How do you really feel about your fish/wildlife agency??

Hoosier Daddy · 01-22-2001, 08:17 AM

Most of you don't seem too shy about talking about this. But I have seen a few posts on this and other boards that lead me to believe that either a lot of people are really ******, or the people that are ****** are more vocal than the rest. So, here's the question. (I don't mean this to evolve into a shouting match either, just a yes or no, maybe a brief explanation would be best.)

Do you think your fish and wildlife agencies (Oregon and Washington, NOT FEDS

) overall do a good job, or not??? This can be related to individuals you have met or the departments as a whole, or both.

My opinion has been pretty obvious in most of my posts. I think the Oregon folks do a pretty good job with what they have. The department itself has some problems, but most of their field group are great folks.

anybody??

Phish_on · 01-22-2001, 09:27 AM

I guess I'll bite on this bait ...

I think the ODFW is in an especially hard position with a lot of pressure from competing forces - trying to protect native fish while providing "angling opportunities" and complying with Fed & interstate requirements, etc. etc.

I have not had a lot of interaction with the agency. I have made some comments during rule reviews, ODFW seems to make a very good effort to provide public information, and actually take the comments into consideration.

The computerized licensing system seems very handy, though I question the use of Social Security numbers as an ID number. I had a heck of a time when I took my son's friend out salmon fishing, trying to get a tag at Fred Meyer, calling long-distance trying to get his SSN ! Mom wasn't home, Dad couldn't find it ... it turned out to be a two-hour ordeal - no SSN, no tag. I learned my lesson, anyway. You can't argue with "Windows."

My only other contact with ODFW is the fish checkers, they always seem friendly (sometimes very tired) and concerned entirely with gathering information rather than enforcement.

I sometimes question the reasoning behind certain regs, but I give them the benefit of the doubt and follow the rules. AND I know which fin is the "adipose"

Barnyard · 01-22-2001, 09:43 AM

Guess I gotta put in my .02. I believe the Feds are the biggest problem in our fish recovery. Note the unequal Spring Chinook allotment. While attending a meeting on the Cowlitz relicenseing agreement with Tacoma power, the director of Wa. fish & Wildlife said " We (WDFW) are just an advisory board for NMFS we have no power....What's that tell you?

lippee · 01-22-2001, 10:11 AM

Oregon I believe is doing the best they can do. Washington I don't know.

WaterDog · 01-22-2001, 10:57 AM

I think they are doing a pretty good job given budget problems and such. I think the computerized tag system works pretty well. They are caught in the middle between the feds and us on alot of issues. Most of the staff I have talked to have always been respectful and understanding.

All I ask is when they set regulations they use common sense and treat every stretch of the same river equally.

------------------
EAT, SLEEP, FISH!

kinaye · 01-22-2001, 02:38 PM

In Washington I have allways felt the best work of the bio's is quickly hidden if the work done dosent look like what the politico machine wants it to look like. The people making the decisions are getting their pockets lined by people who don't allways have the best interest of the fish mind.
Other then that they show the same lack of imagination and shortsightedness as other branches of the government. K

Clamman · 01-22-2001, 03:18 PM

I think the two articles that appeared in the sports section of the Oregonian, one by Meehan on Saturday and one by Monroe on Sunday really put this whole ODFW vs Legislature in prospective. Check it out, both should be on the Oregonian web site.

ISG

Hoosier Daddy · 01-22-2001, 03:32 PM

I saw the Bill Monroe article, good stuff. Much better than Lars Larson and Ferrioli hammering Greer on KXL last week.

Hoosier Daddy · 01-22-2001, 03:33 PM

Hey gang, great responses.

My only question is this...
If the fishermen of the state hate ODFW so much (as legislators like Ted Ferrioli seem to believe), where the hell are they?????

I know we've only gotten a few posts so far, but they all seem mostly positive. Thanks for the input so far.

fishbait · 01-22-2001, 04:30 PM

I'd like to make a cast....

ODFW generally performaning OK, Indivudaly employees have been responsive when I have spoke with them. I believe that they care, both personally and as a department.

Someone else said it, currently facing a problem that was 100 years in making.

TheRogue · 01-22-2001, 05:40 PM

I'll chime in on this one. My best friend is an incredibly avid hunter (some would say insane)...and his is still very distraught over the special tag drawing scandal. He very loudly voiced his opinions to every single adress and phone number that he could get a hold of, calling for criminal charges and firings immediately. Calmer heads prevailed, and I think things were handled pretty well in the end.

It's been politically correct for quite a while to trash any form of government, deserved or not. Regardless of this trashing, I believe the ODFW has done a fine job in dealing with the blasting of the Republican Legislature from one side and the Democratic Governor on the other. I feel for Mr. Greer, and wish him the best of luck in a career path somewhere with less pressure and better pay. Shame on you, politicians.

01-22-2001, 08:14 PM

Lots of good takes on this question; and I agree with them. I will add one negative and one positive. The negative: I do believe the ODFW and their biiologists knew about the problems ahead for native steelhead and other anadromous runs long ago and should have been more ascertive with the fishing public and other Gov. officials in stepping in with such as C&R only on native steelhead much sooner than they did. On the recent positive side, and a trend I hope will continue: It has been the ODFW and WDFW that have jointly sued the NMFS/Fed.Gov./Col. Tribal Fishing Commission on behalf of us sportfishers to first keep us fishing for the Columbia fall chinook and now to get a fairer allocation of the abundance of Col. hatchery spring chinook, and co-inciding ESA impact percatage on the native fish. They are in agreement that the NMFS/Col. Tribal Comm. have been very unfair in the allocation negotiations and mandates. - RT

01-22-2001, 09:08 PM

I was a little distraught to hear that our local ODFW gathered fish from the fish traps on the siletz and took them to the local meat locker for processing to distribute to local tribal members.Native fish included. Would also like comments if anyone knows anything about the palmer creek broodstock program,I have heard the last planting of these fish was two years ago.

garyk · 01-22-2001, 11:12 PM

I've worked with, lobbied occasionally, and sometimes opposed ODFW for nearly 20 years.

The employees are largely above reproach.

Oft times I've noticed that those screaming complaints the loudest, (and I don't mean just this board but the public in general), are entirely lacking in any understanding of the political and process realm in which ODFW operates and is governed by.

As posted above, I too believe ODFW does about as well as expected. Particularly given the long-term hostility of the Oregon Legistlature and resulting lack of financial support.

On the fish side, ODFW is struggling with a crisis that was a hundred years in the making.

If you want ODFW to be a stronger agency and able to do more then call your Sen. and Rep. in Salem. The squeaky wheel gets that dollars and when the Legistlators hear only from those beating up on the agency it makes it easier for them to deny funding.

Mike H · 01-22-2001, 11:17 PM

shuttlebug,

Where did you get the idea that ODFW is taking native fish to local tribal members? I find that very hard to believe.

Mike H

WheresMyBobber · 01-22-2001, 11:43 PM

Good points Gary.

Letting our legislators know how we feel on issues can make a difference, and most of them actually listen to their constituents input. They may not always agree, or vote how we want them to, but unless we make the effort to let them know how we feel, they just plug along the best they know how (I won't get the partisan issue going again).

Writing is good, setting up an appointment and going to the Capitol to actually talk to them is better, but phone calls are tough because of their busy schedules. You can also call their offices in Salem and ask to be notified of any Bills that relate to ODFW funding (or any other issue you're interested in).

Here's a link to the Oregon Legislature that has contact information for all legislators, and a search tool to find them if you don't know who they are. I encourage all people to contact their Senators and Reps. Along with letting them know how you feel, it lets them know we're watching, and we care how they vote.
http://www.leg.state.or.us/

Fishplay · 01-23-2001, 01:34 AM

I know I don't follow the political process as close as I should and have never attended a fisheries meeting. So I try not to ***** too much when decissions are made that I disagree with. I do beleive the States do a good job considering the complexities of the issues these days. I do question the intellegence of the recent change to our Oregon bottomfish reg's however. Limiting the the total catch to one canary rockfish does nothing to protect the species in question. Anyone who's been bottomfishing knows that once these fish are reeled to the surface they don't survive due to the change in atmospheric presure and the result it has on the fish's swim bladder. I think a better solution would have been to impose a 'first fifteen fish caught regardless of size' rule. The black bass limit works because they are not generally caught at the depths you find canaries at. As it stands there is nothing stopping the fishing public from throwing back dead fish all day.
Does anyone else have an opinion on this that may make me feel better?

------------------
FISH!........GET IN THE BOAT!!!!!

[This message has been edited by Fishplay (edited 01-23-2001).]

01-23-2001, 05:18 AM

Mike H, Right from the butchers mouth. pretty much first hand info.

Clamman · 01-23-2001, 05:35 AM

Fishplay,

You asked and answered your question in the same post. You can limit the Canary rockfish catch by fishing in areas and with methods that don't have/catch them. Bottomfish biology is still very slim as far as life history goes. Better to error on the side of caution rather than a "Salmon Crisis" all over agian (though that might be to late).

ISG

Hoosier Daddy · 01-23-2001, 07:40 AM

Shuttlebug: who was the butcher? Got a name or where they work? I think in the past it has not been too uncommon for post-spawn hatchery fish to be given to tribal members on the "usual and accustomed fishing grounds" stuff. I really would be surprised to find that natives were being given. Maybe unmarked fish that returned to the hatchery?? May tie into federal regulations if so, similar to the Alsea situation a couple years ago. I don't know, but I'd really like to know who told you they were giving natives away.