Would you pay into a lottery to take a trophy native fish?

[Jennie@ifish]

Bill and I were thinking about this.
This may be very unpopular... but I'm brave enough to introduce it, I think!
... think of the times you have caught a huge native fish.
Would you pay to be able to keep one, as part of a money raising lottery?
Not everyone would win the right.
You pay, say 5.00 into a lottery, that would pay to support our hatcheries.
A certain number would be notified and sent a tag to keep one for that year.
Is this a good idea, or a rotten one?
Jen

[Jennie@ifish]

Remember... I am not advocating this, I am just initiating discussion on this.
It could be a limited entry... Details haven't been thought out.
I guess they do this on some rivers somewhere.
Of course, numbers of winning tickets would depend on the run size predictions...
Interesting topic... Not sure how I feel about it.
J

[skrimmy]

Come on Jen.....don't sit on the fence! Tell us which side you're on, don't be afraid! Hey, I'm for it. They have lotteries for the hunters, don't they? As long as they limit the number of native fish that could be taken, trophy or not, and the $$ goes towards hatcheries, what's wrong with that idea? I like it.

OK, putting on the flame resistant waders.......again! And this time it's not the ducks vs beavs topic :grin: :grin: Go Ducks, Go Beavs. Croak-All Florida teams!

[tailchaser]

Honestly, I probably wouldn't go for it. Not because I wouldn't love to keep a monster native, but I feel like it would open up the doors to illegal fishermen taking wild fish on the river claiming they had the stamp or tag. There just isn't enough honest people out there (aka the salmon or the elk river crowds) to justify it. Probably the worst part is it's tough to enforce. Unless an officer is on site it would be hard for anyone to call BS on the deal.

However, if the population is "healthy" enough why not open it up to the 1 nat per day 5 per year on your tag and have a monterous fine if you're caught not tagging one?? I would go for a $5 dollar fee for this. Maybe even 10. However, this could have similar implications that I mentioned above.

Just my .02.

tc

[TheRogue]

Native Steelhead Tag. Good for 1 per day, 5 per year, on specific rivers, monitored as they are now. $30. $1000 fine and loss of fishing privileges on those rivers for 3 years for not having the tag and keeping a nate, or being caught on the way home with a nate without filling the tag out.

Works for me.....of all the nates I've caught (besides on the Rogue and Umpqua), I would've probably only kept one, that was the 43-1/2" fish I caught off "The Bench" one late August afternoon in 1994. Don't particularly like the taste of steelhead, but I would love to have a monster on my wall.

TR

[FrogPond]

Are the native runs improving under the current regulations? Have we proven we can protect these fish?
I have never heard of this type of program before. Is it in use somewhere? How is it working there?

This is an interesting idea, I just need more information prior to forming my opinion... [img]graemlins/1zhelp.gif[/img]

If the fish can't take some mortality don't disturb them.

Couldn't bring myself to kill a big wild steelhead since they are endangered. I would take pics and do a replica mount. Big fish like that in an endangered situation need to be allowed to spawn. Good thought provoking thread Jennie.
IMHO -

[ 11-01-2002, 02:12 PM: Message edited by: Shane S ]

[Jennie@ifish]

How do I feel?

Uh.... tentative.

I really don't think I could keep one... Yet, it's an interesting idea, and we need funds.

It would have to be on runs that are very healthy... Do we have them? I don't think so, but I don't know.

I caught a 20 pound native steelhead on the Kilchis, or thereabouts, and... I don't think I could have kept him. Why would I want to, anyway, when I can have him mounted by measurement and picture?

I certainly don't need the meat.

Plus, these big fish are what I want to "go fourth and multiply" so that we'll have more of them.

I personally don't think I'd ever buy a tag for them, unless it was only to support the hatcheries or the fisheries in some way where I knew where my money would go.

It was just something Bill and I thought up... Not sure if it was he or I, but it was one of those... Hey! [img]graemlins/idea.gif[/img] Ideas...

I have enough trouble, as I get older, even bonking a fish at all... Something that is somewhat shocking to me, but it's true. It seems, as I get older, I have more and more trouble killing things at all.

Even spiders!

I guess I'm a wimp, and getting wimpier!

Jen

[sturgn]

I have to say NO, there seems to be plenty of fish to be caught, and How would you ever police this? I prob wouldnt chalange someone on the river if they said they had a tag, But I will challange someone on the river when I know no one is to keep them!

[Flying Roast Beef]

I like the idea of purchasing a special tag better. There would also have to be a yearly quota too. All funds going to the hatcheries (yeah right). Kind of reminds me of when Utah had over the counter doe tags. We used to buy one and start the first campfire with it.

[Tanner]

I have gotten so used to C & R fishing for nates that I would have a real hard time killing one. Therefore I vote no

[WP]

I would definately support a "wild fish for pay" program that had substantial scientific evidence that it wouldf not endanger the run at allowed levels. As for the poachers and cheaters...they are already taking fish illeagally. I would put the funds towards stream rehabilitation and the purchase back of stream side lands to protect spawning areas and minimise silting. It is not enough to protect the3 runs, we have to take positive action to re-invigorate them. If every fisherman was charged $5-10 extra and given a controled oportunity for a trophy native, that would provide substantial funds, over time, to go to stream rehab and run enhancement. A sur charge on licenses could be added, as well for hatchery support. We really don't pay much for the sport we all love. I complain as much as anyone when I buy my license, but the ttruth is we get what we pay for...at the most! I have no issue with resident costs being $50-100 a year and much higher for non-resident, with a short duration license available at reduced rates. The gottcha is that some bureacrat or politician will have control of the funds and too much of it will be wasted on non-sustainable programs or waste. There are just no easy answers...I just know that to get you have to pay...a lot.
WP

[Jennie@ifish]

Good point Sturgn

[Jooky]

throwing money at a problem wont make it go away

[skein]

I agree with tailchaser and sturgn, how would you know if the guy next to you had a tag or not. It would be impossible to police. Let natives go. It'll make you feel like you've done something special (and good) when you do.

Skein

[fishbane]

This is an ok idea.
I think A videp poker machine for wildlife and hatcher funding would be good. And Higher taxes for the wealther upper 10 % of our state residents and corparations.

[SteelieSteve]

I see this as a double standard. We don't keep unclipped fish to preserve natives and to perpetuate the strong native gene pool. So why is it ok to sell lottery permits for natives? If the runs have become strong enough for tagging natives then it's ok for everyone to keep a limited number of fish. But to sell native fish???

[garyk]

Certainly fun to talk about and I realize this is an analagous to the 'trophy sheep/goat tags' that ODFW and others sell as a fundraiser but I vote NO.

1. All other considerations and complications aside, I would argue that 'trophy' specimans are exactly the ones that you DO NOT want to kill because their contribution to the gene pool is so valuable.

2. Furthermore, if such a scenario came to pass, the money should go to research and projects and that support wild fish and their habitat, rather than artificial hatchery production.

[Full Freezer]

ALL the wild ones go back. Especially the big ones. Just need a digital camera, tape measure & a quick stop at the grocery store for a farm bred fish to eat. No need at all to harvest 'em.

[Jennie@ifish]

I hate to say this.... and I'm sure it will start a debate....

But...

I feel that any money we raise for the hatcheries, we should double to put into habitat restoration for the wild fish, also.

So.... If we want to raise the license fee 5.00, it should be 10.00. Half for the hatchery, half for the habitat... and make it FOR SURE go there! No legislatures to tell us where to put it. It goes THERE, period.

Jen

[Captain and Marie]

Jennie,

I don't like the idea.

But did you hear about the southern Oregon Coast starting in January 2003, You can keep natives??

You won't need a special tag! Its free!

I just can not hardly believe it!

What double standards we have!

MW

[Fish-n-Fever]

I am against keeping any native fish other than in systems that allow you to keep nates without a special tag. If a run is secure enough to allow nates to be kept then that's fine but how could anyone justify keeping a nate in a system where they must be protected in order to survive simply because they paid for the right to do so? It kind of suprises me to see so many people that are ok with this idea when all you have to do is post a picture of a native that you have caught and released. If it is held out of the water people scream if it was netted people scream but just because you might pay $ to keep one it makes it ok? I think not.
Ron

[Uglygreen]

Kill Native fish to propogate Hatchery fish? Will never fly.... Not in todays world. Plus, would probably violate the ESA. Nice try though.

UG

[dogfishboy]

OK, I think you are on the right course as far as being creative in coming up with ways to fund hatcheries. Given the current financial situation of government agencies, it is critical that we all think "outside the box."
How you organize and implement this concept is difficult at best. This is not to say that it can't be done. Perhaps a limited event on a select stream, for a one or two day time period, and for a limited number of people who win the lottery. C&R of course. Winner could have his trophy mounted (donated by a taxidermist) and receive a recognition plaque. Entry fees could be larger and perhaps organized by a non-profit so the fees would be tax deductible.

It is critical though that the money raised be used for specific purposes, and not just disappear into some general fund abyss.

I don't know... just throwing out ideas. It will be interesting to see what ifishers come up with and think. They can be a pretty intelligent bunch from time to time. We won't talk about the other times... will we. :grin:

[rob allen]

Absolutely not and hell no and i'd oppose anything anywhere in the lower 48 that allowed the killing of wild steelhead until such time as all our rivers have extremely healthy runs of wild fish. and only then if there were no hatchery fish to kill. No one has any need whatsoever to kill a wild steelhead. There are so many hatchery fish there is no justification for killing wild ones.. You want a trophy steelhead go up to the Clearwater or to the Quinault and get one of thoes trophy HATCHERY steelhead.. If you can afford to go "trophy " steelhead fishing and pay to have one turned into a trophy then you can afford the modest cost of traveling to where you can do it while causeing no harm...

[ko]

Just a thought. What if they started charging for a copy of the rules and regulations brochure? I would not mind paying 2-3 bucks for a copy if it would help the hatcheries.

[Jerry Dove]

FOLKS;
We are trying to get ideas to keep the hatcheries open. If you have any ideas for funding, please post them. UGLYGREEN, I TRIED TO CALL YOU , AND LEFT A MESSAGE BUT YOU DID NOT CALL ME BACK, I WANT TO HEAR YOUR IDEAS. GIVE ME A CALL (503-842-6519) We feel that we are going to need more than one source of funding. Check Jens note on the front page. I also left the meeting yesterday feeling like , lets just say I had a hell of a headache. I feel like we accomplishesd nothing. I think the ODFW was sent down to Tillamook to get us to promote the Jan 28 tax increase and nothing else. Sorry Lindsey Ball but that is how I feel. I think maybe after next Tuesday nights election things might look different. Sometines I think they are trying to break our spirit, but lets not let them!!! What do ya say. Jerry

[TheRogue]

But did you hear about the southern Oregon Coast starting in January 2003, You can keep natives??

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helv">Yup, never should've had those streams closed that they're opening back up!!! They were forced into it by the NMFS and USFWS, even though there was no evidence for the closure to begin with!! Politics!!

Very little pressure on most South Coast streams, and it's one per day, five per year . Rob probably couldn't handle living any closer to the South coast than he does now, probably go postal

[rebell]

I am so proud of you people. :smile: :smile: :smile:

Most are saying, Hell no, I dont need to keep a native Steelhead.

With fiberglass reproductions know available, why would any one want or need to kill a wild steelhead? There are better way's to support our hatcheries Jen, but you have a novel idea. Keep thinking! I believe you are on the right track. [img]graemlins/applause.gif[/img]

[TheRogue]

With fiberglass reproductions know available, why would any one want or need to kill a wild steelhead?

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helv">Maybe if there aren't any hatchery fish, or darn few??? (Again, talking South coast here).

TR

[Chum King]

Interesting ideas and comments from everyone. I guess that I think it could fly in some cases. Ugly Green is right that you still couldn't use the tag for an ESA listed species, but you might be able to use it in some rivers for certain species i.e. spring chinook in the Willamette.

I guess I am looking at this a little differently. If I had the tag, I probably wouldn't use it to keep a trophy. I would use it on that one fish that took my hook a bit too deep and was a likely candidate for crab or crawdad bait if I released him.

As for being able to enforce the rule, maybe the tag could be a plastic band that has to be attached through the mouth and operculum immediately upon retention. The tag would have to have a one time attachment mechanism, be highly visible, and have a date coding (punch out?) so that it couldn't be reused.

I still prefer the fund raising idea that a couple of friends came up with way back when. Have a raffle for individual casts under the Camp Sherman Bridge.

[abercrombie]

you mean "irritating discussion on this"..? ha good luck on this one..

[MasterCaster]

Well I see people are voting but not responding and telling why. :whazzup:

I think it depends on the system and how the run is doing. I Know even if I sent for and drew the tag Im pretty sure I wouldnt use it. All of the native fish I have caught were too nice of a fish for me to keep. I know that may seem strange but they just looked like they belonged in the river and thats where I think they should stay. If there is enough native fish to allow for a small harvest then go for it I dont see any problem with it as long as it is TIGHTLY controled.

Im interested in finding out what others think.

Just my .02

Jon :smile: :grin: :smile:

[kodiakfisher]

So here is a scenario to think about...Our fees are raised for habitat restoration and habitat restoration is working. There is enough science and common sense to know that next point I hope. [img]graemlins/stupid.gif[/img]

Next is there anyone that believes a hatchery fish is genetically superior to wild fish...probably not.

It seems the right answer is to have wild fish reproduce as natural as possible. Dams have to allow enough water to flow but in dry years like this one if the dams weren't there would there be ANY water flowing won't know until there are no dams.

I think we have all seen that natural factors are what influence the size of fish runs for good and bad. Floods in the middle 90's and lately the great ocean conditions of the last.. at least two years. When ocean conditions are good we don't complain near as much about the seals and sea lions or how much fish are being taken by the commercial fisherman whom btw are about out of a job because of farm/hatchery raised salmon.

Once the hatcheries are closed and habitat restored are we all going to stop keeping fish because they are WILD fish or will we justify it by saying there really aren't any wild fish becuase the gene pool is contaminated with hatchery fish. This further supports that we believe hatchery fish are inferior and should be left out of the gene pool. The goal should be to get rid of hatcheries and have fish reproduce naturally. We should as fisherman respect spawning areas for Salmon and let them spawn until a sufficient number of Salmon have spawned then open up the rivers. Heck why not let wild fish spawn in the safety of the hatcheries free from predators and the smolts can head out when they are ready. [img]graemlins/applause.gif[/img]

Like somone said we can go the the grocery store to get a farm/hatchery raised salmon and let all the "Wild" ones go. Okay let me have it I've spoken ill of the prized fish hatcheries.

Kodiakfisher [img]graemlins/stupid.gif[/img] [img]graemlins/applause.gif[/img]

[ 11-05-2002, 02:30 PM: Message edited by: kodiakfisher ]

[Flatfish]

OK so it seems fair to assume that if you could only kill 1 fish you would wait til you got a "special"fish.For most folks "special"=big.Now why would I want to remove the very thing I cherish the most in all of angling?If we kill all the big ones,nobody will take special care in choosing their "special" fish.In a few years our tag for 1 "special" fish just becomes a tag for any fish.Then it becomes Donaldsons(or whatever the name of oregons Blue Creek is)and that aint a pretty site.Now I think the optional thinking is great but why do we have to kill to justify a trip?
Mark and the dog.

[blacktail]

I personally don't have any desire to keep a wild steelhead.

I got over the sad feeling of having to let them go years ago. I enjoy watching them swim away.

Mike