Let's change the rules!!

As much as I think this is just a polite overture by WDFW, if we yell loud enough they just might listen.  WDFW is taking ideas for rule changes for 2013.  Here's our chance to salve our consciences and say that we at least tried.

http://wdfw.wa.gov/fishing/regulations/rule_proposals/myproposal.html

My personal opinion is that WDFW is one of the most anti-angler agencies like it in the country.  I've lived alot of places, fished alot of places (yes, I fished before getting in a kayak), and can say this without any reservation.  All you need to do is take a look at rulebooks for nearby fisheries (CAN, OR) and see that the person with the rod in their hand in WA is the one who loses.  Thanks to unreasonably restrictive seasons, we have to sit at home and tinker with our gear, while Oregonians and Canadians are out on the water.  Guess what I'm doing this weekend?  I'll give you a hint.  Not fishing.

Sure, we're not EXACTLY Canada or Oregon, but close enough to not merit WDFW's treatment of recreational fishing as sea rape by an army of poachers armed with Zebco products.  The sea-rapers are the commercial guys (and the natives...but I'm not going there this time...) And yes, poachers do exist.  But they exist in every state.  I highly doubt WA has more of a poaching problem than Canada or Oregon. 

WDFW's attitude towards recreational anglers is one of suspicion.  Anyone who's been rolled up on by them while fishing can tell you that (3x just last year for me, not even counting the obligatory interrogation when landing at a boat ramp).  For an organization who is supposedly under-funded they are more visible on the water than any other place I've seen.  There's a distinct "babysitting" vibe.  The most I've gotten from other F&W agencies on the water is a friendly wave hello.

WDFW seems to live to mess with you.  What are you fishing for?  Where did you come from? What's in that bag?  That crate?  Did you record that salmon? Let me see your catch card.  Give me those crabs so I can measure them. Let me see those hooks (supposedly they even pull out a piece of cotton and run it over your crushed barb...if it catches, you get a ticket). 

Here's the first rule of governance.  Treat people like children and they will act like children.  Not to sound too much like a tea-partier, but is this how we want to be treated by an organization that's funded with our TAX DOLLARS?? I almost want to ask the guys when they are interrogating me, "Aren't you ashamed of yourself? Me and the rest of these guys have done nothing wrong, yet you treat us like criminals."

Other state's F&W agencies have an express goal to GET people to go out fishing, and to fish safely and responsibily.  WDFW seems to have the opposite.  They seem to want to keep people off the water, and punish those who do go out.  I have really wondered since I started fishing in washington, what exactly is the goal of WDFW?

At the risk of sounding like even more of a crackpot...when the (apparent) policy of a law-enforcement agency is to pre-judge citizens, we're in dangerous territory.  I know we're just talking about recreational fishing here, but it sets a precedent for government.  If we're OK with this, what else will we be OK with?

Before I launch into a even-longer diatribe full of half-informed, half-cocked rants against WDFW (like about how they use bogus science to enact heavy-handed "conservation" measures or they can't seem to understand that recreational fishing BOOSTS THE ECONOMY but WON'T in an environment where you need a lawyer to decode your regulations), I'd like to propose some rule changes you may wish to consider submitting...

(these mostly apply to the sound and san juan marine areas...i.e. WHERE MOST PEOPLE IN WA LIVE)

1.   Make the lingcod limit 2 instead of 1.  Or even better...leave it at 1 and double the season to 90 days. May 1 to July 30.  Would give alot more people the ability to get out on the water and enjoy fishing in some warmer weather.  A 45-day lingcod season is completely unreasonable.

2.  Open rockfish in the sound with a limit of 2.  Any jackass that's tied a jig on and bounced it around some rocks can tell you, there's no shortage of rockfish in the sound.  In regards to the protection of canary and yelloweye rockfish, these fish usually live in deeper water, so leaving the 120-foot depth restriction MORE THAN covers it.

3.  Remove the single-rod saltwater restriction (or, just make the two-pole endorsement statewide, fresh & salt).  This one has always bothered me because it shows how much of a nanny organization they are.  Let the fools try to run multiple lines per person, and watch the circus that ensues.  It's regulated by the difficulty of running more than one line, not the man TELLING you that you can't run more than one line.

4.  Allow barbs when groundfishing.  Come ON, WDFW.  Really?  Salmon, OK I get it.  But you think it matters to a cabezon or a lingcod if the hook has a barb?  These are some of the heartiest fish in the sea.  Released, they are gonna live whether or not the hook had a barb in it.  Recreational fishing can be difficult.  Sometimes you get blanked.  Sometimes you only get one shot.  Sucks when you lose it because you had to use a barbless hook.  One more way WDFW tries to (unnecessarily) stack the odds in the fish's favor.

5.  Area 4 halibut.  OMG, for real?  the "season" for halibut is what, 8 days? and half of those are a weekday?  Just 12 miles across the water in Canada, halibut is open most of the year.  And south, in OR, pretty much all summer.  What gives? 

Anyone got any other good ideas?  I'm gonna go ahead and guess this might spark a little debate.  We're treading on political ground here.

I think you covered it. And beautifully. I'll sign whatever I need to in order to get some changes in WA. I feel more inclined to shell out the cash for an OR license than pay less for a WA one and have to deal with all that. They even hassle me at small lakes while trout fishing. They won't give the Russians (not being racist just a realist taking into account the lakes I fish) a ticket for retaining two or even three legal limits in one day because in one ranger's words "they don't know any better", but they will sit on the bank and watch me with binoculars then stop me at the launch to inspect my lures for barbs since I catch and release. It's all baloney.
I'm glad they're giving us a voice for 2013.  Question is, do they have any true intent to listen to what we have to say? Or is it all a facade....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

If you want to carpool to the public meetings to express these ideas let me know.  I figure with all the tips I've gotten from you, in addition to this, I probably owe you a beer.

FWIW, I can't find anything to argue with the points you made.  There's some aspects I have no personal experience with, but what you're saying sounds about right.

Rule number 1 for getting something changed:  Be ready to offer a solution.

First Halibut:  recommended solution would be:  Make it more like the commercial management version.  An annual catch quota.  How about 2, 3, 5? Halibut per recreational fisher, per year.  Easily managed by catch card.

Or

Make it like hunting for Turkey.  Gotta have a tag, and each tag costs $  and you can only purchase so many tags per year.


2nd, Puget Sound Lingcod:  Obviously certain marine areas have more than others, adjust seasons and limits accordingly.

3rd, Rockfish:  When I try to catch lings, I catch coppers, and LOTS of them, even in sandy/gravel areas looking for flounder.  Open them during Lingcod.  1 or 2 per day, with perhaps an annual limit (catch card) or tag system as mentioned with the Halibut. 

Rule number 1 for getting something changed:  Be ready to offer a solution. 

That's precisely what I'm doing Lee.  I hope you fill out the form.

I don't mind going to meetings and being that loud asshat in the corner either   

so much to say but first i have to mention what wdfw doesn't want to hear about for these rule changes.  from their website:
"Please note that the department is not currently accepting proposals for Salmon, License types and fees, Pacific Halibut, or Coastal Bottomfish, as these are currently addressed in other forums. Please see the box to the right for more information about rulemaking for these topics."

i am no huge fan of wdfw but i feel there are some serious problems with the rants.

first, are we really complaining about enforcement?  i personally do not want game wardens just waving to fishermen... i want them to enforce the rules and you only do that when you actually make contact with fishermen.  are they sometimes overzealous... of course, but you find that with all law enforcement to a degree.

as for wdfw being anti-sportfishing i do not think it is that simple.  we got an extra two months of blackmouth fishing for this upcoming winter in the straits and there is plenty of increased opportunity when they can.  the biggest problem is that they have a legislative mandate to provide commercial fisheries and half the fish are legally required to go to tribal commercial fisheries right off the bat.  oregon does not have to deal with that.  the other problem is that with the numerous endangered species listings within puget sound it has a huge impact on fisheries within the sound, especially salmon and bottomfish fisheries.

while it sucks that canada has longer salmon seasons, that is part of the pacific salmon treaty whose catch sharing is law.  does it suck?  absolutely but we americans hammer certain canadian stocks and have to pay for it.  we have no south turning stocks of salmon and we sit at the bottom of the totem pole when it comes to salmon harvest.  alaska takes a ton of our chinook and then the canadians hammer the rest.  our seasons are based on the few fish that make it back.  does the commercial fleet based in seattle (that fishes hard in alaska too) have too much pull with our legislators and those who set the treaties... hell yes but it has less to do with wdfw and more to do with politics and legislative mandates.

as for halibut, you should get involved.  area 4 is co-mingled with more southerly stocks of halibut so the quotas are not as large as more northerly regions.  the reasons the seasons have gotten so short is a direct result of wdfw pandering to small boat sportfishermen.  i ran a charter boat there and was involved in the meetings and can tell you that what we as charters predicted would happen when they opened closed areas and opened the season later happened exactly as predicted.  shorter seasons and less opportunity are what we got from wdfw trying to appease the small boat fleet(although we will never know since none of them actually showed up at any of the meetings).  small boaters and the city of forks promoted rules that started the demise of area 4 halibut fishing.  since i am no longer in business i do not care, but feel like the truth regarding what happened to the area 4 halibut fishery shouldn't be forgotten.  i was there and saw it with my own eyes.

as for rockfish, it is not always accurate to base regulations solely on angler efficiency.  good fishing does not always mean that stocks can actually handle the type of harvest that would occur if opened. 

it is important to send in comments to wdfw when it comes to rule changes but also remember that attending north of falcon or the halibut meetings will have more impact and will also help educate you about why decisions are made.

i also wanted to point out that the director phil anderson comes from a sportfishing background.

here's a post from another bulletin board that states things better than i ever could.

http://www.piscatorialpursuits.com/forum/ubbthreads.php/topics/719795/1.html

so much to say but first i have to mention what wdfw doesn't want to hear about for these rule changes.  from their website:
"Please note that the department is not currently accepting proposals for Salmon, License types and fees, Pacific Halibut, or Coastal Bottomfish, as these are currently addressed in other forums. Please see the box to the right for more information about rulemaking for these topics."

That sucks.  I missed that. Seems to support my initial notion that it's merely an overture.

first, are we really complaining about enforcement?  i personally do not want game wardens just waving to fishermen... i want them to enforce the rules and you only do that when you actually make contact with fishermen.  are they sometimes overzealous... of course, but you find that with all law enforcement to a degree.

Hell yeah we are.  There's a very important word in the phrase "recreational fishing".  I'll give you a hint.  It's the first one.  Takes a bit away from the experience of *RECREATING* when you're getting interrogated by a group of uniformed, mustachioed men who seem to have the idea that you've done something wrong and they just have to find it.  Sorry, but it's not acceptable to me to be treated like that by ANY enforcement agency.

How you treat people DOES matter. How you treat you constituents DOES matter.  A determined poacher is going to poach.  The guy with the kid with the zebco in his hand is NOT A POACHER. He is out *trying* to have a nice time with his kid.  Wherever I fish, I, like the vast majority of recreational anglers, don't break the rules (as much as I disagree with some of them).  And I would obey the rules whether or not WDFW was looking at me thru binoculars.  JUST LIKE MOST ANGLERS DO.  How a government views and interacts with its citizens...it obviously concerns me. 

the biggest problem is that they have a legislative mandate to provide commercial fisheries and half the fish are legally required to go to tribal commercial fisheries right off the bat.

Exactly!  And we're just supposed to accept that?  You act as if that's the reality for now and evermore.  It sure will be if we don't do something about it.  But I get your point that the issue here is further up the chain than WDFW.  I guess I'm kind of using WDFW as a proxy for state gov't in general, because they are visible (i did say I was "half-informed" )

the other problem is that with the numerous endangered species listings within puget sound it has a huge impact on fisheries within the sound, especially salmon and bottomfish fisheries.

as for rockfish, it is not always accurate to base regulations solely on angler efficiency.  good fishing does not always mean that stocks can actually handle the type of harvest that would occur if opened. 

I just don't know about that.  This is where it gets tricky because who has the resources to conduct a comprehensive, independent study on fish stocks in the sound and san juans?  We are reliant on the studies done by and for state government that seem to IN MY OPINION have an overly-conservative bias.   The only thing I can really trust is my own experience.  And in my own experience some of these policies don't even come close to measuring up to the common sense standard.   Sharing with other folks, there seems to be some agreement on this...so I don't exist in a vacuum. Seems to me there would be a middle ground.

while it sucks that canada has longer salmon seasons, that is part of the pacific salmon treaty whose catch sharing is law.  does it suck?  absolutely but we americans hammer certain canadian stocks and have to pay for it.  we have no south turning stocks of salmon and we sit at the bottom of the totem pole when it comes to salmon harvest.  alaska takes a ton of our chinook and then the canadians hammer the rest.  our seasons are based on the few fish that make it back.  does the commercial fleet based in seattle (that fishes hard in alaska too) have too much pull with our legislators and those who set the treaties... hell yes but it has less to do with wdfw and more to do with politics and legislative mandates.

you're right about it sucking, and that is less about WDFW and more about legislative policies, and that commerical guys have lobby-power...It's up to us recreational guys to figure out a way to consolidate.  PSA, KeepAmericaFishing, and actually attending meetings are a good place to start.  So, point taken there.

AND I KNOW that ranting on a kayak fishing board is "slacktivism".  But my original intent is to get people to submit rule change ideas (also slacktivism, I suppose).  And...it helps me get some of the rage out

Nebulous, rant-y halibut rule change aside...the changes I suggested are quite reasonable.  YES, more fish would be caught (OH NOOOO!) but the slight downside for the resources (again, my opinion) would result in a very significant upside in recreation, enjoyment, delicious dinners, time on the water with friends...i.e. all the things that make life a really nice deal.  THAT is the ultimate goal. 

The broader, more philosophical questions that need to be re-examined are, what is the role of government in regards to (insert your hotbutton issue here)?  Who do they represent? How do we want to interact with them?  How do we want them to interact with us? 

My dislike for WDFW as a governmental agency is a sideshow.  AFAIK I've never ranted like a madman (like this) on these boards before.  I should be allowed one a year.

Preach It!!! The native stuff - which you didn't go into - is insane!

You're on a roll.  Tribal netting would be the cherry on top.   Go for it.  

The enforcement thing must be a Sea/Tac and saltwater deal.  I've been fishing WA for 25 years and I've never been checked.  Can't say that I would mind being checked, if in doing so the officers would also be writing tickets to offenders near me.

You're on a roll.  Tribal netting would be the cherry on top.   Go for it.  

The enforcement thing must be a Sea/Tac and saltwater deal.  I've been fishing WA for 25 years and I've never been checked.  Can't say that I would mind being checked, if in doing so the officers would also be writing tickets to offenders near me.

I'm in bellingham, usually fishing area 7.  It could be the kayak.  Coast Guard rolled up to zee the other day, I think just out of curiosity.

But even when I'm on a PB my interactions with them have never been pleasant.  And I know it can't be me, 'cause I'm a super nice guy, right?

...

right???

Rory. I commend you on your eloquent rant. Well written and well said. I'm also sick and tired of a state agency that requires a new fishing license on 4/1 but can't get the regulation booklet to the public till the end of April. It should be handed out with the new license along with a quid pro quo lawyer. These issues and most regarding recreational fishing in Wa stem from yesteryear(1974's Boldt Decision). This is really when the demise of recreational fishing in this state started. Don't even get me started on how the state cowtows to the commercial interests. The dollars they make pales in comparison to the trickle down dollars recreational anglers create. Commercial interests have the big dollar lobbyists with the politicians in their back pocket. Hence, we take a seat in the very back of the bus(Jim Crow,not quite but we do drink from a restricted fountain). In saying all of this, I agree that political clout comes in having the numbers of constituients to influence these greased palmed politicians. I tried to fight that fight when I moved here in '93 and was VP of the Everett salmon & Steelhead Club. Along with the president we felt we needed to ban together with other fishing organizations to gain that clout. Guess what? We were told we were the "New kids on the block" and didn't have a clue to the battles that were fought around '74. The "Fish Nazis" said they would never bury the hatchet with groups like Trout Unlimited(PSA was formed as a breakaway due to disagreements with TU). In general, we beat our heads against the wall to pull together and got absolutely nowhere. Most recreational fisherman are lazy and just want to fish and won't put the time in to make change. Another issue is recreational fishing is becoming a sport for the folks who have bucks. Look at the cost for gear,gas licenses,ferry fees, camping.etc. It's pricing many out of the sport that has been near and dear to us since childhood. In a nutshell, good luck and let me know how I can help with my limits of time,resources, and age. May the force be with you.

you and i have obviously had far different experiences with enforcement and also have far different perceptions about the scope of poaching in our state.

i have had nothing but good experiences with wdfw enforcement.  i cannot explain our differences and i do believe you but i personally believe we need to at a minimum double the number of enforcement officers statewide.  they are stretched far too thin to do an effective job enforcing the multitude of fishing, hunting, crabbing, nuisance animals, commercial fishing, and all the other things they have to deal with.

my experience is that poaching is rampant.  some of it is simple ignorance as to species, seasons, etc. but there is a ton of truly blatant poaching going on, especially in salmon fisheries.

ranting is great.  i've  jumped off the deep end more times than i can count.  ranting means you're pissed.  start by making proposals in this rule proposal.  i would also urge you to contact wdfw staff and talk to them about your ideas.  you will learn a ton about the fish stocks and learn some of the reasons why decisions are made.  it may not reduce the rage, but it will help point you in the direction that will best lead to changes and that is well thought out, reasonable arguments that do far more good than ranting and raving to the powers that be.  i've attended tons of meetings and the ranters and ravers are good entertainment but they actually imo do harm at these meetings because they shift the focus from bad policies to idiotic behavior (if we ever meet, remind me to tell you about the port angeles meeting about area 4 marine reserves  )

as for wdfw being too conservative i couldn't disagree with you more.  wdfw has a history of not being conservative enough which is why we find ourselves in our current situation.  they consistently have put the needs of the users over the needs of the fish which means both eventually lose.

wdfw is far from perfect but we have certainly made some progress over the past few years in getting them to move.  some of this is the instant access we now have to what is going on via the internet and the ease of contacting wdfw and legislators compared to 10-15 years ago.

the problem facing the sportfishing community coming together like the commercials is far more complex.  commercials just want to harvest fish and make money for the most part.  there is little animosity between commercial groups now (not like in the past when fish wheels and other selective methods were banned).  sportfishing groups are more fragmented because we all see the resource in different ways.  some are far more conservative (i am certainly in that camp) than others when it comes to harvest and hatcheries.  some just want time on the water.  some only want fish to eat.  others are fine with catch and release.  there can often be little agreement between the differing factions because what they want can be diametrically opposed on a single issue. 

i am going to submit a bunch of proposals regarding coastal and strait rivers.  they may not get much traction but any idea starts with one person.

Rory, Topwater, others...I admire your passion.  keep it up.

My personal frustration is the disgusting hypocrisy on the part of law enforcement. 

I follow rules.  Rules are important.  But every day, I see rules being broken in easy sight of law enforcement.  Drugs, public drinking, public camping (occupy ring a bell?)

I asked an officer during the occupy camp fiasco why they did not enforce the laws.  He said the enforcement of law is "subjective." 

I call bullshit.

I was checked at Sucia a few years ago.  I had every freakin' pass, registration, permit you could possibly have.  ALL my hooks were pinched except one.  I asked for a warning because I was obviously trying to follow the rules.  NOPE.  $90 ticket.  OK.  I considered it a donation to the WDFD and really didn't mind it much.

But I remember that every time I walk past some strung out addict pissing on the corner, smoking crack, dealing drugs (rampant), camping in public, with no repercussions.  What's the difference? 

If the Seattle PD (and Portland too) took rule (law) enforcement as seriously as the WDFW, we would all benefit. 

That is all.  Now I have to go watch more My Drunk Kitchen.  ciao.

Both. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk