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 3 1 2 3 >
Topic Options
Rate This Topic
#983610 - 01/14/18 12:17 PM Should the commission be disbanded?
Geoduck Offline
Returning Adult

Registered: 08/10/02
Posts: 437


WDFW Commission Mission Statement: To preserve, protect and perpetuate fish, wildlife and ecosystems while providing sustainable fish and wildlife recreational and commercial opportunities. (see https://wdfw.wa.gov/about/mission_goals.html)

Doesn't seem like they're getting it done.

I thought the idea was to insulate management decisions from politics so that science based management can prevail. That's not what's happening.

Heck, they can't even seem to fire WDFW staff when they directly usurp commission responsibilities (see http://www.piscatorialpursuits.com/forum...Sound_Fish.html)

While its not clear exactly how bad NOF will be this year, the long term trajectory is pretty clear.

Am I missing something or is it time to find a different management model for WDFW?
_________________________
Dig Deep!

Top
#983611 - 01/14/18 12:53 PM Re: Should the commission be disbanded? [Re: Geoduck]
Larry B Offline
River Nutrients

Registered: 10/22/09
Posts: 3020
Loc: University Place and Whidbey I...
Okay, fair enough to question whether the Commission is meeting its obligations and responsibilities. However, if you are going suggest that it be disbanded you need to recognize that it's current existence was achieved by Initiative and you should offer up a better solution. Otherwise, you are encouraging the Legislature to simply vote it into oblivion and revert to the prior untenable, short term (politically driven) management "strategy."

As to criticism that the Commission has not been willing/able to fire Staff the Commission has never been able to take such personnel action. It's power to hire and fire is limited to the Director. It is the Director who has the authority to deal with hires, fires and reassignments of his management team within State law so as to successfully implement direction provided to him by the Commission.

The most current debacle over the 10 Year Chinook Management Plan is a clear failure of the Director to engage with the Commission prior to and during those negotiations and ultimately to obtain their approval of the final Plan prior to his signature and the Plan's submittal to NOAA. The Draconian effects tied to the Stilly SUS impacts (8%) may have been avoided had there been a broader involvement of all parties - something that has actually occurred albeit after the fact.

The good news is that NOAA has apparently sent the Plan back for further negotiations over concerns related to other stocks. Hopefully that will enable the co-managers, NOAA and Federal judge to find a less painful way to address their management concerns w/r/t the Stilly (and others?) and to set the stage for a more balanced annual NOF process.







Edited by Larry B (01/14/18 12:56 PM)
_________________________
Remember to immediately record your catch or you may become the catch!

It's the person who has done nothing who is sure nothing can be done. (Ewing)

Top
#983612 - 01/14/18 01:55 PM Re: Should the commission be disbanded? [Re: Larry B]
darth baiter Offline
Juvenile at Sea

Registered: 04/04/10
Posts: 199
Loc: United States
I would not expect NOAA, by themselves, to relax the management objectives that would allow more for more fishing during their own review of the Plan. However, they may require additional restrictions if they feel that protections for some populations are inadequate. The comanagers would need to request an adjustment to the Plan they originally provided which allow for more fishing and for NOAA to consider these new provisions in their evaluation of whether the overall plan meets conservation/recovery objectives in salmon fisheries. It may be tricky to get the comanagers to agree with these kind of adjustments to the Plan. A request from just WDFW and/or the Commission is unlikely to be recognized or considered by NOAA.

Top
#983613 - 01/14/18 02:16 PM Re: Should the commission be disbanded? [Re: darth baiter]
Larry B Offline
River Nutrients

Registered: 10/22/09
Posts: 3020
Loc: University Place and Whidbey I...
Originally Posted By: darth baiter
I would not expect NOAA, by themselves, to relax the management objectives that would allow more for more fishing during their own review of the Plan. However, they may require additional restrictions if they feel that protections for some populations are inadequate. The comanagers would need to request an adjustment to the Plan they originally provided which allow for more fishing and for NOAA to consider these new provisions in their evaluation of whether the overall plan meets conservation/recovery objectives in salmon fisheries. It may be tricky to get the comanagers to agree with these kind of adjustments to the Plan. A request from just WDFW and/or the Commission is unlikely to be recognized or considered by NOAA.


Well, that is to be determined. Will the reported action by NOAA sending the Plan back to the co-managers open the door to re-addressing the Stilly component? Stand By!
_________________________
Remember to immediately record your catch or you may become the catch!

It's the person who has done nothing who is sure nothing can be done. (Ewing)

Top
#983615 - 01/14/18 02:41 PM Re: Should the commission be disbanded? [Re: Geoduck]
Bay wolf Offline
Repeat Spawner

Registered: 10/26/12
Posts: 1075
Loc: Graham, WA
Originally Posted By: Geoduck


WDFW Commission Mission Statement: To preserve, protect and perpetuate fish, wildlife and ecosystems while providing sustainable fish and wildlife recreational and commercial opportunities. (see https://wdfw.wa.gov/about/mission_goals.html)

Doesn't seem like they're getting it done.

I thought the idea was to insulate management decisions from politics so that science based management can prevail. That's not what's happening.

Heck, they can't even seem to fire WDFW staff when they directly usurp commission responsibilities (see http://www.piscatorialpursuits.com/forum...Sound_Fish.html)

While its not clear exactly how bad NOF will be this year, the long term trajectory is pretty clear.

Am I missing something or is it time to find a different management model for WDFW?


1. The Commission has the authority to hire and fire the Director. It does however require a majority vote, and most probably a chain of administrative procedures like performance evaluations. Those things take time. While there are many who want to hold the Senior Staff at WDFW responsible for failure to supervise (the buck stops at the top), there are some who may want to pardon. The best way forward is to let all the Commissioners know where you stand on the issue.

2. There have already been bills submitted to reduce the Commission to an advisory board. Having the Commission dis-banded or worse yet, reduced to an advisory role would be a catastrophe! Remember, The Deputy Chair of the Commission publicly scolded Director Unsworth on his handling of the PSCSHP. It was not the Commission's fault that the Director intentionally removed them from any oversight of the plan. That responsibility rests solely on Director Unsworth and his Deputy for Fish Management.

3. The cancer in this plan was lack of transparency, and that cancer is spread from the North of Falcon. We MUST support and encourage the Commission to convert the NOF policy to a WAC (Washington Administrative Code) and put language in the WAC that gives stringent supervision over the department and mandates having full transparency in all negotiations conducted by the WDFW.
_________________________
"Forgiveness is between them and God. My job is to arrange the meeting."

1Sgt U.S. Army (Ret)

Top
#983616 - 01/14/18 03:51 PM Re: Should the commission be disbanded? [Re: Geoduck]
Geoduck Offline
Returning Adult

Registered: 08/10/02
Posts: 437
I think its obvious at this point that the only possible solution for some of the problems at WDFW involves new leadership. So far, the commission has been reluctant to provide it. A mild public tongue lashing does not qualify as leadership, nor will it provoke meaningful change.

While the director has many redeeming qualities, understanding salmon management does not seem to be one of them. If they value him so much, they need to insist on a better deputy/leadership team with knowledge of salmon management and skills at negotiation.

I think an ultimatum to the director is in order. Fix the salmon side of the house or leave.

If the commission is willing to stand for this nonsense of salmon managers making policy without consulting to the commission, then I think the commission no longer has a purpose.

While I appreciate the logic of the commission structure, its clearly not yielding positive results for the resource or users. How does WDFW get out of its current tailspin? Can the commission help, or is it just cover for more status quo? Right now it sure feels like it reinforcing the status quo. In a decade we won't be able to fish perch let alone salmon or steelhead if the current trajectory continues.
_________________________
Dig Deep!

Top
#983623 - 01/14/18 06:21 PM Re: Should the commission be disbanded? [Re: Geoduck]
Sky-Guy Offline
The Tide changed

Registered: 08/31/00
Posts: 7232
Loc: Everett
I've read NOAA feedback to the Dept over the plan as originally submitted. It ain't pretty!... and calls for a more conservative approach on 4-5 other watersheds. It isn't just the stilly, it's the Noosack, white, lake Washington, and dungeness all in or near critical status.
I expect this to come out next Friday.
_________________________
You know something bad is going to happen when you hear..."Hey, hold my beer and watch this"

Top
#983626 - 01/14/18 07:48 PM Re: Should the commission be disbanded? [Re: Geoduck]
Great Bender Offline
Juvenile at Sea

Registered: 01/03/17
Posts: 155
Loc: Hood Canal

Take heed...the Commission is far away our best hope to somehow turn this mess around. Those Managers entrusted to act on their (and our) behalf, as well as everyone's best interests, have failed tragically. When this all comes to a climax, the devil will be in the details--a good many of which are already hidden behind a veil of secrecy and cloaked by devious deception. Make no mistake...this whole mess deserves to and has landed squarely on Jim Unsworth's and his Fisheries Manager's desks. This is his quandary until he saves Puget Sound Recreational fishing--or yields, steps aside...and hands the crisis to someone else.
I have some serious concerns. They culminated when I listened to the audio tape of the Commission's special meeting yesterday. Correct me if I'm wrong, but Jim Unsworth was included during the roll call of all those actively listening in and prepped to participate. From that point forward, he never spoke a word.
I'm baffled by how that could take place. Why didn't he plea mea culpa, pick up the reins and contact NOAA to explain what actually transpired, request an extension or review of the Puget Sound Management Plan or even graciously offer to fall on his sword?
The nine Commissioners now saddled with untangling this mess are well qualified and resolved to deal with what must transpire at this point. Give them the support they need. If they were not in place to do just that---this nightmare would already be reality.

Top
#983629 - 01/14/18 09:27 PM Re: Should the commission be disbanded? [Re: Geoduck]
Larry B Offline
River Nutrients

Registered: 10/22/09
Posts: 3020
Loc: University Place and Whidbey I...
GB - The Director looked absolutely ambivalent when Commissioner Carpenter offered up his polite, understated criticism during the early December Commission meeting.

As for the Commission I hope that they individually and as a group fully comprehend the magnitude of the problem as seen by us stakeholders and are up to the challenge.
_________________________
Remember to immediately record your catch or you may become the catch!

It's the person who has done nothing who is sure nothing can be done. (Ewing)

Top
#983630 - 01/14/18 09:49 PM Re: Should the commission be disbanded? [Re: Geoduck]
Bay wolf Offline
Repeat Spawner

Registered: 10/26/12
Posts: 1075
Loc: Graham, WA
I think some of the Commissioners are afraid to fire Unsworth because they don't know how we will react. Especially the board members from the east side. They are insulated from the fisheries issues. But they got punked just like the rest of the Board. They really do need to show their in charge, or risk losing all their authority and respect of the people.
_________________________
"Forgiveness is between them and God. My job is to arrange the meeting."

1Sgt U.S. Army (Ret)

Top
#983631 - 01/14/18 09:56 PM Re: Should the commission be disbanded? [Re: Sky-Guy]
Jake Dogfish Offline
Spawner

Registered: 06/24/00
Posts: 554
Loc: Des Moines
Originally Posted By: Sky-Guy
I've read NOAA feedback to the Dept over the plan as originally submitted. It ain't pretty!... and calls for a more conservative approach on 4-5 other watersheds. It isn't just the stilly, it's the Noosack, white, lake Washington, and dungeness all in or near critical status.
I expect this to come out next Friday.


Your not kidding! The Stilly is a driver but not the only concerns in this plan. For example Lake Washington with a 12% escapement rate: The lowest observed SUS ER was 8.9% in 2010 and it’s the only time since 1992 the SUS ER has been below 12%.
26 years!

Top
#983641 - 01/15/18 07:03 AM Re: Should the commission be disbanded? [Re: Geoduck]
Carcassman Online   content
River Nutrients

Registered: 11/21/07
Posts: 7413
Loc: Olema,California,Planet Earth
Here's is where the concern should be, I think.

PS Chinook listed in the early 90s. We cut back hydro, worked on habitat, tweaked fisheries, based on our models. The runs have not rebounded.

Starting with Stilly, they (Tribe) stopped killing wild Chinook, the state made great reductions and went selective in some fisheries. Little use of hatcheries. Put in all sorts of land-use restrictions. IT HASN"T WORKED.

We are getting to the point where the real world data says what is being done is not enough. This includes AK and BC as NOAA is open to lawsuits for not enforcing ESA and CITIES but that would come from a third party like Greenpeace or Sea Shepherd.

As the 2016 fiasco showed, some Tribes do not support the NI fishery achieving its allowed catch and impacts if it affects theirs. When selective fisheries occur, and they take their full ESA impact, it the precludes a non-selective fishery from taking all the target fish.

I think we re approaching a point where NOAA has to face some hard choices. Cut back/eliminate AK mixed stock catch, negotiate BC off of US fish, either get the tribes to fish selectively of close down NI.

It is the fish or cut bait, [Bleeeeep!] or get off the pot time. Do something so that the return to the gravel significantly exceeds the parent year. Real numbers, not model runs.

Top
#983658 - 01/15/18 10:05 AM Re: Should the commission be disbanded? [Re: Sky-Guy]
stonefish Online   content
King of the Beach

Registered: 12/11/02
Posts: 5205
Loc: Carkeek Park
Originally Posted By: Sky-Guy
I've read NOAA feedback to the Dept over the plan as originally submitted. It ain't pretty!... and calls for a more conservative approach on 4-5 other watersheds. It isn't just the stilly, it's the Noosack, white, lake Washington, and dungeness all in or near critical status.
I expect this to come out next Friday.


SG,
Thanks for the update.
Will that be released on the WDFW or NOAA website?
SF
_________________________
Go Dawgs!
Founding Member - 2023 Pink Plague Opposition Party
#coholivesmatter

Top
#983696 - 01/16/18 01:06 PM Re: Should the commission be disbanded? [Re: Geoduck]
Chasin' Baitman Offline
Returning Adult

Registered: 08/15/12
Posts: 253
I like the Commission right now, but I see Geoduck's point...

Maybe a bad analogy, but if WDFW were a company and the Commission were the Board of Directors, they would NOT look at the results and say:

"Hey, great job folks!" (decades of declines of both natural origin and hatchery production)

"Keep doing what you're doin'!" (further reduce harvest, which is proven to not work)

They would fire the guy in charge.

I know WDFW's managers feel that their hands are tied by ESA, treaties, Boldt, insufficient funding, and probably a bunch of other reasons. But an entity that perpetually claims its hands are tied is an entity with a severe leadership problem.

A Board would never accept "sorry guys, our hands are tied" from a CEO and the Commission should not accept that from WDFW. Solutions exist, and finding them starts with leadership.

Yes, the replacement could end up being yet another goober just like Unsworth turned out to be after Anderson left. But that's not a reason to leave said goober in charge.

Having said all that, we should give the Commission a chance. They have been blindsided right along with us. The Commission is likely in the process of deciding what to do.

I'm writing the Commission recommending the delegation of authority to the director be withdrawn, and the director replaced.

Should be an interesting meeting Friday

Top
#983699 - 01/16/18 01:35 PM Re: Should the commission be disbanded? [Re: Geoduck]
Great Bender Offline
Juvenile at Sea

Registered: 01/03/17
Posts: 155
Loc: Hood Canal
Maybe, just maybe...we can stop this train wreck and turn things around. Thank you, CB. The one thing we all can agree on is Puget Sound without a well researched and soundly deliberated approach to get gear in the water is a most depressing scenario. Your message carries wisdom...and encourages others to keep it moving!

Top
#983827 - 01/19/18 03:57 PM Re: Should the commission be disbanded? [Re: Geoduck]
Bay wolf Offline
Repeat Spawner

Registered: 10/26/12
Posts: 1075
Loc: Graham, WA
We just received this email:

"I learned late last night that the Senate Nat. Resources committee had unanimously confirmed 5 WDFW Commissioners - Baker, Carpenter, McIsaac, Thornburg, and Graybill. The names will be sent to the full Senate for a vote of confirmation. Hopefully, it comes sooner rather than later. Contact with your local State Senator encouraging a quick vote would be appropriate, I think. We, the people, need the Commission confirmed so they can't be easily removed and can do what we're asking of them."

I met with my District Rep this afternoon and asked for his support, which he agreed to. Please, contact your representatives and lets get this done.
_________________________
"Forgiveness is between them and God. My job is to arrange the meeting."

1Sgt U.S. Army (Ret)

Top
#983840 - 01/19/18 05:43 PM Re: Should the commission be disbanded? [Re: Geoduck]
Take-Down Offline
Juvenile at Sea

Registered: 02/29/08
Posts: 117
1. If the Commission has the power to fire the Director, they should do so immediately. His handling of the Mgmt Plan is reprehensible. And really, at this point, it's pretty clear that he's a dipsh*t (and this from a guy who has defended WDFW on this board for years).

2. Am I the only one who finds it odd/depressing/mystifying that Trump's administration is pretty much abandoning the environment on all fronts and yet NOAA is still all over us about catch and release encounters? Shouldn't a little Federal help on the NOAA/Mgmt Plan front be the silver lining of Trump?

Top
#983880 - 01/20/18 10:23 AM Re: Should the commission be disbanded? [Re: Geoduck]
Larry B Offline
River Nutrients

Registered: 10/22/09
Posts: 3020
Loc: University Place and Whidbey I...
Numerous folks made the trip yesterday to Ridgefield in order to testify at the morning public comment session prior to the afternoon Staff briefing on the 10 Year Chinook Harvest Plan (Plan). I don't recall there being even one person who spoke in favor of the Plan or the manner in which it was developed and presented.

Questions were raised as to why the Southern U.S. (SUS) is being more severely restricted that Northern fisheries (which includes current negotiations with Canada of the Salmon Treaty) in ways to reduce perceived risks to the stocks and particularly the Stilly which is the poster child as NOAA/NMFS is dealing with its ESA responsibilities (note: NOAA has taken issue with the Plan's impacts on several other stocks). And does that direction from NOAA open up the opportunity to renegotiate the 8% SUS cap on Stilly impacts? Others testified as to the expected economic impact of a full salmon season shutdown. The Commission was also "encouraged" to step up and assert its role as the Policy setting policy, others recommended that the Commission rescind its broad delegation of authority to the Department, and one individual directly asked that the Director resign.

Some takeaway points (and personal comments):

1. AAG Grossman briefed on the legal aspect of the "secret" nature of the negotiations leading up to the Plan saying confidentiality was dictated by the Federal judge. It was said that the Commission had been informed while Staff also acknowledged that they could and should have done a better job of informing the Commission.

2. I believe it was AAG Grossman who took exception to the contention that only 11 Stilly fish would have been saved had the Plan been applied to the 2017 season. But that person did not say how many fish the after-the-fact modeling (and such modeling only occurred after the Plan was signed) would have saved. Maybe 12?? 13??? Only they know and that seems to be another pertinent fact covered under the confidentiality veil. And they wonder why there is distrust?

3. During the afternoon Staff briefing it was Commissioners McIssac and Carpenter who asked the most pointed questions. Their background in complicated fisheries issues was apparent and a true value to the process. Thank you both!! And Governor Inslee - be sure to re-appoint Commissioner Carpenter!!

4. It was stated that NOAA is not concerned about economic impacts. It was also opined that NOAA/NMFS is willing to accept without discussion impact figures which they perceive as adequately conservative but become far more concerned as impact numbers become close to or below their minimum recovery figures because of a fear of being sued by certain conservation groups.

5. On one hand there was a perception that the SUS impact cap is 8% but then there was discussion that the 8% was when low returns were anticipated and up to 12% for good years (overall 24% in both conditions). I was left wondering who will make that assessment and against what standards? In response to Commissioner McIssac's probing questions the Staff acknowledged that even if northern impacts were ZERO the max SUS would remain at 12%. Why is that? And why is the burden being placed disproportionately on the SUS? There was no discussion as to how in-season adjustments might be accomplished leaving us with the impression that our fisheries would be locked in to the annual NOF agrements which are based entirely upon expectations.

6. There was also one comment to the effect that it would be recreational fishers taking the brunt of SUS restrictions. Does that mean that the tribes will be fishing (mostly non-selectively) even if we don't have a season? Staff would not confirm assertions that the Plan will under certain conditions (such as now) result in a total closure (or at least the State's) of salmon seasons. They simply couldn't say those words - kind of like Fonzie (Happy Days) not being able to use the word "mistake." I recall that when pushed Staff used a term like "potential significant impacts." Paint your own picture.

7. There was a push to have the unofficial Plan utilized for 2018 and probably 2019 because NOAA's process probably won't be completed prior to those seasons.

8. There was no formal action taken by the Commission.

After the public session the Commission and Staff went into Executive Session. Wish I could have been the fly on the wall for that one.

These are my recollections from what was about 3 hours of testimony and briefings. The Commission will be posting an audio recording to their webpage.
_________________________
Remember to immediately record your catch or you may become the catch!

It's the person who has done nothing who is sure nothing can be done. (Ewing)

Top
#983882 - 01/20/18 12:01 PM Re: Should the commission be disbanded? [Re: Geoduck]
Great Bender Offline
Juvenile at Sea

Registered: 01/03/17
Posts: 155
Loc: Hood Canal
Thank you, Larry, for making the long trip and sharing the details. After reading through your comments, my immediate impression was that the Director and his Managers have "circled their wagons" to somehow create a defense of relying on strength in numbers...pointing the finger of blame at the Feds, the Commissioners and a few misinformed radicals out there in the public.

Until the Management Group comes clean on just exactly how the 8% quota was applied to the Stilly situation, AND ALLOWED TO REMAIN AT THAT FIGURE WHEN BEING SIGNED OFF BY THE DIRECTOR, thus warranting his approval...their feet remain in the fire. More and more stakeholders, businessmen, and patrons are becoming aware daily of how this nightmare is shaking out.

This MP would have all been "fait accompli", and on its way to implementation, had not the Commission taken exception to being excluded in the policy-making procedure. Ironically, WDFW is pushing forward in this process as though nothing out of the ordinary has happened--and we, collectively, are not buying a word of it.

There is no better example of making the case for mandatory transparency in the dealings of the Dep't. than what has transpired, and is being spun as reality.

I look forward to hearing the audio record of the proceedings--if only it were more comical than pathetic...

Top
#983883 - 01/20/18 12:59 PM Re: Should the commission be disbanded? [Re: Geoduck]
Bay wolf Offline
Repeat Spawner

Registered: 10/26/12
Posts: 1075
Loc: Graham, WA
Thanks Larry. I find it troubling that Mr. Grossmann’s involment in details of the plan seem more like a lobbyist than legal counsel. It appears he has exceeded his role as advisor on legal matters and is now actively taking part in the negotiations and inserting his objectives rather than advise.

Clearly the Commission needs to see through the BS that lack of transparency is necessary to good fish management as Mr. Grossmann has professed on a couple of occasions now. If that were true, then the current MP would of been perfect!

There is no confidence in the senior leadership of WDFW. Unsworth needs to go, Ron Warren needs to be re-assigned as does AAG Grossmann. That triad is directly responsible for not only the piss poor MP and attempting to undermine the Commission’s authority but for continuing to attempt to shift blame and hinder transparency. Man up, accept your responsibility in this disaster and resign!

WE NEED to tell the Commission to agree to convert the NOF policy to a WAC. It is the ONLY WAY they can affirm their authority and be true to their word as supporting open and fair meetings. If the Board memebers listen to Grossmann and deny conversion, they are clearly sending a message that they are not in support of transparency and are subordinate to the Department, just what WDFW wants!
_________________________
"Forgiveness is between them and God. My job is to arrange the meeting."

1Sgt U.S. Army (Ret)

Top
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 >

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 |