Grandpa

I have been looking into these issues for the last few weeks, and I would like to point out a few things I have found.

First off, I want to say that I believe Billy Frank Jr about as much as I believe the WDFW, they both have an agenda, and it is more than possible that it is not what is best for our fish runs in either case.

Yes, many of the problems can be traced to habitat. However, even if this is the primary cause of wild fish population decline (I am not agreeing with you , just making a point here) you cannot ignore all other causes. If we are going to help the runs we have to try to make changes in all the problems, and not ignore small things that might make a difference just because we are zero'd in on one large thing. What I find myself thinking here that it is an eco"system" we are talking about, and as such we can make a difference by many small things, not just one large thing. If we put all our eggs in one basket the failure of it due to one small thing will be devastating to the runs.

In reading many pro and con arguments about hatcheries one statement has stood forth several times. Researchers have found that when wild fish are supplemeted with hatchery fish they tend to become a different stock, in my understanding it means that just as hatchery fish can establish themselves as a self propogating run in a system, the wild fish can also become dependent on a hatchery over a few generations.
from BPA\'s Salmon Supplementation Studies in Idaho Rivers

You said and you are correct, but I keep thinking we need to look at this as a system, and make moves on all fronts, and not concentrate on only one. These wild runs have had so many things decimate them over the years, habitat, over harvest, ocean conditions, introduced diseases, mismanagement, we are running out of time to help them, and I am afraid if we concentrate on one thing we will lose them all together.

I don't think closing all harvest is a viable option, mainly because as time passed people would lose interest in the fish just by not being exposed to them, and then it would become politically feasable to let them die.

I do think major restrictions on commercialization of the runs will have to be implemented. Whether this be the commercialization of sports harvest by guided trips or the commercialization by Indian and Non - Indian interests.

The ability to selectively fish by commercial interests HAS to be a part of the recovery plan. Even if it means that WE, as state citizens will have to supplement other fishing methods for the tribes and others, such as fish wheels for example, or another method of selective fishery.

I am afraid that using hatcheries to supplement sustainable fish levels is unatainable in the long run. Disease, continual accruing loss of fecundity in hatchery and in wild runs supplemented by hatchery fish, changing conditions in harvest and ocean conditions will add up to drop the seed recovery rate of Hatcheries below the current 58% , which is the last rate I read on seed recovery.

I wish I could say that I thought the WDFW had the ability to oversee our states salmon recovery plan, but historically they have been politically driven by the commercial fishing industry, and I do not see how that can be changed in just a few years.

Regarding Native Fishing Restrictions. I overheard a group of Indian fishermen on the Nisqually river the other day talking while I was anchored next to a net within 1/4 mile of the mouth of the river. Another boat of Indians with two in it showed up and one Indian started to pull his net to move it, all the while complaining to the two who had just showed up " you got your 20 fish already why are you back?" The answer was "no one said how many trips we could make, just that we had to stop at 20 fish per net". This same Indian fisherman has many times held up wild steelhead while passing Chum sports fisherman on the river , evidently caught as bycatch and held up to taunt. There are those kinds in every type of group of fisherman, and it all hurts the resource.

I will agree that most of the treaty tribes have been working on restoration for decades. Starting with the Quinalts I believe. However, the state has been working on one thing only, keeping the harvest levels high for the commercial fishing industry, and while it may be changing, it is changing too slowly.

One quote I read by a Queets Indian named Jim Harp has stayed with me, " We are fisherman, we can't survive without fishing, if that means planting Chinook Salmon then so be it".

I am glad you are confident of returning the wild fish to abundance, personally I think that unless major changes are made in hatchery and commercial fishing practices, and perhaps sport fishing you will only see a steady decline.