This is a double post but judging by reading this thread it might be helpful.


With the Steelhead closure scattered among several threads I thought a dose of reality might be helpful. When the QIN pulled for conservation the reported harvest number was 249 ( no break out on H/W ) which is not good. Then factor in that the QIN are non selective so their impacts on wild are substantial. Using the 2016 / 17 run reconstruction the 10 yr average for QIN is 583 W and 1376 H. The Rec impacts are 94 W and 5226 H . These are the average for 10 years with years up in number as well as down.

Recs on average harvest a greater portion of Steelhead than QIN ( remember Chehalis tribal are also in the states share but not in these averages ) because we are selective. So at the time of the QIN shutdown the 249 net harvest on average would have an impact of 99 W fish. As the river was mudville I doubt that Rec impacts were at 99 when the agency shut things down, in fact the 10 year average says Rec could fished normal seasons and still not equalled the QIN impacts on W.

Simply put this is not about conservation but rather about the QIN fisheries being non selective and Rec are selective. Just as in the Springer closure this is what it is about and frankly the agency just rolls over to the QIN on this issue. After due thought and consideration I think I am giving them to much credit. They are not even in the game!