Document text
Mark Freeman Commentary Bait anglers get boost from ODFW Efforts to legislate fall bait-fishing off the upper Rogue River have hit a snag that is now poised to drown out even fly-fishermen�s passionate pleas on behalf of wild summer steelhead. The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, asked to wade in and settle a long-standing dispute between the upper Rogue�s fly-fishing and bait-fishing constituents, will officially oppose efforts to ban bait from the upper Rogue during November and December. Some fly-fishermen, who have a flies-only season for steelhead each Sept. 1 through Oct. 31 in the upper Rogue, have pressed for the extension as a means to protect wild summer steelhead from excessive catch-and-release fishing with chunks of roe or worms. The main focus, however, is on the bait-fishing frenzy during the first week in November, when bait-fishing is its most effective. Banning bait fishing, and allowing angling only with flies or artificial lures, will not allow appreciably more wild steelhead to survive. If anything, biologists say, it will cause more overall negatives to fishing effort and the angling economy than benefits to steelhead survival. So the agency positively wants to keep the status-quo for upper Rogue angling rules, including the use of bait in November and December. "We�re not going to support further restrictions on the fly season, or on any of the proposals that would add restrictions on the upper Rogue," says Mike Evenson, Rogue District fish biologist for the ODFW. "We feel the existing rules are adequate to address the conservation needs. Additional restrictions won�t bring us anything significant." But it�s a significant message the agency is sending the Oregon Fish and Wildlife Commission on the eve of its two-month tango with setting new angling rules for 2001 and beyond. Just three months ago, the head of the ODFW�s sport-fishing regulations process said the agency will look hard at supporting an extension of the upper Rogue�s flies-only fishing season through December. And Medford attorney Don Denman, who sits on the seven-member commission that sets state angling rules, lent his public support as well. Denman said it seems like an effective conservation measure whose time has come. But the ensuing three months spun the issue 180 degrees. And not, Evenson says, just because the upper Rogue proposal accounted for about a third of the 1,000 public comments to the ODFW since the issue came to light in May. Evenson says the current rules that allow bait-fishing only with tough-to-swallow large hooks are plenty good at making catch-and-release fishing with bait viable. Biologists from the National Marine Fisheries Service, which helped craft the current bait rules, also agrees. Upon further biological review, the numbers just don�t support the notion that the proposal will actually make a difference in wild steelhead survival. First of all, the wild steelhead numbers over Gold Ray Dam remain stable, averaging about 3,400 wild adults in the �90s. That�s well within the 60-year range for wild steelhead counted at the dam, Evenson says. Even if the fish needed extra protection, the proposed changes would not do it, Evenson says. Specifically, the wild steelhead caught and released each fall by bait-fishermen account for only a small sliver of the total wild run, so removing the threat of catch-and-release fishing creates little true impact. A 1998-99 fall survey of upper Rogue anglers estimates that sport-fishermen caught and released 319 wild summer steelhead adults in �98, and 352 adults in �99. That accounted for only 9 percent and 15 percent respectively of the total wild steelhead runs into the upper Rogue those years. Studies in Canada suggest that catch-and-release bait fishing would result in killing about 5 percent of the released fish. Even if upper Rogue anglers killed twice as many released fish as that, only 32 wild steelhead in �98 and 35 in �99 would have been spared had the bait fishing been banned, Evenson says. That�s a paltry savings, Evenson says, for the potential cost of a bait ban. A 1992 bait ban on the Illinois River has sent anglers scurrying away from the once-popular winter steelhead fishing river. Evenson does not want to do the same to the upper Rogue area in the fall, where bait-fishing for steelhead is the only show in town. "I think it all adds up � what we have to gain from restricting bait is pretty slim," Evenson says. "It�s probably not even statistically detectable. If you put more restrictions in place, it won�t have an impact on the status of these runs." Evenson will present these and other findings to the Oregon Fish and Wildlife Commission when it grapples with the proposal during its Sept. 22 meeting in Portland. Having agency biologists actively campaigning against a fishing regulation change is often, but not always, fatal. Sometimes it still hinges upon who from the general public shows up at the Portland meeting, and whether their testimony is compelling. "It�s not easy to predict how things will go," Evenson says. "There are a lot of people on both sides of this issue who really feel they got a stake in this." (Staff writer Mark Freeman covers the outdoors for the Mail Tribune. Call him at 776-4470, or e-mail him at: [email protected] ) Outdoor Journal Obituaries | Sports | Business | Classifieds | Tempo | Prime Times | So Oregon Sites | Outdoor Journal | Subscribe | Contact | Movies | Advertise | Real Estate Showcase | Archive | Editorials | Letters to the editor | Religion | Wake-up Call | NIE | Cyber Chef | Job Network | So Oregon Weather | WSJ Northwest | Forums | AP Wire | AP Money | F.A.Q. | Awards Ottaway Newspapers, Inc. The Community Newspaper Subsidiary of Dow Jones & Co, Inc Copyright �The Mail Tribune 2000, Medford, Oregon USA