Tug, I'm surprised that you're giving accolades to RichG. Good ole Rich, always confident, nearly always wrong.

I have had a question about NOF for a few years now. I would ask WDFW, but I'm pretty sure they wouldn't spend the time to run the numbers. I heard a few years ago that from mid-December to mid-April, about 40% of the work in the fish management program is devoted to NOF. That's a lot of resources, which is a lot of tax dollars. My question is: How different would our NT recreational salmon seasons look if WDFW didn't participate at all in NOF? We know the treaty tribes would still attend. And they pretty much call the shots for WA treaty and NT fishing. So how different would fishing be for you and me?

BTW, WDFW science hasn't failed. By my observation, WDFW science has continued to improve. Management has failed. Management has failed taxpayers and license buyers.

We may think we "need" strong healthy hatchery fish. Actually WDFW's hatchery fish are healthy for the most part. Hatchery fish health has improved greatly over the decades. What we don't have is the higher smolt to adult survival rates that were enjoyed when the ocean environment was a friendlier place for them.

You're wrong about wild fish. Although wild fish are missing from a lot of places, they still occur in enough rivers that they should be managed for their continued existence. Why? To preserve options for us and for future generations of managers, who I hope are wiser than the current ones. We still have native wild Chinook in the Snohomish, Skagit, and Nooksack River basins and most of the coastal OP rivers. We still have native wild coho in the Stillaguamish and Skagit River basins. And we still have native wild chum and pink salmon in most of the rivers where they have always occurred. And we have native wild steelhead in most Puget Sound and coastal rivers, even if that was mostly by happy accident.

I'd rather not have hatchery fish spawning with wild fish. For one thing, we don't need to. And for another reason, we know that hatchery fish breeding with wild fish leads to reduced productivity of the wild fish. The science is generally conclusive on this. I don't know why some people choose not to believe it, unless it's because they refuse to believe anything that doesn't fit their chosen narrative. (That would be called stupidity, BTW.)

Regarding your example of the Skokomish River, yes it has miles of spawning water, but it is not prime. Through political dealing, the Simpson Timber Co. was able for 50 years to clear cut that watershed like it was their private property. And they did. And that devastated the S. Fork for spawning and rearing. (You may know that the Skokomish is the most frequent flooding river in WA state.) WDFW responded with George Adams hatchery and managed all of Hood Canal for hatchery Chinook, coho, and chum salmon, wiping out whatever wild fish of those species remained.

Since just before and since the Cushman hydro relicensing around 2009 or so, WDFW, NMFS, USFWS, and tribes have been working to restore (and recover under ESA) natural production of salmon and steelhead to various streams in HC watersheds. The Skokomish Tribe wanted to restore spring Chinook and sockeye to the NF Skok and steelhead to both forks, I think. I retired almost 10 years ago and dropped the ball on following up when Covid hit. I keep meaning to check back in with my tribal and Tacoma Power contacts but keep procrastinating. The Tribe imported sockeye from Baker River and spring Chinook from the Skagit hatchery (Suiattle River stock origin). I don't know how those are working out. I don't know if fall Chinook recovery is feasible because the Tribe and WDFW want their cake and to eat it too. Meaning they want to retain the early timed segment of the fall Chinook run (Green River hatchery origin) while restoring the natural later timed wild fall Chinook run using the later returning individuals from the existing hatchery stock. Maybe it can work, but with the relentless harvest pressure in HC and in the river, I think it's a long shot.

Anyway, the Simpson contract ended a while back, and the SF Skokomish watershed has been recovering, but it will be a long while yet before it resembles "prime" salmon habitat. Fortunately it is becoming "OK" suitable habitat.

Anyway, just thought I'd help you out a bit regarding wild fish and the management intentions for the Skok.