M_ray,

I'll attempt to address your questions.

1) I don't expect any dramatic changes to fishing immediately, either recreational or treaty. When fish are listed as threatened under the ESA, fishing is often more restricted, but usually not curtailed. Puget Sound wild steelhead are under very low harvest pressure in recent years. Wild steelhead are required to be released in all recreational fisheries excepting wild summer steelhead on the Green River. That run is not native, and has established itself from the natural spawning of hatchery produced Skamania stock. Treaty fisheries target early timed (Dec.-Jan.) hatchery winter steelhead and harvest very low numbers of wild steelhead, typically less than the sport fishery.

NMFS permits continued recreational and commercial fishing of ESA listed salmon and steelhead so long as the incidental harvest of those fish does not jeopardize the survival and recovery of the species. Now, we all know that no fish every benefitted by being caught, either recreationally or commercially. Similarly, we also know that even unhealthy runs can tolerate low levels of incidental harvest without jeopardizing their existance.

For example, a 15% incidental harvest of Columbia/Snake wild spring chinook is allowed during the fisher that targets relatively abundant hatchery chinook. It goes without saying that the wild chinook would fare somewhat better if the entire fishery were closed. However, for that incremental increased benefit, society would have to forego all the benefits associated with fishing for the hatchery fish that are inter-mingled. The central issue comes down to balancing the benefits of fishing for abundant fish and the costs to the listed threatened fish. The management task of threading that needle in a way that satisfies social and ecological demands is a thankless, but necessary task, to say the least.

Presently, wild PS chinook are so protected in WA State that only incidental fisheries occur for the most part any more. By far the majority of the catch occurs in Alaska and BC. Treaty and non-treaty harvests in WA are mostly incidental to harvests of inter-mingled hatchery chinook or fishing for other species. Since PS steelhead are not caught in significant numbers in marine waters outside WA, pre-terminal interceptions are not a significant issue. As I mentioned, neither treaty nor non-treaty fisheries take very many wild PS steeelhead in recent years, so the options for further reductions in fishing are very limited. Where meaningful reductions in fishing can be identified, those are the remaining opportunities for fishery cutbacks. Most conservation measures will have to occur in other areas, such as habitat and hatchery practices.

2) I'm not familiar with the Green River steelhead enhancement program, and I don't know if it will continue or not. While most such wild broodstock programs have failed to result in increased natural steelhead production, the Green River program may serve a unique interest. The upper Green River has been blocked to anadromous fish since about 1910 or so, first due to Tacoma Waters diversion dam, then in 1964 to the Corps' Howard Hanson Dam. An upstream fish passage facility was recently completed by Tacoma Power. They will begin transporting fish to the upper Green River watershed this summer, using some of the expected surplus pink salmon to test the facility and the process. The Corps' downstream fishway will be finished in another couple years, as it's been a complex mix of engineering and construction. The upshot is that the wild steelhead enhancement program may serve as a brood source of steelhead for the upper basin. Otherwise, only those steelhead that voluntarily find and enter Tacoma Water's fishway will be transported to the upper river. Seeding the river with fry produced from the enhancement program would likely increase the steelhead population in the upper basin in fewer years than by waiting for "volunteers."

Cutting back sport fishing has limited benefits to wild steelhead. Most PS rivers close at the end of February to protect wild steelhead. Closing earlier would result in both fewer wild and hatchery steelhead being caught. Since the wild steelhead must be released, failing to harvest more of the hatchery steelhead might be a bigger problem than the incidental mortality to wild steelhead. Reducing steelhead angling would make good sense only if it were accompanied by significant reductions in hatchery steelhead production. The latter action will probably get a lot of attention in steelhead recovery planning.

Sincerely,

Salmo g.