Yes Jerry, I still maintain that for a dynamic population the trend is essentially flat.

Nobody said close the state for pink salmon in 95 after the last big skagit flood. Nevermind the skagit run took to an 80-90% hit. Two generations later it was above escapment. Four generations later it was at historic high levels. Salmonid populations are dynamic and change rapidly reflecting changes in their environment.

Were pink regulations changed statewide to protect skagit pinks. No, because that doesn't make sense.

The strongest case against WSR is that it hasn't solved any of the problem of declining steelhead populations in this state.

There is nothing revolutionary about WSR, it has been in place on the skagit, green, snohomish, and puyallup since 1984. Yet you say they are declining (I still won't argue the puyallup that is the only clear trend).

So if WSR is going to be the magic cure for depressed steelhead, how come these rivers haven't shown any significant recovery in 20 years of WSR?

Don't blame the tribes either, on puyallup, the river with the worst trouble, there has not been any significant tribal harvest in 10+ years.


The simple answer is that harvest isn't actually the problem. If there is a problem for steelhead it is with habitat. If you really want to help steelhead, don't worry about harvest or WSR or anything but the habitat.

There are a lot of agencies and the tribes all worried about harvest. We should focus on protecting the habitat, because that is where steelhead are vulnerable.