WFC, they are headed by lawyers and I think that they believe that they can affect change through lawsuits. WSC is not as litigious and are a bit more down to earth. I have had conversations with a bunch of WSC members and leaders. They have been pretty willing to listen and discuss, in my experience. I believe that they all focus their energies far too much on changes in fish management policies. This is how they see a path to increased run sizes. This is shown by the issues that they tackle from WSC's start lobbying for wild steelhead release to TCA and WFC's fixation on hatcheries. TCA is clear in sharing what their focus is on :
www.theconservationangler.org
WFC has a wider set of goals:
wildfishconservancy.org
WSC seems to focus a bit more at the project level:
www.wildsteelheadcoalition.org
Rarely do the first two actually tackle habitat destroying developments. They may comment on Biop's for the Snake River dams or other major projects but the everyday constant bloodletting of smaller individual projects that degrade wetlands, shorelines, and water quality are left to local jurisdictions. WFC and TCA have pushed for listing of coastal steelhead populations. This is an example of an action that will have little effect on any impacts other than "fish management" impacts. ESA listing of steelhead has not been successful in reducing impacts from any habitat destructive actions or permits in the Puget Sound from what I have seen. It is difficult work commenting on projects such as a hard shoring project for a residence on Camano island but in the end it may be more impactful than being concerned with the WDFW sportfishing rulebook.
A member here recently correctly told me that in fact WFC did tackle issues that were habitat based when they spent time and effort doing work on stream typing. I for one am pleased that they are doing that. I am unsure where it will lead. It may change buffers for forestry projects or development projects. However, if no one is looking at the individual forestry permits or development projects then local politics has a greasy way of subverting these types of policy level changes. I know that the Native Fish Society (NFS) river steward program has had river steward look at individual projects. I have commented on a project with one. Kudo's to them (or him). I think that this sort of basin or area specific oversight is what is missed. Policies are only important if implemented.
I will now jump over my soap box and look out my window, longing to be fishing the Sauk bar believing that there is a fish in that little dimple behind a rock that wants to eat. Damn, do I miss it this year.
I see the Wild Steelhead Coalition (WSC) as being a bit different from The Conservation Angler (TCA) and the Wild Fish Conservancy (WFC). In the case of TCA and WFC, they are headed by lawyers and I think that they believe that they can affect change through lawsuits. WSC is not as litigious and are a bit more down to earth. I have had conversations with a bunch of WSC members and leaders. They have been pretty willing to listen and discuss, in my experience. I believe that they all focus their energies far too much on changes in fish management policies. This is how they see a path to increased run sizes. This is shown by the issues that they tackle from WSC's start lobbying for wild steelhead release to TCA and WFC's fixation on hatcheries. TCA is clear in sharing what their focus is on :
Conservation Initiatives — The Conservation Angler
TCA focuses its multi-faceted advocacy on two we can control: harvest and hatchery management. Read more here.
www.theconservationangler.org
WFC has a wider set of goals:
Our Priorities – Wild Fish Conservancy Northwest
wildfishconservancy.org
WSC seems to focus a bit more at the project level:
Key Issues — Wild Steelhead Coalition
www.wildsteelheadcoalition.org
Rarely do the first two actually tackle habitat destroying developments. They may comment on Biop's for the Snake River dams or other major projects but the everyday constant bloodletting of smaller individual projects that degrade wetlands, shorelines, and water quality are left to local jurisdictions. WFC and TCA have pushed for listing of coastal steelhead populations. This is an example of an action that will have little effect on any impacts other than "fish management" impacts. ESA listing of steelhead has not been successful in reducing impacts from any habitat destructive actions or permits in the Puget Sound from what I have seen. It is difficult work commenting on projects such as a hard shoring project for a residence on Camano island but in the end it may be more impactful than being concerned with the WDFW sportfishing rulebook.
A member here recently correctly told me that in fact WFC did tackle issues that were habitat based when they spent time and effort doing work on stream typing. I for one am pleased that they are doing that. I am unsure where it will lead. It may change buffers for forestry projects or development projects. However, if no one is looking at the individual forestry permits or development projects then local politics has a greasy way of subverting these types of policy level changes. I know that the Native Fish Society (NFS) river steward program has had river steward look at individual projects. I have commented on a project with one. Kudo's to them (or him). I think that this sort of basin or area specific oversight is what is missed. Policies are only important if implemented.
I will now jump over my soap box and look out my window, longing to be fishing the Sauk bar believing that there is a fish in that little dimple behind a rock that wants to eat. Damn, do I miss it this year.
brownheron
corvus ossifragus
Pretty broad brush you’re painting with there.
I was on the NFS board for several years and still support them.
I almost never use a spey rod or even a fly rod for steelhead. I don’t give a goddam about hatcheries. I never support litigation except in last resort emergency situations. So I obviously disagree with some of their work. I told the Exec Direct this to his face at dinner after we went steelhead fishing two weeks ago. I went 3-for-6 on steelhead with my baitcaster and float rods last Sunday. I think I’m in the 8-for-12 range for the season which is a bit low for me but weather has been tough so I’ve only been out about 10 times, not counting back yard fishing.
I’m not an exception to the rule.
Lumping all .orgs into a single group and bashing them as a single unit is not part of the solution to this problem. They are as distinct as any other constituency. It is a contributor to the current problems, not something that helps advance solution. Personal attacks are just dumb if you want change, they entrench animosity instead or spanning divides. There is room to work together even when there are disagreements on policy which is why I also support groups that disagree with some of NFS’s positions.
It’s a lot easier to be lazy and talk shit over the internet than it is to have a discussion with someone who thinks differently in person and try to find common ground and mutual respect. People can do whatever they want but I’m trying to not be lazy with my limited time left in the planet.
You're the one taking it personal. You clearly based on your testimony don't fit the stereotype. Got it, loud and clear. Stereotypes aren't there for nothing though. Stereotypes aren't personal. That's the whole point of them. They hurt when they fit I guess to some degree but they aren't baseless. I've been around enough folks in person to make a snap judgement about groups they belong to or loudly support. I could make a venn diagram for you steeped in stereotypes as to what type of angler belongs to what groups or supports them. That's the problem. There's lots of circles with some overlap but in the end the sport angling community is fragmented. Litigation on low hanging fruit doesn't solve much. So we agree on that much? I posted a snarky comment based in frustration over a fishery I hold dear. You clearly do as well. Yeah it's a broad brush but the paint is a match for most of the house so I'll make no apologies for it. Stereotypes are funny too. You don't think it's funny on cosplay weekend in Forks when everybody who ,"got a bitchin eat in cool guy secret run xj460 on notellum creek" is standing around talking about it? You don't think it's funny that ninety percent of those "full on detonation grabs" were leaves and otherwise inanimate stuff? You don't think it's funny that those same guys now have some heavy mythical connection with the wild and a deep understanding of what's hampering steelhead? I'm sorry but it's all too humorous for me. Excuse me for noticing the irony around us. It brings me joy. And frankly I don't give a shit cause it brings them joy too. Perhaps their advocacy is misplaced in my opinion. Nonetheless they are a voice weighed in while a silent extinction takes place. I don't mean you or anybody else any disrespect on a personal level. A dot org is an entity and I call it how I see it. And I don't respect litigation on some of this stuff. Perhaps I need to get more detailed colour swatches to pick out the bullshit beige from the burnt umber between dot orgs. What can I say. Taxonomically I'm a lumper. Fewer categories brings order to a disorganized world for me.
brownheron
corvus ossifragus
Charles - glad you had a generally positive experience with the NFS river steward. That’s the part of their work that I actively support.
If I'm honest with myself and others as I try to be I'd have to plead guilty to your statement. To be fair though I got lots of people to be mad as do most people that like steelhead, anglers or not.
Yah, he is a good person and a friend. He sucks at golf though.
brownheron
corvus ossifragus
DC-
I don’t think _anything_ about the caricature Forks examples you cite, funny or otherwise.
What I think about are things like the lack of objective data to make decisions resulting in nonsensical seasons and harvest rules.
I have limited resources, time especially, so I want to maximize any small impact I might have on getting to a better place. Lumping, stereotyping and increasing animosity are not in service of those goals so I do
my best to avoid it including in the causes I support, sometimes with limited success but I’m trying.
Rationalize your comments however you want, that’s your prerogative. I don’t see it helping anything except maybe personal catharsis.
I don’t think _anything_ about the caricature Forks examples you cite, funny or otherwise.
What I think about are things like the lack of objective data to make decisions resulting in nonsensical seasons and harvest rules.
I have limited resources, time especially, so I want to maximize any small impact I might have on getting to a better place. Lumping, stereotyping and increasing animosity are not in service of those goals so I do
my best to avoid it including in the causes I support, sometimes with limited success but I’m trying.
Rationalize your comments however you want, that’s your prerogative. I don’t see it helping anything except maybe personal catharsis.
Your position is duly noted and with merit. I will in the future try and ask myself what would steelhead Jesus do before posting such snark. I'm just a man though. A work in the vision of the father but very much still in progress with many faults. One of which is inappropriate laughter in dark times as well as cynicism. Perhaps I will lay down my rod and sully holy waters no more forever. Then again maybe a less penative approach would be to say a thousand , "fish!....... Nevermind I think I'm on a limb that's moving" to atone for my copious sins in this life. I only hope the sacred waters of the peninsula will cleanse my soul so I am more fit to enter steelhead heaven without such a heavy burden and weight that I may not descend downward to the pikeminnow hell below with it's high water temps and absence of chrome. Amen.
Be steady. It all goes down Tuesday.
Bingo bango, all data/science aside, this is really what it boils down to.
The .orgs are nothing but environmental litigators funded by dudes and dudettes who barely fish.
Oh I didn't mean to call you out specifically. I was just marveling at the progression from being mad at WDFW, then the fish checkers, then the tribes, then the Feds, now it's the .orgs.
I get it, it sucks. I've never fished the Skagit and was panning my first trip up this spring. At this point it just kind of feels like bitching about inflation though.... Old man yells at clouds!
Thomas makes a good point - the folks in Occupy Skagit (esp Salmo_G, Smalma, WW and others) worked hard over many years to establish the legitimate basis for opening this fishery. And what I'm mostly pissed at is how easily decisions have been influenced by the IMO legitimate threat of lawsuits.
I have a lot of friends that are still members of the .orgs and all are genuinely concerned for the plight of wild steelhead (as am I). I never intended to paint them as the problem. I'm just annoyed at the tactics of some of their leaders.
And I've offered my suggestions, both when I was a dues paying member and afterwards when I encountered .org leadership at WDFW Commissioner meetings where public input was being gathered. Pretty much deaf ears from them - if you don't fall in line with their tactics the .ORG leaders look at you like you're a selfish idiot for being unwilling to accept their scientific conclusions or make what they believe to be necessary sacrifices.
Just my .02 - YMMV.
I have a lot of friends that are still members of the .orgs and all are genuinely concerned for the plight of wild steelhead (as am I). I never intended to paint them as the problem. I'm just annoyed at the tactics of some of their leaders.
And I've offered my suggestions, both when I was a dues paying member and afterwards when I encountered .org leadership at WDFW Commissioner meetings where public input was being gathered. Pretty much deaf ears from them - if you don't fall in line with their tactics the .ORG leaders look at you like you're a selfish idiot for being unwilling to accept their scientific conclusions or make what they believe to be necessary sacrifices.
Just my .02 - YMMV.
