Check

 

Defiance Boats!

LURECHARGE!

THE PP OUTDOOR FORUMS

Kast Gear!

Power Pro Shimano Reels G Loomis Rods

  Willie boats! Puffballs!

 

Three Rivers Marine

 

 
Page 1 of 2 1 2 >
Topic Options
Rate This Topic
#973824 - 02/24/17 01:24 PM Future of Washington steelheading
Salmo g. Offline
River Nutrients

Registered: 03/08/99
Posts: 13521
In response to the West End Bait Ban thread, I thought it seemed like an interesting idea to try and look at the likely future of steelhead fishing in Washington State.

We should examine the range of potential fishing regulations and restrictions – “the good ole days” 2 steelhead per day, 4 in possession, 30 per year. First, a word about the good ole days. They aren’t coming back. They aren’t coming back for several reasons.

First among them is the relentless growth of the state’s human population. My best estimate is that the state passed the mark of harvestable numbers of self-sustaining wild steelhead somewhere between 1968 and 1972 when the human population was about 2.8 million people. That date varies, of course, by river system and mostly geographic location, with the OP rivers generally being later to still producing harvestable wild steelhead. But when the Columbia River basin and Puget Sound rivers are included, it was decades earlier. With a human population now around 7 million and no end in sight, the future is not promising in terms of restoring or recovering huge increases in wild steelhead.

Even though only a fraction of the new state residents will fish for steelhead, everyone places some degree of burden on development of the environment, and thereby, the habitat that is essential to the production of wild steelhead. Our society is dedicated to giving the highest quality lip service to protecting anadromous fish habitat, all the while continuing at the local, state, and even federal levels to approve projects that at least incrementally continue to degrade, rather than improve it. With these plain as day facts before us, how can anyone envision a future where wild steelhead are abundant enough to sustain harvests even close to the “good ole days?”

If not wild steelhead, then how about hatchery steelhead? Anyone who hasn’t been living under a rock is aware that hatchery steelhead stocking in Puget Sound area rivers has been cut in half or more. A large part of that reason is the ESA listing of all Puget Sound and Columbia River basin wild steelhead. Both the real and alleged negative effects of hatchery steelhead on wild steelhead stocks makes it unlikely that we will see hatchery steelhead stocking returned to former numbers any time soon. Further, hatchery steelhead program levels are subject to Hatchery Genetic Management Plans (HGMP) that are subject to ESA consultation and are presently limited to five scaled back programs in the Puget Sound region.

Another factor, less mentioned, about the hatchery steelhead programs is the much reduced smolt to adult return (SAR) rates the plants have shown in recent years. Programs that formerly delivered SARs of 5 to even 10% (if the anecdotal stories are true) now struggle to perform at even a one (1) percent level. This makes the cost of producing one adult hatchery steelhead more than 5 to 10 times more expensive than in the programs’ heydays. So even if there were no ESA or biological constraints, it’s doubtful that the agencies producing hatchery steelhead could or would afford the immense costs of producing hatchery adult returns experienced two and three decades ago.

At the far other end of fishing regulations like the good ole days is something like the ZEC rivers in Canada’s Gaspe’ peninsula in Quebec. There are over 100 rivers in 29 zones, and regulations vary by both river and the zone within a river. A fishing license costs about $40 for resident and $110 for non-resident, plus you must have a daily fishing access pass that costs from $30 to $100, depending on the quality of fishing pools in the zone. Rivers and zones can be restricted or unrestricted, which limits the number of anglers per zone per day, or not. Fishing in a restricted zone is subject to a draw. Half the draw is in the winter well before the season begins, and half are 48 hours prior to the fishing day. Unrestricted zones are the cheapest to fish, but they also have the most anglers fishing in them.

Catch limits vary by river and season, but a license holder may keep up to 7 salmon per season, distributed across rivers that allow retention, to strict CNR. Fishing with bait is prohibited, and many, but not all, waters are restricted to fly fishing only.

So, a look at the far other end of fishing restrictions include: higher cost, a lottery to obtain fishing days, and more restrictive fishing methods and catch limits. There would be no free drifting, side drifting, boondogging, or bobber-doggin’ from drift boats or jet sleds, to say the least.

I think the most probable future conditions lie somewhere between the extremes. I base that on observations of WDFW’s fishing regulation behavior. Along with cultural differences between here and the Canadian maritime, WDFW traditionally pays no attention to the quality of the angling experience in adopting regulations. And it will adopt the least restrictive regulations necessary to comply with resource conservation requirements.

Paker suggests that steelhead fishing on the OP would be more improved by limiting fishing guides, having a limited entry fishery, or limiting guided fishing days than by banning bait. I agree with him that regulations that reduce the number of other anglers on the river will do more to improve the quality of my fishing experience than a bait fishing ban.

I think it’s important to call out the two dependent variables that get at the heart of the matter. The first is the health and status of the wild steelhead resource. A suite of regulations that ensures that enough steelhead survive to spawn successfully is the first and foremost order of fish management business. The second is that the regulations create a predictable and orderly fishery of high enough quality that enough of us will want to participate in it. Some combination of too many (pick your poison): guides, guide days, anglers, fishing methods, fishing areas, fishing times, and fish encounters (take, or harvest) will impair either or both the quality and the health of the fishery.

The concept of triage was mentioned and advanced by some who posted. Certain of the more urbanized PS rivers (Green, Puyallup, Snoqualmie) will never recover wild steelhead to fishable numbers, so why not write them off and turn them into hatchery fish factories? First, they could recover to the point of supporting CNR fishing, but I agree that they, along with all the others in PS, are not going to ever recover to sustainable harvestable runs. If for no other reason, the PS steelhead ESA listing prevents writing off any wild steelhead population – even while the ESA environmental regulatory process continues to approve additional incremental losses to those populations. And the hatchery steelhead programs on those and the other rivers are limited to levels that won’t adversely impact the wild populations. And as I mentioned above, large hatchery programs don’t mean large adult returns in this era of very low SAR. For instance, hatchery releases of 100,000 smolts in the Nooksack and Puyallup systems returned only a couple dozen adult returns each within the last few years. Not the kind of program you can build a fishery on unless and until SAR rates climb back up to where they used to be.

Poster Myassisdragon says there are as many wild steelhead in some PS rivers today as there was in the 1970s. This is correct, but on average all but a couple of those rivers remain below established spawning escapement goals. We aren’t fishing any of those populations, but that can change as conservative management plans are developed and approved by NMFS. The problem that I foresee is that many anglers are not going to like the kind of fishing that can be allowed and stay within the ESA take limits. How do we best limit that take so as to remain within the limits? The usual Selective Fishing Regulations, with no bait, single barbless hook, no motors, or no fishing from a motorized boat while under power? No fishing from a boat? No what?

I attended a crystal ball gazing meeting last week to discuss what some future fishing regulations might look like and include. I don’t know what will come to pass, but the long-standing Selective Fishing Regulations are probably a given. They are precedent. Anglers are used to them. Monitoring for ESA reasons, like the mid-Columbia area, is also a given. The funding for that monitoring isn’t. So a North Sound Endorsement, very much along the lines of the Columbia River endorsement, is a distinct possibility. But how much will we pay for it in order to cover the monitoring/enforcement costs?

Under monitoring, when the allowable take limit is reached, the season closes. That could hurt, when one considers that the Skagit season extended to April 30. Anglers I know enjoyed fishing to the last day of the season and want to regain that option. A host of options were presented. Limiting guides is a popular one, but WDFW claims not to have authority to do so, making that option a non-starter. A bill introduced in the WA Legislature this session that was aimed at addressing guide limits on the OP died in committee so went no where.

One thing that is within WDFW’s purview is the catch limit. But how do you do that when the seasons are already CNR? Well, back before there were CNR seasons, the daily steelhead catch limit was 2 per day. That was 2 per day, whether you retained or released your catch. Not much enforcement of that went on that I know of, but it got me to thinking. Enforcement would push back because a catch limit in a CNR fishery is unenforceable. True. But enforcement pushed back when Sparky’s Law – you know, the one where you cannot remove a fish from the water if it must be or you intend to release it – was introduced either. Anglers on this forum made all kinds of negative comments about it being stupid both because it was unenforceable and unnecessary to the survival of released steelhead. But you know what? In the interval since Sparky’s Law was adopted, on average I’ve seen much improved handling of fish that are being released than before. I don’t think that’s coincidental. Anglers are taking better care of the fish that they release. Enforceable or not, I think most of the anglers follow most of the regulations most of the time. With a limited fishery like the Skagit was, and will be again, the army of angler eyes on the river tend to make the fishery relatively self-regulating.

I didn’t want to venture off topic here, but I think the Skagit and the mid-Columbia tributaries are as good an example as we have of what future steelheading regulations and conditions might be. Just thought this topic deserved a thread of its own so as not to divert the west end bait ban thread.

Sg

Top
#973828 - 02/24/17 02:55 PM Re: Future of Washington steelheading [Re: Salmo g.]
cohoangler Offline
Three Time Spawner

Registered: 12/29/99
Posts: 1611
Loc: Vancouver, Washington
Salmo g - Your comparison to the Eastern Provinces of Canada are probably more correct than you realize. As you know, the life history, productivity, and habitat requirements of steelhead are remarkably similar to Atlantic salmon. With the notable exception of spring spawning vs fall spawning, the two fish species are very similar. And their life history and productivity are waaaaaay different than Pacific salmon.

Indeed under the right circumstances, Pacific salmon are one of the most productive fish on the planet. If in doubt, just look at those pics of spawning sockeye and pinks in Alaska. You NEVER see aggregations of spawning steelhead like that…..

So in my view, we ought to be regulating steelhead the way we regulate Atlantic salmon. For starters, future management of wild steelhead in the PNW should be completely different than Chinook, coho, or any other species of Pacific salmon. Future management should focus on the quality of the fishing experience, and the privilege of hooking and landing a wild fish.

I realize this notion may get very little support on this BB. But if we want truly wild steelhead to be available in the future for anglers, we should get used to a very different angling experience than we have now.

Top
#973846 - 02/24/17 05:50 PM Re: Future of Washington steelheading [Re: Salmo g.]
Carcassman Online   content
River Nutrients

Registered: 11/21/07
Posts: 7413
Loc: Olema,California,Planet Earth
Salmo has a great idea and we really need to do the same exercise for all resources. Couple thoughts to add.

With the exception of WB there are the Co-Managers. Not sure they would agree to a triage scenario. At least not without a lot of money throw at them.

For PS, I would suggest that the Skagit, Stillaguamish, Nisqually, and probably the west side Hood Canal rivers as wild. No hatchery steelhead (should be all species) at all. Probably C&R but I would suggest that if the runs rebound to where some dead fish are acceptable then hold a lottery for wild fish. I would also impose a C&R CRC with all fish brought to hand recorded.

The other major systems like Nooksack, Samish, Snohomish, Green, and Puyallup would have major hatchery programs. I would set the planting goal at least at 100,000K as it seems that the currently successful steelhead programs on the Pacific Coast are large. Broodstock would be collected from each stream and each stream would stand or fall on internal returns. Mark all fish so that if one shows up in the wild streams they can be killed and kept.

We also need to significantly invest in public bank access to the streams as it should not be a requirement of steel heading to have a boat.

I am not sure about the Straits, but Elwha and Dungenesss should probably be wild (Elwha for sure) but I would resurrect the Lyre.

As to regs, the hatchery streams should be wide open. For the wild streams I would lean to single circle hook with bait, lures, or flies allowed. The wild CRC could tell us what they are caught on, if desired.

I recall discussions with WDG wardens and the regs did limit the daily catch to the bag number whether killed or released. I remember when we bios recommended that if one fly-fished and released fish that they would not count in the limit. Vote was all us to 2, with 2 being the leadership. The motion lost/

Top
#973851 - 02/24/17 06:29 PM Re: Future of Washington steelheading [Re: Salmo g.]
AP a.k.a. Kaiser D Offline
Hippie

Registered: 01/31/02
Posts: 4533
Loc: B'ham
I've always thought the end game is pay-to-play on an extreme level. We'll try a bunch of stuff between now and then but eventually it will be a supply and demand equation increasingly controlled by private, rather than public, entities. Guides might be mandatory. Similarities in some big game hunting or exclusive golf courses.

Top
#973857 - 02/24/17 06:52 PM Re: Future of Washington steelheading [Re: Salmo g.]
RB3 Offline
Repeat Spawner

Registered: 08/24/10
Posts: 1383
Time to build a pond and stock it.

Top
#973859 - 02/24/17 07:03 PM Re: Future of Washington steelheading [Re: Salmo g.]
Bent Metal Offline
Carcass

Registered: 01/09/14
Posts: 2312
Loc: Sky River(WA) Clearwater(Id)
If our rivers were managed on a watershed by watershed basis, we could then have seasons that reflected the data which would be available for each system and have our seasons accordingly to recent escapement levels. Lack of management and understanding is what's driving all the hypothetical nonsense here.

No matter how successful a system is; the for profit groups (guides) should be capped for each system and from there special regulations would mirror the health of the watershed and it's steelhead. The healthier the system, the more liberal the regs. If a system was healthy but not reaching the upper threshold then stricter regs would be needed. If a system was not meeting goals then it's closed.

One thing that needs to happen is more enforcement and regular creel surveys for all system's!

At the rate things are going now, in 10 yrs it will all be over. The least they can do is build us a steelheaders memorial/museum.......that would be cool
_________________________




Top
#973868 - 02/24/17 09:15 PM Re: Future of Washington steelheading [Re: Salmo g.]
MetalheadMatt Offline
Fry

Registered: 09/12/16
Posts: 33
Brood stock has proved to work, without help our runs are failing and will continue to fail........
And if you don't think netting is the main culprit of our demise, just look to the south, Umpqua 30-50k native escapement yearly, a watershed, where logging runs rampant, farmed all along it's banks, and habitat problems like most of our waters, fished to death..... But no nets. The Queets far less habitat problems, but can't even make minimal escapement most years...... But it is netted to death.

We know what the problem is, yet we continue to point fingers every where else. Without major intervention, they will perish as they are doing now......

The second problem in the sound is, with both Salmon and steelhead, is we net most of the bait fish. The sound is our nursery, and we send the out to find little to no food in the nursery, years ago all summer long it was a Bait fish Mecca, now you have to search for bait. They don't survive because the fridge is empty....


Edited by MetalheadMatt (02/24/17 09:38 PM)

Top
#973885 - 02/25/17 04:24 PM Re: Future of Washington steelheading [Re: Salmo g.]
RICH G
Unregistered


it is true that over harvest is the problem and always has been the problem. I remember years ago I was at Bob's house and he told me about a book he either had or had read which was written by the UW fisheries department and published 2 years before the Bolt Decision in 1970. The book was a survey of the Quileute system and cited that it was the healthiest and most productive system in the state and even in 1970 less than 1% of the available spawning habitat was being utilized.

My dad knew a guy who died in his 90s in the early 1990's, he lived in Port Townsend and and actually died in a car wreck on his way home from fishing the west end. He started fishing the West End Rivers back in the early 1930's. He told my dad that you could stand in one hole all day, any day of the year it was not overloaded with spawning salmon and hook steelhead one after another.

Look at much of ALaska, huge runs of salmon and honestly very volatile river conditions, lots of silt and 4 months worth of available habitat to the fish VS 12 months down here yet empty rivers here compared to there.

I believe habitat and the pollution issue plays much less of a role than we are told. Salmon will spawn in a ditch alongside the road, I saw pinks and sockeye do it up in Alaska when I was a kid. If the fish are present they will find a way to complete their life cycle. If they are not present they can't reproduce. It's as simple as that....

Top
#973886 - 02/25/17 04:29 PM Re: Future of Washington steelheading [Re: Salmo g.]
Salmo g. Offline
River Nutrients

Registered: 03/08/99
Posts: 13521
Now that Rich G has weighed in, we can rest in confidence that habitat health and ocean survival conditions are not a problem when it comes to salmon and steelhead abundance.

BTW Rich, the Boldt Decision was in Feb. 1974, so exactly which year was it that the UW fisheries department book you referred to was published?

Top
#973888 - 02/25/17 04:56 PM Re: Future of Washington steelheading [Re: Salmo g.]
5 * General Evo Offline
Lord of the Chums

Registered: 03/29/14
Posts: 6825
_________________________
BLM IS A TERRORIST ORGANIZATION
ANTIFA IS A TERRORIST ORGANIZATION


Top
#973889 - 02/25/17 05:42 PM Re: Future of Washington steelheading [Re: Salmo g.]
No Warranty Offline
Juvenile at Sea

Registered: 07/28/09
Posts: 111
Originally Posted By: Salmo g.
Now that Rich G has weighed in, we can rest in confidence that habitat health and ocean survival conditions are not a problem when it comes to salmon and steelhead abundance.

BTW Rich, the Boldt Decision was in Feb. 1974, so exactly which year was it that the UW fisheries department book you referred to was published?

Rich has had more predictions come true than you. Too bad you never sought his advice or wisdom. We might have some more steelhead if you had.

Top
#973891 - 02/25/17 07:03 PM Re: Future of Washington steelheading [Re: Salmo g.]
NickD90 Offline
Shooting Instructor for hire

Registered: 10/26/10
Posts: 7260
Loc: Snohomish, WA
"A gamefish is too valuable to be caught only once". - Lee Wulff
_________________________
“If the military were fighting for our freedom, they would be storming Capitol Hill”. – FleaFlickr02

Top
#973893 - 02/25/17 08:46 PM Re: Future of Washington steelheading [Re: Salmo g.]
Carcassman Online   content
River Nutrients

Registered: 11/21/07
Posts: 7413
Loc: Olema,California,Planet Earth
Well, that'll work for half of them..........

Top
#973894 - 02/25/17 08:49 PM Re: Future of Washington steelheading [Re: NickD90]
ColeyG Offline
Ranger Danger

Registered: 02/08/07
Posts: 3098
Loc: AK
Originally Posted By: NickD90
"A gamefish is too valuable to be caught only once". - Lee Wulff




"If it ain't one thing, it's a mothafuckin nother."

-Snoop Dog
_________________________
I am still not a cop.

EZ Thread Yarn Balls

"I don't care how you catch them, as long as you treat them well and with respect." Lani Waller in "A Steelheader's Way."

Top
#973895 - 02/25/17 10:09 PM Re: Future of Washington steelheading [Re: No Warranty]
Salmo g. Offline
River Nutrients

Registered: 03/08/99
Posts: 13521
Originally Posted By: No Warranty
Originally Posted By: Salmo g.
Now that Rich G has weighed in, we can rest in confidence that habitat health and ocean survival conditions are not a problem when it comes to salmon and steelhead abundance.

BTW Rich, the Boldt Decision was in Feb. 1974, so exactly which year was it that the UW fisheries department book you referred to was published?

Rich has had more predictions come true than you. Too bad you never sought his advice or wisdom. We might have some more steelhead if you had.


Other than the Trump win, what has Rich G accurately predicted? Sasquatch? No. Gnomes? No. SHTF on Tuesday? No. Market collapse? No. So what else then?

Top
#973897 - 02/25/17 10:42 PM Re: Future of Washington steelheading [Re: ColeyG]
eyeFISH Offline
Ornamental Rice Bowl

Registered: 11/24/03
Posts: 12766
Originally Posted By: ColeyG


"If it ain't one thing, it's a mothafuckin nother."

-Snoop Dog


I think "Dimples" beat him to it, Coley.

Seriously funny, and worth a listen.... even if just once.



"My fukkin 2-bit job went on strike...
I put up with a lot of crap I don't like...
And to add to my woes...
This UGLY woman named Sadie...
Called and said she's havin' MY baby

Lawd, have mercy!"
_________________________
"Let every angler who loves to fish think what it would mean to him to find the fish were gone." (Zane Grey)

"If you don't kill them, they will spawn." (Carcassman)


The Keen Eye MD
Long Live the Kings!

Top
#973901 - 02/26/17 10:37 AM Re: Future of Washington steelheading [Re: ColeyG]
Jason Beezuz Offline
My Waders are Moist

Registered: 11/20/08
Posts: 3440
Loc: PNW
Originally Posted By: ColeyG
Originally Posted By: NickD90
"A gamefish is too valuable to be caught only once". - Lee Wulff




"If it ain't one thing, it's a mothafuckin nother."

-Snoop Dog


Speak
_________________________
Maybe he's born with it.

Maybe it's amphetamines.

Top
#973906 - 02/26/17 11:03 AM Re: Future of Washington steelheading [Re: Salmo g.]
5 * General Evo Offline
Lord of the Chums

Registered: 03/29/14
Posts: 6825
in 2008, 98 Steelhead spawned in the Puyallup system... last year, 1629 wild fish were counted....

tack a few on for the rats that poach the fish as well...

to me that looks like they can, and will, come back.....

if people let them....
_________________________
BLM IS A TERRORIST ORGANIZATION
ANTIFA IS A TERRORIST ORGANIZATION


Top
#973910 - 02/26/17 02:00 PM Re: Future of Washington steelheading [Re: Salmo g.]
Smalma Offline
River Nutrients

Registered: 11/25/01
Posts: 2844
Loc: Marysville
Evo-

The last two years the Nisqually has had an up tick in wilds steelhead returns as well. In fact the 2016 was the largest in 25 years. Could it be that the marine survival issues for PS steelhead are turning around? Guess we will know in a few more years.

curt

Top
#973911 - 02/26/17 02:00 PM Re: Future of Washington steelheading [Re: Salmo g.]
Old Crab Offline
Alevin

Registered: 03/29/13
Posts: 19
Loc: Hood Canal
Had to comment-probably as it's raining hard out and a guy as old and sweet as I could melt under these conditions. I used to steelhead fish a lot from the banks of small wadeable creeks and rivers on the peninsula and hood canal: Duckabush, Dosewallips, Morse creek, Salt Creek, Lyre River, East & West Twin, Deep Creek, Pysht and Clallam.... you get the picture. Only the Pysht and Clallam were netted then. Now, if you look at the regulations you will find only some are C & R or are open when steelhead are not expected to be present or for hatchery only. This looks good on paper until you realize there have been no hatchery plants for a number of years on these rivers which are too small to float. C & R is just not an option on these small creeks-witness the lack of a number of cars/trucks you see along side parking areas at those streams open to C & R. WDFG and their biologists have systematically made those streams non-fishable. One way to make them fishable again is to plant them and open them up to create more diversified areas to fish for when the fish return. Habitat and population have not changed in the last 50 years in those areas. If each of you open and read the regulations, you will find similar situations in areas you know and 'used' to fish!

Top
Page 1 of 2 1 2 >

Search

Site Links
Home
Our Washington Fishing
Our Alaska Fishing
Reports
Rates
Contact Us
About Us
Recipes
Photos / Videos
Visit us on Facebook
Today's Birthdays
CHUBS
Recent Gallery Pix
hatchery steelhead
Hatchery Releases into the Pacific and Harvest
Who's Online
0 registered (), 939 Guests and 1 Spider online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Newest Members
John Boob, Lawrence, I'm Still RichG, feyt, Freezeout
11498 Registered Users
Top Posters
Todd 28170
Dan S. 17149
Sol Duc 16138
The Moderator 14486
Salmo g. 13521
eyeFISH 12766
STRIKE ZONE 12107
Dogfish 10979
ParaLeaks 10513
Jerry Garcia 9160
Forum Stats
11498 Members
16 Forums
63773 Topics
645302 Posts

Max Online: 3001 @ 01/28/20 02:48 PM

Join the PP forums.

It's quick, easy, and always free!

Working for the fish and our future fishing opportunities:

The Wild Steelhead Coalition

The Photo & Video Gallery. Nearly 1200 images from our fishing trips! Tips, techniques, live weight calculator & more in the Fishing Resource Center. The time is now to get prime dates for 2018 Olympic Peninsula Winter Steelhead , don't miss out!.

| HOME | ALASKA FISHING | WASHINGTON FISHING | RIVER REPORTS | FORUMS | FISHING RESOURCE CENTER | CHARTER RATES | CONTACT US | WHAT ABOUT BOB? | PHOTO & VIDEO GALLERY | LEARN ABOUT THE FISH | RECIPES | SITE HELP & FAQ |