: Sparkey's Law?
11-16-2004, 06:25 PM
I just saw that a local Washington guide put up a bunch of pictures from his trips this fall on a famous Washington/Oregon river. Many of these pictures show glory shots where the fish, complete with intact adipose, is held three feet out of the water.
Has Sparkey's law been repealed or were all these pics from the Oregon portion of said river?
For those that don't know, Sparkey's law was recently passed to forbid removal from the water of wild fish with an intact adipose fin in those fisheries that required wild anadromous fish release.
11-16-2004, 07:05 PM
Maybe some are above the law.
11-16-2004, 08:29 PM
Itís amazing that he would do this but he done stuff like this before!
He him self holding fish and his son and side kick!
I saw him over there and that Coho pic HMMM!
11-16-2004, 08:45 PM
I too quickly concluded who this was and checked out the photos. Hum....did not know he was licensed to guide in Orygun. Oh well, nobody will notice.
11-16-2004, 09:38 PM
There is a prominent outfitter a certain Blue Ribbon trout stream in the State that has been posting pictures of his clients' hero shots of that rivers threatened and off limits steelhead for a couple months now.
He notes that the pictures were taken "yesterday" or "this week" and proclaims them to be wild steelhead as well.
Oh well...many in our community believe that because they fish with a flyrod they are above the law, ethics etc. etc. etc.
Umm can't we just send the pics of violations like both of the above to the WDFW? Seem self implicating...no?
11-17-2004, 12:09 AM
He also was promoting fishing on a closed run of fish last month.
11-17-2004, 12:48 AM
I found another E. Washington Flyshop/Outfitter who has posted NUMEROUS photos of wild Klick steelhead taken completely out of the water.
11-17-2004, 01:27 AM
Let's be a little reasonable about this.
You can not expect the many outfitters/shops/guides out their to totally revamp their websites over night so that the pictures that are presented represent the current law. Most of these folks rely on their websites as their main source of advertisement and a quality website is must for a successful business.
However, those that are blatantly violating the law and parading around hero shots taken this year of wild steelhead that are not be handled according to the law should be dealt with (it is obvious to see who is doing such a thing). In many cases, it isn't all the difficult to determine what pictures were taken this year and which ones are from past years (heck, many photos on some of these sites are recycled every year). It is also best, I believe, to give the benefit of the doubt to those that do not appear to be parading around current photos that do not abide by the law but yet, still have older photos on their site.
11-17-2004, 09:27 AM
I am not a fan of this law at all. I think that it is hard to enforce in the least and at its worst it is being used to disparage certain guides or individuals that donít abide by the letter of the law. I would assume that the main purpose of this law is to protect the fish from being mishandled. I seriously doubt that these guides are mishandling these fish and suspect the fish are only out of the water for the short time it takes to snap a picture. I would think that the effort put forth to malign these guides and individuals would be better used to go after those that really do harm the fish with poor release techniques. You can see these folks everyday on the rivers.
11-17-2004, 10:12 AM
I agree that efforts should also be directed at those who are blatently harming fish and I have also felt the law is a feel good measure at best but it is still the law and until repealed, it represents a limit on acceptable behavior in the sport. The person in question hosts a widely read website and often writes about his conservation ethic. I don't think it unreasonable to expect him (or any of us) to both abide by the law and model acceptable behavior.
In my mind this is little different than rules that forbid the keeping of hatchery fish caught during the spring catch & release season. While I would argue that these fish need to be removed from the river no matter when they are caught, if I keep one I am breaking the law and setting a bad example for other anglers.
11-17-2004, 02:13 PM
I agree that we all should obey the laws even if we don't agree with the law.
I have no real opinion about the guide in question except maybe a mild complaint about schools. In fact the few times I have met this guide on the river he has been polite and respected my water to point of asking how he and his clients should float by me. He only had 2 on that occaision.
He just doesn't matter that much to me and I think my time will be better spent letting the others I see know how a fish should be handled. If I can do so safely. I really don't care if others remove the fish from the water for a picture if that is what they wanto do. I do care that they do so in a manner that does the least amount of harm to the fish.
Personally, I rarely take fish pictures of anykind in the water or out. I used to but over time I just don't see the need anymore.
11-17-2004, 02:32 PM
I am with you on the pics. As for the guide, he has always been respectful to me on the water as well. It just irks me about the pics.
11-17-2004, 10:04 PM
Given the history of unethical, impolite and downright jackassed behavior... I wasn't surpised to see the pics, and i believe that they were taken in Wa.
Another reason to avoid these water slappin' sea donkeys like the plague that they are.
11-18-2004, 11:33 AM
i have found pics from at least 3 different prominent guides/outfitters doing the same thing. While i dont agree with it, and believe they also need to respect the law, i don't think you can single out any single guide on this issue. As far as the guide KerryS is reffering to goes, I am only 20, and I took a guide trip with that guide when I was 16. At the time, I was trying to teach myself to fish for steelhead and with parents and relatives who did not fish, I was very frustrated and this guide was the only one I had heard of. The trip went fine, and he seemed like a great guy. Since then I have heard a huge load of stuff talked about him and yet never any specific reasons why people dont like him except for his schools. I guess being a relative newbie to the game, I will pass judgement, but if anyone wants to PM or email me with their take on this guide, and SPECIFICALLY why they have that take, I am all ears. I do agree with all of the posts above though that nobody should be above the law. thanks.
11-19-2004, 03:11 PM
"Hum....did not know he was licensed to guide in Orygun. Oh well, nobody will notice." Hey Inland if you think the person you folks are talking about is not licensed to guide in Oregon call the Oregon Marine Board and ask them(503-378-8587). However if he is working for a licensed Oregon outfitter/guide and is listed on there paperwork as an employee he is legal to guide in Oregon. if you know who he is working for you can ask them to check that. The licensed Oregon outfitter/guide has to sign an affidavit stating all his listed employees have a current first aid card and are on there insurance a copy of which is also sent to the Marine board. The Marine board will go after any one who is in violation of state law. There was one on the John Day river this last year who they caught and pleaded guilty and is now banned from even floating the river.
One quick phone call will answer any questions you have plus it will also stop any wild rummors from flying around the internet. tight lines,brian
11-19-2004, 05:32 PM
the pics dont prove he was working in oregon...while i dont recognize the locations, i would bet they are in washington, few people are dumb enough to risk huge sanctions to fish a few miles up a river they are legally allowed to fish lower down.
11-19-2004, 08:00 PM
I'm not 100% certain who this Guide is but somebody ( and I do know who) operated the very same type of service and was working in the Olympic National Park without a permit. I will not let that go unrewarded in the future, him or anyone else.
11-19-2004, 08:28 PM
heck, why bother getting a park license or a salmon charter license... with wdfw enforcement (and onp), you're more likely to be struck by lightning than for the department to crack down on illegal guiding in washington state.
11-19-2004, 11:16 PM
It was just a smart arsed comment because if HE were fishing in Washington AND holding wild fish outta the water that IS illegal. That is the whole point of this thread, in case you needed that pointed out.
11-20-2004, 04:39 PM
explaining it to me i get it now, "Hum....did not know he was licensed to guide in Orygun. Oh well, nobody will notice." HA HA HA :)
11-20-2004, 11:01 PM
Over on the Westfly board we were discussing this subject after several pics appeared with a wild steelhead on its side, in very little water. In one pic a wild fish was in the bottom of a boat. You'd think this would be easy one on a fly-fishing board, but alas no. "We still treat them better than most fishermen," "If you're really concerned about wild fish, you shouldn't fish them at all," etc.... That said, many, many chimed in later on a related thread and talked sense.