It's the fresh to fresh transfers that are the issue. Why have a policy that you annually "exempt"?

That's right CM. I forgot about the Minter/Skykomish transfers to Skookumchuck before the transfer to salt water. A valid question about the exemptions. How was this fixed? Or was it? Did they add early rearing to Skookumchuck or are they doing early rearing on pathogen-free water before going to Skookumchuck? Or is it an on-going exemption? My memory is going.

I think it is just basically exempted each year. About 15 years ago WDFW was (for the umpteenth time) trying to find a site in deep South Sound to use as base for that production. The Deschutes hatchery, in Pioneer Park, was supposed to do this. It was also supposed to bring the Tumwater Falls Chinook production into Cleanwater Act compliance for hatchery discharges.

It is, i believe, simply easier to keep doing what has been done than it is to get the funding, get the permits, and so onto build a new facility of facilities that would meet current rules.

This worked well so long as the Chehalis basin folks kept quiet.

I think it is safe to say that is coming to an end.

Thinking out loud here. With the demise and demo of the paper mill at Chambers Bay there is both land and freshwater at that location. To the best of my knowledge that spring water has no existing fish in it and dumps directly into the estuary.

When I last brought that up to a WDFW staffer I was told that they were more interested in expanding at the existing hatchery operation on Chambers Creek (the old game farm) in Lakewood. He also said that would occur only if and when the tidewater dam is removed.

Are they missing an opportunity at Chambers Bay?

Edit: Maybe something to ask Ryan Lothrop at his Tuesday night presentation: http://www.piscatorialpursuits.com/forum...html#Post882979

WDFW had (still has) a hatchery on the headwaters of that stream. It is on the grounds of Western State.

The local enhancement group would like to see some salmon in Chambers Bay be managed for wild stock, allowed to spawni good numbers, and so on. They are being required to protect the habitat and water, just nobody is letting anadromous fish up. There would probably be a lot of local pushback to more hatcheries there.

I was aware that there was a WDFW facility on the grounds of Western State although not that it was a hatchery nor that it was on the same waterway as what was feeding the mill.

Surprised that the WDFW Staffer wasn't aware of your info (or willing to explain that) when I asked. In fact, his response indicating a willingness for more production at the main hatchery on Chambers Creek appears to be in conflict with having Chambers Creek managed for wild fish in its relatively short length ending at Lake Steilacoom and two or three small tribs.

I was actually thinking about rearing pond(s) on the grounds of the former mill rather than a new hatchery facility.

Pretty sure they do, or did do, incubation and rearing up there. Garrison Springs is the name (finally remembered). Because it was pathogen free they were able to rear and then transfer. No fish were directly released because they would have had to go through the mill.

WDFW already has a facility at the dam and at one time were going to put some more ponds there.

Institutional memory is not a priority.