67 Sportfishing Rule Adoption Process | Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife
 

Sportfishing Rule Changes for 2016-2017

See proposed rule
language (CR-103)
2016 Recreational Fishing Rules
Concise Explanatory Statement
Fish & Wildlife Commission
Meeting Dec. 11-12, 2015

2016 – 2017 Sportfishing Rule Proposals – Briefing and Public Hearing. Audio available.

Recommended
for Public Comment
Not Recommended
for further consideration
View by Region
Puget Sound Coast Not Region Specific
Liberalize limits for Bass, Channel Catfish,
and Walleye in the Columbia River
and tributaries contiguous with Oregon

Recommended for Public Comment

Rule Change Recommendation Short Title
# 49. Require wild Steelhead harvest tag

Invitation for further public comment on a recommendations developed by the North Coast Steelhead Advisors Group (NCSAG). Click here to see the recommendations. Use the form below to enter your comments.

 • Final Rule Actions
 • See comments

Rules Category
Coast

Type of Rule Change Proposal
Conservation

Short Description
Require purchase and use of annual "Wild Steelhead" harvest tag. This proposal is being considered by the North Coast Advisory Group and will be refined as the Advisory Group provides feedback.

Explanation
Require the purchase and use of a harvest tag if an angler intends to harvest a wild steelhead. Upon harvesting a wild steelhead, the angler must affix the tag to the harvested fish. An angler is limited to one harvest tag per year. Additionally, if an angler is fishing with a licensed guide, they must use the guide’s wild steelhead harvest tag. Licensed guides are limited to three harvest tags per year. Recommended that WDFW consider charging a premium for the purchase of these tags as is done for other trophy animals. See Table.

Table for Proposal 49. Require wild Steelhead harvest tag.
Number

River

County

1

Bogachiel

Clallam

2

Calawah

Clallam

3

Clearwater

Jefferson

4

Dickey

Clallam

5

Hoh

Jefferson

6

Quillayute

Clallam

7

Quinault

Grays Harbor

8

Salmon

Grays Harbor

9

Snahapish

Jefferson

10

Sol Duc

Clallam

Related Public Proposals Received
DFW229807-16
DFW074141-16
DFW893497-16
DFW955673-16
DFW246367-16

Final Rule Actions

Staff Recommendation
Do not adopt.

Commission Action
Did not adopt.

Rule Modifications
None


Public Testimony

No public testimony

Online Public Comments  (111 comments)

LAMPERS, RAYMOND J  August 07, 2015
GRANITE FALLS, WA  
Comments:
No on wild steelhead tag on any rivers
DURHAM, JOSEPH P  August 09, 2015
ABERDEEN, WA  
Comments:
NO... The rule as it is now is sufficient to allow protection of wild steelhead, by recreational fishers. What needs to change is the States allowable, as it now is worded, to, once an angler has caught and released what would have been a daily limit. ( 1 ) wild steelhead. He or she stops fishing for the rest of that day. Catch and Release for the fun of it kills far to many wild steelhead. STOP CATCH AND RELEASE ON WEAK STOCKS.
TACHELL, ART J  August 10, 2015
TACOMA , WA  
Comments:
should be no wild fish retention be anyone do you want them to recover or not?
TACHELL, JONATHAN T  August 10, 2015
GIG HARBOR, WA  
Comments:
I vote no on this proposal. No wild steelhead retention should be allowed on the rivers listed above at this time.
ALLEN, ROBERT E  August 11, 2015
VANCOUVER, WA  
Comments:
no, it should be illegal to harvest wild steelhead.. there are enough hatchery fish wanting to keep wild ones as well is just greed.
PATTERSON, DOUGLAS I  August 11, 2015
MOUNTLAKE TERRACE, WA  
Comments:
Just quit killing them, the state will be money ahead in the long run. If the fishing is good people from out of state will pay a premium to fish. Its been very successful in canada. Also Not addressed again this time, We need to limit the amount of guides on the rivers. Maybe no guide licence if you are not a resident? No guide licence if your company isn't based in washington state?
BURKLE, BOB   August 11, 2015
ELMA, WA  
Comments:
Why kill any at all? Killing a wild steelhead that will likely survive to be caught more than 20 times before expiring (studies from Canada show 1.8 to 3.5% mortality each time they are caught and released) is foolish, counterproductive, and reduces opportunity. There is absolutely no need to harvest a steelhead on purpose, they don't taste that great compared to a chinook or coho, and a fiberglass replica can be made from measurements and a picture taken of your "trophy" that looks better, lasts longer, and costs less money. Comparing the take of a trophy steelhead, which can be easily caught and released, to the take of a trophy game animal, which pretty much has to be shot in order to take it, is ludicrous in the extreme. I hope all anglers join me in roundly "shooting" this one down and not "releasing" this dumb idea for another day.
HOLTCAMP, RON J  August 17, 2015
OLYMPIA, WA  
Comments:
Oppose. Proposal will NOT increase fish populations and, as proposed, is not equitably applied to ALL harvesters of wild steelhead.
CUSHING, STEPHEN W  October 16, 2015
BRUSH PRAIRIE, WA  
Comments:
No on proposal #49! It's just another tax! Stop the taking of wild steelhead ... see proposal #46.
MACFARLANE, SHAWN K  October 18, 2015
VANCOUVER, WA  
Comments:
What bureaucrat thought this one up. Brilliant! Let's offer tags for spotted owls and Columbia White tailed Deer while we're at it.
WANG, DAVID A  October 19, 2015
MEDFORD, OR  
Comments:
I would rather see no killing of wild steelhead as well as no removing or lifting of wild steelhead from the water. I would also like to see closure of the rivers on the Olympic Penninsula 2 days a week to allow refuge and safe passage. Too many anglers cheat on selective gear regulations to make it effective. Closing the rivers April 1st would also be acceptable to me. Too many anglers target the Redds, and you can't police that.
LEISHMAN, COLE J  October 19, 2015
BELLINGHAM, WA  
Comments:
I do not support this regulation. Nobody should be able to keep a fish that is on the verge of extinction. Fishing for wild steelhead should be catch and release.
THYER, DAVID G  October 19, 2015
SEATTLE, WA  
Comments:
The retention of wild steelhead is absurd. Our wild steelhead populations are in real jeopardy and the "one fish" retention practice is chronically and systemically abused today. It would still be abused under a "tag" policy. There is not adequate policing to prevent abuse. This proposal should be rejected.
CHAUSSEE, CODY   October 20, 2015
SEATTLE, WA  
Comments:
We should not be harvesting ANY wild steelhead since the species is endangered. Charging money to harvest the fish is not going to help the fish population.
LUND, MARK C  October 25, 2015
KENT, WA  
Comments:
A majority of guides and their clients won't harvest wild Steelhead. Let the angler and guides make the decision. Please don't limit angling opportunities then make anglers pay more for that small opportunity. Seems illegal.
MCMILLEN, SAM K  October 25, 2015
SEATTLE, WA  
Comments:
If harvest of wild steelhead is to continue it should absolutely be regulated more stictly. Having a tag system such as this makes a lot of sense. Especially considering the infrequency of checks by game wardens on the coast. In over 100 days fishing in the forks area the past 5 years i have never seen a game officer check me or anyone else in my proximity.
WAUGH, BRIAN   October 26, 2015
MONROE, WA  
Comments:
How about we just do away with wild steelhead retention. Instead of trying to capitalize on our dwindling resources.
SIMMS, RICH K  October 26, 2015
MUKILTEO, WA  
Comments:
If we go to full release for wild steelhead there would be no need for a harvest tag.
BELLOWS, CHRISTOPHER   October 26, 2015
STEAMBOAT SPRINGS, CO  
Comments:
This is a good rule, but with the current lack of enforcement it is likely not to make any difference. You should work with the legislature to make any fees raised from this tag to go towards enforcement of rules on the North Coast rivers. Money won't fix your enforcement issues since many anglers view WDFW enforcement as a joke, not only because wardens are scarce (money) but when you do see one you rarely see them out of their vehicles and writing tickets, even when told of poaching.
FEE, RYLEY   October 26, 2015
BOTHELL, WA  
Comments:
I am in support of this proposal if Wild Steelhead retention continues to be allowed. However, The state should not allow wild steelhead retention anywhere statewide.
MORAVEC, ANDREW W  October 26, 2015
SNOQUALMIE, WA  
Comments:
A statewide Zero Kill policy should be enacted for Wild Steelhead.
GIRTZ, TODD   October 27, 2015
LAKE TAPPS, WA  
Comments:
i am in favor of the new rule to reduce the number of wild steelhead kept
SWARTZ, LARRY D  October 27, 2015
EDMONDS, WA  
Comments:
I can agree to this as long as the state still requires ALL anglers for steelhead purchase a punchcard. One could argue if I do not keep any fish I do not need a punchcard - I think the data from the cards both catch and keep and released fish can be valuable for the improvement of the fishery. I also think there should be a coastal river of Washington endorsement purchased similar to the Columbia River endorsement that can be used to enhance the fisheries on the Washington Coast.
WOODS, WILLIAM M  October 29, 2015
SEATTLE, WA  
Comments:
I don't believe in the harvesting of any Wild steelhead at this time in the sports fishery. I believe the tagging proposal will encourage greater depletion of the species, so am against it.
DUDEK, PAUL H  October 29, 2015
AUBURNDALE, MA  
Comments:
I recommend this proposal
SAVAGLIO, BRUCE   October 29, 2015
SEQUIM, WA  
Comments:
A tag does nothing to protect wild steelhead.it merely allows those who can pay to kill wild fish. Release all wild fish! This must include netters.
GOODWIN, RED   October 29, 2015
BLAINE, WA  
Comments:
I fully support all of these proposal: Require the purchase and use of a harvest tag if an angler intends to harvest a wild steelhead. Upon harvesting a wild steelhead, the angler must affix the tag to the harvested fish. An angler is limited to one harvest tag per year. Additionally, if an angler is fishing with a licensed guide, they must use the guide’s wild steelhead harvest tag. Licensed guides are limited to three harvest tags per year. Recommended that WDFW consider charging a premium for the purchase of these tags as is done for other trophy animals.
SMITH, MARK T  October 29, 2015
RICHLAND, WA  
Comments:
There should be no harvest of native steelhead anywhere in the state of Washington and particularly on the OP rivers. This proposal should not be considered period.
BURGE, RICHARD T  October 29, 2015
QUILCENE, WA  
Comments:
If we continue to maintain a sport harvest fishery, which I do not support, then a harvest tag is become necessary. It will allow enforcement to reduce the number of illegal fish taken after some individuals harvest one fish. Extra illegal harvest is high and some estimate it at 50% or even more. Although unknown it is probably very high and a harvest tag will reduce this illegal harvest. I continue to support CnR only for steelhead and rainbow trout if WDFW will address the issue of the over harvest on the Hoh and Queets Rivers. Otherwise there is no valid reason to penalize sport fishers that take one fish per year.
BARNIER, DAVID   October 29, 2015
PT.ANGELES, WA  
Comments:
another ridiculous money grubbing proposal. With no basis in conservation whatsoever. I do not support it.
SMOKE, MICHAEL   October 29, 2015
KETTLE FALLS, WA  
Comments:
This is a dumb idea. No wild steelhead retention should be allowed. Given the current state of affairs, we need to be enforcing catch-and-release on wild populations and only allowing retention of hatchery fish.
BURKE, TIM   October 29, 2015
KIRKLAND, WA  
Comments:
As a long time passionate steelhead fisherman I do not thing we should harvest any wild fish at any point in time until the run replenishes. Why should we kill fish we are trying to fish. Catch and Release must be the new expectation for fisherman and their clients.
PETERS, THOM   October 29, 2015
SNOHOMISH, WA  
Comments:
Strongly disagree. There should be NO retention of wild steelhead. ".. charging a premium for the purchase of these tags as is done for other trophy animals." This is a regressive mind set and should never be allowed!
MCGIVERN, MIKE H  October 29, 2015
KIRKLAND, WA  
Comments:
I disagree with this proposal to sell wild steelhead tags. I believe all wild steelhead should be released. A photo to commemorate/document the memory should be allowed.
LAMPERS, RAYMOND J  October 29, 2015
GRANITE FALLS, WA  
Comments:
No we dont want or need more unnecessary regulations on our over regulated fishing as it is now.
ALLEN, JASON   October 30, 2015
SEATTLE, WA  
Comments:
No. Make it illegal to harvest.
FIGDORE, BRYCE   October 30, 2015
KIRKLAND, WA  
Comments:
I do not support this measure. I support the prohibition of wild steelhead harvest as proposed in measure #48.
LACY, JOHN   October 30, 2015
INDIANAPOLIS, IN  
Comments:
I advise against any WSH harvest, but I can see this rule being effective to reducing harvest of WSH by implementing a tag policy and having the cost of said tag & fine of said angler without a tag to be large enough to deter the wish to harvest illegally or at all. I would consider the 1 tag per season to be in the range of $1000-2500. The fine to be $2500 per WSH harvested without a tag
ALEXANDER, ROBERT   October 30, 2015
BEAVER, WA  
Comments:
If the Citizens feel compelled to kill wild steelhead, tags ought to at least reduce poaching.
HARDY, JIM   October 30, 2015
KIRKLAND, WA  
Comments:
There should be a catch and release restriction on all wild steelhead! It seems ludicrous to me that there are many proposals to restrict fishing techniques and methods to protect wild steelhead, but the state is more than willing to sell tags for wild steelhead as a revenue source if it serves to generate cash. If anglers want to keep a fish they have the opportunity to keep hatchery steelhead! Keep your priorities consistent if you want to maintain any modicum of integrity.
MCCABE, CHRISTOPHER   October 30, 2015
PORTLAND, OR  
Comments:
I recommend this action. - Christopher McCabe
BROOKS, JASON J  October 30, 2015
PUYALLUP, WA  
Comments:
yes, if wild steelhead are to be retained, but I would rather see a no wild steelhead retention rule
LEE, TRAVIS   October 30, 2015
MOUNT VERNON, WA  
Comments:
No native steelhead should be killed. No tags for anybody. WDFW shouldn't get more money out of it either, there shouldn't be a price on "trophies" when the WDFW can't even keep steelhead in the rivers in this state as it is.
MILLER, RUSSELL   October 30, 2015
EDMONDS, WA  
Comments:
Make it expensive to kill wild fish. Really expensive. They are the states treasure and our state fish, really really really expensive.
DURHAM, JOSEPH P  October 30, 2015
ABERDEEN, WA  
Comments:
Strongly opposed. It is believed the guides would ave a huge disadvantage over sports angles, and would receive boat tags for their clients. I oppose any raffle, drawing, or any kind of tag, unless they be sold individually, and only one tag per year on rivers already regulated one wild fish per year per angler. Other wise leave the reg as it now exist.
HAAG, KATIE   October 30, 2015
FORKS, WA  
Comments:
This rule change will eliminate jobs for our struggling local economy. We have people who come to our rivers to harvest ONE fish per year. They hire guides. The guides are a wage earner for a family. We have precious few family-wage earners in our local economy. Let's help them continue to earn a decent living so they can support their families and not have to rely on public assistance. If a guide can allow three clients to harvest wild steelhead, those three will go the highest bidder. Steelhead fishing is for all or nobody, not just the "rich man." Secondary resources will also be limited if this rule is implemented--people staying in hotels and private rentals, eating at our local restaurants, and visiting other local places will be reduced. Our local business struggle. Why make it even more difficult for them to survive? If wild steelhead is endangered and in such critical decline then ALL stakeholders shouldn't be harvesting this resource.
MITCHELL, THOMAS   October 30, 2015
BELLEVUE, WA  
Comments:
I prefer the competing proposal of no harvest of wild (non-hatchery) fish. There is no reason to kill ANY wild native steelhead in Washington.
BROEKHOF, WILLEM E  October 30, 2015
SEATTLE, WA  
Comments:
Please do NOT add this proposal to the rules. With the increased pressure the OP rivers will receive due to the closure of steelhead fisheries across Wa, the OP rivers will not be able to support even 1 wild steelhead killed per angler with this tag. This will also derail any progress made by other rules and regulations designed to protect wild steelhead. Please do not add this to the regulations.
WARNER, ANDREA U  October 30, 2015
BELLINGHAM, WA  
Comments:
There should be no harvest of wild steelhead. It is rediculous to still allow wild steelhead to be killed. It is just senseless and irresponsible.
WELCH, DENNIS G  October 31, 2015
MOUNT VERNON, WA  
Comments:
You got be studid excuse me,, why kill a native fish at all . Dennis Welch
JOHNSON, DAVID L  October 31, 2015
BELLINGHAM, WA  
Comments:
We should not allow the harvest of wild steelhead and if that is adopted there is no need for a wild steelhead tag. Adopting the use of a tag only makes it more likely that continued angler harvest of wild fish will occur and help ensure that their numbers continue to decrease. I'm opposed to this option.
STOLL, RICHARD   October 31, 2015
POULSBO, WA  
Comments:
All wild fish under this rule should be released...no tag fishery should be implemented.
DENIGER, MIKE   November 01, 2015
BONNEY LAKE, WA  
Comments:
I support this proposal if rule #48 is not implemented. This would be the next best option.
MASONIS, ROBERT J  November 02, 2015
SEATTLE, WA  
Comments:
I support eliminating all wild steelhead harvest, so oppose a wild steelhead harvest tag.
CAMPBELL, DAVE   November 02, 2015
SHORELINE, WA  
Comments:
Agree with the proposal. It would be prefered to impliment a catch and release policy for wild steelhead on these rivers.
HALL, DAN   November 02, 2015
SHORELINE, WA  
Comments:
I disagree with this proposal. There should be no harvest of wild steelhead.
MCLEOD, KEN JAMES   November 02, 2015
BOTHELL, WA  
Comments:
Not in favor of adopting a said sport-harvest tag $$$ for the OP rivers for steelhead fishing, as I believe this will only eliminate the common Joe user who is the majority license buyer, this is an approach some elitists have authored for quite some time to get rid of most users, thus gaining more for wealthy selves. I think the idea the funds will be used for enforcement is ridiculous. Further, if the WDFW doesn't plant hatchery steelhead, establishes C&R everywhere, no ONE wild sport-harvest, plus too many restrictive use methods such as selective gear & no bait, what then is the reason to buy a license any more?
PURDIE, JASON   November 02, 2015
EDMONDS, WA  
Comments:
If it is not possible to completely shut down the harvest of wild steelhead, then I think this could be a good possibility. Of course, I believe whole heartedly that all wild steelhead should be illegal to harvest. I think this option could be good though because I have heard first hand accounts of several local fishermen around the Forks area that harvest wild steelhead and do not record it on their catch record card, only to return the next day or later in the week to harvest more wild steelhead one at a time. I don't know how this tag system could be enforced, however one possibility could be a requirement to bring the harvested fish to a game check station. I still have fears and doubts that many would not follow the rules. If they are getting away with it now, I don't know how the tagging would change anything. The best method is definitely the elimination of all wild steelhead harvest, including gill nets.
ROSS, ROGER   November 02, 2015
PORT ANGELES , WA  
Comments:
Contradicts everything we are trying to do........ Really? Definitely against this one.
DODGSON, ROBERT W  November 02, 2015
MERCER ISLAND, WA  
Comments:
Sure but select something like hunting Pheasant have them choose odd or even days which would limit the amount of fishermen on one river.
BRODECK, KEN R  November 03, 2015
BEND, OR  
Comments:
Please do not allow wild steelhead retention of any kind or amount. these fish need to spawn.
JOLLIFFE, MICHAEL A  November 03, 2015
PORTLAND, OR  
Comments:
I fully support a wild steelhead harvest tag, but only if all proceeds generated from sale of the tag are used to support improvement of the wild fishery. All funds generated by the wild steelhead tags should be earmarked for enforcement, funding population monitoring, etc. in the location where the harvest took place. Rivers where a significant amount of wild harvest is occurring would thus have significant funding available for enforcement and monitoring of the health of that same fishery. While I personally choose not to keep wild fish as an angler, I don't think others should be limited in their choice. However, they should be required to pay for their impact on the resource: they have reduced recreational opportunity for me as I can never catch those fish, and those fish can't spawn to support the abundance of future wild fish. The only way to offset this impact is to internalize those costs by requiring tags be purchased and then using those proceeds exclusively for wild fish.
ADAMSON , DAVID G  November 03, 2015
SEATTLE, WA  
Comments:
Yes please!
HUNTLEY, KYLE C  November 04, 2015
OREGON CITY, OR  
Comments:
I am against the purchase of any tag that would allow the harvest of wild steelhead on any river in the state of Washington.
HOLTCAMP, RONALD J  November 04, 2015
OLYMPIA, WA  
Comments:
I oppose Recommendation #49. There is no indication of the administrative and enforcement costs; no suggestion of the cost of a tag, and no frame of reference for 'trophy' fish [I personally doubt any steelhead under 15lbs would be considered a trophy]. Further, since most guides have numerous clients, it would create an untenable decision on which 3 could retain a wild steelhead.
BORDERLINE BASSIN CONTENDERS, ROBERT HARRIMAN   November 04, 2015
BELLINGHAM, WA  
Comments:
the Borderline Bassin Contenders a hunting & fishing club since 1973 is intrigued with this proposal and would like to see an admendment to include sturgeon. Better yet why not treat the wild steelhead and the sturgeon like big game whereby one or party would apply for a one a year tag to harvest a wild steelhead or sturgeon - the application fees would be similar to big game application fees. This would absolutely limit the amount of harvest, raise funds for the Dept to refine work on both of these species including DNA testing. sincerely, Bob Harriman, legis liaison Borderline Bassin Contenders
ATLAS, WILLIAM I  November 04, 2015
SEATTLE, WA  
Comments:
If wild steelhead harvest is not to be eliminated all together, anglers wishing to harvest wild steelhead should be required to purchase a harvest tag. Wild steelhead are tremendously valuable to our state's economy and are worth far more than anglers are currently paying. I also am very supportive of placing limits on the number of wild steelhead that can be harvested by clients of a guide in a given year. I support this rule change.
BINDER, JOSEPH   November 05, 2015
SEATTLE, WA  
Comments:
I would much prefer that wild steelhead retention is prohibited completely. I do not discern the benefit this measure would realistically have on the fish or the fishery.
BOUCHER, MIKE   November 05, 2015
SEQUIM, WA  
Comments:
Yes. This is a good rule. In favor.
FISHER, FRANK P  November 06, 2015
BELLEVUE, WA  
Comments:
I do not agree with the wild steelhead tag option for North Coast rivers. I would prefer to see no wild steelhead retention as long as the co-managers agree not to increase their allotment.
KEEFER, SHANE T  November 07, 2015
LYNNWOOD, WA  
Comments:
End all retention of native steelhead. Expensive tag or not.
SHARF, JOHN D  November 07, 2015
KENMORE, WA  
Comments:
Against this proposal, would limit opportunity to wealthy anglers only.
GRAHN , GARY E  November 07, 2015
PORT ANGELES, WA  
Comments:
I believe this a bad idea. As you will cause resentment by local residents and those not able to afford the trophy tag to illegal killing of wild steelhead. There is already an air of this in our community towards the guides and there clients.
MYHRES, ED   November 08, 2015
MOUNT VERNON, WA  
Comments:
The sportsman already buys a license to fish with a punch card for steelhead. There is no reason to make a tag for fishing. Its not like fisherman are hunting big game animals.
MILLER, BRYNAN M  November 08, 2015
PORT ORCHARD, WA  
Comments:
Love this idea as it will limit the number of wild steelhead that are poached. The idea of three fish per guide will also help. This will make poachers easier to find and easier to criminalize. This will also make no problems with understanding one fish per person not per day.
JULIAN, AUGUST   November 08, 2015
BAINBRIDGE ISLAND, WA  
Comments:
This would be better than the wild harvest we allow now, but please stop killing wild steelhead. Please end all sport harvest of Wild steelhead.
WHITE, DAVID   November 08, 2015
SEQUIM, WA  
Comments:
I am not in favor of this rule change. More revenue is not needed nor are more unnecessary restrictions.
BRENNAN, ANGELO X  November 09, 2015
LAKE OSWEGO, OR  
Comments:
NO! Wild steelhead should not be harvested.
HEIRIGS, MARK W  November 09, 2015
VANCOUVER, WA  
Comments:
If the retention of wild steelhead is to persist, which Clark-Skamania Flyfishers oppose, then CSF supports initiating a Wild Steelhead Harvest Tag. CSF’s support for this regulation is depended upon all generated funds be used to benefit wild steelhead enhancement with a citizen oversight panel overseeing distribution of the funds.
JONES, JOHN M  November 09, 2015
SAMMAMISH, WA  
Comments:
I DO NOT support this proposal. It would appear to conflict with the 'no retention' proposal which I do support.
WESTLUND, ROGER G  November 09, 2015
SNOHOMISH, WA  
Comments:
I do not feel this proposal is enough for our wild steelhead. There should be NO wild steelhead harvest in Washington State.
BOYD, LEWIS   November 10, 2015
EVERETT, WA  
Comments:
No, I already pay too much for less opportunity. According to a NOAA study of 2011,of the 23 coastal states in the US. WA is almost dead last at #22 in non resident dollars coming into this state. If you want more dollars then work on bringing these dollars back to WA where this state was once the salmon capitol destination of the world. This is what happens when ocean fisheries pocket the fish cutting into once quality fisheries that supported this state economic and didn't put all the burden on the sport angler with numerous fees.
ABRAHAMSE, BILL   November 10, 2015
SPOKANE, WA  
Comments:
I support this rule change to further protect wild steelhead
CURTIS, CHARLES A  November 10, 2015
LAKE STEVENS, WA  
Comments:
if there has to be wild steelhead retention, then please use a tag system like this.
SCHMITZ, JIM P  November 10, 2015
TACOMA, WA  
Comments:
I am writing in support of the Wild Steelhead tag. It is totally absurd that we are even at a point where it is an option to think of killing these fish. That said, if someone is going to do it they should have to harvest it legally and by purchasing a tag. This may not reduce the typical non stop poaching that takes place everyday on the coast but might help keep some records of those that want to play by the rules. I myself hunt big game and have no problem buying tags in hopes to preserve and protect the resource. Please pass this rule and set a help wild steelhead. Currently nobody is checking the anglers who harvesting wild fish daily.This may put some heat on the dishonest poacher and some pressure of the enforcement. Make sure it has a tag. If this rule doesn't pass then I support the overall release of every wild steelhead. Let the tribes be the ones who take these beautiful fish down. Not the anglers who care so much about their future.
T, CHRIS   November 10, 2015
SHORELINE, WA  
Comments:
I would support this proposal. thanks
DYER, JONATHAN H  November 11, 2015
RENO, NV  
Comments:
I do not support this change. Please don't allow the take of Wild Steelhead under any circumstance. Protect Wild fish they are to precious to wind up freezer burned and thrown out. Thank You, Jonathan Dyer Reno, Nevada
KLEPPS, TODD D  November 11, 2015
BEAVER, WA  
Comments:
I think this is a great idea.
TOWNLEY, BRYAN   November 11, 2015
NORTH BEND, WA  
Comments:
GOOD PROPOSAL, BUT BE AWARE WHEN OUR ALLOCATION IS ADJUSTED, THE TRIBES WILL PICK UP ANYTHING THAT WE GIVE UP.
FRIEDRICH, ANDREW   November 11, 2015
PORT TOWNSEND, WA  
Comments:
Because I oppose wild steelhead "harvest" I do not think there should be tags allowing it available. If, however, they were allowed I agree that guides should be limited to three a year and that a guided catch should count against the guides tags, but also that an individual should not be allowed to retain multiple catches by using multiple guides or guide tag fish plus individual tag fish. Also, the tag price should be very high indeed.
ST.CLAIR, LUCAS   November 11, 2015
PORTLAND, ME  
Comments:
WDFW should require a wild steelhead tag in order to fish for them.
OLANIE, ERIC   November 11, 2015
HANSVILLE, WA  
Comments:
Oppose. NO take of any wild steelhead should be allowed EVER!
ROBINSON, JESS S  November 11, 2015
MARYSVILLE , WA  
Comments:
I do not support this
MARTIN, GABE   November 11, 2015
BATTLE GROUND, WA  
Comments:
This proposal sets Up for fisherman to continue to cheat the system. If we are considering putting an end to harvesting wild steelhead, why would we allow selective harvesting. This will likely allow sport fisherman and guides to cheat the system. Who will monitor the harvest? There is no way to effectively monitor how many of the fish are being taken. I live on the shores of a steelhead stream and each year I see fisherman quietly taking fish, quickly cleaning them and putting them in their fishing bag. How are we to know if the fish is wild, or not. Who is checking this. It would be much easier to not allow wild harvest at all!
HARRIS, JIM & PAM   November 11, 2015
HELENA, MT  
Comments:
It would be best to allow NO harvesting of wild steelhead, but if that is not the case, then having fisherman pay A LOT more to harvest one might be a deterrent to killing wild steelhead. And limiting guides to the number of wild steelhead they can kill is an alternative to not allowing any wild steelhead to be killed (though not really a good one). And no one, for a minute should believe that this will decrease the number of fisherman or impact the guides business in anyway. Thanks for allowing public comment.
BABCOCK, GABE F  November 11, 2015
CORVALLIS, OR  
Comments:
The idea of hunting/fishing trophy animals pays for conservation is so backwards that i'd prefer that no wild fish are harvested until the hatchery fish are ousted and the wild fish population returns to sustainable numbers.
HIKES, MATTHEW   November 11, 2015
PORTLAND, OR  
Comments:
Wild steelhead should not be harvested, with or without a tag.
CANALAS, ROBERT A  November 11, 2015
ROSEVILLE, CA  
Comments:
The introduction of this rule could undue all the effort spent on saving those wild steelhead. If an angler wants to keep a steelhead, catch a hatchery. If they want an adventure, catch and release a wild. Wild fish will be sustainable in the future if changes continue to be made, but that is not now. We must not count our steelhead before they are hatched. Right now, we all need to restore and conserve wild steelhead.
PRESCOTT, STANLEY W  November 11, 2015
COVINGTON, WA  
Comments:
Please implement rule
COLE, ALLYN   November 11, 2015
ELMA, WA  
Comments:
NO WILD STEELHEAD HARVEST!!
ALLISON, KEITH P  November 12, 2015
BEAVER, WA  
Comments:
No guide should be promoting the harvest of wild steelhead, additionally it would create an extra kill opportunity for an angler to use the guides tag instead of his or her own tag. Would the guide then be done for the season after harvesting three wild steelhead?
FIGURA, ERIC R  November 12, 2015
GLIDE, OR  
Comments:
Harvesting of Wild steelhead should be entirely prohibited. A tag should not be allowed for a trophy fish as that fish holds all the genes that we need in our rivers. I do not support a harvest tag for Wild Steelhead. No Harvest of Wild Steelhead.
VOJTA, COPI   November 12, 2015
BELLINGHAM, WA  
Comments:
Fully support, if there is to be continued allowable wild steelhead harvest.
CARVER SR, RUSSELL L  November 12, 2015
LAKE TAPPS, WA  
Comments:
This rule change greatly reduces our opportunity to harvest our fish . The impacts of the net fisheries on these streams should be stopped if the conservation is so dire . At this time there are harvestable numbers of fish otherwise there woul be no net fisheries on these streams . There should be no fees involved !
BEAUCHAMP , SEAN   November 12, 2015
EVERETT, WA  
Comments:
Without increased enforcement this rule keeps the door wide open for illegal retention. Let's move on from harvesting wild steelhead and increase protection and opportunity by way of selective gear regulations and wild steelhead release. Current escapement levels are such that harvesting wild steelhead should not be an option
SELF, MERLIN   November 12, 2015
POULSBO, WA  
Comments:
No---no harvest of wild steelhead. Release all wild steelhead. The time is long past we had enough wild steelhead brood stock returns to allow any harvest.
OLSON, KRIS   November 12, 2015
SALT LAKE CITY, UT  
Comments:
While I strongly oppose the harvest of wild steelhead under any conditions, selling a high-priced tag of limited number for "trophy" animals has proven to be an effective conservation model for a number of other species. Again, I strongly oppose the harvest of wild steelhead, BUT, in the event that any harvest is open, I would reluctantly support the adoption of limited-number, high-priced tags for wild steelhead.
PAULL, BEN   November 12, 2015
SEATTLE, WA  
Comments:
If wild steelhead retention is allowed, then I support this. But I don't think wild steelhead retention should be legal in the first place.
JULIAN, MARK   November 12, 2015
BAINBRIDGE ISLAND, WA  
Comments:
If you're going to allow any wild steelhead harvest, this rule should be put in place and enforced. However it would be simpler and better for all concerned if harvesting wild steelhead were just prohibited.
BURGY, AARON   November 12, 2015
WOODINVILLE, WA  
Comments:
If it makes the harvest numbers go down why not, let those that really need the food do the paperwork, and keep those that don't take pictures.
BOYLE, MARK   November 12, 2015
MUKILTEO, WA  
Comments:
I am against this. Vote NO! It should be allowed to keep at least one wild fish without an extra tag. For heavens sake. We can only keep one wild fish versus tribal netting thousands of wild fish. We are legally allowed 50% of the harvestable catch beyond escapement goals. We already have a punch card and designate wild or hatchery on the card.

Other Comments Received