Smalma,

Thanks for noticing that. As it turns out, I did receive an email that Phil's run size estimate was for wild steelhead only, and not aggregated hatchery and wild. I didn't know I was looking at incomplete information. I think we all agree that having all the salient information is essential to understanding what's going on in the Chehalis basin.

Given the 5 day a week net fishery for months on end, it would be helpful to also know what the expected fishing effort is. If this were a full fleet fishery, it doesn't seem likely that the treaty harvest would be as low as predicted. Without more and better information, I can easily understand that many fishermen feel the steelhead stock is being managed into oblivion. If the effort is low, and the number of units of gear is also low, then the number of days/week fished doesn't appear so reckless.

I'd rather see better state and tribal communication of management information so that we're less likely to read about rumors of WDFW trading commercial steelheading for increased non-treaty commercial salmon fishing on the internet. I admit I was willing to accept that there might be substance to the rumor, given WDFW's lower Columbia gillnet intentions for wild steelhead, and that the poor December showing of steelhead in the Chehalis tribs and Humptulips recreational catch seemed to bear consistency to the rumor.

Sincerely,

Salmo g.

Rich, speak for yourself. Not all the "people on this board" think as you do, and what are you talking about "corruption?" Too many days netting on a native stock that might be in jeopardy is one thing. But conspiracy theories and blah blah blah about stuff like "corruption" is nonsense.

oops..meant to say as of last thursday they hadn't got their late coho number....

Bodysurf -
Thanks for catch my error - downside of posting prior to my first cup of coffee in the morning.

FNP - My apologies for my comments based on my mis-reading of your post - my error.

Tight lines
S malma

Gotta go along with salmonbelly.

I think it would be wonderful if we heard a report from any WDFW employee or tribal member (or advocate) that was not trying to justify a harvest issue in favor of MSY. The OJ trial is a good example of dueling science and contradictory evidence. Well I can dream can't I?

So?

I'll wait to tomorow to post what happen today at the SCPAC meeting to long of a day, 4 hour drive back from Olympia

The OJ trial??? Oh man. That case was not a good example of anything. Please!

The numbers that I have don't add up.
So until I can say anything, I have to have the right numbers.

Salmonbelly

Keep on being a sheep thats what they like. Its nieve to think our WDFW is run with honesty and good intentions.

Rich, aren't you a cop? Do you have a scintilla of evidence of corruption? Or do you just throw out crap like that for effect? If you can't discuss an issue rationally, then shut the hell up. Do I sound like a sheep?

I'd go with the latter... its all a conspiracy you know.

When I worked in La Push I had some spacific knoledge of some catch numbers of wild steelhead given to me by the fish buyer.

There was a situation that came up when some numbers were given by WDFW about somthing I had direct knoledge about the reality was the numbers given by the WDFW were 5 times lower. I said somthing about it and I got flamed big time. At that time I could not say anything about it unless I wanted to lose my job.

It had to do with the catch numbers of wild steelhead for 2001.

So what does your "eye witness account" have to do with your previous statement again???

You dont have to be a bio to know whats going on. I watched them fish for over three years for wild steelhead and talked to the fisherman, buyers proccessors. I saw the numbers with my own eyes. What I saw and what we are told are two very different things.

I lived next door to one of the bio's down there as well and got some pretty interesting info. He didnt hesitate to admitt what I already said.

The WDFW knows what is going on and do nothing about it. They take the info given to them at face value when they know whats really happening. That is dishonest and fraud if you ask me.

Its all bull ****. I have no faith at in the way our WDFW does buisness.

I too must question the validity of their numbers.

Let's go back to the issue of the tribal "steelhead" nets targeting late run coho in the Chehalis. If the total coho catch were really just 65 fish, why would they need 17 days of netting to accomplish that. Honestly, why would ANYBODY go gillnetting 17 days for a catch that lousey.... that's an average of less than 4 coho per day for ALL the nets combined! Or is it that they are just gluttons for hard work with little reward?

Too fishy to pass the smell test, if you ask me. Especially since late coho are the dominant species running the Chehalis corridor at that time of year.... 4 fish a day.... that's absolutely insane!

Sombody is thinkin.

The problem is WDFW expects people to just accept what they say and most people do. Maybe its because WDFW just accepts what the tribes say. I dont know what the deal is but I can tell you I have seen it first hand when the fish are comming out of the tribal fishermans boats onto the scales and into the buyers totes. I have been shown individual log books kept by tribal fisherman shown to me by them. On the quileute atleast just a couple of these guys have documentation that they harvested more than the entire reported catch for wild steelhead.

I dont know where the numbers are being fudged but the finished product that we see are very far from the truth.

I have seen alot of things. On many occasions I have seen Hoh fisherman come up and sell their fish in La Push for a better price or when they are not supposed to be fishing at all on the Hoh. From what I have been told buy the buyers those fish dont get counted agianst the quota or counted at all for that matter. I could go on and on but Im sure you get the point.

I put this on the other thread about WDFW's response to the allegations raised on the steelhead netting issue, but I figured it should go here as well:

How can this this reply be considered credible when in the same document, the state can't even decide if the sport impact from wild steelhead release is 800 fish or 99 fish?

The way I analyze this is that they are predicting about a 50:50 wild:hatchery return since they are counting on nonselective gillnets to harvest roughly 2000 wild and 2000 hatchery. It's reasonable to assume that the sport catch would fall in similar proportion. If we are projected to harvest 6500 hatchery fish, they probably are counting on us to encounter equal numbers of wild fish that must be released by regulation. If the C&R impact is 99 wild fish, the hooking mortality comes out to 1.5%. If the impact is 800 wild fish, then the hooking mortality comes out to 12.3%. Which is it?

The other thing I fear coming out of the WDFW numbers is justification for more wild harvest on the non-tribal side. This is just plain WRONG! Those "excess" wild steelhead should be invested in seeding the available gravel, not as an increase in sport harvest to appease some perceived inequity in tribal:nontribal allocation.

Two wrongs do not make it right!

If WDFW decides to allow wild retention for sports, that would only drive the total harvest (wild plus hatchery) into further imbalance as sports take an even bigger share of the total harvest. That will have the tribes crying foul and demanding even more netting time in the future.

Sports should NOT get sucked into this ridiculous scheme to allow retention of wild fish in the basin until all sides can honestly lay out what the future repercussions might be.

"Two wrongs do not make it right!"

This, is key...however, there is a contingent of sportfishers who don't view them as "wrongs", unless the tribe gets to catch them and they don't get to bonk what they catch.

If this is indeed a ploy to get sportfishermen to not give the tribal fishery too much flack, then it will work with some...because there will always be fishermen who do not consider the health of the resource, just the fairness factor of who gets to be the one to kill them, rather than asking if they ought to be killing them at all, either party.

Fish on...

Todd