Fellow Anglers,

I’m not sure where to begin, but it disturbs me to see how easily many of you revive worn and ineffective rhetoric. Those of you who think that WDFW is finally “getting a clue” and is making precedent setting regulatory changes that will lead to increased overall protection of native steelhead on these rivers or statewide are not paying attention.

WDFW is doing nothing more nor less than implementing the rule developed last year that was taken in part from its Wild Salmonid Policy. WDFW will not permit targeted fishing on runs that are less than 80% of the escapement goal. They will permit non-targeted fishing (for another species or stock in the same area at the same time) and incidental mortality of the weak stock. The essence of this policy is that WDFW is concerned about a weak native stock, but they are more concerned about harvesting any co-mingled fish population, whether it be hatchery steelhead, coho, chum, or whatever. Specifically, incidental mortality of weak stocks is OK as long as it occurs at a fairly low level (incidental) while fishing for a more abundant stock. The over-riding intent is to prevent “waste” from failure to harvest other fish.

What is missing is a critical analysis of how WDFW and the Wild Salmonid Policy does not value non-consumptive (CNR) fishing. WDFW and tribal co-managers have adopted a salmon and steelhead management policy of Maximum Sustained Harvest. Having implemented that policy on the most productive native steelhead runs, along with a series of adverse environmental conditions since 1990, has resulted in depressed runs to the Skagit, Stilly, and Snohomish. The continued use of this management model will continue to result in native runs that are much closer to the escapement goal (if not lower) than in runs that include a significant harvest component. (Refer to the many discourses on why MSY or MSH invariably results in depressed fish populations.) Furthermore, the bulk of any such harvests will come from the early segment of these wild runs. They are harvested during the main part of the treaty Indian fishery and the recreational fishery targeting hatchery winter run steelhead.

I believe it is an unintended design, but none the less, since there is no particular advocacy of catch and release seasons on late-timed native steelhead runs among the fishery managers (WDFW and tribes), the trend will be toward an - - Oops! Golly gee, the native steelhead return is again near or less than the escapement goal, and it will be necessary to close the March and April CNR seasons to protect the depressed native run. Now, protecting weak runs is a very good policy. It’s just that the burden of providing that protection is going to fall to the fishery that is last in line and has no management policy advocacy.

So if you think this scenario sucks now and for the foreseeable future and you want to do something about it other than whining here on the BB every year when your favorite fishery closes, I think you’re interests are best served by supporting the Wild Steelhead Coalition and FFF Steelhead Committee in attempting to modify WDFW’s fishery management policy, at least for steelhead. Until the WDFW Commission acknowledges that CNR fishing and that recreation, not harvest, equals or exceeds the value of traditional consumptive harvest fisheries, I believe we can expect to see systematic mediocre or poorer returns of native steelhead, particularly in Puget Sound rivers.

Sincerely,

Salmo g.