Smalma,

Thank you taking a 'stab' at it. My beliefs towards credibility of management agencies is totally related to their function of harvest management and politics. Problem is, your employer has been in charge of this situation for 'several' decades now and look where we are? The results more than speak for themselves. A handful of rivers on the OP are now the "Least Depressed" in the state. And here we sit arguing politcs of a rule change that will do nothing measurable for another 7-10 years (If the rule is upheld). My best guess is that it would take at least 2 full generations of several year classes to be able to study the affects of getting more spawners on the beds. I only pray that when this rule comes up again, that the foot is firmly planted in the door, and it will be renewed for a legitimate length of time to really show the difference it can make. Either way I will pray every night for the next decade that the returning progeny from the next two seasons are the highest runs to hit the OP in nearly 50 years. That would pretty much prove the point.

Back to the point at hand:

"However they would cover under the WSR regulations - it is not Native Steelhead release after all." Simple to fix- Rule exception: all steelhead above sunset falls can be harvested.

But if I am understanding this correctly- the bull trout and salmon above the falls are native to the sky drainage, but not to that particular area. They have now colonized the habitat because of something man changed? Did WDFW build a fish ladder or are they lifted over the obstruction? Are the 'recently' established populations in the Sky totally dependant upon that area to survive cutting it off?

William