Disgusting: Lifting bass limits on the Columbia River!!

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Rodney Heupel on March 11, 2016 at 3:00pm

Ben Hanes said:

Josh,

I started the squeaky wheel-ness I just haven't made much headway yet with, I guess, the right people.  I have contacted WDFW regarding the issue, though, so at least I'm trying to do something....At our next club meeting, I intend to form a committee; hopefully we can get a few guys on board so that one guy isn't bearing all of the burden.  I will also be speaking at the Richland Rod and Gun Club on April 5, and will bring up the topic at that meeting, where I will also push to form another committee with that club.

I think part of the problem is a lot of bass guys are just focused on the fishing and the tournaments.  Beyond that, most just want to be left alone.  That was/is me too. I hate the government....I'm trying to do better, though, now, but honestly I would rather just focus on the fishing........

Unfortunately we have environmentalists against us, who are extremely politically active.

Well said, as bass anglers we have to become well organized and fight in numbers armed with science. Anger and unfounded opinions will not make anything positive happen, passion and commitment are required. One has to be willing to give up/sacrifice lost wages, a pre-fish weekend, family time to protect and fight for the sport of bass fishing we love while it still exists the way it does. Our fisheries biologists our on our side, but you have to remember who signs their paychecks. This is a political fight that starts at the Federal level.

Permalink Reply by Mike Bess on March 11, 2016 at 4:19pm

Maybe missing the NWB event would've been in your best interest....

Josh Potter said:

Dana- I hear your frustration but I wouldn't give up on the e-mail writing campaign. You state that the letter writing campaign isn't working or won't work at all. This might be in part due to the fact that many are bitching but might be bitching to the wrong people. An example of that would be the guy who complains on here to a group of his peers but doesn't send an e-mail to the commission.

In the same amount of time it takes to type a complaint on this board, you could type an e-mail to the commission. Many say they have done that but I would bet most haven't.

The squeaky wheel gets the grease in almost all of these deals. I am speaking from experience on this.

In 2010 I was part of a small group that was able to get a game law changed. We felt like everybody we spoke with was in support of our proposal. However, when the WDFW survey open comment period was finished, we were in the minority. It wasn't a landslide type of scenario but our proposal had more against it than for it.

We made certain someone from our group was present at every event possible where we thought we could take another jab. I damn near didn't make it to the NWBASS Potholes event that year because of a Friday night meeting in Colville that didn't end until midnight. These were HEATED meetings. I got to the point where I just started calling our local WDFW guys on a regular basis. We had scientific data to support our argument but WDFW didn't give it any credence because it wasn't "their" data. Long story longer....in the end we actually lost some support and STILL WON!

We got a 4 year trial period for the rule change we wanted. The moral of the story is a group of us raised so much hell that they caved. It did take 2 years but it happened!

Permalink Reply by Jake Anderson on March 12, 2016 at 7:36am

Josh,

So you are saying that e-mails did little to nothing to get your big game victory. That your win came from organizing a possibly armed militia of bad ass mofos to attend some meetings and scare the ever-lasting bejeezus out of some people. Or something slightly more sophisticated and professional, but lets not have the details get in the way of a good mental picture...

Im pretty sure this is what my friend Dana is referring to.

Permalink Reply by Jake Anderson on March 12, 2016 at 7:39am

I will say I left a "heavy handed message" on voicemail, and the response back was that wdfw is very suprised by the backlash given that this has been on the "dockett" so long. Im suprised that they are suprised. This has been a heated debate since they removed limits above mcnary the first time. I'm sick of the bs.

Permalink Reply by Ben Hanes on March 12, 2016 at 10:35am

This is my pissed off response.  I would encourage anyone to literally copy it, maybe change a few words, and send it to the following people: bruce.bolding@dfw.wa.gov;larry.phillips@dfw.wa.gov; charmane.ashbrook@dfw.wa.gov

I would encourage someone to come up with a more political response, because all I want to do is get my rifle and go on a manhunt.

Anyways, here it is:

To Whom It May Concern,

As an angler for the last 29 years in the State of Washington, I am extremely concerned about the WDFW’s biased and liberal agenda with regards to fisheries management.  The most recent ruling, in regards to lifting all limits on walleye, bass, and catfish, is beyond an irresponsible decision, and only goes to satisfy those politicians, environmentalists, and left-winged activists at the very top.  It’s extremely unfair that a select few can make this decision.

According to the Warm water fisheries manager, this decision was made to protect an “endangered species.”  How could that be?  The salmon runs on the Columbia River have been larger than EVER.  The steelhead runs have been ample.  Furthermore, numerous tests and studies have been done in the past that support that smallmouth bass do not negatively affect salmonids, as is being promulgated by the most recent liberal, extreme environmentalists.  (See: https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=ht...) As stated in the article:

“There is concern that smallmouth bass may negatively impact other native species, specifically salmonids. Smallmouth bass and salmonids have overlapping habitats. However, in 1985 WDFW completed an exhaustive evaluation of the interaction between smallmouth bass and native salmonid populations in the Northwest.  Fletcher (1991) found that there was no clear evidence of reduced salmonid survival as a result of smallmouth bass interaction.”

What recent studies have been performed to emphatically support that bass, walleye, and catfish are so detrimental to salmonids, that ALL limits are lifted?  This does not only seem political; it is also irresponsible!

What evidence do you have that largemouth bass, which spend most of their lives in the sloughs off the river, are a predator of salmonids?  How could this even be possible? 

If smallmouth and walleye are such a detrimental factor to salmonids, how is it that the last 3 years have had the largest returned salmon runs in recorded history?

What sort of science is the department relying on?  It would seem to me, political science, as this decision is based solely on opinion, environmentalism, and liberalism.

Is the department aware of how much revenue is generated in this state with regards to bass fishing and tournaments?  Is the department aware of the number of bass clubs in the state?

In summary, this is extremely disappointing.  As the president of the Columbia Basin Bass Club, I have formed alliances with other clubs in our area including the Richland Rod and Gun Club (a club with a mission focused on conservation!), and we are coming after you.  We are all tired of the unscientific, political, and liberal decisions being made to conserve OUR wildlife.

 

Sincerely,

Benjamin E. Hanes

Permalink Reply by Dana Steiner on March 12, 2016 at 5:57pm

Jeff, you are correct. The problem with letters, e-mails and petitions are that there is not a real person attached. I prefer looking my opponent in the eye. For those that prefer the written approach, your letters and e-mails might be better suited being addressed to the governor, senators, representatives and your local elected officials. I really don't think some flunky at the WDFW really cares about what you think. They are just a puppet in the big scheme.

Jon Sessler has indicated in numerous post that you need to follow the money trail. The "MONEY" is buying these decisions. Cut off the money and you might just start getting the attention of a man concerned about losing his job. Some of you might not like it, but intimidation is also part of the equation. 

Jeff McBroom said:

+1

Unless officials are changed or some "real" heat is put on them this will only get worse. 

Those of you who want to write letters or send emails--go ahead. That is your right and i encourage you to do so. The only issue i see with that is this; does that letter or email make it far enough up the chain of command or organization chart to make a difference?? Or does the final destination of that email or letter end with the very people that really don't give a shit about our opinion??

I would send that letter Ben wrote to every newspaper and tv organization in our state. Maybe it could gain some traction there. Plus WDFW  won't be able to control what happens if a news organization deceides to run with it. 

Jon Sessler said:

Until there is a change in elected officials (the ones who appoint the commission) this path will be followed.

Follow the money, the strings are being pulled in Washington D.C. through the ESA, and  the various environmental groups. The funding of "protecting" endangered species is what this is all about. As long ass WDFW is trying to protect - they get funded.

Bounties are next!

Permalink Reply by Dana Steiner on March 12, 2016 at 9:14pm

So people are blaming bass, walleye and catfish for the predation of salmonids on the Columbia River. Who or what are we to blame for the dismal returns of steelhead and salmon on rivers like the Nooksack, Skagit, Sauk, Samish, Skykomish, Snohomish, Stillaguamish, etc. Last time I checked, there is no scientific data to indicate these type of predatory creatures exist in any significant numbers on these river systems. We can't blame tribal netting, destruction of habitat, pollution or population growth------this would cost to much and not be politically correct.

Permalink Reply by Josh Potter on March 14, 2016 at 9:54am

I was in no way insinuating that you weren't doing your part. I'm was pretty sure you and Ben have sent letter's and or e-mail's. I just know from my experience that I hear a lot of guys talk but very few follow through with any action. I used to always tell those guys, "call WDFW and repeat to them what you just said to me".

 
Dana Steiner said:

Josh,

I've wrote so many letters and sent so many e-mails to politicians and different groups over the years, I should sue them all for carpal tunnel. Now I would just rather kick them in the nuts. We need to attack them back with more then just a pen or a keyboard. And if you think some of them don't monitor this site, you are wrong. So in a way, our bitching on this forum is a form of communicating our disgust with their poor decision making. 

Josh Potter said:

Dana- I hear your frustration but I wouldn't give up on the e-mail writing campaign. You state that the letter writing campaign isn't working or won't work at all. This might be in part due to the fact that many are bitching but might be bitching to the wrong people. An example of that would be the guy who complains on here to a group of his peers but doesn't send an e-mail to the commission.

In the same amount of time it takes to type a complaint on this board, you could type an e-mail to the commission. Many say they have done that but I would bet most haven't.

The squeaky wheel gets the grease in almost all of these deals. I am speaking from experience on this.

In 2010 I was part of a small group that was able to get a game law changed. We felt like everybody we spoke with was in support of our proposal. However, when the WDFW survey open comment period was finished, we were in the minority. It wasn't a landslide type of scenario but our proposal had more against it than for it.

We made certain someone from our group was present at every event possible where we thought we could take another jab. I damn near didn't make it to the NWBASS Potholes event that year because of a Friday night meeting in Colville that didn't end until midnight. These were HEATED meetings. I got to the point where I just started calling our local WDFW guys on a regular basis. We had scientific data to support our argument but WDFW didn't give it any credence because it wasn't "their" data. Long story longer....in the end we actually lost some support and STILL WON!

We got a 4 year trial period for the rule change we wanted. The moral of the story is a group of us raised so much hell that they caved. It did take 2 years but it happened!

Permalink Reply by Dana Steiner on March 14, 2016 at 10:08am

No offense taken in my camp. I was raised to never let a bully take my lunch money, even it meant getting my butt handed to me. I think we are all saying the same thing, some like myself just have a different approach. We need to be directing our discontent to a level higher than the WDFW.
 
Josh Potter said:

I was in no way insinuating that you weren't doing your part. I'm was pretty sure you and Ben have sent letter's and or e-mail's. I just know from my experience that I hear a lot of guys talk but very few follow through with any action. I used to always tell those guys, "call WDFW and repeat to them what you just said to me".

 
Dana Steiner said:

Josh,

I've wrote so many letters and sent so many e-mails to politicians and different groups over the years, I should sue them all for carpal tunnel. Now I would just rather kick them in the nuts. We need to attack them back with more then just a pen or a keyboard. And if you think some of them don't monitor this site, you are wrong. So in a way, our bitching on this forum is a form of communicating our disgust with their poor decision making. 

Josh Potter said:

Dana- I hear your frustration but I wouldn't give up on the e-mail writing campaign. You state that the letter writing campaign isn't working or won't work at all. This might be in part due to the fact that many are bitching but might be bitching to the wrong people. An example of that would be the guy who complains on here to a group of his peers but doesn't send an e-mail to the commission.

In the same amount of time it takes to type a complaint on this board, you could type an e-mail to the commission. Many say they have done that but I would bet most haven't.

The squeaky wheel gets the grease in almost all of these deals. I am speaking from experience on this.

In 2010 I was part of a small group that was able to get a game law changed. We felt like everybody we spoke with was in support of our proposal. However, when the WDFW survey open comment period was finished, we were in the minority. It wasn't a landslide type of scenario but our proposal had more against it than for it.

We made certain someone from our group was present at every event possible where we thought we could take another jab. I damn near didn't make it to the NWBASS Potholes event that year because of a Friday night meeting in Colville that didn't end until midnight. These were HEATED meetings. I got to the point where I just started calling our local WDFW guys on a regular basis. We had scientific data to support our argument but WDFW didn't give it any credence because it wasn't "their" data. Long story longer....in the end we actually lost some support and STILL WON!

We got a 4 year trial period for the rule change we wanted. The moral of the story is a group of us raised so much hell that they caved. It did take 2 years but it happened!

Permalink Reply by Josh Potter on March 14, 2016 at 10:22am

I was gone at a baseball tournament all weekend and didn't have a chance to read any of this until just now.

Banding together in groups was really the only way we got the attention we needed to enact change.

At the time I was the President of a local branch of a national conservation group. The other groups were all local sportsman's clubs and there was also a group of outfitter's that banded together. I think one of the organizations was called the Pend O'rielle Sportsman's Alliance or something like that. I don't know if they were even a "official" non-profit organization or not but they were probably the loudest voice of the bunch.

Eventually we made enough noise that WDFW decided they would get all of the interested parties in one room and "have it out" so to speak. In the end I think we got our way because those opposed were all individuals and those for the change were mostly organized.

Our deal was a rule that only affected 2 GMU's at the state level. I don't know how affective we would have been if we were fighting a Federal issue. However, to have even a puncher's chance at this fight I would think that efforts would have to be coordinated.

We started by organization leaders coming together. In this case it seems like bass club leaders would be the first place to start. You might even be able to get other "sportsman's groups" to support you as well. 

Permalink Reply by Ryan Higgins on March 14, 2016 at 1:57pm

Unfortunately your 1985 study may be trumped by more recent studies that do indicate at certain times of the year Smallmouth Bass have a serious impact on juvenile Salmonid escapement.  The studies indicate that the biggest threat to the Juveniles is in the smaller more abundant Smallmouth and the major area of concern is the Yakima river.  They do further prove that the majority of mainstem Smallmouth (and Walleye and Catfish for that matter) pose very little threat to juvenile Salmonids.  This is why when this was brought up last year I advocated to maintain a slot limit to put pressure on the smaller fish which are the most abundant and do the most damage to the Salmonid population.  Even a slot limit with no quantity limit is better than a free for all.

http://www.ykfp.org/publications/SpeciesInteractions/Fritts%20and%2...

ftp://ftp.pcouncil.org/pub/Salmon%20EFH/34-Zimmerman_1999.pdf

Ben Hanes said:

This is my pissed off response.  I would encourage anyone to literally copy it, maybe change a few words, and send it to the following people: bruce.bolding@dfw.wa.gov;larry.phillips@dfw.wa.gov; charmane.ashbrook@dfw.wa.gov

I would encourage someone to come up with a more political response, because all I want to do is get my rifle and go on a manhunt.

Anyways, here it is:

To Whom It May Concern,

As an angler for the last 29 years in the State of Washington, I am extremely concerned about the WDFW’s biased and liberal agenda with regards to fisheries management.  The most recent ruling, in regards to lifting all limits on walleye, bass, and catfish, is beyond an irresponsible decision, and only goes to satisfy those politicians, environmentalists, and left-winged activists at the very top.  It’s extremely unfair that a select few can make this decision.

According to the Warm water fisheries manager, this decision was made to protect an “endangered species.”  How could that be?  The salmon runs on the Columbia River have been larger than EVER.  The steelhead runs have been ample.  Furthermore, numerous tests and studies have been done in the past that support that smallmouth bass do not negatively affect salmonids, as is being promulgated by the most recent liberal, extreme environmentalists.  (See: https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=ht...) As stated in the article:

“There is concern that smallmouth bass may negatively impact other native species, specifically salmonids. Smallmouth bass and salmonids have overlapping habitats. However, in 1985 WDFW completed an exhaustive evaluation of the interaction between smallmouth bass and native salmonid populations in the Northwest.  Fletcher (1991) found that there was no clear evidence of reduced salmonid survival as a result of smallmouth bass interaction.”

What recent studies have been performed to emphatically support that bass, walleye, and catfish are so detrimental to salmonids, that ALL limits are lifted?  This does not only seem political; it is also irresponsible!

What evidence do you have that largemouth bass, which spend most of their lives in the sloughs off the river, are a predator of salmonids?  How could this even be possible? 

If smallmouth and walleye are such a detrimental factor to salmonids, how is it that the last 3 years have had the largest returned salmon runs in recorded history?

What sort of science is the department relying on?  It would seem to me, political science, as this decision is based solely on opinion, environmentalism, and liberalism.

Is the department aware of how much revenue is generated in this state with regards to bass fishing and tournaments?  Is the department aware of the number of bass clubs in the state?

In summary, this is extremely disappointing.  As the president of the Columbia Basin Bass Club, I have formed alliances with other clubs in our area including the Richland Rod and Gun Club (a club with a mission focused on conservation!), and we are coming after you.  We are all tired of the unscientific, political, and liberal decisions being made to conserve OUR wildlife.

 

Sincerely,

Benjamin E. Hanes

Permalink Reply by Tom Nelson on March 14, 2016 at 2:19pm

Hey gang,

I've been lurking a bit and have not posted but I need to ask y'all...

In the face of ESA listed salmonid stocks and with the Columbia being one of the largest producers of salmon, is it a big surprise that this watershed would be managed by WDFW for native salmonid production?

Flame away if you must but I'm honestly wondering what this board's thoughts are on this issue.

Thanks!

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• …
• 6
• Next ›
• Page