Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
I’m not seeing a change. ‘View active topics’ seems to be workimg for me just as it always has. I have set no additional options.
Brian, the “jitter” problem I recently reported to you is now much improved; however, it is not gone completely. There is still some minor “jitters” when I edit below the initial edit box, but it no longer jumps to the top of the text with every keystroke :). It’s still slightly irritating but at least now I can edit and type below the initial edit box in IE. Thanks for doing the upograde.
caveman,
I’ve read 2 of your posts today. I concluded that your moniker here in the forum fits you like a glove.
So Sandy there studies out there have addressed this particular topic?
There are dozens of them just on trout. A Google search will provide you with a long list. Going to scientific research sites will provide higher quality studies.
Here’s just one (picked at random) — not the greatest study (a study of studies really), but it gives you an idea.
http://www.acuteangling.com/Reference/C&RMortality.html
P.S. Research tends to discourage the use of nets. But some nets are better than others. Naturally, a lot depends on the actual situation; for example, it is likley that trapping a fish in a net and leaving it in the water would be better than picking up the fish by hand and putting in a boat.
The TB website shows that Ken Masel is the 2010 scholarship chairperson under the Mike Mitchell administration.
Ken announced his resignation from that post at the January 2010 meeting.
….when you turned it back
I’m not sure what you meant by this phrase. If you mean “catch and release”, that is returning the fish to the lake after catching it, you are not doing THIS fish any favors. If one desires to release a fish after catching it, studies show that one must NOT handle the fish very much or very long. Mortality rates can be quite high if you remove the fish from the water, or tire it out from fighting it too hard. Another probelm for those the use lures (and absolutely if you use bait) is what’s called “hooking mortality”. Any sort of deep hooking, or excessive tissue damage (easy to do if you are using treble hooks), and almost certainly if you see any blood, often causes the fish to die within an few days of release. From these photos, it is clear that this fish has been handled too much to be returned to the lake. If you are going to hold it up for photos etc, then take it home and eat it!
How are people able to do this without access to fish?
Actually, it is quite easy to get fish fry. Not only are there private hatcheries, people’s private trout ponds and private lakes, but all you really need is a bucket.
There are hundreds of lakes in this state that have been ruined for fishing by illegal stocking. These idiots have no idea what they are doing, nor do they understand the potential consequences (e.g., over reproduction, or worse) of what they apparently think is a non-risky simple act of being a mini-Johnny-Appleseed. There are dozens of highly trained biologists at the state who study this stuff and attempt to make the right decisions about what and when to stock, and all that work can go down the drain because some Yo-Yo thinks he knows best. These are VERY selfish people.
I can’t tell you much, but I can tell you that once a couple of years ago I was coming down the Ira Spring trail after having x-countried in that general area. Near the parking area, I overtook a woman in her 70’s who was also coming down. I decided to walk the short way to the cars with her even tho I was moving somewhat faster than her. She was doing great, just a little slow. It turned out that she had BOTH knees replaced in the relatively recent past. She loved hiking and wasn’t about to give it up. She had not been to the top of Bandera or anything, but she did say that she had just done 2000′ vertical that day!
Having lived 30 years in California hiking/fishing the Sierras, and now 30 years in Washington hiking/fishing the Cascades, I see many differences btwn the 2 situations. I will mention just one: in Washington large portions of various high mountain designated wilderness areas are under the management of the Forest Service; whereas in California the National Park Serivice manages a large portion of these high mountain wilderness areas. (I haven’t done a factual analysis of this statement, but that is my impression — if I’m wrong I hope someone will correct me). The NPS has always been far more aggressive about what might be called the “pristine character” of wilderness areas than the USFS. The cultures of the 2 agencies is quite different. It is true, of course, that Wilderness Act of 1964 governs both agencies when it comes to managing wilderness areas, but everyone, it seems, has a differing view what what phrases such as “umtrammeled by man” means.
I’m not sure what “Sotra” means (unless you mean “sorta”), but in any case, it does sound like this situation is not quite the same kind of deal that went down in 2004 (I think it was) when DNR purchased the nearby “Crown Lakes”. That deal was definitely a “blackmail” deal.
I find it hard to believe that DNR is “not interested” in purchasing a parcel of land smack dab in the middle of its NRCA. I would guess it is more likely DNR isn’t interested at the asking price. These lands are usually purchased for their timber value long ago, but are now being sold as land for development……at a far higher price per acre rate.
As you indicate, this doesn’t sound like a quick and dirty “get rich quick” scheme, but I suspect it is a “sell for inflated price” proposition. The owners indicate on their website that logging can be done (“thinning” they say, so I suspect there are some limits on logging), but go on to say that the land can be used for:
“Perhaps, the ultimate location for a private lodge. Or, maybe, the most breathtaking building site in all of King County.”
This is similar to what happened with the “Crown Lakes”. The owner in that case attempted to value the land based not on timber (especially since it was already logged :)), but as if the land could be developed into a number of exclusive lake side estates. DNR did finally buy that land for inclusion into the NRCA at a highish price ($5 million I think), but not at the outrageous original asking price.
I’ve got to think this situation hinges on price, not interest. (But again I am only speculating.)
There are 2 parcels of private property op there. One is for sale http://www.baldhornet.com/1Property.html. Winter of 2007 or 08 (I don’t remember which) the owners plowed the road to show perspective timber buyers the property.
Thanks for the info Kent. Looking at the website you provided, it is clear that it is this Bald Hornet group that cut this new road (supposedly to provide access for cutting timber on the land).
This Bald Hornet parcel is smack dab in the middle of the newly extended Mt Si preservation area. I am highly suspicious that this is another one of those “blackmail” deals where the owners know the state government would like to remove private land in the middle of a public land area. So the land owner pretends to put it up for sale as prime development property in order to force a sale to the state at inflated prices.
This website actually presents this land as if the attraction is logging it (apparently selectively due to existing regulkations), and then building your “dream house”, or perhaps a resort community. Can you imagine……with access via the existing road!! I can’t imagine buying for such a use. My guess is that the property is being offered that way so that when the state makes an offer, the owners will say it is worth far more than the timber on it and will attempt to value it as if it is prime resort development land. (I’m just guessing of course.)
Actually I was wondering why Sandy waited until spring………..
……because I am an old fart. My blood is too thick in the winter to pump!
P.S. You must have had an interesting ski up the Kamakazi trail. 🙂
@Kathy wrote:
I had been told just recently there was trail maintenance with blasting on the Kamikaze trail, and that the trail was closed by the workers.
Yes, there is trail work going (construction I’d say rather than maintenance) on the lower part of the trial, and they’ve closed the Kamikaze trail for safety reasons I presume. But no work was going on that day so we just joined the Kamikaze trail above the heavy construction area. Kathy, I suspect you are right about logging prep since there is already an old clear cut nearby. I guess I was still surprised to see a new road up there since the DNR has recently declared much of that area protected (at least for some areas that are VERY nearby). I guess that means that there are some significant portions of the south side of Tenerife that are in private hands.
@allison wrote:
Any new road or trail construction on the south side of 90 does not surprise me.
I’m talking to the NORTH of I-90.
