Comparing Washington Fishing Regulations & Costs To Other States & Countries
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 2 окт 2024
- Enjoyed that content? Want to see more? Click here to subscribe bit.ly/3eADeto
If you want to support this channel consider becoming a community member by hitting the join button or alternatively check out my Patreon account. Members and Patrons get access to exclusive content and one on one interactions with me. Click here to learn more: / spiltmilt
Thank you so much for watching and all the support I receive from my Patrons and community members. Please remember to like, subscribe, and share. It matters and it helps.
I’ve been paying for fishing licenses in Washington for 40 years supposedly for conservation. What have I received in return? Steelhead fishing is now almost impossible to find in Washington. Apparently stocked trout are my reward.
There are numerous factors playing into the survival and return numbers of ocean run species. I don't think it's fair at all to put the blame on the people trying to restore those runs.
It's not for conservation, all license revenue goes into the state general fund and politics governs what the WDFW is allocated in order to manage their business.
While WDFW certainly has its fair share of responsibility for steelhead declines that also falls on National Marine Fisheries Service, US Fish & Wildlife Service, tribes, and so on. I agree though Steelhead fishing absolutely sucks in this state. I'd rather go fish them in the Great Lakes where double digit days aren't that rare.
As for fishing license sales, they represent a very small fraction of WDFW's generated budget. Fishing license sales and taxes on fishing tackle represent just 15% of WDFW's operating budget.
Really interesting. I never though about the complexity as a result of more opportunity.
I'm looking forward to them digitizing the regulations and catch cards. Hopefully that come soon, that should help quite a bit!
Sensible take Tyler. It might be worth mentioning WA does have a free fishing weekend in June, which is comparable to free piers in California for providing opportunity, except it's limited temporally instead of spatially (which probably provide free opportunity to more people overall). The US and Canada in general seem to strike a pretty good balance in terms of cost and opportunity. The licenses are cheap compared to what most anglers spend on gear and gas in a season. I think New Zealand is similar. Europe has some amazing places to fish, but you're right that the licensing is a mess.
I've fished Slovenia for marble trout, and it was very similar to how you described Spain. The rivers I was fishing are managed by private organizations that handle much of the management (stocking etc) and make licenses available to the public, but the cost was something like 90 Euros per day for each section of river. People who live nearby can get a discount by buying a punchcard with 20 days worth of fishing or something, and they have to punch it each day they fish. I spent more on licenses in three days there than I do in three years in the US, even fishing multiple states as a nonresident. It was totally worth it for the rare experience, but I'd hate to have my home waters work like that!
I recently decided to get into Kayak fishing and have really enjoyed your videos, well done sir! As a “newbie” I just wish they’d write the regs so pure beginners like me could simply understand the rules! I don’t want to break the rules but there seem to be so many variables it seems inevitable. I’m thankful for the variety of species and opportunities but the regs are not written for new fisherman and/or regular guys to understand and implement.
Salmon are garbage fish
Grew up in MN, where the regulations book was about the size of an owner’s manual for a crescent wrench.
Moved to WA and I couldn’t figure out when bass opener was because it’s not just one date, you have to look up the exact lake you are fishing.
Mind blown
Yes, it’s getting much more complicated now than in the past without any improvements being made. Closing hatcheries and closing down access to fish that still are there while the rules were being changed to prevent fisheries in unrelated areas.
As far as saltwater goes I agree with you that sport is not the issue but the commercial industry.
I do feel that the best option for salmon and steelhead takes should be the first one or two that the area has been designated for and then you are done.
I did like the look on the regulations from other countries too.
Monetary doesn't bother me much, I just buy the get everything licenses and don't worry about it. The regs however get quite annoying even lake to lake. Far more lakes should just fall under general year round rules imo just for the sake of simplification. Then there's like the Columbia and its tributaries, is this stretch a lake/reservoir or is it still a river? How far down can I fish this? Oh cross that line and this changes. The app definitely has helped make that more accessible. I get emergency regs on Salmon and sometimes those closures can make sense when necessary, but man they can be annoying and feel like they're getting way more pervasive with a lot more species. And so many dates are hard to plan around because they get announced too close to the seasons. Hali dates. Shrimp dates. Crab openers. Etc. You get a lot of this with the hunting and special hunts too, our draws always feel so late.
Oh and the fucking catch card games. Shuffling which catch card I need and having different dates I need to turn them in and mail them. JUST LET ME INPUT IT ONLINE ALREADY!
That and turning everything in to a derby with tiny seasons on pressured fish. Certain fisheries I swear would have way less pressure if they just had a standard 30 day season open in the reg book instead of doing the date games with emergency rules with open closed, open closed, and hyping limited things when you get everyone and their mom out on the same day to get out before the seasons gone
Great message - thanks for sharing it with your audience....though in reading some of the comments, it didn't sink it with everyone. I found it a well thought out, reasoned assessment of our fisheries' value/complexity. I'm a fisheries biologist who's worked in Washington most of my 25+ year career. I dont' work for WDFW are set regs but I've worked in fish management in other states, and I understand the regs as well as the constraints put on our fishereies by the region's increasing population, ESA-listings, tribal co-management challenges, etc. Your message that simplifying the regs = less opportunities is 100% spot-on and I wish that would sink in with people.
Yeah a lot of people don’t get it.
Moving from Europe this bible fishing book is crazy
Europe's privatization of river and lake systems is crazy to me.
Yes its ridiculous.
Interesting topic. Yes, the regulations are complex because the situation is complex. There is a large population putting a huge demand on limited resources. I would rather have the complex regs with the increased opportunity. People need to have more patience and take timeto understand the reg. book. Yes, it could be organized to make it easier im sure. Make some suggestions, folks! I like the Wa. Fishing App. It would be better if it didnt need to download and update everytime it opened. I would like to see some reciprocity on license feeswith neighboring states, if you have a license Wa. You could get a reduced fee in neiboring state. B.C. has a fare fee system i think and they manage the interior fisheries very well. Wa. Could takesome lessons.
I wish BC was a bit simpler like Washington where it was combined Saltwater and Freshwater, but we have the really awkward situation of the Province being responsible for Freshwater (Non-tidal) and Steelhead, and the Federal government being responsible for Saltwater and Salmon (including in freshwater). This results in a nightmare of you needing to have to check multiple spots to see what the regulations are (ie a River may have a closed section listed in the freshwater regs and then a limited salmon opening listed in the federal salmon regulations). Compound that with often conflicting information and agencies who love to write rules in quasi-legalese results in the average person being confused AF around what is actually open and what the acceptable manner of fishing for said species is. And we don't have an app for freshwater, just a mediocre one for saltwater that often does not contain the right rules for fisheries. But, we do get a more actively managed fishery that supposedly gives us more opportunities as anglers, rather than blanket closures. I am glad we aren't Europe and our fisheries are mostly still public.
I am willing to pay way more, but i know nothing will improve anyways. Two fisheries that thrive, shad and walleye, are not managed at all 😂😂😂
I’m a Washington resident want to get started fishing, but damn it’s confusing.
Sounds like you need a new hobby. Its not that hard.
Let me save everyone interested in coming out to the west coast to fish, a lot of time and money... it's not worth it stick to the gulf coast...God bless Florida,Texas,Louisiana,Alabama and Mississippi
As someone who has lived in Texas, Alabama, and Florida I can say I enjoy my life in the West way more. Just something about having all these public lands and mountains.
Two things that I think WA does not do well:
The language and how the rules are presented are extremely confusing. Clarity is not a priority. Of the states that I've fished, I think Texas does this the best. Their rules are really cleanly laid out and use plain spoken language. They also tell you want you can do, whereas a lot of WA regs state what you can't do. This obscures what the actual opportunity is. As someone who moved to this state, it was really hard to figure out.
They also have a lot of false precision in their season structure & limits. This false precision leads to a lot of needless complexity. In some places this is to get around ESA impacts (but not always), but even then they clearly don't have the ability to measure, model or forecast to a level of accuracy that is consistent with the level of specificity in the regulations.
That's an interesting observation about what is and what isn't legal perspective. Framing the regulations in a way more specifically about what is legal may help some people.
Since I moved here from Arizona and started fishing about 25 years ago I have stated to others many times that "to go fishing in Washington you need to take a lawyer with you to read the regulations and interpret them, a river guide to tell you where you are on the river and how you can fish that section and a fisheries biologist to identify and tell you if that fish is legal or not." I often wonder if it is worth it, especially since I haven't caught a Steelhead in almost a decade.
I moved here from Colorado. I didn't find it very hard at all.
Not sure I agree about free fishing in the ocean. I was in the Coast Guard from 76-80 and we did a great deal of work protecting our 200 mile limit. So there is certainly management within our "boundary" to keep foreign fisheries from operating within that boundary. While it is federally funded much of the Coast Guard stations are within the states such as Oregon, Washington and California with state support for search and rescue, location support such as prime pier locations, etc. Outside of the 200 mile limit I would support free fishing.
As $0 of license fees are used to support Coast Guard operation and CG primarily supports protection of commercial fisheries I can't agree. I pay my federal taxes already. Paying for rockfisg, lingcod, tuna, and halibut which require no resources for management doesn't make sense to me. The real impacts on those fisheries come from monitoring of commercial operations and they should pay their share but they don't pay enough so we are forced to cover the gap.
@@spiltmilt I can see your point about the CG and federal funding. My understanding is WA state Fish and Wildlife manage the ground fish policies. This means monitoring, scientific collection, blending commercial and recreational fishing opportunities, etc. So that would mean resources applied toward this I would think ?
A lot of the regs are confusing so no matter how well I think that I understand them and am following all of the rules I sweat bullets whenever approached by enforcement. You not only have the regs pamphlet but there are also RCF rules to research and follow. I think where things go wrong is this just happened to a friend of mine. Fishing for salmon from shore. He drove a long way and arrived at the spot which is very popular and people were fishing until dark. He set up his tent and camped on the river. The next morning in the pre-dawn light he cast out his offering. A few minutes later he was approached by enforcement and given a huge fine. Unknown to him there was an emergency closure at midnight he was completely unaware of. Didnt matter he got the fine and had to pay it because it would have cost him more money to travel back to contest the ticket not to mention the time and travel distance. P.S. He had no cell service to check regs before he cast his line in.
Regulations should be published once per year and it should be absolutely illegal to change them in between but tyrannical government dose whatever they want
Thanks again Tyler for helping make sense of, what is otherwise, a nebulous and highly charged topic. The time and energy you put into gathering and sharing this information is much appreciated!
Holy crap dude! You just ripped open a giant hole in the natural resource continum. This topic exposes alot of the intricacies of natural resource management. I found it interesting to see the highlighted differences. Just based on those observations you could surmise that that countries with little or no regulation most likely had a larger subsistence fisheries. While here and in Europe fishing is a recreational activity.
I thought that the Japanese approach to salmon was interesting. Seems like we're destined for that our selves here in the PNW.
I can't agree that the over specific regulations are wise. That train of thought leads to fractured/divided management agencies and law. Those two things create situations for things like the green Peter incident.
I thank you for this video! This illustrated a much bigger problem in natural resource management.
The regulations in Washington have disincentivized me from fishing, especially exploring new waters. Using landmarks as fishing boundaries is confusing when you’re not familiar with the area. I think, at one point the Methow River used telephone poles as a boundary marker.
It can be difficult to navigate, when you have general regulations with exceptions and emergency rules. Add in seasons for “lowland lakes” when the lake next to it is open year round and there used to be split season lakes too. I think there was a river that was open for salmon on certain days of the week. Also buoyant vs non-bouyant lure restrictions. Often, it’s not worth the risk of trying a new fishery for fear of accidentally breaking the law.
The Fish Washington app gives me greater confidence, but it can be buggy and I’ve heard it doesn’t always have correct information.
I lived in Utah for a few years. Overall, I think their fisheries are managed better. They have issues with regulations that can be confusing at times, but better than here.
moved to Washington from Northern Indiana. when I first grabbed the regulations I was shocked at the price and book. Indiana has a trout/Salmon stamp to purchase along with fish license. Still not way near what I pay here. $23.00 lic. $11.00 trout/salmon. ohio non resident $51.00 Michigan non resident $76. still spend more here for Washington and non resident Oregon.
A more relevant topic might be the actual ecological value of each state 's permit system and the real ecological value of adhering to the rules.
Relevant yes but more difficult given the wide range of challenges faced by fisheries managers in all the states. There are rules in Washington that make no biological sense to me but I also understand that providing opportunity to fish river and lake systems that are also occupied by endangered salmonid runs is really challenging.
@@spiltmilt Yep. And the opportunities are decreasing by the day, at least here in SW WA rivers in Pacific County....lots of river shutdowns coming in March. Thanks for highlighting these issues in a rational format.
Yeah I lived in Vancouver, WA for five years and watched rivers like the East Fork of the Lewis go from great to terrible. Largely brought on by lawsuits by the Wild Fish Conservancy and the elimination of hatchery stocks. I really do think that there needs to be some reform on hatchery management in sw. WA rivers as the returns in many of those rivers is well below what others are getting in the same areas in nearby Oregon or by tribal run hatcheries in the region. For nearly the entire time I lived there the North Fork hatchery on the Lewis didn't produce a single harvestable run of Spring Chinook while the nearby Kalama easily met escapement goals each year.
I personally believe that most of our salmon are getting intercepted by commercial fleets in Alaska and BC waters either intentionally or as by-catch. Bloated pinniped populations are problematic as well but both of those are really large issues to take on.
Very interesting! I guess we really don't have it near as bad as we like to complain that we do. Thank you!
$70 for a resident license seems steep compared to Virginia
Missouri for example the fishing permit is $12 for all species for the year. $49 for non-residents. Military discounts and free permits for anglers over 65. They also offer tiered lifetime permits based on age. I would argue they have equal or better freshwater fishing opportunities and better management.
Lets be fair. There are way more fishing opportunities in Washington state than Missouri. The number of species and shellfish in the PNW exceeds that available in Missouri many times over.
@@spiltmilt I agree due to Washington being a coastal state. But in terms of freshwater gamefish species, I would argue Missouri has as many opportunities. I think the higher costs in Washington are driven in part to the balance of interest between Commercial and Sport Fisherman. I am fully aware that commissioners are in bed with some of the self interest groups.
It just seems mind boggling to me that Missouri can have successful sport fishery programs at a fraction of the cost Oregon and Washington charge. I feel strongly we are shooting ourselves in the foot by pinching sport fisherman with fees and ultra complex regulations.
The creeks in my town growing up in Oregon, where I discovered my love of fishing are all closed. Zero opportunities for the next generation to enjoy what I enjoyed by riding my bike to the creek.
I do not like the direction WDFW and ODFW have been heading the past 20 years.
Maybe I misunderstood the opening spoken paragraph but the annual Fish WA license for $69.55 includes fresh/salt, two pole, salmon and crab cards etc as an “all in one”. I agree that WA regs are incredibly confusing to the point of absurdity though, and the cost is WAY more than it should be for what we get. This is absolutely not a troll post, btw. I really enjoy your content and hope to meet you on the water someday!
You are correct good catch.
There are a lot of rules, but honestly most lowland lakes don't have many and they don't usually change. Mountain lakes usually have no rules at all except for the minimum size and daily limit.
This is true. Lake regs alone are simple
Saltwater regs in Washington aren't terribly complex as long as you're paying attention to the emergency changes. Freshwater is so tough because of the endangered salmon, steelhead, sturgeon management at the micro level. You nailed it saying a one-size-fits-all approach for freshwater here would just take opportunity away with the most restrictive need. States that don't have to worry about managing a sport fishery for critical species really don't need such regs specific to each river/tributary/lake that might contain these fish that need to be conserved.
WDFW has done a "wonderful job" (not really) with Puget Sound. My fishing partner calls it the Dead Sea". When I came her in the 70s Everyone caught their limits. There were True Cod, Ling Cod, Red Snapper, Sea Bass and many salmon. After the WDFW allowed the commercials to come in and drag the bottom, lots of habitat was ruined. All the cod and Snapper are gone now. Fishing in Areas 11 and 13 (my main areas) is very different. I used to live right on the water and I fished every week for many years. Now its a 6 hour drive for me... hardly worth the gas to get there. The WDFW has a lot of people on their boards who do not fish (at all) and they really don't care.
Red Snapper don't occur in Puget Sound. Rock Fish populations are recovering in Puget Sound and salmon fishing in Puget Sound has been particularly good for the past few years especially Kings, Coho, and Pinks.
@@spiltmilt "Yellow Eye" was another name for Red Snapper I was told. Maybe I have the wrong name, but no one has caught them for a very long time. I would say since the 80s. I fish around Tacoma in area 11 and 13 mostly.
Older generations simply didn't understand the life history or these rockfish species which led to over exploitation. You can't take limits of 70 year old rockfish forever before it collapses. At least we know better now
@@spiltmilt I agree. We learned the hard way.
Being an Oregon resident who is licensed in Oregon and Washington (and living within range of fishing both sides of the Columbia, it's tributaries, and coast) not only have I seen the costs rise as an in-state angler but I do feel a bit bad for those that are paying to fish here from out of state. Not trying to say that I think it should be cheaper for an out-of-state angler to fish here necessarily (git off my lawn >_< ) but paying damn near twice as much is pretty crazy. It sounds like based on what you discussed in this video, its just the status quo and could be worse. But I only fish freshwater in WA, and even I am paying muuch less for that opportunity (still giving me access to the CR and tributary salmon and steelhead) and some years tagging more fish with that opportunity than I am as an in-state resident of Oregon. I still buy all the extras in Oregon (two-rod endorsement, hatchery harvest card - should probably stop that, shellfish license, etc) but even just the price of admission for a general fishing license, combined angling tag, and CR basin endorsement blows me away with how badly Oregon's prices have ballooned in recent years.
And now Oregon is going through a change in director of F&W, so I honestly wonder what effect that might have on management moving forward. They claimed that Director Melcher's ability to keep the cost of fishing licenses from rising was a notable achievement of his tenure, but I actually saw the cost of licenses rise quite a lot in that time so I'm not sure what they were getting at with that claim. Maybe that it didn't go even higher than it could have?? Either way, I feel like it's only a matter of time before WDFW attempts to make their costs more in line with Oregon's, but I honestly hope they still continue to allow (what I think is) a reasonable cost for an out of state angler. I find certain opportunities in Washington to be much more lucrative during times of the year where things just seem dead and stagnant in Oregon. That being said, I guess a one-day license is always an option. I always buy both licenses and just make sure that I find ways to use the opportunity to make the cost worthwhile, and I feel fortunate that I've found some fisheries where the cost is worth the price of admission.
As you stated in another social media post last week, I hope that Washington can follow Oregon's footsteps and incorporate a license management app on phones, as that's been a really nice feature to have. And I hope Oregon makes an app similar to the Fish Washington app for regulations. I still find myself getting confused with the layout of all the rules on certain rivers, and I hope they continue to refine that and make it easier to understand, especially for people looking to fish new river systems and quickly get up to speed on the special rules of that system. But no matter what I still keep paper copies of both states in my car just in case. I know active management is the biggest barrier to keeping anglers informed on system closures, and I think having an app that gives push notifications for system closure / regulation changes in-season is the best way to get that information out there to anglers. Thanks for your insight and comparisons! Very interesting stuff.
Um... this topic is so near and dear to my heart that I have sent Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife letters and I've sent my local representatives to Olympia letters with no return response yet. But I'm not done. Let be me be unironically direct and angry, the Washington Regulations must be simplified. It isn't a conversation or a request. Right off the bat, I'll tell you that the complexity all but guarantees non-compliance. Example: I was out of compliance with the 2 pole rules on shared border waters (the Columbia) for the first 2 years I was here (as an aside, retrictions on the midwest waters were most leinant on rivers, you could have 3 lines and 15 (!) set lines on the Missouri River). I just had no idea. Another point is that the rules are so complex the app or even Fish and Wildlife can get the enforcement wrong. A stretch of river I fish, the app literally says 2 poles allowed, then later says 2 poles not allowed. It is time for somebody to collectively unF@#$ themselves and be reasonable. Another example, I was trying to plan a possible guided Halibut trip, and the booklet has a link for dates etc, but the link doesn't lead you the answer. I have an immediate suggestion, stop trying to manage the fisheries so precisely. Make one set of rules for each pool of the Columbia and one set of rules for entire rivers. And yes, make more water barbless/catch and release if you are concerned about the population. Look, I am NOT a fisheries scientist, but I do work in the government, and this is not how you do. Really, this needs an overhaul, and no Department of Fish and Wildlife person will not at least hear from me about this before I am done. It has to change.
SO you are basically arguing for less opportunity because you can't navigate the rules. I disagree. Its not hard to understand and if you need help reach out to the agency directly or someone who has a better understanding.
I can see why you might think that from what I wrote, and I understand this isn't the '60s anymore. There are going to be special rules. But I'm highly educated person, trying dliigently to follow the rules, and I find them inscrutable. The answers are just NOT there, because they are trying to write in every possibility. It is too much, I don't have any idea how to simplify, but it must be done. One thing IS true, and I want to stress, we have an embarassment of riches for fishing opportunity here. You are traveling the world to catch them all, but it would take me a lifetime just to catch all the Washington fish. And maybe the cost of that embarrassment of riches is the regulations as they are... @@spiltmilt
I fish 200 days a year in many states and countries and have never been cited. If I can do it. Anyone can.
Well, I really do love your videos, and I like this topic quite a lot. But um... aren't you a educated fisheries biologist or something (I remember something about that in a video yours, I may have the exact detail wrong). I had a commander who used to say, "If I can do it, anyone can." I've never agreed with these kinds of statements, but I'll stick to watching fishing videos, I suppose. Didn't mean to offend, sorry if I did. @@spiltmilt
As someone from Idaho, coming to Oregon I would agree that the regulations are overly complicated in Oregon and Washington. My father doesn't fish anymore because of it. Sadly, I believe the increased regulations, reduced fishing opportunities, and fishing fees have pushed me away from the sport. Local ponds are even closing down here in Salem, Oregon due to the homelessness. Idaho regulations are simple, communicated clearly, posted in obvious spots with huge signs, and have clear language. The biggest concern with regulations in Idaho is the confusing language regarding sturgeon rigs, which needs to be clarified. (suggested vs required line test) I also believe communication plays a role in these regulations, In Oregon, I have used regulations that are posted in the book, but then told they're different and it's been informed digitally, then even local enforcement was unsure of said changes when I called the local offices. The wardens in Idaho are 1000x better at dealing with the public and sportsmen as well. I have 3 of my local wardens on my phone, they would answer any question or concern I had while fishing or hunting. They are a huge part of the community and are there to educate unless you're very obviously breaking the law. Every Oregon Warden or OSP officer checking my fish or licenses has been less than professional. I had an officer try telling me that a hatchery steelhead fish DOES have an adipose fin and tried citing me until I pulled out the BOOK of regulations. (I have the encounter videotaped too) Side note, in Idaho, they are starting to listen to $ in some fisheries though, and it will be the downfall for those fisheries. Their regulations favor more access and opportunity for fishermen which is different in Oregon and Washington. The 2-pole permit is just as it states, two poles. I know in Oregon it's not the same and targeting certain species is limited to 1-pole, like Sturgeon. In Idaho, you can target sturgeon with 2 rods, or even one rod of sturgeon, and bass fish with the other at the same time as long as you're within reasonable distance to attend to the sturgeon rod. Just my two cents.
I fish in Idaho a lot and never encountered signage. I do believe their rules are simpler but the rules around salmon and steelhead are equally complex as Oregon and Washington.
As for law enforcement officers I've had a mixed bag of experiences in Oregon, Washington, and Idaho. Some professional and courteous and others were jerks but saw no real clear pattern between states.
I am from Boise/Eastern Idaho, and popular fishing locations have signage stating regulations. Typically around launching/parking location. American Falls on the Snake put up 3 huge signs when they made changes to the regulations 2 years ago. I even visited last year, and they closed an access point due to being Idaho Power property, even that was addressed with a sign on the gate. I guess my experiences show signage to recent changes in regulation. I would assume lesser populated or visited locations don't post signs, possibly linked to budgetary and traffic concerns. I can see the reason for the lack of a sign due to less traffic and need, compared to said example of American Falls.
I don't fish for Salmon or Steelhead up north in Idaho, too much combat fishing for my liking. Also, usually, B runs, are not as pretty or as tasty as Oregon/Washington Salmon/Steelhead. With that being said, I have heard other fishermen complaining when they go up north because of the regulations.
Most of my encounters with law enforcement were within smaller communities in both states. My experiences with the Eastern Idaho Game Wardens may sway my bias a bit. @@spiltmilt
I lived in northern Idaho. Zero signage up there.
Regulations in western states are ridiculous. All the extra permits and tags, etc are also out of control. I understand that not all bodies of water can survive with the same regulations, but if you’re going to do that, just put all the regs in a section for that body of water so you don’t have to bounce around to 3 or 4 different sections then hope you didn’t miss or forget some specific regulation. Also the boat permit and invasive species fees are stupid. Add them to everyone’s boat registration and don’t bother out of state visitors with it.
More regulations w democratic leadership. What have we gotten in return? The fishing sucks in Washington
I think the fishing is pretty good here. I have consistent success. I am able to put away 100's of pounds of salmon, walleye, kokanee, and bottomfish in my freezer every year. Do I think it could be improved absolutely but try growing up in places like Kansas. No public lands and limited fishing opportunity unless you love Bluegills and bullheads.
I mean I get it, but the permit and invasive species are literally a fee only on outsiders to fund the stations that check outside boats coming in...
@@tazeat it’s a hassle. Just build it into the licenses or something. Too many things to keep track of and not something people always know they need to know. Too many ways for an honest person to get screwed with a violation of a rule/law they didn’t even know existed. You shouldn’t have to be a lawyer to Fing go fishing or boating. Charge what you want to fund what you want, just make it easier for people to not get in trouble. For instance, was watching one of those ranger tv shows and they pulled over a guy who had this license, that license, this permit, etc, except one. had all he needed, was clearly not trying to get away with something, but he didnt know he needed this one other thing. had 3 or 4 relevant licenses and permits but didnt know about one more so he gets a ticket and all his catch confiscated. that's BS.
If WDFW would put more fish in the water, maybe we wouldn’t have so many endangered species.
The population in Washington has doubled since 1980. I’m thankful we still have a viable public fishery. Without regulation our waterways would have been denuded long ago.
I could write a book here myself. The Washington Dept of Fish and Wildlife expects us to call in EVERY morning if we are fishing rivers because of special closures. IE: The season is open, the regs say "whatever river is open, its 3:30 in the morning and we are supposed to call in (there is no one there at that time). We will be issued a ticket if we get caught. Its bogus. PS: I don't own a cell phone. So calling later in the day is out of the question.
What state/province do you live in?
@@spiltmilt I live near Republic, Washington on Curlew Lake.
WDFW does not require you to call in every morning. That's a lie.
@@spiltmilt I did not literally mean every day. But my fishing partner got a $125 ticket for fishing on a river that had closed although the regs said the season was open. What I meant was in order to be safe, you better call in or check the internet page before going. I did not mean to mislead. I could have worded it better.
Half of Australia, including Tasmania requires a fishing licence, originally this covered the cost of stocking trout but has been extended saltwater as well.
That is false. You do not need a fishing license for marine waters in Tasmania. fishing.tas.gov.au/recreational-fishing/recreational-sea-fishing-licences
My apology I didn't scroll down and have only fished freshwater in Tasmanian.
No worries
B.C seems perfect regulation wise. In Washington they call residents “customers”. It’s a business and not a public resource.
Move to Thailand, Careful what you say
What does that mean?