What group best serves the interest of sports fishing?

Which of these groups in your opinion best serves the interest of sports anglers?

[Pete]

NSIA

[slabhunter]

Liz Hamilton did an outstanding job at the last three salmon/sturgeon meetings I attended! NSIA

[ 02-29-2004, 02:36 PM: Message edited by: slabhunter ]

[freespool]

NSIA,they have people that get paid to fight for sportsmans rights,I like that.


salmon hugger

[David Johnson]

My vote was for "other" and that other would be NSIA.


By working with politicians localy and in D.C. this group has pushed for funding for fin clipping and open seasons. If it wasn't for them none of us would be fishing for Columbia springers, coho or fall fish and the gill netters would have more fish. That's just one area they work on, they also work on issues from the Rogue River to Puget sound.

The NW Steelheaders have done a great job with education and some local issues too.

[David Johnson]

NSIA,they have people that get paid to fight for sportsmans rights,I like that.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">They are paid by their membership that includes local guides, Fisherman's Marine , Luhr Jensen, GI Joes, Steven's Marine and many, many others.

[Hawg Caller]

NSIA- from what I've seen and heard Liz Hamilton-by the way is she married ? my kinda gal.

[Straydog]

NSIA beyond a doubt, in my mind.

What David Johnson says about NSIA is right on the money!

[Full Freezer]

NSIA - Liz is awesome to watch in action!

Go get 'em girl. [img]graemlins/applause.gif[/img]

[AuntyM]

Wild Steelhead Coalition.

[boater]

washington trout

[brdkdg]

Yes Hawg Caller, Liz is married. She is also a very good fisher person.

[Flatfish]

It depends on the issue.

Mark and the dog.

[Thumper]

NSIA

[ssteelheadsteve]

Clear winner is Oregon Angler

[spinner fisher]

I voted for other, and I believe the group that has done the most is NSIA. There are also some other great organiztions out there like the North West steelheaders and Fish First! These groups truly all receive alot of recognition.

[spinner fisher]

Correction on last reply, These groups receive very little recognition, they need alot more!

[Mojo]

In the Pacific Northwest, probably NSIA. Nationwide, you have to say TU. Now the question was stated "What group best serves the interest of sports fishing?". Maybe I'm reading too much in to this. I think they all help, and KUDO's to each and every one. Stew, join 'em all!

[Born to be Wild]

I really don’t know much or anything about the Association of Northwest Steelheaders or Tillamook Anglers although I tend to believe Tillamook Anglers probably leans too much or relies too much on hatchery fish.

Trout Unlimited, Oregon Trout, and Native Fish Society are all too radical and not in the best interest of the average fishermen.
I personally battled two of those three groups last year as they opposed the opening of the Silcoos/Talkenitch wild coho fishery for ridiculous reasoning.
They lost, sound science and management won.

By working with politicians localy and in D.C. this group has pushed for funding for fin clipping and open seasons. If it wasn't for them none of us would be fishing for Columbia springers, coho or fall fish and the gill netters would have more fish. That's just one area they work on, they also work on issues from the Rogue River to Puget sound.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">By fall fish you mean Columbia River fall fish don’t you?
I know NSIA had nothing to do with all the great coastal wild Chinook fisheries.
Also I had heard NSIA take credit for getting the hatchery coho fin clipped years ago but have heard since that wasn’t necessarily true?
I have to question the accuracy of your statement David.

NSIA has done some good things for fishermen regarding hatchery fish anyway but I have seen some moves by that organization that are not in the best interest of wild fish or the timber industry.
But as in any political group or politician you can’t make everyone happy.
If you prioritize hatchery fisheries, you are not prioritizing wild fish.

I voted "other" and did not pick a group as I’m not familiar with a group that is both non- extreme and also favors managing our valuable wild fish for future sustainable wild fisheries.

Dan

[SalmonSeason]

NSIA
I just wish this many folks could have or would have been at the last and previous compact meetings. NSIA was there! I sure hope more and more folks here put their .02 or more into writing to the approp. officials in an effort to increase fish#'s and fisherman/persons opportunities

Originally posted by Mojo:
In the Pacific Northwest, probably NSIA. Nationwide, you have to say TU. Now the question was stated "What group best serves the interest of sports fishing?". Maybe I'm reading too much in to this. I think they all help, and KUDO's to each and every one. Stew, join 'em all!

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">I belong to three of the groups that I listed and a couple of the ones that others listed in the thread.
Yes you probably are reading too much into the poll I just wanted to see who people on ifish feel is the group or organization that does the most for them.

[AuntyM]

OH! Well, then I say Ifish. Ifish is the right answer huh? :grin:

[fineline]

If the steelheaders had not been doing what they have for the last 30 years, the industry would have gone bust a long time ago. Nsia serves the industry. Sport fishing benefits from industry reps looking out for their interests. Liz and company have really done a fine job of taking care of business. I can remember working as a steelheader with other steelheaders to create a Tillimook bubble fishery, wildfish policies, fin clipping or marking of fish to allow a selective harvest of hatchery salmon and steelhead when at that time it was impossible due to all sorts of fins being clipped for various reasons from California to Alaska. Who do you think has been spending countless volunteer hours working to enhance and protect our sport when the industry folks were unorganized? Find the funds for full time staff for the Steelheaders and there won't be any stopping them.

[Born to be Wild]

OH! Well, then I say Ifish. Ifish is the right answer huh?
Aunty M

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">

Aunty M, I thought of ifish and meant to post ifish as being a possibility since there is so much info here and a lot of folks get educated on this site regarding all aspects of fishing.

I had a long telephone conversation with Bill Bakke of Native Fish Society today and even after I pointed out when he returned my message that I was the one at the meeting that opposed him and Katlyn Lovell at the joint ODFW/NOAA meeting regarding opening up a wild coho fishery on Siltcoos/Talkenitch , he told me; "that's what makes the world go around".

As I said it turned into a lenghly conversation and I got to know Bill much better and always have had great respect for his website.

If I could change my vote, I would have to vote Native Fish Society and the reason is that he is not opposed to hatchery fish as with myself, but he doesn't want them in situations where they are spawning with wild fish and screwing up the wild fish as we have seen documented in most places.

Bill started advocating wild fish and hatchery problems back in the late 70's I believe.
It was when most had a closed ear and mocked or shunned him and the newer data coming in on hatchery/wild problems. (That's just my guess based on experience, not Bill's words).

I don't share all the same opinions as Bill but he has at least tried informing the public of the problems of hatchery fish in the early stages of data collection and should be commended for that.
He was the "pioneer".
Of course there are those that just want to turn their head and keep on catching "brat's" as long as someone will decide to finance them!

That's the problem with NSIA.
No long term solution for sustainable fisheries.
Just the same old political BS fighting whoever gets in the way of harvesting those precious hatchery fish.
As I said promoting or putting most of your eggs in the hatchery basket in selective fisheries is not going to solve the various problems we have!
It's only a "quick-fix" or bandaid that your physician might prescribe hiding the real problems but treating the symtoms!

Sorry for the rant.

I will get together with Bill at a later time when convienent and learn more about this interesting individual.

Dano

[Jerry Dove]

Does it really matter??!! As long as we all work together for the same cause. When it comes to bring the troups together, who does it best? ifish.net, RIGHT?

[Straydog]

NSIA is an intervener to the suit to remove Savage Rapids Dam on the Rogue. The removal of Savage Rapids Dam is estimated to increase fish numbers by up to 22%. SRD is not concerned if it kills hatchery fish or wild fish. NSIA is involved to help the wild fish as much as the hatchery fish.

NSIA's mission is "Dedicated to the preservation, restoration and enhancement of sport fisheries and businesses dependent on them." Does anyone think "preservation, restoration and enchancement" is directed exclusively to hatchery fish?????

NSIA was one of only a few groups to speak out in favor of the Siskiyou Wildlands National Monument which was proposed to preserve the headwaters and watersheds of the Illinois River, the Chetco River, the Pistol River, Euchere Creek and Hunter Creek in an effort to preserve some of last of the best wild fish habitat in Southern Oregon.

Anyone that believes the efforts of NSIA are limited to only hatchery fish and their issues are not informed in terms of what NSIA does in the big picture.

I think it would serve all interested in the future of fishing better if people were to learn what NSIA is really about before making divisive statements about them.

[ 03-01-2004, 09:17 PM: Message edited by: Straydog ]

[Born to be Wild]

OK Straydog, I will give my honest opinion of what I have seen in Liz Hamilton (who I personally like) and spill my guts to some extent.

NSIA promotes “selective fisheries” which is not in the best interest of fishermen.
It is not a sustainable fishery and is detrimental to “long term” natural wild fish fisheries.

NSIA ignores the problematic hatchery issues but endorses or attacks other special interest groups, i.e. forestry even when they are not the main problem as was such the case of the Tillamook fishery.
They endorsed the Tillamook Rainforest Coalition that every biologist I talked to (approx. 8 or so) said was extreme and overkill and unnecessary.
A large percentage of timber workers are avid sportsmen and support local sporting goods businesses and other local businesses.
Ya know Straydog, they even buy tackle, guns and ammunition.

I ran into Liz at a WDFW/NSIA meeting up in Olympia a couple months ago.
Liz the political “puppet” she is gave a few more than subtle hints to Jeff Koenings (WDFW Director) that they should follow suit of Oregon to get the broodstock programs going there as well to make up slack time in the late winter months (Feb.-March).
Now Washington is not known to be hurting from a lack of hatchery fish!

Liz’s politics were in disregard of the already hurting wild steelhead in Washington State but directed at possible extra $dollars for the folks that sell sporting goods and guided trips.

I had another private conversation with Liz one night on the phone and she asked me to not mention it on the internet because it was regarding a wild/hatchery issue and she didn’t want to concern or scare folks but keep it quiet in hopes that she could resolve it behind the scenes.
Out of respect for Liz and even though I knew about it prior to talking to Liz, I won’t mention it here.

So you see Straydog, Liz and NSIA will fight for more fish including fighting dams, loggers, etc., but will not attempt to correct or recognize a lot of the problems with hatchery fish or take on the destructive “gill-netters”!

So I hope that most fishermen will recognize NSIA as another political group that serves only special interest groups (sporting goods and guides) and that could be the possible reason that most Oregon Charters don’t support NSIA.

NSIA is working backwards in seeking out hatchery fisheries instead of resolving the mess we are in.

Dano

[ 03-01-2004, 11:05 PM: Message edited by: Born to be Wild ]

[garyk]

I'll just quickly interject here that NSIA also took and still takes a leadership position for advocating the removal of the lower Snake River dams. And that, friends, is all about restoring the Columbia and its wild fish.

[AuntyM]

BTBW,

I think you're on the right path with your criticisms. The reason I can't jump on board with Bakke and the Native Fish Society is that they represent the same thing to me as Washington Trout. Unwilling to answer questions in a public forum. That would be why I originally selected the Wild Steelhead Coalition. They will answer tough questions and have thoroughly done their homework. Getting WSR statewide was a big win for the fish!

Once you examine WSC positions, actions and approach, you realize they are sport fishermen (no, not a bunch of elitist fly guys, they are a balanced group of good ol fishermen.) trying to do the best thing for wild steelhead. I doubt you will see them ignore other salmonid species that need help as they grow.

Were we at the same meeting in Olympia?

[Straydog]

Originally posted by Born to be Wild:

1. That's the problem with NSIA.
No long term solution for sustainable fisheries.

2. NSIA ignores the problematic hatchery issues

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">These are inaccurate if not irresponsible statements. Did you not read about NSIA's involvment in Watershed protection for Wild Fish? Is their involvment in Tillamook Forests, Dams and Watersheds not about a "long term solution for sustainable fisheries"?

Since you are not a member and I assume not kept up to date on all of the issues NSIA is involved in, I would be curious to know from what basis of fact you make these allegations.

Further, NSIA is an INDUSTRY group. Does it not make sense that an industry group would work to support and advance the industry they represent? I sit on a BLM advisory committee with the Vice President of the Southern Oregon Timber Industry Associaton and have never heard him lobby for fish nor do I expect to. However, I do find agreement with him on both fish and timber issues at times.

Further, Liz Hamilton works under the direction and guidance of a board. To reduce her to a "political puppet" in an attempt to discredit her is again, irresponible. She stands for what her board directs her to stand for. Further, without the support of Liz, the board that guides her and all of the businesses that support NSIA, (you seemingly have no idea how many good, hard working business people you discredit in your bad mouthing of NSIA and Liz) there would be no sport fishing to speak of in many places and people like your brother, your good friend Brad and thousands of others would likely be looking for work in an economy that isn't providing many jobs.

I for one, as an avid fisher person and succesful wholesaler of Sporting Goods very much appreciate what Liz and NSIA have done for Sportfishing and the industry it provides.

I was first introduced to NSIA about nine years ago when I was introduced to it by Jim Martin who had recently retired as head of ODFW and Buzz Ramsey, both of whom have invested and sacraficed countless dollars and hours so that you have fish to catch and your brother and thousands of others like him have jobs.

Now are those such an misdirected goals to have?

[ 03-02-2004, 07:21 AM: Message edited by: Straydog ]

[Born to be Wild]

Like I said Straydog, NSIA is about politics and short term fisheries, not long term solutions.
I like Liz and I appreciate some of the things NSIA has done in the past but I disagree with a lot of their political moves and can't appreciate them for that reason.

Wish you would leave my brother out of this but he would have a job anyway regardless of NSIA.

You said it best when you said; "NSIA is an INDUSTRY group".
Their priorty is money and hatchery fish, not wild fish.
They pick and choose here and there and want the best of both worlds but it doesn't work that way.
As I said, NSIA is not looking at the overall longterm solutions but rather a bandaid.

Also Straydog, why is it I have never seen NSIA at the annual Ocean Salmon Industry Group meetings in Newport?
Do us ocean sportsfishermen not spend enough money on divers and misc. tackle?
Would be willing to bet that they attend meetings regarding Buoy 10?

Politics are politics Straydog and we will never agree on them.
You have your opinion and I and others have ours.

Dan

[RiverRogue]

Attended the compact meeting in OC. Liz and NSIA did a great job. NSIA&gt;&gt;&gt;yes

[freespool]

Funny you say NSIA is only interested in industry and politics. Did you know they are fighting to reduce gillnet by catch mortallities? Those would be the natives I beleave. Politics is what fuels change in our democratic society. So don't you think it prudent for NSIA to become political? It looks to me like they took a page out of the gillnetters play book. After all they have been very sucessful in making the tail wag the dog for years. No organization is everything to everybody,but they do stand for a lot of good things,plus they seem sucessful in doing so. Liz Hamilton does a wonderful job as executive dirrector and spokesperson for this sportsmans orgaization,she is an avid fisher and she has a degree in fisheries biology which in my mind is a big plus. NSIA gives us the biggest bang for our buck,please support this sportfishing organization. Also get involved in the issues facing sportfishing,attend the meetings and give them your opinion.


salmon hugger

[Straydog]

As you say Dan, we all have opinions and I have to say, it feels very good to be standing proudly within the majority opinion, based on the responses posted on this thread.

Well I guess I should have listed NSIA as a choice :blush: Totally slipped my mind :whazzup:
Oh well leaving it off gave some people the opportunity to include them and other people the opportunity to comment on them...over and over again

[Kentucky Hog Hunter]

#1 - ANWS
#2 - NSIA

[ 03-02-2004, 03:45 PM: Message edited by: Kentucky Hog Hunter ]

[Born to be Wild]

Whatever Stew.
Straydog addressed me and now Freespool and now you.

“No organization is everything to everybody” as Freespool said.
Most of you are pro-hatchery folks and NSIA is perfect for you as they promote selective fisheries.
I do not as discussed in the broodstock thread, I think it was a poor decision starting a new hatchery program in the Nestucca River and should have been managed for wild fish.
That's the big difference between me and NSIA.

Of course I expect NSIA to be political Freespool as are all the organizations that Stew put on the poll.
I felt it was a bad move NSIA endorsing the Tillamook Rainforest Coallition.
I feel NSIA would have spent there energy and time better attempting to get rid of the nets and maybe they wouldn’t have this on going battle with the gill-netters.
I heard that Liz was disappointed in the opening of the Siltcoos/Talkenitch wild coho fishery that was biologically sound and yet she is pushing for more hatchery programs.

So stand proud Straydog but I do not feel alone with the couple negative NSIA emails I have received from other ifisher’s.

I’m done with this thread and don’t feel it necessary to explain my opinions again; over and over again. :grin:

Dano

[boater]

Originally posted by AuntyM:
The reason I can't jump on board with Bakke and the Native Fish Society is that they represent the same thing to me as Washington Trout. Unwilling to answer questions in a public forum.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">the reason i "can" jump on board with these groups is that they represent the "fish" and i think the question your waiting on for ramon to answer is how would washington trout operate a hatchery ?? i personaly could care less how WT would operate a hatchery because they dont write the laws pertaining to hatcherys they try to make the state follow them and i personaly dont think thats a bad thing

[Jerry Dove]

Dano. You know some times I think you just like to see your writing on the screen. You say one thing today and tomorrow you forget what you said and say something else. You said in an early post that you did not know anything about the NWSH or the Tillamook Anglers, but in the past you have raved on about both groups, Me thinks you speak out of both sides of your mouth. I for one think that NISA does a great job!! I don't always agree with some of there positions, ie the rain forest coalition and the Tillamook Forest. As I said earler, as long as we all work together, there is no stoping us. Gee did I say those things, I'm sorry, well maybe not.

[Born to be Wild]

Jerry, you must have me confused with someone else.
I don't even know what NWSH is (I suspect NW Steelheaders?) or know hardly anything at all about the Tillamook Anglers.
Actually I know next to nothing about either organization.

That's the honest to God truth Jerry.

I would venture to guess that Tillamook Anglers is a localized pro-hatchery group in that area and that is definately not me.

Again Jerry, I'm not anti-hatchery, just anti-hatchery where you don't need them or better off without them.

And you are correct that Liz and NSIA has done some good things for fishermen, but there are some political moves or the overall picture that doesn't satisfy me.

Dano

[Springer43]

1- NSIA
2- NW Steelheaders

These two groups are essentialy working towards the same goals. Both groups get the big picture but as a consequence, occasionally seem to be at odds with limited perspecive folks. On the whole, they are the best thing we have going for us and our fisheries!

[billsan]

Steelheaders provide opportunities for anglers to learn about fishing and to share the joys of fishing. They also provide a balanced legislative agenda. Oregon Anglers is great for pro-hatchery views. NSIA is right on top of Columbia and business matters. TU works for good genetics. Steelheaders do a lot for habitat improvement, in addition to the watershed councils. Thank heavens for all of them.

[AuntyM]

the reason i "can" jump on board with these groups is that they represent the "fish" and i think the question your waiting on for ramon to answer is how would washington trout operate a hatchery ?? i personaly could care less how WT would operate a hatchery because they dont write the laws pertaining to hatcherys they try to make the state follow them and i personaly dont think thats a bad thing

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">First Boater, that was not the question. Ramon was asked to answer the question "what KIND of hatchery would Washington Trout approve of?" He said he would do some research months and months ago and has yet to answer the question as he agreed to do. I am not going to forget about it, NOR will I hound the man over it.

Also, their original case was over the HGMPs not being finished as required. What they actually accomplished was more delay by adding another layer of public comment.

Second, NEWSFLASH! Ramon and I sort of buried the hatchet and I have no desire to dig it back up. I don't think he does either. He assumed I was against wild fish. I was against the lawsuit, but mostly against the injunction to stop spring smolt planting in most Puget Sound rivers.

As more evidence is discovered, you can bet WT's case will get stronger about hatchery impacts and I wish them all the best, because I think they will need it in light of the recent 9th Circuit Court decision, commercials that that would willingly wipe out wild fish and tribes that won't even fin clip without a gun to their heads.

I do NOT like any group that does most of their work behind the scenes and tells people it must be that way so they don't compromise their work. If you think that applies to only WT, you'd be VERY mistaken. Which I know you're not Boater. You usually know far more than you will divulge. :tongue:

The Wild Steelhead Coalition has not operated that way so far. That makes me have more faith in them than other groups. They are conservation/environment minded while still being fishermen/women.

[drhall99]

Sounds like NSIA and NW Steelheaders (and a few others) are groups that need our support. It's unfortunate that we, as anglers can't even get through this thread without a major disagreement. Instead of fighting, maybe we, as fishermen who love the sport, should do our best to support the groups that fit our beliefs the most and focus our energy where it will help the most.

Doug

[Todd]

I don't think that any one group represents everything that any conscientious angler ought to be concerned about.

While I am the VP of Political and Legal Affairs for the Wild Steelhead Coalition, I also belong to three other organizations, and work weekly with representatives from as many as a dozen more.

Things I see as issues:

1. Opportunity for sportfishermen

This is addressed by working on all the other issues on this list, but more generally is done by addressing things through various channels, i.e., politically, legally, work on the ground, and combinations of all those. No one group I know, except perhaps TU, uses all those channels.

2. Wild fish advocacy

This is accomplished by various types of groups, some being fishing groups, some being conservation groups, some being preseveration groups.

3. Commercial fishing issues

Mainly addressed politically and legally, but from very different and complementary angles. The WSC does it from a limiting wild steelhead bycatch angle...NSIA does is from a greater allocation of harvestable fish for sportfishermen and the businesses that depend on them, as does the NMTA. WT, OT, and NFS do it from the ESA impacts on wild salmonids, steelhead and salmon, angle. PSA and RFA do it from a sportfishing opportunity angle.

All of these are important, and all need to be done, and none of these groups do it from all the necessary angles.

4. Hydro issues

Kind of the same as #3, all the groups address it, but from very different angles.

5. Habitat issues

Some groups spend time planting trees, some picking up garbage, some spreading carcasses, some battling the BPA, or counties, or using the SMA or GMA, or the ESA, or working for funding to fix habitat that's still salvageable, or protecting habitat that's still pristine.

Again, all necessary, and many different groups all work on it to get all the different angles covered.

Sometimes the same groups that band together on, say, the Col. R. net fishery issues, may be on opposite sides of the table when the discussion of proper hatchery techniques comes up. Three or four groups may even represent four non-compatible positions.

In an effort to protect wild fish, some groups may advocate for better selective fisheries, while some may advocate for less hatchery fish. The overall goal is the same, though, because there is no opportunity if wild fish get pushed too far...we'll have no hatchery fish or fishing.

With all these competing needs and philosophies, how does the sportfishing community come together and take the big chunk of political power we have by the horns and wield it with all of our numbers behind it?

To me it's obvious, the various groups have to agree to agree on some things, and agree to disagree on others. Unfortunately, it's just as obvious that most of the folks in the groups, including many here and on other BB's, don't agree to disagree, and also agree to just antagonize each other on everything because they don't agree on everything.

It's stupid and counterproductive, and makes the tribes and commercial fishermen jump for joy.

Fish on...

Todd

Todd why is there no regional representation by the Wild Steelhead Coalition down here? I think it would be welcome!