To separate this from GH/WB.

I wonder if back in the "heyday" of the Cowlitz nmaybe WDG paid for some of the steelhead. TCL had a legally binding agreement about what they re required to pay for. WDG "may" have done more, on their dime. I know they did Tiger Musky there, and those weren't mitigation fish.

Whenever the heyday of the Cowltiz was, the state could have spent state money on Cowlitz fish enhancement, but I have no knowledge of either agency having done so. On the other hand, neither agency (WDG and WDF) were not above spending Tacoma mitigation money beyond Tacoma's defined mitigation obligations. That contributed to difficulties in the 2000 license negotiations, with Tacoma even reserving the right to contract with a party other than WDFW to operate the Cowlitz hatcheries.

I've seen no records of 3 million steelhead in the Cowlitz as Chinook 1 referred to in the GH/WB thread. Certainly not 3 million adult steelhead nor 3 million steelhead smolts. The highest steelhead hatchery smolt production for the Cowlitz that I can recall was something north of one million smolts, maybe 1.2 or 1.4, far short of 3 million. And that was winter and summer smolts combined.

Yeah, the State did often use the mitigation monies elsewhere/elsewise.

Tug mentioned, back on the WB thread, that there "were" summer steelhead in the Colwitz before the dams. It is very similar to the Wynoochee Springs in that the State and Mitigatee agree as to what is mitigated for and how much that entails. Obviously, if there were summers (or Springs) and the mitigation agreement did not include them then the Agencies had very good reasons for not including them.

Maybe you should ask some of the old timers like Cowlitzfishermen. That have been around the Cowlitz for years or maybe you should go ask Mark Johnson the old hatchery manager, but again you weren't there in the 80's. And Jack Tipping Tiger Muskie program is a terrible program when your trying to recover wild fish. And should be stopped immediately. How come you didn't stop that in 2000 ?

Crickets.

Chinook 1, Cowlitzfisherman and I are friends, and he corrects me whenever I get one of the Cowlitz fish statistics wrong, so no worries there.

The tiger muskies are not major predators of juvenile salmon or steelhead. The tiger muskies prey mainly on pikeminnow, which do prey on juvenile salmon. Tiger muskies are water temperature dependent predators, and by the time they become really active in late spring, early summer, the salmon and steelhead smolts have mostly moved through Mayfield reservoir. So although tiger musky are an exotic species not native to the Cowlitz basin, none of the relicensing stakeholders raised it as an issue that had to be dealt with, and WDFW wanted to continue the program.

Plant fish.
It was promised.

Tug posted in the WB thread:

"Salmo, et al,

Tacoma Light should have an obligation for summer steelhead, because there were, indeed, in significant numbers of summer runs in the Cowlitz prior to Mayfield. I researched this in the early 2000's by talking with old timers from the Mossyrock area. Bob Shaner, now deceased, confirmed the summer run's existence because he caught them way back then. Prior to the dam being put in, the Cowlitz, especially in the summer, was a milky, glacial stream, so surveys, such as they were back then, would have been nearly impossible for accuracy if they even happened at all. (And I'm referring to Shaner's fishing in the 1950-60 era.) Of course Tacoma doesn't want to mitigate for any fish losses. They don't care about fish, just money, and they will weasel out of any obligations that they can. What has happened to the cutthroat program?

Keep up the good work, Salmo, I respect your postings."

I don't have them here at home now, but during the Cowlitz relicensing I collected all the WDF and WDG fish data for the fish trap they operated near the Mayfield dam site. The trap was operated for 2 or 3 years before the dam was finished, and those were the fish numbers used to develop Tacoma's mitigation obligations for the Cowlitz River. Steelhead were not recorded as being either winter or summer run, and some steelhead were trapped during the months that summer steelhead normally run. However, those numbers that might have been summer runs, including late winter run or spawned out kelts, were very low in number, although they were included in the total. So the mitigation number for steelhead was 12,000, this being the average number that returned during the years sampled before dam construction was finished.

It's worth noting that WDFW did not want the steelhead mitigation number included in the new license that FERC issued in 2002. The reason is that the Department believed they could, based on prior hatchery performance, get returns well above 12,000 (winter and summer runs combined) with releases of around one million hatchery steelhead smolts or more. And that was true, in the 1980s and 1990s when SAR (smolt to adult returns) were higher. But ocean survival rates have declined since then, not just for the Cowlitz River, but for all Columbia River tributaries, north coast, Puget Sound, and Salish Sea tributary rivers.

Tacoma's goal during relicensing was to minimize its financial exposure, which is typical of every power company and utility. Nonetheless, TP's hatchery costs increased compared to its first license period, which included major upgrades at the salmon hatchery, and its fish passage costs skyrocketed since they had been minimal during the first license. I don't know how much TP spent on the new juvenile fishway at Cowlitz Falls Dam, but I'd estimate it at well north of $50 million.

Last I heard the cutthroat program was halved, from 150,000 smolts to 75,000 because the USFWS representative was influenced by a report describing trout predation on juvenile Chinook. That was from CA's Klamath River if I recall correctly, and I don't think it's applicable to the Cowlitz, but mine wasn't the only vote on the fish committee. I don't know if any other changes have been made with respect to the SRC program. It would be easy enough to check with the Red Book.

"Tacoma's goal during relicensing was to minimize its financial exposure, which is typical of every power company and utility. Nonetheless, TP's hatchery costs increased compared to its first license period, which included major upgrades at the salmon hatchery, and its fish passage costs skyrocketed since they had been minimal during the first license. I don't know how much TP spent on the new juvenile fishway at Cowlitz Falls Dam, but I'd estimate it at well north of $50 million."

Who gives a chit???????
Last I heard they charge more for power too.
Plant fish or pull your fish blocking concrete wall out.

Ok, getting of topic here, but why isn't the science being followed when it comes to bass? I have yet to see science that shows bass forage on smolts in any significant amount, yet there is a push by the state to eradicate them from the Columbia/Snake systems as well as any lake that has salmon/steelhead wander through it. Obviously they are invasive/non-native, but the save the Orca crap is getting out of hand.

Thank you for the links...I have some reading to do

Back when I was in Grad School, which was at the end of the Owens Era and beginning of the Dawgfather, the UW Coop Unit was looking at in-lake predation of Issaquah Creek Chinook (in Sammamish). The findings? Use lures that look like Chinook in the spring of you want to catch lots of Smallies.

A while later, there was a lot of angst about spin rays eating the LW sockeye fry as the exited the Cedar, as there seemed to be a big in-lake loos of fry. It was easy to blame the predators, because they do eat sockeye. Just not then, because the water temps were below levels when they feed (much). We do know that the Tigers will eat salmonids; just not when the temps are too low.

As an aside on the Tigers, WDW made a regulation banning undesirable animals from the state. One of the criteria was that an animal would be banned if it preyed on native species. At the same time, they were aggressively touting Tigers. Anybody catch the dichotomy there?

They seemed pretty limited on ranges, but consistently documented predations.

Now, about the birds: https://www.nwcouncil.org/news/bird-pred...z8Lf3Nv76t32VlM

Hog wash that's like saying SRKW only eat wild Chinook. LMFAO

No, not even close to the same. Your's is an absolute whereas Salmo G.'s post includes a number of qualifiers.

So your both trying to tell the reader that Tiger Musky won't eat Salmon smolt. Where have you two been in the last couple of years. Because we have a big problem with their relative the Northern pike in Lake Roosevelt in eastern Washington. You might want to think twice about your statements.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiger_muskellunge
https://www.spokesman.com/stories/2018/may/17/surging-northern-pike-population-in-lake-roosevelt/#/0

Salmo didn't say they don't eat salmonids. They are not likely to eat smolts because of temperature during outmigration. They do eat salmonids, and WDFW knows that from sampling but it is likely that the majority are resident trout or salmon juveniles reading in the lakes in summer. Also, lake Roosevelt is not anadromous waters (now). They are eating resident salmonids.

Temporal and spatial considerations are important. There was a recent paper on Smallie predation in the Snake. They do eat Chinook smolts there. But, if there are lots of Sandrollers, they prefer them. Understanding the whole ecosystem might help us manage better.

I clearly did not take a position one way or another.....I simply pointed out that Salmo's post as written tacitly acknowledged that some predation by Tiger muskies may or does occur whereas your comparison attempted to characterize his post as definitively saying such predation does not occur.

To now try and draw the issue of Northern pike into the discussion further muddies the discussion.

Is there an underlying purpose/goal in your approach????

After reading all of his posts I believe trolling S.G. and yourself IS his underlying purpose and approach. There doesn't seem to be a logical thought process, and a lot of vague references to past practices. I don't have a horse in this race, just an observer to the direction of responses from him on this topic and others. He says he fishes with a rod and reel but does quite a bit from his keyboard as well. Just sayin', Bob R

If more people had a horse in the Cowlitz race perhaps we would still have significant plants in the river.

Pathetic!!!

Considering how many meetings Melanie and I go to we don't need another cause to support. I don't fish the Cowlitz, I don't know enough about the history or the fishery to contribute anything factual (although that doesn't stop other misinformed individuals from commenting!), how is that pathetic? I don't support Tacoma Power not doing all they can to meet mitigation requirements. Considering how far it is from where I live it's not one of the rivers I frequent. The horse in the race referred to the fact that I am not taking one side or the other as far as the followers of this thread are debating. Bob R

Sorry you felt this was directed at you.
It wasn't.

Yup.
Pre Clancy back when Roger Smith and Mike Kelly ruled the river now those were the days!!!!

Thanks for clarification, it's getting confusing without a scorecard. I think the current climate (hot blobs at sea) has me a little rattled. Returns on everything are in the tank, is the end in sight? On another note tuna fishing is off the charts. Haven't seen them this close in years. Hopefully WDFW won't get involved. They seem to screw up everything they touch. Bob R

They took a look at the tuna fishery back when Anderson was Director and decided there was no need for their involvement - a very good decision as there was absolutely no value to be added.

If only Tuna spawned in rivers.
I'd eat it with Ketchup.

More hatchery salmon and steelhead are planted in the Cowlitz than any other river in Washington State except the mainstem Columbia. The problem does not seem to be a lack of fish being stocked. The Cowlitz is not immune to the same poor smolt to adult return rates that afflicts every other river.

More
More More
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Hot blobs and pinniped predation, two of the smolt to adult returns biggest issues. Take a look at the current water temp. charts the tuna fishermen use and you will see the issue. Not only salmon stocks, but the baitfish they thrive on also bites it when this occurs. I dread the next 4 years for salmon returns. bob r

Let me quote a top NOAA fisheries representative "those fish shouldn't have in the Cowlitz to being with" when discussing the early chambers creek stock. That served as a world class Steelhead fishery for some 70 years.And brought in millions of dollars in revenue to the local communities of SW Washington.Back in 2002 when the settlement agreement was signed. TP created the fish technical committee or FTC that all the agencies had a seat at the table except for the sports community.And it was also closed to the public.And good old Salmo g just happened to represent NOAA on the FTC.Remember the FTC is making decision in a closed meeting format. Sound just like what is happening with NOF today. And guess who fought the hardest to keep the public out of those meeting. You guess it none other then Salmo g and his friends from TU and AR. Everyone like to blame WDFW or TP for the problem on the Cowlitz ,but in all reality NOAA has a big roll in what happens on the Cowlitz. So eliminating a world class Steelhead fishery is probably one of the biggest con jobs ever pulled on sportsmen in Washington. And not eliminating the invasive species Tiger Musky is just mind blowing. So you see he did play a major roll in killing the Cowlitz. After years of hard work from people like Cowlitzfishermen and myself the FTC is now open to the public on a every other meeting concept. So please feel free to flame me,but your never going to get to let up on the killer of the Cowlitz.

Those were the days my friend.

Yup.
The flat brim crowd has mo idea...............as usual.

Just to clarify - the sports community is not an agency, therefore they would have no seat at the table. Their interest should have been represented by WDFW. I also want to clarify that Salmo g was long gone from the FTC when decisions about Cowlitz hatchery programming were finally made.

Sorry but the sports community could have sign on to the settlement agreement,but wasn't buying the garbage TP was selling. The guides signed on ,but found out there half vote wasn't going to get them anything so they drop out. One of the point is he was there keeping the public out of FTC meeting. Funny his name show up on meeting minutes for sometime after the 2002 signing.

Love it honey when you call me a troll. And if you had a nag in the race it be dead last or the the glue factory.

]
You prove yourself that you are indeed a troll. What fishing reports have you ever posted on this site? Numerous things you say have been proven to be total B.S. You never address that. All your posts attack other members. A-holes like you should stay on the "dark side". You are the classic definition of a troll and are proud of it. Troll away, you get NO respect from anyone here. Bob R

So if the sports community didn't sign on to the agreement, why would they possibly have a seat on the FTC? The answer is, they wouldn't, so your comment makes no sense. And again for clarification, the hatchery programs for the new license were not developed until sometime after 2010. I believe they were finalized in 2011, but that was too long ago for me to remember for sure. Nevertheless, it was long after Salmo g. was no longer involved in the project. The NOAA representative at that time was Michelle Day. I'm sure she would be more than happy to address your complaints.

Regardless of what Agencies or sports may have wanted at Cowlitz, the programs had to fit under ESA. If you want to go back to pouring Chambers Creeks into the system, get ESA changed.

The true ESA species is the Native American Indian.

Perhaps all of us plants should vacate this piece of land.

ESA.....................What a chit show.

It's almost flattering that Chinook1 thinks I have, or had, so much influence on proceedings that legally involved multiple agencies. I was involved in developing the Cowlitz settlement agreement in 2000, but was out of the picture by the time FERC approved TP's new license in 2002. The decision to terminate use of Chambers Creek origin steelhead in the Cowlitz hatchery program was made a number of years later.

For the record, had I still been involved, I would not have supported the decision to quit using early timed hatchery winter steelhead. The reason is simple. The Cowlitz provides a unique mechanism for separating hatchery and natural production fish at the fish barrier dam. No early timed hatchery steelhead would ever make it to the upper basin unless managers decided to place them there. Further, the concern that the early timed Chambers Creek fish would stray into lower Cowlitz River tributaries and cause genetic introgression with native wild steelhead was unwarranted. The Cowlitz steelhead genetics study showed that introgression in those tributaries was very low, considering that well over one million Chambers Creek steelhead fry had been deliberately stocked in those streams in years gone by. Apparently those who make the decisions thought it better to suspend use of Chambers Creek fish and reduce the risk to zero.

A number of changes have been made to the Cowlitz hatchery program that was initially described by the license settlement agreement. The main reason for those changes was to better comply with ESA interests in recovering natural origin populations of ESA-listed species.

I don't need your respect or want it. It's D bags like you that will never get it.

I get your point but the reality is that there is no such thing as a NATIVE AMERICAN insofar as humans did not come out of the ooze in the western hemisphere. We are all immigrants or the progeny of immigrants.

But, hey, I'd be willing to go back to Norway if all of those other humanoids in the Western Hemisphere to include those claiming to be NATIVE AMERICAN would go back to the lands from which their ancestors emigrated.

But that surely won't happen........

Chinookie, the more you blather the more you convince others that you are less than irrelevant which indicates some sort of disorder. Untreatable Trollism (and that is demeaning to most traditional trolls)??

Chinook 1 is pretty misinformed on most things and appears to have a skewed perception of past events. He is also a troll and a pretty basic one at that. Nothing special or worth even talking about really. Other similar trolls seem to come around every few months then are gone. The only trolls worth talking about are Big Stick, Nordic1/Swede, and Fish Prince.

Salmo can you refresh my memory on why they quit allowing summer stealhead to be planted from the Toledo ponds??

That was a huge blow as well.

WDFW X 1 = 0,

I was never informed about why that decision was made. My guess is that WDFW didn't consider it necessary when they increased total summer run production at Blue Creek. Same total pounds of production, just in one place, and sort of hypothetically reducing the risks of straying and spawning with or in the same places used by bonafide native wild steelhead in the lower river tributaries. Even when the risk is small, management might see it as a small thing to change the program when total production stays the same, or even increases. Is the change beneficial to sport fishing? Probably not, but that's not the only consideration in the equation that management is faced with balancing.

The sport fishing world we live in has changed dramatically in recent years. Not so long ago - and when hatchery smolt to adult returns were significantly higher - a lot of management decisions were approved if they improved sport fishing opportunity and resulted in grip-n-grin photos in Fishing and Hunting News. That was good PR for WDG, then WDW, then WDFW. ESA has certainly changed a lot of that. Hatchery steelhead production for Puget Sound streams has been reduced 65% over the last 10 years. That, combined with pitifully low SAR has made winter steelhead fishing pretty much a waste of time. Total Cowlitz hatchery steelhead has remained about the same, last I heard, the difference being that early winters were terminated, late winters increased, and summer run production increased. Unfortunately, SAR is so darn low, returns are so bad that I didn't fish the Cowlitz even once this summer or fall. That's a first, but I digress. A lot of decisions to reduce hatchery steelhead stocking and limiting the hatchery release points to places where adult collection of uncaught fish is highly likely are based on helping recovery of wild, or natural production, ESA steelhead. IMO that won't have much of an affect on recovery because recovery is dependent on more significant factors. But as you know, there are a lot to True Believers who are certain that hatchery steelhead are a main cause of poor wild steelhead production.

Sg

Not producing fish saves a lot of dollars. Might be another factor.

Whether it's how much better the fishing used to be or how much pressure it used to keep off other steelhead fisheries, just about everyone misses the not-so-old days on the Cowlitz.

Driving into those Cowlitz boat launches/parking lots now it is hard to believe they would be absolutely full back then during early winter run steelhead season.

As a long time Grays Harbor resident....Oh how I wish for the "hay day days" of the Cowlitz River, kept the guides and many of the "big city fishers" busy catching springers, winter and summer steelhead, Coho.....Now when I fish, I have the big boat guides, 100's of drift boats, and the walk in fishermen to contend with. More people, less fish.....not a good situation!!!!!

Unfortunately, this is how it's going to be everywhere from here on. The really sad thing is, for all the young fishermen, THESE ARE the good ol days.