Spey Pages banner

What level of interest would you have in this type of publication

  • Very Interested

    Votes: 14 45.2%
  • Interested

    Votes: 9 29.0%
  • Mildly Interested

    Votes: 3 9.7%
  • Not Interested

    Votes: 5 16.1%
1 - 13 of 13 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
246 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Hello everyone. I am considering putting together a venture that would create a conservation magazine in the NW to discuss and inspire conservation work for wild/native species in Oregon, Washington, Idaho, and Northern California. I will also focus on watersheds as they are integral to our fish that we love. It will give an outlet to any conservation group to publish editorial about their efforts, their focus, and their victories. It will have a section for grassroots work on local watersheds as well as major issues. I hope to attempt to unite sportsmen for conservation work by eliminating the divisiveness that has existed in the past and show that there is much more that we agree on than we disagree on and unite people around that. By giving a voice to any conservation group I hope to bring many of them together. We will focus on articles not only by scientists, but by people with constant boots on the ground. Ranchers, local watershed councils, guides, etc. . . . What I am looking to find out is what kind of interest all of you would have in this type of publication.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
168 Posts
It would great to have a highly-researched based magazine which highlights the challenges facing steelhead. I would also really enjoy a regular column that highlights steelhead fly tying.

Russ
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,503 Posts
I would love to see something that would tie all conservation and environmental efforts together- not just steelhead and salmon, but the whole resource. Combined voices is the only way over usage and over development will be confronted effectively.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
246 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 ·
I would love to see something that would tie all conservation and environmental efforts together- not just steelhead and salmon, but the whole resource. Combined voices is the only way over usage and over development will be confronted effectively.
The biggest issue that I have seen since I have been involved and even before that is that there is a division between conservation and environmental movements. While the platforms are very similar and they agree on 90% of the agenda, the 10% is the part that divides and conquers. This venture is a way to try and unite these two sides by giving all the groups a voice from the same platform. It is also a way to reach out to a broader group than what the non-profits have been able to reach out to. If sportsmen and environmentalists are able to unite and work together on the 90% so much more work can be accomplished and this united group would likely be the single largest lobby in the United States.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
874 Posts
Japple,

I applaud most of your concept. Having served as chair of our local watershed council and member for the last 11(?) years, bringing the "good work" to the forefront would be a great endeavor. It would be great to see a periodical which promotes watershed health, improvement, etc.

However, when you restrict your concern to wild/native species, you negate and contradict your tenet "I hope to attempt to unite sportsmen for conservation work by eliminating the divisiveness that has existed in the past and show that there is much more that we agree on than we disagree on and unite people around that."

My response will likely stimulate a strong knee-jerk reaction from those who are staunch anti-hatchery folks. So be it, but that is case-in-point divisiveness.

I love to eat chukars and pheasants. Our daughters' first meat came from these non-native species. Is their presence in this country categorically bad? I submit not. My family loves to eat steelhead. Unfortunately, in the world we live in today, it is no longer practical to "take" more than a modicum of wild fish; this is not due to hatcheries or hatchery practices in my estimation, but mostly due to human population expansion.

If you truly want to eliminate divisiveness amongst anglers, please consider adding those who appreciate or at least acknowledge hatchery fish to your potential audience.

Here endeth my gospel for the day, let the shxt-storm begin!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
246 Posts
Discussion Starter · #8 ·
I appreciate your response and agree with your sentiment. I do plan to include those groups that are pro-hatchery and give them a voice as well. This publication should spark a conversation. However, the pro. vs. anti-hatchery debate will likely not be discussed very much. Only here and there. I do not want this publication to focus on that extremely divisive issue. Rather it will focus on habitat, harvest, local concerns, current and future concerns, etc. . .

Thanks for giving your thoughts. I need all the assistance I can get.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,239 Posts
Great idea! I think that this is something that is sorely needed, and I agree with your sentiments that overall there is so much we could find to agree on if we look for them rather than the things we differ on.

Keep at it, and keep us posted please,
JB
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,239 Posts
However, when you restrict your concern to wild/native species, you negate and contradict your tenet "I hope to attempt to unite sportsmen for conservation work by eliminating the divisiveness that has existed in the past and show that there is much more that we agree on than we disagree on and unite people around that."

My response will likely stimulate a strong knee-jerk reaction from those who are staunch anti-hatchery folks. So be it, but that is case-in-point divisiveness.

I love to eat chukars and pheasants. Our daughters' first meat came from these non-native species. Is their presence in this country categorically bad? I submit not. My family loves to eat steelhead. Unfortunately, in the world we live in today, it is no longer practical to "take" more than a modicum of wild fish; this is not due to hatcheries or hatchery practices in my estimation, but mostly due to human population expansion.

If you truly want to eliminate divisiveness amongst anglers, please consider adding those who appreciate or at least acknowledge hatchery fish to your potential audience.

Here endeth my gospel for the day, let the shxt-storm begin!
You'll get no **** from me, as I think you raise a valid concern. I do not entirely agree however that there need be any division here. Just my opinion, but the way I see it is that by focusing on known relevant issues surrounding the ecosystem/resource as a whole you would by definition have a priority to wild and native species over non native, hatchery, or farmed varieties. This would not need to turn into an anti hatchery slam, though in some cases there would likely be some specific concern/critique of the particulars of that watershed and it's management practices.

Clearly there could be plenty of issues, with lots of different "solutions" to debate or argue over. These differences don't need to be the central focus however; if these issues are handled respectfully by level heads, I think that a lot of folks could agree on certain specific details that would improve the watershed as a whole. For instance; there are some streams that I would love to see an all wild run on. I'm also pragmatic enough to see that at this point in time it would be a major uphill battle to even begin to go there... in the mean time there are far more pressing issues that could be addressed, many of which likely have a much broader support base.
Cheers,
JB
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
246 Posts
Discussion Starter · #12 ·
The question of hatcheries is whether or not they are a valid form of conservation or if they have a negative impact on the wild populations. The stated goal of hatcheries is to help restore wild runs to self sufficiency. Whether or not they do this or not is part of the debate. This happens to be one of the most contentious issues that we face. This particular issue introduces the most personal bias as well and makes it difficult to be objective. Fortunately, whether people are pro or anti-hatchery, all of us are passionate about fish and that should be the one thing that unites everyone under a banner of conservation to ensure those fish are here for future generations. It is that passion that can get all of us to put aside the hatchery debate and focus on other issues.
 
1 - 13 of 13 Posts
Top