Todd,

The so called trends you see are just short snap shots. With a dynamic population that moves up and down as rapidly as salmonid populations do, your really aren't showing any meaningfull trend. If you look at most of the graphs on WSC's web site, the only data points that really indicate a downward trend are the last 2 data points (years). The last 2 data points out of 20+ data points can't really define a meaningful trend.

If you look at the data for most of these graphs and exclude 2002, and 2003. Then the trends are flat or for many cases upwards.
To me this indicates a very weak downward trend based only on the most recent events. Not really a long term trend.

Sure steelhead have had a bad couple of years but that does not define a 20 year trend of decline. That defines a bad two years for steelhead.

The case for the puyallup is much stronger. You can remove any two data points and the trend is still obiously down.

The data for the puyallup support a general twenty year trend of decline.
The data for most other rivers shown don't.
That's why I call it junk science.
The conclusions aren't supported by the data.

Futhermore, WSR, I believe has been in place for 20+ years on the puyallup yet it has not been improved. In fact the data depict a downward trend despite WSR. Likewise for the cedar where all fishing has been closed.

What about the quilayute? It has shown a very weak increasing trend. How do you defend WSR for a river with steelhead population growth? Clearly that run can withstand some pressure, its been growing in the face of it.

So I think WSR makes perfect senes for the puyallup, but not for the quilayute. Other rivers lie in between. A reasonable standard could certainly be applied.

I just think WSR supporters and WSC should come clean as to why this is so important to them. It is not biologically justified. It may be justified from a recreational maximization or economic standpoint, but nobody has pushed that justification much.


Finally Todd, should this precendent of blanket managment be applied to other fisheries? If not, why are steelhead so special? As I've said before this is a very dangerous precedent from the perspective of future fishing opportuntity.

Clearly puget sound chinook are in worse straights than steelhead. Likewise puget sound halibut, and black rockfish are severely depressed. Shall we close retention of wild chinook, halibut, and black rockfish in the rest of the state even though there are healthy populations outside puget sound?
Such blanket closrues would result if the logic dictated by WSR is applied.