New article up on Tidal exchange today regarding the 10-year Puget Sound Chinook Harvest Management Plan:

https://tidalexchange.com/2018/01/04/wdfw-gives-up-puget-sound-fishing-for-nothing/

We'd love your insightful feedback...Discuss!

Thanks for sharing. Well written and reasoned. What is the co-managers' response to this position and line of reasoning? Was this considered and discussed during negotiations? OH, that's right - we'll never know.

I'm curious as to WDFW and the Tribes motivation to shut down PS fishing. They do that and they'll loose support for the hatchery programs that are working putting further pressure on Wilds with the sea lions and whales without any other food source to mitigate. A vicious downward spiral for our fisheries.

Without a major change in management, sell the boat or go to the north are our options - neither good for the fish or the economy.

The article is very well researched and clearly explains how "flawed" thinking and "special interest consideration" will devastate our sport and our fish.

It is important to remember however why we are having to be reactive rather than been pro-active. The fact that the Department is using the Tribal position that they are immune to state open meetings laws to secretly negotiate in a way that is not beneficial to the recreational community.

WE are now faced with an uphill battle to FIX this plan, when we should have had a part in it's crafting. Had the proper procedures been followed and the public, sport advisory groups, recreational organizations and the Commission been involved, we would of produced a much better policy and it would of been done with cohesion and confidence.

This again highlights the damage our continuation with allowing Secret Meetings cause.

We must all let the Commission know, we cannot abide any more prohibition of public oversight in our fisheries management. THIS MUST BE THE LAST TIME WE HAVE TO BE REACTIVE to a deal WDFW cut with the tribes!

I thought it was a well-reasoned article......until the habitat card came up. We all know that habitat is critical. I am not familiar with the Stilly basin, but a quick Google Earth shows me that, other than the development right around Arlington and it's storm water impacts, the rest of the basin looks pretty undeveloped. And if Arlington's development footprint increase in impervious surfaces has mainly occurred since 2005, the storm water discharge should not be an issue. And Arlington is only about 10 miles the way the crow flies from the Sound, and I would think that the majority of the spawning would be further upriver.

I know the Oso slide couldn't have been much help to the system, and logging is always significant to increasing peak flows. It didn't appear that the basin was that depleted of forested areas? Does Arlington's wastewater discharge to the river?

NOFISH that couldn't be further from the truth. A lot of the upper river is rip rapped and can not function properly within its floodplain, and roughly 90%+ of the lower habitat in the "estuary" is diked/rip rapped for agriculture. More recently there has been efforts (primarily by the Stilliguamish Tribe, mind you) to breach some of the relic levies that are no longer providing functionality for ag land and re-inundate the tide marsh in the estuary. Estuarine habitats are CRUCIAL for juvenile survival. Moreover, there are a ton of culverts throughout the basin on its tribs (the main spawning habitats), several of which are currently in process or have already been repaired as a direct result of the States loss to the tribes over the culverts case that has been ongoing. The habitat in the Stilly basin is hurting bad, there's no doubt about that in my mind!

The habitat is in terrible condition is the problem. If you were to stop all fishing on the West Coast these wild Chinook still could not recover. I recieved this from Curt Kraemer this morning on the sediment in the river.


"Based on this estimate, landslide material accounted for about 30 percent of the total suspended sediment load in the lower Stillaguamish River between March 2014 and September 2015."


Sediment information came from a USGS study. "Geomorphic Response of the North Fork Stillaguamish River to the State Route 30 landslide near Oso, Washington", a 2017 report

https://pubs.usgs.gov/sir/2017/5055/sir20175055.pdf

The relevant find comes from the 4 th paragraph in the Stanwood section on Page 44.

So 70% of the sediment is from other sources other than the Oso Landslide. The available habitat/river capacity for wild chinook is about 930. Curt ran the numbers. WDFW modelers back it up with 900-1000 fish. Page 167 of the plan states that Chinook recovery is highly unlikely in its current form.

I dont think all of the tribes were involved with the Stilly. Each had to deal with its own rivers/UandA. I think this is more of a Stilly issue than all tribal issue. I have feed back that quite a few tribes are not liking this either. Most think that it is a green light for them but its not. It the impacts are to go over the new 8% they might not fish either.

So this really is not a tribal issue except for the Stilly Tribe. I think they made a stand for very little-to no fishing for last 25 years. They want their river fixed or something to happen to help fix it. I guess they made their point and were heard.

We are working on a solution to the problem. I cannot say what that is right now but am feeling better about our outcome. It has been a 4+ week exploration for us. The best thing anyone can do is to email a letter to the Commission and let them know your thoughts.

At the last meeting with WDFW over this, they told us they had a meeting scheduled with the commission and the commission was going to direct them on what was to be done.

So do your part right now and email a letter to the commission telling them that you want this Puget Sound Chinook Harvest Management Plan either altered or rescinded, but cannot live with it in its current state, if you agree. This helps the newer non fish commissioners understand from our perspective how we feel and want to see happen.

commission@dfw.wa.gov,

PSA is in the process of putting together a letter to the commission behalf of our chapters and the recreationals. We will be sending out an Voter Voice announcement for others too.

WDFW, especially under Phil, wanted ocean fisheries for salmon. The PS fisheries have been cut back for years. The Tribes, I think, would prefer to not see any fishing in "their" home waters. Also, if the NI share is taken in the summer in the ocean then the Tribal fisheries get to balance that off, per Hoh v. Baldridge. They want the ocean fishing.

Doesn't really matter to them, also, who pays for the hatcheries. It is a government responsibility to mitigate for the ecological damage done by approved activities.

Great article as far as it went. There are other holes in the 5 gallon bucket which negatively affect returns and which may be mitigated (to include but not limited to predation).

If readers go to the group's website and check out the Board of Directors there are several tribal members to include one from the Stillaguamish tribe.

There are enough things wrong with today's salmon-driven ecosystems that everybody can say "It's not us, it's them" and be right. Fix all the habitat and the pinnipeds and fishery and hatchery impacts will still hold them down. Close all the fisheries and the seals will be happy.

Unfortunately, there is so much blame to go around that nobody really has to do anything because the other guy should act first.

Way back when the Feds were first talking about banning lead for waterfowl hunting WDG opposed it because habitat loss was killing more ducks than lead poisoning. Same logic holds for salmon.

IF there is ever going to be any chance of addressing this in any meaningful manner, it is going to take a cohesive and cooperative effort by ALL parties. With the Senior Leadership of WDFW doing everything at it's dysfunctional best, to drive a larger wedge between the treaty tribes and the largest stewards (us) we are not going in the right direction!

It will take all pieces working together, even those who see that their role is "small".

Letter sent.

fb

Those TidalExchange articles are very well written. This one is no exception. Letter sent.

How will this 10 year plan affect Puget Sound Winter Blackmouth fishing seasons?

Blackmouth in area 7/8/9 sure seem very very likely to be a casualty.

Sent email to commuissioners.

Well written article!

Here is a link to the plan WDFW is presenting to commisioners today. Had we used this plan as it sits to model last years fisheries, people would be marching on Olympia. see page 39

https://wdfw.wa.gov/commission/meetings/2018/01/jan1218_Combined_PSCHMP.pdf

I read the plan, I felt like the missed a golden opportunity to bring up the Pinniped predation on Salmon in puget sound and address the the MMPA could interfere with the ability to recover an ESA stock.

Thanks Skyguy for posting this:

Pay close attention to how they dance around the issue of transparency. What they are saying is, it's better to NOT LET THE PUBLIC KNOW WHAT DEALS WE ARE MAKING! AND WE NEED TO KEEP THE COMMISSION OUT OF THE LOOP, SO THEY DON'T LET THE PUBLIC KNOW EITHER!

SO, folks, the senior staff at WDFW in collusion with the Tribes are creating policies that directly effect you, yet THEY feel it's better if you don't know about it! WHY?????

BECAUSE IF YOU KNEW ABOUT IT THE GD POLICY WOULDN'T OF GOTTEN WRITTEN THEY WAY IT DID!!

FK THESE CROOKED MF'S!! WE PAY THESE SOB'S SALERY!!!
TIME FOR SOMEONE(S) HEAD TO BE ON A PIKE!!!

FYI. Link is a letter from NSIA to WDFW regarding the Chinook plan. The document is constructed a little different. You have to go to the bottom of the page and hit an arrow to go to the next page.

http://www.nsiafishing.org/general/nsia-...880828857421875

What a bunch of bs.
A 1,000 fish summer chinook quota for MA 9. Really??????
WDFW is doing their best to kill the long history of sportsfishing on Puget Sound.

Not only are they going to kill sportsfishing, they’ll kill the marine (boats) and retail tackle industries.

All over 9-10 fish.
All those involved in negotiating this agreement behind the public’s and commission’s back need to be [Bleeeeep!] canned.
SF

Canned?

You mean in tin cans, under pressure, in a boiling hot environment?

I agree.

I hope you've sent a copy of this to the Commission. It's great to put your perspective on the board, but the Commission can make things happen. They need to hear from everybody

Bay Wolf,
I’ve been wearing out my [Bleeeeep!] fingers on this issue.
I’ve gotten only one response so far, but I don’t give a [Bleeeeep!].
They’ll continue to hear from me.
SF

Good for you Stonefish. Don't give up and don't give in! I hope others will take your example and let the Commission know how they feel.

It makes a difference, but only if they get many, many letters.

Thanks Stonefish.

I read this very interesting reply from a gentlemen named Bill on the Tidal Exchange article. I think Bill brings some good points, some that should be considered if the state and tribal co-managers are serious about ESA recovery. Big steps, and steps that won't be popular, but steps that would have major consequences for reducing impacts and a good place to start:

Bill | January 14, 2018 at 5:14 pm | Reply
I am glad to see all the responses especially the Tribal response, I doubt we would ever see a WDFW or NOAA response.
I like many others have lost trust in the co-managers. You can point to many issues habitat loss, over harvest, ocean conditions but secret meetings without input from all stakeholders is flawed & corrupt, this latest plan is a fine example, they don’t have all the facts but are crafting a plan in secret?? The fist issue I have is sale for profit of ESA listed fish, this should be the first manageable issue. STOP THE SALE OF ESA listed PUGET
SOUND CHINOOK! Second issue, the only group that fishes selectively also pumps the Most money back into the economy, funds hatcheries, gets SCREWED! Why allow commercial harvest in the Puget Sound selling ESA listed Chinook for profit? The co-managers make no distinction between a commercial harvester and a selective fishing sportsmen. One catches,sells ESA listed fish, the other pays $1000.00 per hatchery fish for the opportunity.
A note to our Tribal Co-Manager’s you could help us understand your position by being more transparent, you can read what we are thinking and you can comment, where can we read what your thinking and respond? You can read creel reports open to all, easy to find. Your catch not so easy to find…….
The commercial harvesters fish in Alaska and then come down here and fish…Why??
Why allow commercial harvest in Washington we get very little return and lose a lot in way of ESA listed fish. Why not give the their quota to the only group using selective methods?
Where is Jay Inslee in all of this? he would probably make things worse but he is asleep at the wheel again!!!!!!!

Note: There are commercial selective fisheries in Puget Sound. The point I believe is that "What is mandated to sport fishermen should also be mandated to all other user groups. In addition, the economic impact of commercial fishing needs to be explored deeply. Yes, there are those that depend on it for a livelihood, but many commercial fish for supplemental income. Perhaps we can reduce the impacts on ESA fish through a by-out program and a reduction in commercial licensing into the future. As a equitable trade, we may have to look at a cap or reduction in recreational guide licenses. Painful yes, but fair. In addition, we have to face the music, the population is exploding and the pressures on our waterways are increasing. There will have to be sacrifice from the sport fishing community too. We cannot have it all, but we can spread the pain equally and to insure that, we must have everything out in the open by everyone involved.