Close the hatchery creek so the tribes can sweep

Not sure how I feel about this. Seems like taxpayers who fund the hatchery are being denied fishing opportunity so that tribal fishers can get a handout.

Crap. Is there a tutorial that shows me how to put a picture on a post on this site?

Insert Cascade Regs here. I apparantly lack the skills or permissions.

The sharing of salmon is in all WA-controlled fisheries. Those fisheries in the Sound, in the ocean, all take salmon from the share. The Tribes are confined to the Unsuaol and Accustomed (U&A) which often includes freshwater. That is why, with the exception of steelhead, the Tribes often get more of the freshwater fish because the non-Indians got theirs "outside".

September 18, 2020

Skagit River from Highway 9 to Baker River to temporarily close to all fishing

Action: Closes all recreational fishing.

Species affected: All species.

Effective Dates: From 12 a.m. Monday, Sept. 21, through 6 p.m. Tuesday, Sept. 22, 2020.

Location: Skagit River (Skagit County) from the Highway 9 bridge in Sedro Woolley to the mouth of the Baker River.

Reason for action: This area of the Skagit River will close to all fishing to avoid gear conflicts with treaty fisheries scheduled those dates.

Additional information: Anglers are asked to respect tribal fishers and reminded to not interfere with tribal fisheries. Conflicts that arise during ongoing fisheries may require additional time and area closures in the future to reduce conflicts.

Information contact: Team Mill Creek, 425 775-1311

A growing trend, and it is often part of the NOF regulation package, is closures to angling when in-river netting occurs. Apparently the two groups don't play well together.

What ever happened to "In Common"?

Tribes are entitled to 50% of returns to WA waters. So the ocean( commercial and rec ) and straights & sound ( commercial and rec ) count into the nt catch. Adds up to terminal tribal fisheries seasons being a bit much to get their share which fuels the hard feelings. Then you have the growth of terminal and sound rec fishers which adds fuel to the fire. This is a zero sum game to be sure.

All the above are illustrations of the low priority that both WDFW commission and agency place on recreational fisheries; a much larger issue than NOF!

Examples -
The Skagit recreational closures on the Skagit of approximately 35 miles of river because of conflicts between user groups. This is on the second largest river in the State; if the groups can't fish together there were can they? One would have thought that a WDFW enforcement presences could have reduced those conflicts.

Willapa Bay recreational Chinook fishery without tribal fisheries has effectively been gutted. The proposed hatchery closures (including Forks and Nemah) as part of the actions to be taken to meet budget short falls will be the final nails in coffin in that fishery.

Puget Sound steelhead recreational is but finished. The proposed hatchery closures (Tokul Creek, Reiter, and Whitehorse hatchery) eliminates any chance of a summer steelhead fishery as well as any chance to develop an alternative summer steelhead brood stock. The north Sound "S" rivers will be without any steelhead fishing.

Reduction of Puget Sound marine Chinook recreational fisheries (eliminations of winter seasons) drive by Stillaguamish issues. I understand how the status of the Stillaguamish are a concern and how that drives those seasons. It is obviously a long term problem and it has been equally obvious nearly a decade that the day of reckoning we saw during 2020 NOF was coming. Did/Does WDFW develop a strategy to address those resources concerns while continue some fishing? Have the worked with the recreational community proactively to develop strategies to address those resource concerns? The answers of course are no.

BTW the recreational fishery losses due those Stillaguamish Chinook include in river game fish seasons.

Those same hatchery closures will also affect Region 4 lowland lake trout fishing. Those closures (also includes the Arlington hatchery) will reduce the numbers of catchable available to plant in the region by 60%. How does that make sense? The license sales associated with those fisheries is one of the few money makers the agency has. The last I looked the region is the home of the significant numbers of anglers.

These are just examples from fisheries that I'm familiar with and suspect that there are other examples across the State. WE must judge the agency on their actions (are lack of action) and not what is said!

The agency is moving rapidly towards one most of us will not recognize.

Curt

I really don't need the lesson in fisheries management, but continue to be confounded by some of the new management practices. I don't know the Skagit, but is the entire fishable section, above which the tribes don't fish, closed to sports? My impression , perhaps incorrectly, was that it was closed when the tribes fish. Nisqually system has adopted that practice.

Tug, it would seem that WDFW has essentially abandoned rec fishermen, especially freshwater (and regardless of what they fish for) to keep the Tribes happy. Keeping the Tribes happy allows for some ocean and straits fishing, which is the goal.

I believe that WDFW would happily give up anything inside the Straits if the ocean and Straits could have a consistent fishery for a reasonable (economically to Westport, Neah Bay. LaPush, PA).

I may be wrong, but that sure looks like the flight plan.

Second on what Smalma posted above yesterday. WDFW under Susewind is getting out of the recreational fishing business. It's obvious that steelhead fisheries have been a PITA for WDFW for some time, but to close a hatchery that produces resident trout for stocking lakes - the only money maker in the state hatchery line up - is solid evidence that Susewind plans to take the agency in the direction of a "petting zoo" kind of fish experience for NT citizens and hand over actual "fishing" that the Washington Department of Salmon actually cares about to the treaty tribes and base future funding of the Department mainly on General Fund appropriations.

Smalma's right; the future WDFW is an agency most of us will not recognize.

I saw, too, that the Commission supports re-gillnetting the Columbia. There goes any hope for a rec-supported license fee increase. Is Susewind just trying to destroy WDFW as quickly as possible?

then use your pen & vote inslee out. only way to have any chance of changing things. or just sit back & bitch.