The great C and R debate

[Amx]

True dat. They'll never tell us 'where the money goes', or why.

[raptorschild]

The captain of your college debate team? Awsome. Just awsome. Although the captain of a debate team should know that if you are going to play devils advocate you should do it with facts....otherwise you are just being contrarian. To suggest that because you keep big bass and keep catching them, that somehow that means that you didn't have any impact is pure devils advocate ignorance. 1 less good fish is 1 less good fish. Math is Math. The best spot in any lake or pond will always have the best fish move up on it, if its vacant. You will keep catching big fish on the best spots until their are no more good fish left. Fisheries...even small ones, are way to dynamic to assess for "joe bank angler". If you have access to electro shock, then I might listen to something beyond your anecdotal jargon.


This is a common sense issue. No need for Devils Advocates. The problem with "common sense" is that it is absolutely a misnomer. So many people lack common sense that it can't possibly have the word Common within it. How else could Barack Obama get elected not once but TWICE! People that call bass "invasive" lack common sense. Every Hatchery steelhead is invasive. Pikeminnow are NATIVE! but their populations, at least in rivers with dams, is man influenced...which means the predation impact is non native even though the genetics are native. WITH ME SO FAR? If you are with me, then you now realize its ridiculous and futile to try to judge what should or shouldn't be prioritized based on your perception of "native" or "invasive". Its not that simple. 99% of people on this forum are non-native.

Back to common sense: Selective Harvest: Good. Keeping big bass: Bad. Harassing others for keeping a good fish: Illegal. etc... There is no debate here.

The debate ends when people wake up and realize that for sooooo many reasons beyond our control, and way beyond "invasive competition" that "Native species" are not thriving here, and are in fact going the way of the Buffalo. In fact, many such as Columbia River Steelhead already have.

Oceanic Conditions, Melting Glaciers, Dams, Pollution, Streamside Habitat destruction have all raised water temps to levels that WILL IN FACT get worse before they get better. Fight the losing fight all you want...but I'm going to embrace what we know is already coming...or already here. You don't win against mother nature, try all you want, but she's telling us that warm-water species are what will be thriving here and they are! Lake Chelan, Moses, Potholes, Columbia, Sammamish, Coeur D'alene, Banks....all were once terrific trout fisheries, whose primary targeted species are all now warmwater fish. Sorry for those who feel some emotional need to cling to a species that is unable to adapt. One day Bass won't be fit for the Northwest either, and when they go away, I'll be ready to embrace the NW Bonefish, because I think with my brain, rather than my emotion.


What cracks me up is this idea that "we are a salmon state." It's like people don't realize that a few hundred years of history is really nothing at all. Its not even a blip on any historical radar. How old is earth? How many species has it seen come and go? Salmon on this earth is such a small potatoes concept. In 500 years we might be a BONEFISH state! where 300 years of chasing bone fish on the flats of the Puget sound very well may be our new heritage. People from Costa Rica will flock here to get in on some of the action. Who knows?

My point. People need to quit being simpletons. Things are changing. If you want to join CCA, and try to save the "native Steelhead" of which there really aren't any left....go on ahead. I'm just going to keep fishing for everything, and will embrace bass fishing as the Northwests future like it or not, and putting good fish back so that when I go to Sportsmans Wherehouse in kennewick I might see a kid in a picture holding up a fish I very well may have paid forward.

All you anti warmwater guys go on and do your best to destroy great fisheries while trying to save one that is already dead.... Yeah, that makes sense. Kill those bass and walleye! get em!

[Amx]

1 less good fish is 1 less good fish.

That isn't entirely true, think about it. You're right, but there is more to it.

1 dead fish can't make babies and those babies can't make babies. Therefore the loss is in generations of genes lost to the lake.

Also I'm as native to this country as any 'native American' as there are NO human species native/indigenous to the North American continent.

[Jigking Fishhead]

Bravo, Well said raptorschild.

[BassDood]

AMX brought up a point about license funds going to wherever. Several years ago, the state had a "warm water enhancement fee" that if you fished for warm water fish, you paid a little more. Not sure that those funds went anywhere to "enhance" bass or other warm water fish. I can't say I ever saw anything from it. If they would have sound evidence of funds going where they belonged, I wouldn't mind seeing that.

[jd39]

raptorschild,
I disagree with your viewpoint,

"Math is Math" - true but there are many variables in this equation, I’d never assume I know all of them
“People that call bass "invasive" lack common sense.” – “invasive species” has broad definitions, look it up, maybe “introduced species” would be more appropriate for bass but the use of “invasive species” is within acceptable use of the term
“Every Hatchery steelhead is invasive.” – how so? There’s human intervention in their lifecycle but they’re still a native species to WA state I believe. Has the hatchery debate led to them being classified as something other than steelhead?
“Its not that simple.” – I agree with that
“Selective Harvest: Good. Keeping big bass: Bad. Harassing others for keeping a good fish: Illegal. etc... There is no debate here.” Well I don’t know, what if I don’t like bass? Wouldn’t keeping big bass be good in my eyes? I’m not saying it is, only that it can be debated. Playing devil’s advocate. I don’t harass legal fisherman, or illegal fisherman for that matter, just call the cops, no debate there from me.
“You don't win against mother nature” – true but the problems salmon and steelhead face are in large part not related to mother nature, Mother nature didn’t show up in the mid 19th century and fish the native runs nearly to extinction then start a hatchery program to clean up its mess. Mother nature didn’t build the dams. Mother nature isn’t removing the nutrient rice carcasses of decaying salmon from the systems. Mother nature didn’t hand down the Boldt Decision. Mother nature didn’t create gill nets. Mother nature didn’t dredge the Columbia and build sediment islands perfectly situated for predatory bird colonies to gorge on fry from while raising young. I could go on. Notice I didn't list bass, I think they are way, way down on the list if on it at all.
“What cracks me up is this idea that "we are a salmon state." It's like people don't realize that a few hundred years of history is really nothing at all. Its not even a blip on any historical radar. How old is earth?” Salmon are a part of WA state culture, history and future, your statements won’t change that. A few hundred years is a “blip” on the “historical radar”, you don’t think anything’s happened in the last few hundred years? Geologic time is a wholly different context to frame this in and human history does become less relevant in that context but I’m not sure I see the point?
“My point. People need to quit being simpletons. Things are changing.” – they are indeed but not wanting to embrace the destruction of fish species we love does not make us simpletons, especially when there is evidence that we can do better and have healthy salmon/steelhead fisheries if some of the things mother nature didn’t do above are dealt with. I respectfully disagree with your point.
I trust you disagree with me on this, please know it’s nothing personal and if you take offense to any of the above it is not intentional on my part. I don't want to see warmwater fisheries destroyed, I think there's room for everyone (except poachers). Take care.

[sickbayer]

raptorschild,
I disagree with your viewpoint,

"Math is Math" - true but there are many variables in this equation, I’d never assume I know all of them
“People that call bass "invasive" lack common sense.” – “invasive species” has broad definitions, look it up, maybe “introduced species” would be more appropriate for bass but the use of “invasive species” is within acceptable use of the term
“Every Hatchery steelhead is invasive.” – how so? There’s human intervention in their lifecycle but they’re still a native species to WA state I believe. Has the hatchery debate led to them being classified as something other than steelhead?
“Its not that simple.” – I agree with that
“Selective Harvest: Good. Keeping big bass: Bad. Harassing others for keeping a good fish: Illegal. etc... There is no debate here.” Well I don’t know, what if I don’t like bass? Wouldn’t keeping big bass be good in my eyes? I’m not saying it is, only that it can be debated. Playing devil’s advocate. I don’t harass legal fisherman, or illegal fisherman for that matter, just call the cops, no debate there from me.
“You don't win against mother nature” – true but the problems salmon and steelhead face are in large part not related to mother nature, Mother nature didn’t show up in the mid 19th century and fish the native runs nearly to extinction then start a hatchery program to clean up its mess. Mother nature didn’t build the dams. Mother nature isn’t removing the nutrient rice carcasses of decaying salmon from the systems. Mother nature didn’t hand down the Boldt Decision. Mother nature didn’t create gill nets. Mother nature didn’t dredge the Columbia and build sediment islands perfectly situated for predatory bird colonies to gorge on fry from while raising young. I could go on. Notice I didn't list bass, I think they are way, way down on the list if on it at all.
“What cracks me up is this idea that "we are a salmon state." It's like people don't realize that a few hundred years of history is really nothing at all. Its not even a blip on any historical radar. How old is earth?” Salmon are a part of WA state culture, history and future, your statements won’t change that. A few hundred years is a “blip” on the “historical radar”, you don’t think anything’s happened in the last few hundred years? Geologic time is a wholly different context to frame this in and human history does become less relevant in that context but I’m not sure I see the point?
“My point. People need to quit being simpletons. Things are changing.” – they are indeed but not wanting to embrace the destruction of fish species we love does not make us simpletons, especially when there is evidence that we can do better and have healthy salmon/steelhead fisheries if some of the things mother nature didn’t do above are dealt with. I respectfully disagree with your point.
I trust you disagree with me on this, please know it’s nothing personal and if you take offense to any of the above it is not intentional on my part. I don't want to see warmwater fisheries destroyed, I think there's room for everyone (except poachers). Take care.

well said!

[natetreat]

Yes, I was the president of the debate team, and I'm damn good at it. In your mind it's an "either this - or that" idea. We either manage our lakes for trout, or bass. Take out all the money from the salmon hatcheries and refit them for bass and pike. It's inevitable?

I'm not sure why you're so upset with anything that I've been saying, if you'd been paying attention, I'm on your side! But nothing will change so long as it's a bunch of guys yelling "eat bass! Eat Bass!" and the other guys are chasing them down in their bass boats throwing lead heads at them. At some point you're going to have to be realistic and accept that there are lots of anglers out there that just don't care about bass, and that the way that our state prioritizes it's resource is not going to give the bass fishermen a blank check.

If the folks who yelled the loudest made the laws, African Americans would be sitting at the back of the bus, gay people would be euthanized and abortion would be punishable by death. And this would be a VERY loud state. And I mean really loud. You wouldn't even be able to hear yourself think.

I the end, reason prevails and the level heads make the compromises necessary to serve all of the interests here - conservation of native species and the management of introduced ones. We've got it pretty good here in Washington.

[fishingmachine]

As much as you can say wdfw Is equally fair for all it simply is not. If that was the case we wouldn't have lakes killing off bass and other species to plant trout. The real fact of the matter is that wdfw could give a rats ass about bass in our state. If they cared they wouldn't have changed the limits and regs on smallmouth or walleye on the Columbia. If they cared they wouldn't raise fees for the small bass clubs that are now ridiculous as I showed nate already. The truth is we have two fights as bass fisherman 1. promoting catch and release on the bigger fish for future generations and 2. dealing with wdfw killing the good bass fisheries we have in the state.

[natetreat]

Look, as much as I can identify with frustration with the idiocy of WDFW policy, they are an equal opportunity destroyer. They piss on everyone's parade, not to mention that when salmon and steelhead are concerned they are at the beck and call of NOAA and the feds as far as being able to do anything.

A government agency doesn't "care" in the sense that you're talking about. They listen, and folks get fired, and votes get cast and lobbies are made. It's politics, and nothing happens fast. If you're going to want good bass fisheries, some sacrifices have to be made, like having an equal number of trout fisheries.

[fishingmachine]

Lol I could understand your argument if there weren't already plenty of trout fisheries. there are so many trout only lakes in the state. If you knew about badger lake it would make sense that they should leave it alone seeing as it has 6+# smallies and 9+# largies. I feel the frustration that all the salmon guys feel as well because I enjoy salmon fishing too. We have dying fisheries because of so many reasons such as Elliot bay or even some river systems or sockeye fisheries but yet pinks are thriving. Wonder why but that's a whole different cup of tea.

I would be okay with them killing some lakes and making em only bass lakes but it seems it only goes the way of killing bass to make trout lakes.

[natetreat]

All the trout lakes that I've fished also have bass in them. Not the giant sized ones in Badger though, that's a stupid shame. Is Badger on any river system or are they just killing bass to kill bass.

[fishingmachine]

Just killing bass to kill bass. Same with spectacle lake. I can think of the lakes like omak, rattlesnake as two I know don't have bass. I know pass lake as well if im not mistaken.
I guess that's where I have a lot of frustration. Also heard from a homeowner wdfw was netting flowing to take out bass as well.

[rayborbon]

Hello, I thought I would make my one contribution to the discussion here. I am the perpetrating bass murderer who started the idea of a discussion after someone rudely intruded upon my fishing report. Let me start with saying I have no regrets harvesting one largemouth bass in almost twenty years of fishing in Washington state.

I served 7 years active duty in the Army, been shot at, mortared, rocketed, whatever and I think I earned my ******* bass. A lot of my friends are still in and some of my brothers expired in foreign countries like Iraq and Afghanistan. These guys' families were forgotten because their country is too fired up about Trayvon and Lindsay Lohan *********.. and now it's one ******* bass.

When I decide to take one bass out of Lake Washington it isn't because I am selfish and it isn't because I don't understand what conservation is, it's because I wanted to and I think I earned my right to take my damn bass. To hear some ongoing lecture by some kid who was merely swimming around in his dad's balls when I was overseas dealing with jackasses who wanted to kill me while my damn government set up stupid rules of engagement I think the discussion is stupid. I'm glad some kid from Issaquah who probably grew up in much higher economic standing than I ever had the privilege of experiencing has the ability to fish bass. At the same time I think he was damn rude and should probably take notice of when and where he begins his lectures and consider his audience.

I find it ironic that some fishermen like to cannibalize their own because they want to control other people's actions and they look like PETA members doing so. But if you try that stuff on the lake don't be expecting anything but a dirt nap if you are disrespectful. If you want to get focused on overharvest there's this thing called a gill net that can do more damage in one day than I can do in years of hook and line. Have your little debates if you want to feel important but I'm gonna catch some damn fish.

Tight lines haters.

(Edited by Admin)

[Mike Carey]

Gotta respect the passion on that post. Thank you for your service.

Last comment and this thread will be locked. (Admin privilege)

When the fishing report in question got posted, I figured "this will be up about ten minutes before someone comments on C & R.

As one who has been on the receiving end of these kind of comments, I can tell you it's damn annoying. I have no comment on the C & R thread, but I would ask that people not use the report comments to push their personal agendas. Keep that stuff on the forums and let people share their fishing experiences without having to wonder what kind of negative comments are going to come their way. And if you are the person posting the report, you can always hit "delete".