Coastal steelhead rules out now...

https://fortress.wa.gov/dfw/erules/efish...Ip9g6OBSqwM4ugc

Fish on...

Todd

Takeaways...

No fishing from a floating device, period, coastwide.

Selective gear rules, coastwide.

Most of the streams look to have about the same season length as usual, except for anything usually open past April 1st...closes on April 1st.

Fish on...

Todd

looks like the tribes are about to make a metric sh!t ton of money...

The tribes don't ever make any sh!t tons of money, metric or otherwise, from steelhead fishing, even in good years, and this will not be a good year.

The Quileute is the only system that has any harvestable fish at all in it, and it's only making escapement by a few thousand.

Fish on...

Todd

you dont think that people will pay guides more to go fish over there, including the ones that can walk into Cook and the likes? boat fishing is still allowed on tribal rivers..


also, all the fish the will not be caught due to it, will be absorbed by the tribes, they have done it before, and will do it again...

and they sell those fish...

None of this applies to the Quinault on the rez, in any event, and those guides have no problem fishing every fishable day already.

As noted above, the only river with harvestable wild steelhead is the Quileute, and there aren't many, and of course they will catch some and sell them...it's what they do...but they don't make much money at it even when it's good, and it's not going to be good.

Fish on...

Todd

thats what im saying, if people cant fish there, they will pay to go on tribal land, maybe not you, or some of the others here, but tons will...

hell theres walk in guides advertising on the fishing pages all the time, and it will increase, as well as people wanting to go catch fish...

that equates to money in the pocket...

and Quileute, are you saying just that river, or the system (Bogy, Duc, Calawah)?

The Quileute system is the only one making escapement, and most of those fish are going up the Sol Duc...so the dude that nets there at the mouth of the Sol Duc will get some, as will the guys that drift nets down at Richwine...but that's about it.

The Quinault guides are booked solid all year...this won't change that any.

Fish on...

Todd

I wonder what the bank etiquette will be like? Or, does that even exist in our state.?

At least up in Canadia, the unwritten rule of thumb is to take a cast take some steps. Take a cast, take some steps. Work your way down a run. If you're new to the run, you start at the top of the run. You do not low-hole people on a run. If you hook a fish (landed or not), you move back up to the top of the run.

Does that even happen on places like the Hoh that are lined with fly flinging Jesus Looking Freaks and Ascot Wearing Salmo's of the world?

Pretty sure the local coastal guides are going to use their boats to take their clients to the most popular locations and set up camp.

Just ask yourself - what would Fly do??

Personally, I think bobber dogging from shore would be a good tactic. Cast at the head of the hole and run that float right down the middle of the run as you walk down at river speed down the river.

Shoredogging!

I feel for the guilds but they’ll either adjust or move on. Sol Duc will gain the most from no boat fishing as banking is tough at best anyway. A step in the right direction (says a dyed in the wool egg goo guy) another chapter let’s hope it’s not the last. Too many people to little resources.

Defund Inslee's Puppets known as WDFW!!!!!
They have failed for decades but will continue to cash checks far beyond their work days.

This is some of the best news I've heard all year. I fish this way most of the time anyway.

I havent read but does this include old folks that want to go with a friend or guide whom may be in a wheelchair or what about disabled folks? You would think you could fish "on anchor". I personally enjoy finding a spot and working it over. The choo choo train of boats in places like the sol duc would be dramatically influenced...

Since we are all too stupid to actually make an attempt to save our resources, why not implement a pay to play for each river? This is in addition to the annual required fishing license.

$25 a day to fish one particular river. You can pay by the day, week, month, or season. No fishing from a boat is allowed.

$100 a day to fish one particular river from a boat.

Established guides would either be to absorb this cost, or pass this one to someone who really wants to catch a wild steelhead. Many guides would not participate and thus reduce the amount of guided pressure on the river.

Once more, I'm super glad I don't own a boat.

Jeez Paker, did I pee in your Cheerios or something?


I read the new regulations and realized that I won't be directly affected at all since I wade fish even when using a boat. I use barbless hooks and don't use bait, and release all wild trout and most hatchery ones too. There could be indirect effects though. Anglers in boats who usually drift on past where I'm fishing might now be inclined to stop and share the run if it looks to be easily wadeable. I'm OK with that; it's an imperfect season. And a lot of the places I fish aren't wade fished by most sane fishermen.

Maybe you'd like to take a page from Quebec's salmon management book? Public rivers are managed by the ZEC. Some rivers have pretty small salmon runs, like 2,000 fish, sometimes even less. But they allow fishing, without over-fishing. Every river is divided into "beats." You have to have a Quebec fishing license, and then you buy a day ticket for a beat. Each beat is limited in the number of rods that can fish it each day. Some rod days are sold in advance through a lottery that begins in January I think. The balance of the rod days can be purchased up to the date of fishing. About the cheapest non-resident day ticket is about $50, but that's usually for crappy water or season. Decent tickets start at about $75 and go up from there.

On some rivers, a non-resident angler must fish with a guide - which keeps local fishing guides employed. On other rivers you can fish without a guide. It's possible to arrange 5 days of fishing for an all in cost around $2,600 for travel, lodging, licenses and fees.

Oh, and it's all catch and release fishing for wild Atlantic salmon.

I hope every gravel bar is filled shoulder to shoulder so the spey crowd can see what they had.

Those rivers don't need selective gear regulations, not the issue.

Get rid of the hatchery plants where there are native steelhead and the natives will thrive in time. The hatchery fish are the #1 demise of the native populations...

Just my .02...

Keith

Yup. This just makes everyone else fish the way I've been doing it for years. No loud objections from me. I'm a little concerned there won't be enough productive bank water to go around, but that should be eased by the fact that not as many people are going to pay guides to stand in line like everyone else at the honey holes.

Counterpoint to Evo's "concerns:"
I think it would be a good thing if the QIN profited from this. I've been preaching for years that the tribes could make a lot more money for the nation by premier guiding than they do gillnetting steelhead. Being the exclusive provider of that service should give them a huge advantage over the NT guides, who have to park their boats and get clients out to fish.

Too bad we can't convince the tribes to quit allowing sport harvest of wild fish. That could turn out to be one hell of a gotcha as more people start booking tribal guides to get the premier experience. Many guided anglers are all too excited to bonk everything they catch, so I don't think we can count on goodwill protecting the fish... Oh, well. If they do start profiting more from guiding, perhaps it will change their views on the potential of C&R fisheries. Perhaps....

Nope. I don't eat Cheerios or something.

Once again I'm just pointing out that we (as a recreational angling group) are just allowing the state to cut our throats as we all sit back and bask in our slow and eventual deaths. Matter of fact we seem to enjoy it, as we've done this over and over again.

We allow restriction and restriction after restriction on our rivers. Some even pat themselves on their back, on a "job well done.", but yet the end result hasn't changed.

The wild steelhead resource continues to dwindle away to extinction.

Fishermen are truly selfish people that absolutely do not care about the fish they are supposedly attempting to "save" because if they did care, they'd just stop fishing for wild steelhead.

As I've said before, will someone please turn off the river lights when the last wild steelhead has been caught and killed?

If steelhead fishing is that messed up, or the powers that be are so damn worried about fishing pressure, it's time to close it ALL down. Tribes included.

The runs are *not* healthy. They are *not* recovering and showing no signs of real recovery.

But yet, we are happy to bend over and take another regulation restriction in our efforts to destroy the resource.

Shut it all down. Open it back up only *after* true recovery has happened. If that takes 500 years, so be it.

(Grumble. Grumble. Piss. Moan. Lather. Rinse. Repeat.)

Maybe not on the coast where still to this day most of the rivers are flooded with hatchery smolt plants and massive amounts of straying occurs. In other places where hatchery smolt plants have been extremely reduced or eliminated it's showing native numbers rebounding and in some places exceeding escapement. But I get the greed of the almighty steelhead fisherman, nothing better than a chambers creek brat for an epic battle and table fare...

Stop planting the hatchery steelhead and the natives will return.

But as Illahee would say, I'm just an arm chair biologist and I don't know [Bleeeeep!]....

Keith

DIbs on the front seat!!!!!!



Oh, well this makes it all better. Fish the way FleaFlicker02 has been fishing for years. Problem solved!

Man, I hope you don't fish like sh!T. It's bad enough that I have to fish the way you've been doing it for your years now, but if you're only hooking 1 or so steelhead a year, because you suck..... FML!



Anyone care to tell me why these new regulations are going in to effect on the 14th?

I thought this was all to protect the wild fish. How many wild fish are in the coastal systems now? Not many.

Only thing this regulation is doing now is screwing over those trying to get one of Sthdr1's chamber creek brats. Ok, not really screwing over because one really can't get screwed over with a brat/turd/banana.

Why not put these regs in to effect...oh I dunno, say Jan 1?

Evo - the walk-in tribal guides are already packed in to places like Cook Crick and the Salmon. It's already stupidly crowded and I don't see that increasing or changing. It's always going to be stupid crowded on those rivers and this regulation won't effect that.

As for the Quinault, it's generally only fishable if and when the lake doesn't turn over and puke out the river. It's never a flow issue. Back when I used to fish it, the lake would stop turning over around late Feb and the river would be fished from March-April for the most part. There isn't going to be big push of new tribal guides that can boat that river.

I wouldn't expect any more guides on the Queets either.

I agree, sure would love to be in on the WDFW conversation with the December 14, 2020 date.......doesn't make good sense to me !!!!!! Sure hope WDFW has a plan to truck the Wynoochee trap hatchery steelhead back down the river to give sportsmen a 2nd or 3rd chance at them ?????? If not, then LOTS of hatchery steelhead will be "trucked above the dam", grrrrrrrr what a waste !!!!

In fairness to the closure, it completely contradicts the concept of removing as many hatchery turds as you can from the system to prevent spawning with natives. But then again, if you are forced to fish from the bank do the harvest numbers really drop much? I'd say yes, if pressure drops and less people choose to go fishing.

Is this just a Covert Covid operation to reduce the spread of the illness on the rivers?

Keith

I've been doing my part for quite some time now, I don't catch much and mostly just get in the way of the guys that do.

(only half kidding)

Remind me again what rivers are being closed on the 14th?

None.

So why the emergency regulation against the coast now?

Who came up with the brilliant idea that just because a certain river is "under escapement" that the pressure from that river will move to the coast?

The same people that fished the under-escaped river last year, will continue to fish it this year. They are not going to just magically decide to fish only the coastal rivers.

Would be one thing if the state were closing down these under escapement rivers to all fishing and bringing about these new anti-boat regulations, but they are NOT.

No rivers have been closed.

If they are under escapement, why are they still open to fish now or past the 14th?

IF A RIVER IN OUR STATE IS UNDER ESCAPEMENT, CLOSE IT DOWN ON THE 14th.

This just reeks of a special interest group attack on fishing regulations (again). I want to know who the asshole is who talked to the other asshole in the WDFW to get this bullsh! passed.

I'm really shocked that a lot more of you really don't seem to care that much about how the WDFW is just continually fvcking you over.

Look up the word "precedence" in the dictionary. Because this is what this is....and this isn't good.

I'm starting to get the sense that you like to steelhead fish out of boats.

fb

DEFUND THE WDFW PENSION COLLECTING AGENCY!!!!!!!!!!

THEY FAILED.

i wonder when the park is going to follow suit. Anyone heard?

I’d like to know what the difference in mortality is between a fly fisher that has to battle a steelhead for a long duration vs someone in a boat that can net for a quick release.

I'm more concerned with the studies that have eliminated standard gear fisherman and no signs of improvements. Selective gear rules are nothing more than to eliminate the game hogs...

Just goes to show tactics used has little if anything to do with survival and populations. It's a much bigger problem that no one wants to acknowledge..

Keith

what it sounds like they"re trying to get rid of the boat ho's =)

I obviously don’t post here much but for some reason I’m feeling compelled to. I’m sure I'll be called out for whining, sour grapes, whatever, and that's likely true, but I am also just so surprised at the reaction from many on here. Full disclosure, yes, I am one of those lowly fishing guides that this will majorly impact. I live in a town that rhymes with dorks and pretend to guide there year around. I understand that I am a commercial entity making a living off of a public resource. Many of you may not agree with that and I understand that argument for sure. I’m not here to change anyone’s mind in regards to liking or not liking guides and I'm certainly not going to waste my breath looking for sympathy in the way my livelihood is being affected. I would however, like many of you to consider WDFW’s role in these new regulations from another perspective and to shed some light on how I feel we aren't being properly managed.

First and foremost, as it relates to the Quileute system… WDFW has always managed steelhead fisheries under the maximum sustainable harvest model. Under those guidelines the Quileute system has a forecast of 9276 steelhead. That forecast is 3376 fish over escapement. Traditionally that would mean that sport anglers have 1,688 fish to harvest through a catch and release fishery and the tribal co-mangers have 1,688 fish to harvest in their commercial gill net fishery. The tribe has stated plainly that they see no reason for increased conservation measures and they plan to operate their fishery as such. Why is WDFW disagreeing with that stance? WDFW is using creel data that would suggest that anglers catch 4000-5000 steelhead a winter in the Q system (Keep in mind this comes entirely from 2014 and prior creel data before we moved to no bait, barbless hooks ect.). Using the 10% mortality figure (that again, has not changed since we went to no removal of wild steelhead from the water, no bait, barbless hooks, only 1 hook) agreed on between the state and tribe, thats 4-500 dead steelhead. Far below the number we would be allowed to harvest while still meeting WDFWs escapement goal. If all the shift in pressure from Grays Harbor led to twice as many fish being caught (I would hope we can logically agree that wouldn't happen) we would still comply with our management objectives.

So by those numbers, we clearly have the numbers to support a full season on the Q system. We fished on similar numbers last year and the year before on the Hoh and met escapement as well. WDFW justification for further restrictions would be the closures to the Chehalis system (which now aren't happening even though those rivers are under escapement?) and not the projected numbers for the Q system. They will not answer to why they have suddenly, for the first time ever, decided to make a coast wide blanket restriction when they have always managed system by system. For everyone agreeing with this change in management, I would ask if you will be supporting the Skagit opening this winter. By this logic, the Sky is closed so the Skagit must be too regardless of return.

Now for the many elephants in the room. This decision they just made is obviously a big one. At a recent meeting with the board of WDFW commissioners, none of the commissioners had even heard mention of these rule changes despite having met with WDFW fisheries managers in a meeting just 2 days prior. This rule has a large impact to the economy of some rural towns. WDFW failed to reach out to our state senator Van De Wege or our other representatives to inform them as well. Personally, I'm disheartened that a decision of this magnitude is being made extremely quickly with very little input from so many stakeholders and without any economic considerations. How about you?

And of course, the biggest elephant of all. Does it seem odd to any of you that a couple special interest groups that just so happen to only fish from the bank, have been pushing hard for no fishing from floating devices since 2015 and now for the first time ever, without any number or studies to back it up, WDFW decides that this will be an effective tool to save wild steelhead? Is it okay to you, even if this doesn't immediately impact you, that minority special interest groups seem to have WDFW pushing their agenda now?

It is disheartening to me that as a group of passionate sportsmen, we are okay with the department making new rules that aren't backed by any good science showing that they will really help wild steelhead. In 2016 we were told that no bait and barbs would really help. 5 years later we are restricting ourselves further due to low returns. We were told that we needed to go to all catch and release and that the tribe wouldn't take those extra fish. They did so there was again, no savings. I have no personal beefs with any of those rules but I sure think we need to start getting a little more return for our sacrifices. We’ve seen declines in wild steelhead sate wide, we have closed rivers to all angling and they still fail to come back. At some point we need to stop being okay with further restrictions that we know won't help and insist that WDFW re evaluates the escapement goals on our rivers. Thats the only way, under the MSY model, to restrict any harvest and let more fish spawn. Otherwise we could have 30,000 show up to the Q system next year and the state and tribe will still feel the need to harvest that run down to 9,000.

Does anyone here truly believe that not fishing from a floating device will lead to an increase in wild steelhead returns in the future? I mean REALLY? And if you don’t, regardless of your feeling on greedy fishing guides or wether you have always bank fished anyways, you should be outraged. As a community of fisher people we need to support each other better. We need to care that someone that fished the Sol Duc for the last 45 years and won't be able to wade is going to be cut out of the fishery. Im sure every Puget Sounder can relate to that pain. I’m saddened that some kids won't get into this sport because of these regulations. We should care about the tradition of some of the best oarsmen on the planet that have navigated those rivers, the plug pullers, and the elderly and the disabled losing the ability to participate in wild winter steelhead fisheries for no return on their sacrifice. The ones that aren't affected by this should remember that the next rule out of left field might take away a fishery they love. We need to care about the small communities like Forks that will be devastatingly impacted by rules that won't have any bottom line savings of our fish in the long run.

And finally, we need to let WDFW know that when further restrictions are necessary, they implement them in the right way. A good example would be that somehow, to protect wild winter steelhead, you cannot fish from a floating device on the upper Hoh above Morgan’s for hatchery summer steelhead. Why? I guess because the WDFW wrote it in the regs wrong and despite it being pointed out multiple times, have failed to bother to amend that. Sure its not a high traffic area in the summer, but that doesn't mean it should be regulated for no reason. In this current case, there is no science backed reason for restricting fishing from a floating device for Bogachiel hatchery steelhead which WDFW claims they want caught and retained that I'm aware of. Motels, restaurants, and yes, even those indicator using, bead dragging, public resource abusing god damn fishing guides that have suffered losses due to covid, and are about to lose out again, shouldn't face the additional loss that not fishing from a boat will have when only hatchery steelhead are present.

Food for thought…

Sold the boat last week, traded in the PU for a car today and have started sorting out my gear for Craigslist or garage sale.

Well Mr. Paker, color me slow on the uptake since I didn't get all that from your reference to ". . . the ascot wearing Salmos of the world . . . "

You'll get no argument from me that the recreational angling community as a whole does nothing as WDFW steadily chips away at sport fishing opportunity. Except for me and a few other like-minded souls who contact WDFW and testify at WDFW Commission meetings to point out how the Department bites the very hand that feeds it. Part of how they do it successfully is by the incremental approach, closing a small niche here and one there, and by veiling closures under the false cloak of "conservation" when it's been shown to them that is provably not the case. Yet they keep chipping away.

Restrictions on fishing, per se, are not a problem nor THE problem. Absent restrictions we, as in all fishers, would fish every valuable stock to obliteration. Fisheries management, by its very definition, is the process of imposing a variety of restrictions on fishing. Some restrictions serve conservation purposes; others serve social purposes - liking spreading out the available catch among more citizens and license buyers. There's nothing wrong nor unseemly about that.

Steelhead populations continue to dwindle, but it is for reasons other than fishing in almost every case. Since fishing is not the proximate cause of steelhead population decline, it is nonsense to say that fishermen who care about wild steelhead should just stop fishing for them. And if fishermen stop fishing for steelhead and divert their attention to golf or tennis, who is going to advocate for wild steelhead? You may not have noticed, but I have; people who don't fish don't advocate for fish conservation. Most fishermen don't either, but that's a related buy separate point.

It really sounds like you're saying is that if steelhead fishing is so messed up that Paker can't fish the way Paker chooses to fish (from a boat with a guide), then it is time to close it all down, tribes included. You know enough to know how foolish that last part is. By federal treaty right, tribes will still be fishing for whatever is left long after the last sport fishing opportunity has been closed. That is settled case law. Your position looks to me a lot like the official position the Wildcat Steelhead Club took regarding the Skagit. They opposed the CNR special regs season that began for wild steelhead in 1981. Their view was (maybe still is) that unless the run could support a two wild steelhead harvest per angler per day, then the river should be closed to all fishing. Their way, or no way. You sound remarkably similar. The Wildcatters would forgo a whole lotta' sportfishing opportunity with their narrow steelhead world view.

In the present case of this season on the coast, WDFW said their objective is to reduce sport fishing encounters with wild steelhead. That is - reduce - not eliminate, which you would choose if you can't encounter them your preferred way. I posted previously that I read that something like 70% of the coastal steelhead encounters are by anglers fishing from boats. And a large proportion of that is from guide boats. Can you please name one action, other than complete closures, that does as much to reduce angling encounters with wild steelhead?

Steelhead runs are not healthy. And this regulation won't make them healthier, at least not by statistical significance. However, by reducing encounters and their associated incidental mortality (conservatively calculated at 10% but more likely in the 4 - 5% range), it's realistically possible that significantly more steelhead will survive to spawn in 2021.

Good job of getting your thoughts down. You gotta to learn to shoot from the hip though so you can fit in!

We'll just disagree on this one Keith. Generally speaking, hatchery steelhead don't do anything positive for wild steelhead. In the case of western WA wild winter steelhead, very few hatchery steelhead spawn with wild steelhead. Genetic introgression does occur, but not to a very high degree, and certainly not enough to be a major factor limiting wild steelhead population abundance. Yes, there are cases where adding or removing hatchery steelhead is correlated with negative or positive changes in wild steelhead abundance. In the majority of those cases, the same identical swings in wild steelhead abundance also occurred in river systems where hatchery steelhead have always been absent. We need to be careful about asserting causation with correlation because it does not always hold.

The proximate cause of declining steelhead populations is the very significant reduction in marine survival dating to the early 1990s. Which happens to inversely correlate with the increasing abundance of pinipeds in WA waters, especially Puget Sound. And fairly recently this correlation has been shown to be one of the causes for decline. Other factors appear to be things like ocean upwelling (the blob of 2015) and PDO. The longer term proximate cause of declining wild steelhead populations has been freshwater habitat degradation. When you account for the swings in wild steelhead abundance in rivers that don't have hatchery steelhead, the stocking of hatchery steelhead moves quite a ways down the list of factors affecting wild steelhead population abundance.

Survive, quite possibly. But if they hit the redds with a stray or hatchery fish the point of even making the spawning bed is useless and renders a reproductive fitness near ZERO... There is so much evidence pointing towards this statement being accurate and we all turn a blind eye. We as mankind can't fix this problem, mother nature needs to fix it's self.

I fought the thought 12-15 years ago, but there is so much evidence that shows it to be true.

Get rid of hatchery fish and brood stock programs and someday we could have a population that could be well above escapement allowing more opportunity to fish over them with methods we choose to use.

Keith

You're right. Well not so much special interests attacking fishing regulations, but special interests that think some fishing is preferable to no fishing. Maybe even some guides who generally fish out of boats.

Statistically speaking, no significant difference. Fishing from a boat, regardless of gear type, often results in a quicker landing than fishing from shore. Steelhead resist being pulled toward shallow water along the shoreline, and they like to try to hide under boats, sometimes making for a real quick net job, well before the fish is played out. Nonetheless, mortality rates are about the same. Playing the fish a bit longer is irrelevant during the winter season because water temperatures are low, and lactic acid build up is not an issue. The primary factor affecting mortality is hook placement. Fish hooked in the corner of the jaw usually survive, even if handling is otherwise pretty bad. Fish hooked in the gills or eye are the most likely to die.

First and foremost I disagree with this statement, there is more data from recent studies that says otherwise. I've watched the demise of another favorite river of mine due to a broodstock program. This write up in it's self just pisses me off.. Thev've all but destroyed the genetics in this river and fishing has gone in the shitter there.

Hatchery and Supplementation Program

Keith

What studies are these Keith? I've mostly seen selective gear rules associated with quality waters regulations, where the intent is to improve the quality of the angling experience. Those rules are usually single barbless hooks, no bait, and no motors on boats. These regs don't have much, if anything, to do with fish populations overall.

Nailed it! It's the Anti-Paker fishing initiative!

Hatchery supplementation Study

This one in particular is what I was referencing. I've watched the numbers and size of native winter steelhead in this river change over the last 7-8 years.

Keith

Seahawksteelie,

Thank you for joining the conversation. I like your post, even if you are a lowly boat-rowing guide from a town that rhymes with dorks. Diversity requires the inclusion of some local input. I think you have WDFW by the short and curlies regarding this blanket, one size fits all, regulation when the status quo has been basin specific. Not that I support MSY/MSH as management models; I don't. Mainly because everywhere on the planet that they are used, fish populations decline.

As for that biggest elephant, my hunch is coincidence. The WDFW anadromous fish program doesn't like those fly fishing groups, not only because one of them is always suing the Deparment, but also because they release fish alive. The anadromous fish program identifies much more closely with Bloody Decks. It's the inland fish program with all those fly fishing lakes and quality waters that hang with the fly fishing crowd.

This particular regulation has a bit of science behind it, although not for the Quiliyute system. I posted earlier that about 70% of the steelhead encounters are by boat anglers. And the reason for increased restriction is to reduce encounters. This regulation should achieve that. As for helping wild steelhead, it should put a few more spawners on the gravel in 2021. It's not a steelhead recovery measure though.

I'll add another to the causes of steelhead declines. We have set minimum flows for salmon spawning and that has worked well. But it has also switched mykiss from anadromous to residents.

Another recent report showing the effects of hatchery plant cuts to zero. The writing is on the wall for the future of the hatchery and broodstock steelhead. It's just a matter of time for those rivers that don't have any way to regulate them off the spawning beds..

Keep in mind I fished this river since the mid 1980's, you didn't see wild summer steelhead in it and if you did you might have caught enough to count on one hand from March to July in a year but most were just non-clipped hatchery fish. In that same time frame the wild winter numbers were decimated as well. Oddly, they planted somewhere to the tune of 120k hatchery summer steelhead through the late 90's and about 100-140k hatchery winter steelhead as well but started to reduce plants from the 2000's on and down to near zero for the last 8-10 years.

EFL steelhead numbers

Keith

I have wasted many a day going to meetings and voicing my opinion to WDFW. It hasn't mattered once.

They don't give 2 chits as long as they are cashing checks.

Perhaps they would have listened if us sportsmen would have only tried?
Give us a break Mr. Tacoma Power.

It continues to be those that have been cashing checks on our public resources that are to blame. Follow the money.
Big and small.

Congrats on the commercialization of the resource.

You banged the fat lady while she was singing.

Lame.

If no one else has pointed this out, i will just offer these two words... FOREGONE OPPORTUNITY. What is given up, will be harvested in theory.. or is there something im missing?

Parker's posts about sums it up for me...and I haven't fished the OP in over a decade. I've had no desire to, as I want to remember it "as it used to be". Plus, his logic mimics what I've been harping on about for years "over here" on the Upper Columbia (and NO, Vancouver isn't "upriver" LOL), except these runs have been buggered-up with hatchery genetics for 70+ years. Once these fish were ESA listed in '97, it was assumed that this was going to be phukked to ever get the #'s adjusted for a "logical fishery", however that may be defined. Which to me is a total selective, CnR fishery. Once the bio's stated that the first 250,000 steelhead smolts from Wells hatchery were not being clipped to ensure that "they'd make it back to the hatchery" (which is at the dam), I just gave up the fight once the #'s were being manipulated IMO. Eventually, we did start having modified seasons again ('05-'15 I believe). Nothing in the last 5-6 years now, with a trend to continue...

I know I went off topic, as this thread is about the OP and the closure to fishing from boats. So after just a few minutes of goggling, here's a link to WDFW's "State Action Plans" for threatened critters. He11, I might be looking in the wrong spots, but nowhere do I see any mention of OP steelhead?! Not that I disagree that something should be done for all the increased activity on that particular resource. Moreso, where's the backup/data from the past that references how acute this issue is? Check out Chapter 3, and Appendix 4. As I mentioned, I could be all wet on this as I have no background in biology/science...just a layman.

https://wdfw.wa.gov/species-habitats/at-risk/swap


In closing, I was going to C/P my long-winded post on this very similiar subject of lost opportunities from earlier this year, in which the topic was opening up the N. of Falcon negotiations (and hating on WDFW) but I didn't want to go searching, plus ABU wouldn't read it anyhow (too long ). In short, I pined (sniveled) about the downfall of the WA steelhead from my experiences over the last 40 years of my life. Now, this rule is just "another brick in the wall"...

Here is another study on a different river. Maybe some rivers are different than others and hatchery and wild steelhead can coexist together? Another piece to the puzzle.

https://hatchery-wild-coexist.com/ian-courters-ground-breaking-study/

I miss my office talks with my insider. I’d get filled in on the real skinny, we’d hash it out over a white board and some graphs, and we’d come up up with a working solution that not only would have solved this problem, but fixed the agency as a whole, and would be well on our way to solving global climate change.

All before 9:00 am.

I blame COVID.

This study was done to evaluate the impacts of hatchery summer steelhead on wild winter native steelhead. From what I know of the study it has nothing to do with the point I was making. I've never claimed that hatchery summer steelhead have an effect on wild winter steelhead populations. If you have hatchery winter steelhead spawning with wild winter steelhead then your reproductive fitness is at or near zero. The Clackamas river is just like the Kalama river where they have the ability with a dam to monitor and sort/select steelhead that pass above the dam.

The EFL (study I posted) actually has a run of wild summer steelhead and in reducing the hatchery plants the population of wild summer steelhead has increased. Since reducing the hatchery summer steelhead plants to zero the population is above what is assumed to be historic returns. There is no dam on the EFL so however many adult hatchery summer steelhead return can end up on spawning beds with wild summer steelhead and the same goes for the hatchery winter steelhead / wild winter steelhead. On occasion I'll grab my gear and go catch a few of them in the summer, when you find a freshy near tidewater they are hands down the most explosive steelhead I've caught in my life.. Absolute barn burners and smoke your thumb on a consistent basis.



Keith

Memories of the light line tournament on the Kalama.
Down low.
Waves of fresh fish.
The good ole days.

These days suck ass!!!!!!!!!!!!

Generally your point seems to be get rid of hatchery plants and the natives will come back. You were not specific about which runs or rivers. On the OP rivers that drain into Hood Canal they stopped planting hatchery steelhead years ago and the natives have not rebounded. Haven't seen a rebound in wild steelhead in the creeks on the Kitsap Peninsula either. We all know there are always other factors that affect this.

Be more specific to rivers..? Many Puget sound rivers still get plenty of hatchery steelhead plants. In fairness to my argument hatchery supplementation/broodstocking dates back to the late 1800's and early 1900's in most of these Puget sound rivers. I can't imagine how whacked the genetics are in these rivers. Needless to say, it's likely that little if any true genetic stock is left to fight for, but that's just an opinion.

On a side note, my goal is to not rid the rivers of hatchery fish. I just would like to see wild fish return in some solid numbers. There are tribs that can support plants and populations without question.

Keith

Special meeting to discuss the emergency regulations. A press release should be coming out soon.



Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
Fish and Wildlife Commission

Fish Committee

NOTICE OF SPECIAL MEETING via Zoom Web Conference

WHEN: December 11, 2020 – 1:00-3:00 PM

Committee Members: Carpenter, Kehoe, Graybill, McIsaac

Agenda Topics:

•2020 Coastal Steelhead – Briefing, Public CommentFish program staff will provide the Fish Committee a briefing on coastal Steelhead to include the long-term trends, 2020-21 forecast, management actions to meet conservation objectives and fishing opportunity.
*WHERE: This meeting will take place via Zoom. The link for the public to participate is listed below(https://zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_rYGiHzo3SP2bZUWvvj9_RA)
To join via phone please choose a number below and then you’ll be prompted to enter the Webinar ID#: 976-1472-6756
1-312-626-67991-888-475-4499 (Toll Free)

Should be a beaut of a meeting.

I will suggest reg's amendments as follows:
1. Manage in a more sophistocated by-basin manner (ie. don't apply the boat rule to the entire Quillayute system, just the Bogie and Q below Leyendeckers, based on forecast, and other tribs where we have forecasting may also apply).
2. Don't enforce boat rule until Feb 1 on rivers with expected hatchery returns; mop em up.

The trout release and no bait reg's seem like no-brainers to me, although one could argue for use of bait up til Feb 1 on rivers with hatchery returns (below hatchery return sites only).

fb

Interesting idea on how to nit-pick the rules to suit your wanted exploitation level...

Of course on the other hand what do we usually hear people crying about how "convoluted and confusing" wdfw rules are?
Having cake and eating it as well there I guess

I believe the ocean conditions are bad.

Plastic in the stomach contents of returning fish.

Offshore netting of squid leaving scars on these fish. How many fall outs are counted in International waters?

We Need to address the whole life cycle of our State icon, not just the lacking returning adults.

Edit: They want to fly more Navy F-18s over the OP. Why not have them fly out over the open water to enforce the exclusion zone? Tanker crews need training too.

Although I understand what you are saying, we can believe what we want to believe and point blame in any and all directions but the science is tough to defy. When pre-hatchery populations were 10-50x what we currently see in wild steelhead populations one would think it's logical to look back to when those populations took the hardest hits and almost all places you look it's right after the times that hatchery interactions started. These wild fish numbers have been extinguished long before any of us started fishing any of these rivers in discussion...

To me, it's a matter of time before hatchery fish are absolutely recognized for the demise of wild fish populations. My selfishness wants to see it happen sooner than later so that at some point in my life I can see the returns of wild fish like they once used to be. Call me crazy but I see this as something that can happen.

Part of being hell bent on the logic circles back to the Lewis River Fall Chinook known as the lower river brights. There has been 0 Fall chinook hatchery plants in this river since 1970 and it has always had an amazingly huge run of native fall chinook which has withstood all the ocean conditions, harvest, habitat, predators, in-river harvest, etc. When you get to fish the 21 miles of river below the dam and have such an amazing great Fall Chinook fishery and opportunity it makes you question hatchery fish in general. Every other sub-basin in the CR has hatchery plants and their native fall chinook populations suck.

In regards to steelhead, I've watched Pacific Corp and WDFW destroy the native winter steelhead population in the Lewis river over the last 10 years. They introduced broodstocking and numbers sky rocketed with cookie cutters then roughly 8-10 years later the Natural Origin spawning population is on it's lips. It's a sad thing to see. Pre-broodstocking this run actually was impressive.

I'm not throwing the towel in, but something needs to change.

Keith

Study just out! Hood Canal Bridge Fn up outward migration.

https://www.ptleader.com/stories/new-study-hood-canal-bridge-is-blocking-half-of-all-migrating-steelhead-trout,71906

My thought is that any of those studies are pretty specific to the watershed they were conducted in.

The "hatchery fish don't hurt" studies tend to actually be "don't hurt much, and we want hatchery fish really bad" conclusions...and that's ok, just need to be straight on what they are saying, and who is saying it.

In SW Washington, Keith is spot on, at least in regards to two rivers I have spent considerable time on...the EFL and the Toutle.

When Mt. St. Helens blew up the Toutle, it didn't take much time at all for significant runs of wild winter runs to return...my understanding is that lots of the Toutle wild fish used the Kalama, Lewis, and Cowlitz after the eruption, and then re-colonized the Toutle rather well in the years to follow.

We then put a zillion hatchery summer runs in the Toutle, which made for a successful and enjoyable summer run harvest fishery, but immediately turned the wild winters right around and depressed their numbers.

Keith's chat above about the EFL is spot on, as well.

That being said...steelhead in Puget Sound are a completely different situation...Puget Sound itself seems to be crushing all the outgoing smolts, hatchery or wild, and add in the Hood Canal Bridge on the streams there, and almost none even make it out, much less return as adults.

Hatchery fish probably played/plays little or no part in that, at least not at the level they are being planted now.

Fish on...

Todd

One of the big problems of hatchery fish was, pre selective fisheries, we simply hammered the early part of the wild run. Wild fish (used) to return in December, January, February.

The sport and net non-selective fisheries hammered them out of existence. Some of the folks who worked on major watersheds believed that it was the early returning fish that spawned in the tributaries. Data I saw, through '10, was that the tributary spawner numbers are falling. Some in the Skagit, tons in the Green. Had nothing to do with interbreeding, but simply a mixed stock fishery. Not the only reason, but it's one of them.

And I too remember catching big winter natives in the early 80's with my dad on the EFL in late November and December, ironically right in line with all the Chambers Creek turds that were brought it then the front half of the wild run crashed. I cherish a picture at my dads house of him and I 2 days before Christmas with a 25 and 21 pound steelhead he took that day.

It went through a phase where you'd mostly catch wild winter natives in Feb-April if you could find them but the front half of the run disappeared. Call it a coincidence but science tells me those Chambers Creek turds paired up with their share of those early winter native spawners nearly wiping that run out do their the reproductive fitness of HxW. It doesn't work. HxW doesn't work and BxW doesn't work either...

Either find a way to segregate the hatchery fish from the river or eliminate them in rivers with native populations. It's a fix no one wants to see but it's a fact in fixing it...

Keith

Didn't know you made it down to these stomping grounds much Todd, let's connect in a couple months. I could put you up and we could go chase some of those big 20's... Not it, you're rowing....

Keith

River specific:
The Nisqually. Has never had hatchery steelhead plants, and I can't remember how long it's been closed. Seems to have had and maintained the same declining number trends as the other So. PS rivers. Until the last few years has any sign of any recovery occurred. I have buddy that works at Centralia PUD and they trap and count them at their diversion dam.

The Puyallup, hasn't been planted since 08 ?? I think, man time flies! and has shown little sign of recovery. Has closed the last 10yrs by Dec. 31st. The Puyallup Tribe (with WDFW) does run a small supplementary hatchery program that plants a modest number of 30,000 broodstock winter steelhead on the White River system, in an effort to boost the winter steelhead population there.Those steelhead smolts are released in a tributary of the Clearwater River. Seems the White/Stuck has always sucked since I can remember from back in the 70's.

The Green, gets a measly winter plant of 10-50k and also closes by Dec. 31st. It's wild run has also struggled similarly. I think they still operate a broodstock program and not sure of it's success.

Bottom line is even though little to none hatchery steelhead plants have occurred on these rivers and all still struggle to meet escapement. I am not convinced that can't coexist.

I am convinced that certain rivers are a lost cause for recovery and should be loaded with plants to provide some recreation. Cowiltz being one. That is, if we can get them to survive. My 2cents.

The broodstock fish on the Duc don't seem to have caused a crash there, at least based on WDFW's graphs. Why is that?

The Kalama is the same, it has a hatchery facility that draws them back too. Snyder Creek sucks most of those fish out of the river and off the redds imho... I've never read studies on the brood program there but every brood program is different. Whether they consistently use Natural origin spawners for their program or do they keep reproducing from the brood stock returners? It seems as if those programs that keep reproducing from their brood returns reduces the reproductive fitness and creates more strays.

Rivers that do have dams/barriers to sort hatchery fish out, Clackamas, Kalama, etc. seem to do ok with hatchery plants as long as those fish can't make the spawning beds... I haven't been up to the Duc in years though, it was a fun river!

Keith

The Nisqually is a great example of hatchery fish NOT being the problem. How can the anti-hatchery people explain this? Puts a hole in that argument for sure. Lots of time , no fishing and the run is functionally gone. That run generally peaked in March, April, so netting by the tribe does not exist at that time of the year. It's been at least 25 or 30 years since they declined.

No really way to tell if the Snider program was good, bad, or indifferent, so far as wild fish goes...there were no metrics to measure it.

Some notables, the program only used wild fish, and not that many. It definitely returned fish, caught several every year.

Fish on...

Todd

Shut em all down and call em gene banks.

Your not gonna reverse the impact man is having on this rock until you reverse man's population and that ain't gonna happen.

Might as well bring back the dinosaurs while your at it.

The Wind River in the gorge has not received any steelhead hatchery plants since 1997 and is designated a wild gene bank. Below are the Total Natural Escapement of Summer Runs in the Wind since 2000. The trend is flat, no real increase or decrease in the past 20 years.

Year Adults
2000 219
2001 489
2002 691
2003 1,114
2004 895
2005 601
2006 660
2007 769
2008 640
2009 607
2010 767
2011 1,500
2012 817
2013 762
2014 282
2015 577
2016 1,015
2017 1,061
2018 241
2019 481

River specific:
The Nisqually. Has never had hatchery steelhead plants, and I can't remember how long it's been closed. Seems to have had and maintained the same declining number trends as the other So. PS rivers. Until the last few years has any sign of any recovery occurred. I have buddy that works at Centralia PUD and they trap and count them at their diversion dam.

For the Nisqually, Thirty to forty years ago, steelhead spawning runs averaged in the range of 6,000 fish, but the population crashed by 90 percent in the 1990s and continued on a downward spiral through the first decade of this century. No hatchery-origin winter steelhead have been released into the watershed since 1982, and the number of wild steelhead spawning in the river increased to more than 1,000 fish in 2015 and more than 2,000 in 2016 from a low of 269 in the 2012.

The Puyallup, hasn't been planted since 08 ?? I think, man time flies! and has shown little sign of recovery. Has closed the last 10yrs by Dec. 31st. The Puyallup Tribe (with WDFW) does run a small supplementary hatchery program that plants a modest number of 30,000 broodstock winter steelhead on the White River system, in an effort to boost the winter steelhead population there.Those steelhead smolts are released in a tributary of the Clearwater River. Seems the White/Stuck has always sucked since I can remember from back in the 70's.

Puyallup River steelhead
The wild winter steelhead escapement estimate for steelhead spawning in the mainstem of the Puyallup River is 197 fish. An estimated 1,366 steelhead spawned in the Carbon River in 2016.
This estimate includes fish spawning in the mainstem of the Carbon River, South Prairie,Wilkeson, and Voight’s creeks.

White River steelhead
Estimates of steelhead spawning below Mud Mountain Dam via redd surveys (295 fish) were combined with the number of fish transported upstream at Buckley trap (533 fish) for an estimated 828 White River steelhead returning. Of these fish, 34 originated from the wild brood
program and 23 natural origin steelhead were used for broodstock at White River hatchery. The progeny of these fish will be marked with blank wire tag and reared in acclimation ponds in the
upper White River consistent with previous years.

The Green, gets a measly winter plant of 10-50k and also closes by Dec. 31st. It's wild run has also struggled similarly. I think they still operate a broodstock program and not sure of it's success.

Ton's of hatchery/brood play in this river.. Looks like a mess on paper...

I'm not advocating for eliminating hatchery steelhead. I just want to get to the bottom of what the cause of population declines and the fact that very little if anything changes the population rebound until all hatchery / brood interactions are halted in a river basin... Just seems to add up when you really start spending time reading and spending time on the water confirming results..

Keith

You sure about hatchery plants in there, I thought I read that it received some winter steelhead plants in 2017-2019? Maybe it was the Big White Salmon? I don't remember...

Do you remember how many hatchery summer steelhead they planted in the Wind River annually back in the early 2000's?

Keith

I’d have to believe the Nisqually was planted with hatchery fish at one time, as just about everything was planted with something back in the day.
It hasn’t been opened since 1993 for steelhead fishing.
I agree with Jake, you can’t really compare coastal rivers with the Nisqually as Puget Sound and what is going on with it make them pretty dissimilar in my opinion.

The Puyallup system is getting plants of about 35K in winter fish.
I’m not sure if those are getting planted in the White or the Puyallup itself and what their source is. Maybe a broodstock program from White River native stock?
If anyone knows, I’d be interested to know the source of those fish and where they are planted.
SF

Cliff notes on this: Etiology of declining steelhead runs actually pretty complicated.

We love simple correlations, cause-effect, makes for a good story, makes us sound smart when we say it's simple-stupid, but doesn't apply to wild steelhead as a species.

Every basin is literally a whole different ball of wax, and merits its own study and set of solutions. I wish humanity cared enough to unwrap it and attack it, but too costly and inconvenient,

fb

Well said.

Well said.. I do agree that every basin needs a better definition it before it's too late.

Keith

Not really, the changes I suggest won't result in significantly less nates to gravel (except the Duc/Calawah, where forecasts say it can absorb it), spreads angler pressure out a lot more, improves angler experience by a lot, and gets hatchery fish out of the systems. Not sure I would personally benefit, I don't fish the Duc/Calawah anyways.

I don't cry about convoluted rules. I can read, and understand how complicated the fisheries are, so complex systems need complex rules. People who make that complaint in this setting should clue in and STFU,

fb

Some still believe in Santa.

https://wdfw.wa.gov/sites/default/files/...onferencev2.pdf

"The broodstock fish on the Duc don't seem to have caused a crash there, at least based on WDFW's graphs. Why is that?"

I thought that very same thing. Those Schneider Creek Fish didn't seem to have any effect on the wild run at all. They were the very earliest component of the wild run but none the less.

I think the boat fishing closure is a travesty that could have been avoided long ago. For years the non-Indian share haaaas been considerably below a 50% limit of "harvestable" steelhead. Prescriptive measures and suggestions we brought up at meeting after meeting. Most involved adding more restriction to anglers, and most restrictive measures on bait, lures and seasons have been applied Anglers can't even remove a steelhead from the water. No more taking wild steelhead, which was recommended long ago, but failed to be put into regulation for far too long.

The suggestion that should have been implemented years ago is that the Boldt Decision should have been fairly implemented to let the tribes have their 50%, but that the anglers be required wild fish release to be put on the gravel. As it is, the tribes take our 50%, plus more than that that is under-reported. We wouldn't be in the situation we are now, if that would have been implemented years ago.

Maybe the rules are all wrong and you should keep or release the first one you catch and be done for the day. Recorded on a punch card with however many are to be kept/released per year and adjusted to the native harvest to equal 50%.

How can I be a social media all-star if I can only post a picture of myself with only ONE steelhead per day?

People don’t have the self control for that. Also, if you drive across the state to fish a spot and get into a fish the first five minutes then you are done for the day? Seems arbitrary to me. Some rivers can sustain a bit more pressure. It’s good to recognize your own limits. For me, hooking a couple of fish is good enough in most instances. Sometimes just one is enough. I have no need to rack up substantial numbers to brag about online or to others. If hooking a few fish isn’t fulfilling for you and you have a need to catch as many wild steelhead as you possibly can, then you are a part of the problem.

Ah T3 not everyplace. In Grays Harbor the Nation does have a larger impact on wild Steelhead and it limits their season. Rec on the other hand take more Steelhead as we do C&R on wild. So % wise in GH Rec take more winter Steelhead. Then as we have Summerrun Rec harvest the balance is even more tilted to non treaty fishers. Then the Chehalis Tribal catch ( they are non treaty ) is also added to the states share.

Run reconstruction for a example year is 2016 and it was QIN 2165 and NT 9142. 10 yr average is QIN 664 and NT 6081. The five year average is QIN 885 and NT 6177. These numbers do not include the Chehalis Tribe and they average 1200 to a 1000 a year.

Sometimes things are not what they seem to be.

"Back in the day" WDG required that every steelhead be punched. The limit was 2 per day, whether released or killed. It also included kelts. You C&R a kelt and that was supposed to be punched. This "each fish counts to your limit" applied to all species. I think the trout limit was 6, and when you had brought 6 to hand you were done.

New Zealand is noticing a problem with C&R on Brown Trout in some rivers. The fish are sore mouthed to the point that they are thin from not eating. One suggestion was that the limit be X fish per day, regardless of kept or released.

"How can I be a social media all-star if I can only post a picture of myself with only ONE steelhead per day?

People don’t have the self control for that. "


This is a huge problem. I lambasted a guide yesterday for blowing up spots. They justified ot as their right. No accoutsbility.

A large portion of people go through it, even I did in my younger years exploiting fisheries and helping people become better fisherman. It's self recognition or the recognition of a job well done.. People thrive for it, but you get burnt a few times and selfishness kicks in...

Keith

It's called EGO. It's never good lol.

Chambers early winter stock smolts were released most years into the Nisqually River from 1966 up to 1982, and Skamania summer stock smolts were released in most years from 1977 up to 1994. Chambers Creek releases averaged 19,200 fish/yr (Range 0 - 35,400) and Skamania releases averaged 23,400 fish/yr (Range 0 - 47,600).

There was an egg taking station that operated during the early 1900's but not much information is available about that operation. It probably doesn't really matter.

NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-NWFSC-128

"A large portion of people go through it, even I did in my younger years exploiting fisheries and helping people become better fisherman. It's self recognition or the recognition of a job well done.. People thrive for it, but you get burnt a few times and selfishness kicks in... rofl"


Truer words have never been spoken!!!!!!!!!!
Unfortunately before there wasn't the platform like today.
Today sucks.
Technology sucks.
Give me a Shimano 201SG on direct drive.




All you flatbrimmers need to start pulling out.

I never understood the need to brag about the amount of fish caught in a day online. I guess that's why I've never posted a picture here either. To me, catching a fast limit of steelhead was a good thing, as that then allowed me to go do something else. Go get a limit of dungies (remember when the Sound was only closed to crabbing from April to June?) or then shoot a limit of mallards. Even go shoot trap or he11 maybe even mow the lawn.

With the age of the digital camera there became a disconnect within some of the population, as they needed to feel validated by "proving" they could catch a fish or 2 (or alot). The ability to then easily share these images with the WWW allowed some of these folks to continually share their exploits on our local rivers. Hey, I like looking at fish pictures too but after you've caught a few, most of them are pretty much the same, IMO. That logic didn't jive with mine though (and how I was raised); when I have a good thing going, the last thing I want is to encourage more people to wear out the places I'm utilizing?! Different strokes I guess....

Been here on the other computer all afternoon.

"I hope you’re all in the meeting right now."

The definition of insanity applies here.

Perhaps it will be different this time?

I watched the presentation and learned some things. Turned it off early in disgust after the Patagonia boy shared his opinion. On the front end of the line no less.

12/11/2020

2 of us watched the whole presentation, because I have a "smart TV", I'm able to project my computer image to my 65" TV.

More than 500 people signed in to speak, 2 minute limit. I never counted but if 50 people spoke that would be a lot.

People who never got to speak were asked to email their comments in.....

My take away: Starting Monday, 12/14/2020, there will be NO FISHING out of a boat.

I can't even think how the fishing will be on say "the Wynoochee"........10 drift boats pulled up on a gravel bar, to be able to fish from shore.....with 10 others that were "walk in"....... might be a real cluster xuck,,,,,,,

Ditto. I had a chance to speak but my mic was bungled up, so lost my spot in line, so submitted in writing instead.

I think they're in a tough spot, and I'm encouraged that they're trying to up their game in communication, even though this round of emergency reg's was a little ham-handed.

I'm on board with what they're doing too. I think they could tailor it a little better by basin, and maybe prosecute a little whack and stack on the hatchery fish, but reducing wild encounters by their constituents is the one thing they can control in-season. Ocean conditions and treaty fisheries not so much. I'd rather have a heavily restricted fishery than no opportunity at all, and there's equally strong conservation rationale to just shut it all down. We might have gotten off easy this year,

fb

I got a new perspective from this meeting. In the quilleute there’s roughly 3,300 fish above escapement and the Indians are entitled to half of that so will they really take half, or less, or more? Our half will be spread out through c&r, they are assuming we’ll take 1,600 fish by c&r & if so that is insane! If 1,600 fish get killed by c&r that’s a complete waste of fish. II’ve released quite a few steelies and by my count I can only guess I killed one, the rest I wouldn’t be surprised if they lived. If the numbers that I have correlate with all c&r fisherman I think the natives are jacking us into believing we’re killing fish by c&r & taking our share too. As for the other rivers not meeting escapement or coming in a couple over they should just be shut down till they resemble the quilleute model.

I sat in for the whole meeting. I know when it comes to Salmon the Quilayutes have made adjustments in days, net size etc over the years. I'm curious what concessions the Quinaults are doing with regards to the Queets. The Queets has missed Escapement Goals for both Coho & Steelhead for a lot of years over the last 20 (I can't remember the exact #). And the Queets does not have to deal with habitat destruction etc.
The one Wild Card out there is the National Park. What are they going to do? They do not have to follow what WDFW does.

Bye bye steelhead.

According to them they follow state rules.

bobrr: The Park does not always follow WDFW. They went to "Release All Wild Fish" a few years back. That's different then the sate. Take the Hoh. You can't keep Wild Salmon in the park but can once outside the Park.

In Grays Harbor County, there are rivers where it is legal to fish SALMON until 12/31/2020...... In the 20+ years that I've been a "spoon fisherman on the hook", I've never caught a steelhead using the salmon type spoons many fishermen use.

Supporting this is supporting more broken policies that have been proven not to work. We need to use the Tillamook county example and run with it, or the salmon river. Broodstocking works. There aren’t any non biased studies that can dispute it. None.

Why is the Skookumchuck even involved in this wild steelhead debate. That dam killed all the real “wild” fish decades ago.

You can’t even kill hatchery steelhead on that river...that’s all that’s there.

Our state is useless at fisheries management.

(r state is useless at fisheries management.)


u got that right

I wonder how many guides are planning on moving their operations to one of these supposedly "healthy" rivers that Sthdr1 has mentioned? Even better, you know they will post great wide-angle panning shots of these majestic fish all of BookFace and InstaTard. Social mediaites will eat this crap up.

Doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out which river that is

It actually takes *less* time to drive to these rivers from Seattle than taking a ferry and getting out to the OP.

Can't wait to guide fish from a boat on these rivers! Can't wait to fill your wonderful social media sites with grip-n-grins. Maybe toss up a few movies on YouTube to make it so obvious where the good fishing is!

Oh well. Probably won't take long until these Columbia River basin rivers are taking the brunt of the boating guide services and won't be healthy for long. But who cares, right? As long as *I* get to fish them and fish them the way I like, fvck everyone and everything else.

Once again, will someone please remind me why we are allowed to hammer on runs of wild steelhead in rivers that are not making escapement goals?

If a river is projected *not* to make it's escapement goal this year, it should be CLOSED to all fishing.

Will someone please remind me again why this new rule of not being able to fish from a boat isn't state wide? If we're gonna get bent over and fvcked by the WDFW, shouldn't we all be bending over equally?



Don't worry WDFW. Looks like a lot of sportsmen are jumping on the "I don't give a fvck how the state fvcks me or the wild fish in the ass as long as I get to fish for wild steelhead regardless of the costs now or in the future." bandwagon.

Again.

Lather. Rinse. Repeat

Stop making sense paker

what do you mean you cant kill hatchery steelhead on the Skookumchuck?

This is spot on.

“Release ALL rainbow trout”. That’s steelhead.

All you old farts complaining about Instagram and YouTube must have never had subscriptions to STS or other magazines that blew up rivers. 99% of the people who are successful at Instagram or YouTube don’t say where they are fishing.

Whah whah whah. The state is the problem, some of these “glory shot guys” are doing more positive things for steelhead and salmon than most of the people complaining about them.

Omg are you dumb enough to think that means no adult steelhead retention??

I'm 41.. Not a old fart..

You can kill hatchery fish on the Skook...

Fish it once before talking about legal limitations..

I'm sure he's a regular there, just to dumb to realize that rule is for trout and not steelhead, which is anything over 21"

20”....but who’s counting anyway.
SF

While most of this talk has been about the boating restrictions, I am a bit more concerned with the Selective rules. While it may make sense in some basins to promote this later on, there is no need for it in December in most rivers. Last week I was stopped for a a couple of hours on one of the effected rivers. I was joined by two other guys as I walked in. We all stopped at a well known hole and spread out a little bit, trading places as we through jigs, spinners and the floated some bait. After an hour they moved on and I switched up to some eggs behind a spin n- glow. On the third cast a mint bright hatchery coho came flying up and slammed the rig as I as pulling it in. We had worked it over hard and had seen nothing. The other two guys walked down and I helped one of them pull another out hatchery fish in a few minutes later on the same eggs drifted bare. In the between a jack came flying up chasing the eggs but bit short. I am almost positive nothing else would have worked other than the eggs, which produced fairly quick. In an extreme case, I have a friend who was working a hatchery hole a few years back. There were 10 or so guys hitting it hard and no one had a fish all day. About an hour before dark he remembered he had some prawns in his bag. The next hour he hooked a fish almost every cast, while no one else had a hit. They were debating whether it really was the prawns so he tossed one over to the guy next to him. First cast and it was fish on.
I hate that they are taking away options before they need to.

Well I'll agree with you on that, while I agree with most of it, the start date is 4-6 weeks too early in my opinion. Would be nice to mop up the brats before going no-bait and no-boat.
fb

Shut your fkn mouth flatbiller when adults are talking .

It's bullchit.

Well hell. Someone tell the officer I talked to at a local boat launch today. He said no steelhead retention. Period. He said rainbow trout are steelhead. He’s not wrong. That’s what he is enforcing. Oh and by the way, you can’t stand up from a pontoon and fish, you have to beach it.

Just what I was told. They need to clarify the rules better. Maybe add sizes and specific species names we are familiar with. All it takes is “limit of hatchery steelhead still allowed” or something.

He was adamant about it too. Call region 6 and ask them. I’m going to tomorrow.

One of the spots (a lot of them actually) don’t have specific rules for steelhead. Just trout, then other rivers (particularly Columbia tribs) have “steelhead limit: 3 hatchery”. So if a system doesn’t have steelhead in its regs, can you keep steelhead? Yes. Because it’s your daily over 14” two fish limit (hatchery rainbow trout).

The officer said that all the systems with the new regulations that do not have specific “Hatchery steelhead” limits are catch and release all “rainbow trout” regardless of size now.

The rules as they are written don’t apply man. The Skookumchuck doesn’t have a specific steelhead limit. The original reads “Trout: (Except cutthroat and wild rainbow trout min 14”) daily limit 2.

According the WDFW officer I talked to, that means because the new regulations say, ALL rainbow trout (even hatchery steelhead over 14”) must be released.

Hopefully they come out with a correction. Otherwise there are going to be some really confused people out there.

Read the emergency regulation again. He’s just going by the letter of the law. His job I guess. He told me to call the office for clarification.

You can stand on the bottom with your raft or toon behind you and fish. You can't sit on anchor and fish. Rainbow trout and steelhead may be the same fish genetically, but they aren't in the regulations. A steelhead is clearly defined as a rainbow trout in excess of 20 inches in length.

That officer was pretty poorly informed and his ass is going to get chewed on by his supervisor or a judge for having such a piss poor understanding of the rules he's supposed to enforce. If there was any justice in the world, he'd get fired for being so ignorant of his own organization's rules.

If he got fired would he still collect his pension???
So lame.

The idea that any of our Wardens don't know that rule and are as incompetent as you is just plain silly..

And I can prove it isn't true because you won't post the name of this officer that you didn't talk to on this subject... just like with your Purdy creek fiasco. Just a fukin lying ginger kook.

Perhaps they will have an upcoming episode in the TV series where the warden or their superior is wrong??

Would it be fiction?

You guys need to go someplace, and out-negative each other,
fb

National Park updated their rules as of 12-14
Queets River:
• Selective gear rules in effect: the use of artificial lure with a barbless point hook only, bait is prohibited.

Salmon River:
• Selective gear rules in effect: the use of artificial lure with a barbless point hook only, bait is prohibited.

I don't think that will be an issue and honestly it gets a ton of pressure already. It's a funny river where most fish blast through to the mid to upper watershed with no access unless you're beyond expert on the oars or don't mind getting wet in a raft. If you get some high water they blow right through and 98% of that upper water shed is private until you hit the closed areas.
Narly ass water for sure, beyond a pucker show.

Keith

So they called me back. While I was wrong, so was the officer. They had more than a couple calls for clarification after people interacted with officers. The officers have since been corrected.

I was wrong. No big deal. So was the officer. I find when new rules are adopted there is confusion.

I asked about the pontoon thing. You can’t be “in your boat” which includes standing with your feet on gravel and the boat resting on your legs you can’t be using your boat at all. They said that you’d likely be corrected and not ticketed for it...the first time, it’s an officer discretion issue. If they think it’s giving you an unfair advantage they might ticket you.

In an email “if you are using rod holders on the boat but standing on the bank it is still considered “fishing from a floating device” as per the new regulation.

Non of that affects me usually as I’m on the bank most of the time.

Look. I asked, they told me...I was wrong and they needed to get clarification. I’m willing to admit it. Glad it’s clear now. Jeez people. I’ve had to pull out my phone or book before and correct officers. It happens. They don’t always know the rules. I’ve also been unaware of new rules and emergency changes and been graciously told to correct myself without receiving a ticket. It does get hard to keep track of every single rule and regulation and the entire language of the pamphlet.

Yeahhhh....it's gonna be alright child...yeahhhhhhhhhhhhhh

While the tears is runnin down your cheeks you wonder how you gonna catch a steelhead when ya can't read...Ooooh child things are gonna get brighter(chrome)

Go ahead. Ticket me. When you're standing on the bottom and your craft is floating behind you, you aren't fishing from a floating device, you're standing on the bottom. The way the reg is written says you can do it and I don't give a flying fvck if they say you can't.

I don't have or use a pontoon any more, but when I did, we fished the Wyoochee above the 7400 line pretty frequently. The "no fishing from a floating device" rule was in effect there years ago. We would regularly stand on bottom with the toon floating behind us, make some casts. jump back in the seat, float down a ways, and then do it again. The gamies watched this section like a hawk and dished out tickets left and right - but they wouldn't hassle you about fishing like that. The warden that checked me a couple times put it this way - "Are your feet on the bottom? Then you aren't fishing from a floating device - by definition."

Region 6 needs to get it squared away. Their job isn't to harass people or make gray out of black and white. This crap pisses me off even if it won't affect me personally.

What is going to come of these new rules? Will there be more fish next year with relaxed rules, less fish next year closed season or more rules then this season, or rules like this the rest of your life & happy about it?

Rules placed today for conservation are reflected in returns in about 4 years. The only way it affects next year is if the unkilled fish return as repeat spawners.

If I had said this 4 years ago would they have predicted the outcome we see today and if so would they have made the same rules? Seems like they should of just closed it all down instead of hoping for better ocean conditions. Even if ocean conditions are horrible fish will survive. I haven’t heard of a run collapsing because of ocean conditions. Fish know how to survive. The ocean isn’t a McDonalds.

Folks on bookface were talking about some sort of discrimination claim, that disabled folks that can't bank walk are left out in the cold, so I thought I'd share a bit of information about that.

The WDFW blog mentioned this, and gave the link to where you go to request a reasonable accommodation for your disability...i.e., if you disability keeps you from participating, go there and request a waiver from the rule so that you can fish out of a boat.

That's how the ADA works, and if they refuse to accommodate you, then you may have a claim for discrimination.

I have no idea what WDFW's plan is on this...maybe they are handing out waivers, maybe they are flat out saying no and leaving themselves vulnerable to a discrimination claim...but in any event, here's the information:

https://wdfw.medium.com/changes-to-the-coastal-steelhead-season-67131dd05ba7

"What options are available for anglers who have a physical disability that would prohibit them from fishing under these restrictions?
DFW makes every effort to provide angling opportunities for people of all abilities. Disability access concerns may be addressed via a request for reasonable accommodation. More information about this process is available on our Requests for Title VI / ADA services web page."

There's a link there to go and make an accommodation request.

If anyone who needs one tries this, I'd be very curious to hear what they have to say.

Fish on...

Todd

Also, in weird twist of fuckin stupid...a guide on bookface who wants to sue WDFW for discrimination against disabled people...I gave him free advice on how to do it, how to have a disabled person ask for a reasonable accommodation, and if it is refused, then to sue under the ADA...

He called it a liberal plot, called me "flyguy" (?), and blocked me.

Not sure if there is a lot of stupid involved (yes, there is) or maybe some day drinking?

Either way...don't be stupid like that.

Fish on...

Todd

Suddenly 1000's of fishermen develop limps.

There's an ADA access spot on the Cowlitz at Barrier Dam and another at the crack pipe at the Blue Creek trout hatchery, and I think I saw one on the Bogachiel at the hatchery confluence hole with the Calawha. The ones on the Cowlitz are not often used in the many times I've seen them, but you have to actually be bonafide disabled, and in a wheelchair to use them. Being an overweight lard azz doesn't count.

Well, it's not even an opinion. It's literally how to sue for discrimination, which he apparently wants to do.

It's too bad being stupid doesn't hurt. I know I say that a lot, but I think it a lot, too.

Fish on...

Todd

Alright Salmo, Monday morning quarterback time…

What can WDFW do better? I’ll play.

Well let me start by saying somewhat seriously “everything”. Now that I've got that out of the way lets talk some specifics. I understand that conservation groups and the tribe often have the departments hands pretty tied up. With that said, my biggest gripe with the WDFW is solely of their own doing. The WDFW needs to improve on their giant lack of transparency and accountability. This current regulation decisions are a prime example of both.

When WDFW came out with the 4 potential management options for coastal steelhead, I was personally caught somewhat off guard. I was well aware of the struggles happening to the south, and by no means do I have my head in the sand when it comes to wild steelhead trends, but numbers that were adequate for a normal fishery in the Quillayute system appeared to be there. When we met with James Lossee he expressed that although the predicted return was large enough to support our normal fishery, he felt that the added pressure from the Chehalis area warranted increased protection. This is the first management scenario that I have been a part of that didn't involve a goal of meeting the escapement number. So, James was asked repeatedly, what the new goal would be (i.e. what decrease in encounters are we hoping to get to). Neither he, nor anyone else at WDFW has provided an answer.

If WDFW doesn't have a goal, or a plan, then I would argue that they are just making rules for the sake of making rules which I don't support. An April closure should reduce at least a quarter of encounters (based on creel data for the Quillayute system). Why isn't that enough? Again, no answer. At the very core of all of this, that seems to be the most important puzzle piece and its missing.

WDFW could do a much better job at including and actually listening to various stakeholders. When concern was expressed in regards to the no boat fishing rule, James asked for alternative ideas. I heard some that I feel would also reduce angler impacts without excluding a huge number of users. Some of those were:

No fishing from an inflatable device. This discourages Chehalis area guides and anglers that are unfamiliar navigating the Sol Duc and Calawah from migrating to Forks and more importantly, would give low water refuge to the fish in the upper rivers when things got too low to float in a hard boat. Reduces pressure, reduces impacts. Check and check!

A days of the week closure. We could close the rivers 1,2,3,4,? Days a week to reduce impacts to an acceptable level (again, WDFW would have to actually inform us what that acceptable level is). Instead of a full closure in April, this strategy spreads the impacts throughout the entire run. It allows for monitoring throughout the season, and would allow for in-season adjustments (another place WDFW could improve) based on wether the run appears to be coming in above or below the forecast. The tribe manages their fishery this way, halibut seasons follow this approach. Again, it reduces pressure, reduces impacts, doesn't favor any user group or exclude anyone. Seems reasonable to me.

Close the upper rivers for the entire season and leave the lower rivers open. If you think this would condense anglers too much, just wait until we are all fighting for the same few beaches to stand on. Steelhead stack up in larger numbers in the upper river than they do in the lower. The river is smaller the higher you go making fish easier to find. Unfortunately a lot more fish are caught as they attempt to spawn when you get higher in the system as well. In this scenario, every high water event would move significant numbers of fish up river. These pushes of fish would get a free pass to the upper rivers where they would be left alone, achieving our goal of reducing impacts and reducing pressure while once again keeping the fishery accessible to everyone.

Those 3 ideas in particular would substantially decrease angler encounters and would regulate all anglers fairly. Why were none of them considered you might ask? WDFW has again, failed to give any explanation. Theres that pesky transparency issue again eh.

WDFW could use better science. By better science I mean real, unbiased data. I saw the graph you mentioned showing that boat anglers on the Hoh caught what was it, 80? percent of the fish. I look at that graph and all it tells me is that fishing guides with clients lobbing bobbers are 80% more effective at catching steelhead than the average spey angler. Anybody shocked by that? Anybody? Simple creel data cannot say how much the fishing from the boat increased that percentage of catch because both angler skill and chosen technique are huge factors that aren't being accounted for. WDFW had the opportunity to get better data on this when the stretch from Morgans to the park boundary closed to fishing from a boat. They could have made it a point to get creel data from the various user groups that were utilizing this section of river under the new regulation. I would especially be interested to see how the guides who were getting clients out of the boat to fish with conventional gear’s catch numbers would compare to those using the same techniques from the boat. At the end of the day, I certainly feel that fishing from a boat is an advantage, but I guarantee that the guys pounding on the best spots from the bank did some serious catching too. Would you not agree that this is obviously flawed data that WDFW is pushing to justify an unproven rule? I’m back to the lack of accountability.

WDFW could take more time to discuss the ins and outs of regulation changes with people that are consistently on the water. This process unnecessarily moved extremely fast (there aren't any wild steelhead in numbers yet on the coast so why did we have to make this rushed decision?) Had they taken the time to thoroughly vet each option, maybe they would have considered some of the unintended consequences of the no fishing from boats rule. I’m going to take a not so wild guess and say that there will be a huge pressure shift to the upper rivers with this rule. The water is smaller and therefor easier to fish from shore. Fish stack up in certain “glory holes” where anglers can pound away on them vs trying to search them out of the lower river as they travel through. If you are one of those folks that is worried not only about catch and release mortality but also about the possible loss of fitness for spawning fish post catch and release, wouldn't the upper river closure scenario be a better one vs a beat the hell out of the refuge spots in the upper rivers from the bank scenario?

Thats not all… WDFW was overly concerned that closures to the south would shift all of the pressure to the Forks rivers. Why aren't they just as concerned that by taking away fishing from a boat, a huge chunk the fishing pressure is going to shift from the Sol Duc (the healthiest of all of the coastal streams) to the Hoh and Bogie (not in nearly as good of shape as the Duc) because, as the people who regularly fish these rivers know, the Sol Duc is damn near impossible to wade in most places and those other rivers just so happen to accommodate it quite well. And once again, why can't I get WDFW to give a reasonable explanation for this?

WDFW could do a better job of accounting for both the social and economic impacts of its decisions. Let me be clear, I care about wild steelhead a whole damn lot and absolutely believe that when needed, conservation should always take priority over economic impact. With that said, I look at the costs to small businesses (not just my guide business) and the Forks community as a whole and I can't help but feel some anger. Why? Because the small details matter. I obviously don't agree with these new regulations as they pertain to the wild steelhead fishery (I’m speaking strictly Quillayute system here) as a whole but I even more adamantly disagree with WDFW implementing these new rules on the 14th of December. In the few days since the rules went into effect, the bogie hatchery parking lot went from 20+ trailers a day to 1 on the 14th (and yes, conditions were fantastic on the 14th). I saw 2 the next day and 2 the day after that. During the peak of the hatchery return, with good conditions and fish available. I want to puke. WDFW’s creel data shows that from 2015-2019, on average 9.4 wild steelhead are caught and released in the Bogie from when the hatchery fish start to come in in November all the way to the 15th of January. With a 10% mortality rate thats still less than a 1 fish savings that we get in return for seriously damaging the Bogie hatchery steelhead fishery. Thats not fair to anglers who’s taxes funded those returns, thats not fair to anglers who planned trips to Forks to harvest some steelhead, its a huge hit to an already struggling rural community, and most of all it accomplishes absolutely 0 conservation objectives. The fact that there is no accountability for something so far from what any informed person could consider good management is why I have finally lost all faith in the WDFW.

The social aspect, which again, shouldn't trump important conservation measures, should absolutely still be considered. How many of you caught your first steelhead in the vicinity of a hatchery? The bogie brat fishery is a far cry from what it once was, but it is still one of the biggest producers of November and December timed steelhead in this state. Its still a popular fishery and the one where I see the most beginner anglers participating. We need those new faces to stick around now more than ever to keep this whole fishing thing going. How many anglers will feel so discriminated against from the no boat fishing rule that they will hang up steelheading all together? I know of several personally. I love having the river to myself as much as anyone but I truly feel now more than ever that we are losing the passion for steelhead fishing. If we can't keep people interested, my opinion is that steelhead are far worse off in the long run than they would be in the net of a boat angler. How many of you would have the passion that you have for steelhead if this is the climate that you started your journey in?

Now, to be clear, I do think that moving forward, we need to encourage WDFW to come up with creative regulations that keep rivers open. I am in no way saying that I would rather close the river to everyone if I can’t fish how I want to. I am saying that WDFW could do so much better. THEY NEED TO DO SO MUCH BETTER! There are ideas that achieve the goals we want (Wait, I still don't know what the goal is) that don't exclude large portions of our user group. Its pretty clear that the regs are set in stone for this winter but WDFW is making it clear that until the entire Chehalis Basin recovers, they will continue to impose strong restrictions blanketed over the entire coast regardless of what returns those other rivers experience. I personally hope that those of you that demand that WDFW does a better job, will continue to remind them of such. They aren't holding themselves accountable so we have to. If you don't fish the coast, and you think these no fishing from boat regs aren't heading your way in a hurry, think again. If you only bank fish and you think this will benefit you, I think you will be very unpleasantly surprised as the season gets started. If we can't rally together now in support of each other and in support of better management, I wouldn't expect much fishing opportunity in the future. Uhhhhh ****

As a side note, I only care about disabled fisherman and am now booking trips. If you sit on wheels, I got deals. Really though, as hard as it is to believe, I do care that a lot of folks will be hurt by this rule. I had to cancel the days I had scheduled to take my dad fishing because he can't safely get in and out of the boat. I wish he was younger and in better shape but he's not. This will be the first winter steelhead season we don't get to fish together since he was carrying me around in a backpack. I think that sucks. I have some long time clients that fall into (or should I say out of) the same boat. There are plenty of able bodied people ready to go wade fishing so it has no affect on my bottom dollar but I still care. So should you. And when you get old and crippled, I hope some younger folks advocate for you too. Like it or not, we are in this in some way or another together. By my simple minded logic, when the fish are gone we all lose. I understand that many fishing guides leave a whole lot to be desired (myself included), but I would encourage some of you to keep in mind the blood, sweat, tears and lost sleep that some fishing guides, many of whom I’m lucky to know, have sacrificed in an effort to give back to the resource and the angling community as a whole. Don't get me wrong, I support limited entry on guides even if that leaves me out and I believe that taking advantage of a public resource should come with a lot of giving back. By no means am I sticking up for those just in it for themselves. I’m often embarrassed of many of my peers, but I also know we have all benefited in a lot of ways from some of the fishing guides out there (broodstock programs, helping our hatchery workers when they need it, testifying on behalf of sport fisherman at commission meetings, fighting for many of our shared interests in advisory groups, supporting enforcement, even the techniques that they developed and we learned directly or indirectly that have made days on the water more enjoyable). I do think that those guys have earned the right to not be lumped in with the takers. Even if that goes without saying, some people might not realize that.

Anyway, my arm is tired, someone bench me

Just FYI for those really wondering

Thank you for taking the time to contact us with your request for reasonable accommodations. At WDFW, we pride ourselves on supporting inclusivity and access for people of all abilities to enjoy the outdoors.



As fishery managers, we also realize that to preserve any coastal steelhead angling opportunity and recover wild fish in the future, we must take drastic measures to catch fewer fish now. Instead of an outright closure, these restrictions offer a way to help meet conservation objectives while still allowing some, though reduced, fishing opportunity.



Due to the dire situation of these wild runs, we’ve had to make extremely difficult decisions that will help preserve fish for the future. To support conservation of these wild runs, fishing by boat won’t be possible this season.



We maintain information on other ADA-accessible water access sites and other boat-accessible locations on our website and would encourage those interested to make use of that information to plan alternate trips. Many of these locations are not expected to be impacted by the current low forecast numbers, though we understand that these opportunities may differ from your normal experience.



We realize that this is a challenging time for the coastal steelhead community. To share additional feedback, please contact us at fishpgm@dfw.wa.gov. On behalf of WDFW, thank you for your continued engagement in recreational angling and passion for supporting this resource.





Thank you:



Peter Vernie

Licensing Division Manager

Department of Fish and Wildlife

Office Phone: 360-902-2302

Cell Phone: 360-790-5514

If anyone is interested after receiving that email, that's the jumping off point to an ADA discrimination suit...is providing a few fishing areas that are ADA accessible a "reasonable accommodation" so that disabled folks can fish?

The State would argue yes, a disabled person would argue no, and a court would decide.

Fish on...

Todd

Since the Dechutes down in Oregon has been no fishing from a floating device forever I would think WDFW has a pretty good precedent that a rule like that doesn't run afoul of the ADA.

Although it looks like the Deshutes does have this provision:

If a customer is disabled and cannot wade, a special permit may be obtained through Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife which allows one to fish from a boat that is being held in place by a fly fishing Guide while wading. Disabled permits take time to procure with a medical doctor’s proof of disablement

Seahawksteelie,

Thanks for posting again. Yours have been the most thoughtful posts in this thread. I think we and everyone else posting here agrees that transparency and accountability should be top priorities at WDFW. Weird thing is, WDFW claims to value transparency, front and center, on the agency website. I asked the Commission to prohibit the Director and staff from using the term "transparency" in all agency correspondence and other printed matter until they stopped lying to us constituents. No action taken, and no surprise either, since taking action would be a confession that they've been lying to us.

I agree there are some straightforward actions the agency could take to increase its credibility with constituents manyfold, but those simple changes would be painful to the status quo. I understand though; the status quo is revered as though it were God.

!. Live up to the transparency value. How? Pretty simple. Any staff or the Director caught in a provable lie gets 30 days suspension without pay. You see, as it is now, lying pays just as well as truthing, and makes life easier even if you get caught. It's worth the risk since there is no penalty. If lying hurt economically, there would be a strong incentive to simply tell the truth, even if it were embarrassing. For example, when the Department says a particular restriction is necessary for conservation, yet a simple analysis shows little to no conservation will be achieved. Turns out the real reason is because the Tribe made them do it. Can't believe WDFW management is stupid enough to think some of us don't talk with tribal representatives about what happened and why.

2. Transparency would include accountability. Accountability is nigh on impossible as long as the Commission is OK with the Director and upper management lying to constituents. So the only way for there to be accountability is to cause the commissioners to squirm in their seats so badly they get hemorrhoids. Perhaps then they'd require accountability from the Director. If it's required of the Director, he'll require it from everyone downhill from his position.

3. Transparency means complying with the open public meetings act and no more behind closed door meetings with treaty tribes at NOF. That of course means no LOAF and no shirttail riding on the BIA ESA Section 7 permit for Puget Sound fishing, which leads to . . .

4. WDFW submits a plan to NMFS for a ESA 4(d) rule or section 10 permit for PS fisheries under its jurisdiction. It doesn't have to be convenient for NMFS, and NMFS might find it awkward explaining to a federal judge why it holds a state agency hostage to a tribal permit, giving tribes complete authority over non-treaty fishing that by law is under state jurisdiction. WDFW would do well to hire private attorneys for this case, since AAGs are already complicit in giving the tribes whatever they want.

5. There is no one "right" solution for the issue of declining steelhead on the north coast, Chehalis watershed, PS, or inland mid-Columbia runs. There are a lot of ways to achieve conservation objectives. A good start would be to spell out what the conservation objectives are. All we really know is that this season's goal on the north coast is to reduce recreational gear encounters with wild steelhead. WDFW did pick the one specific alternative that most easily, if not best, achieves that. For all that however, I think we deserve a thoughtful and quantitative explanation of the prospective benefits of this measure, compared and contrasted to the benefits of alternative measures. Something that the 4-point proposal fell far, far short of.

I've seen various references to the Dechutes & some Canadian Rivers. There is a big difference. With the Dechutes you are talking about 1 river. What WDFW has done covers not only a large # of rivers but also a large physical area that covers the entire coast except what the Park controls. That really limits opportunity for people with disabilities.

[quote=Salmo g.][quote=elparquito][quote=Salmo g.]

Can you please name one action, other than complete closures, that does as much to reduce angling encounters with wild steelhead?

/quote]


Stop plants/or cut way back winter run steelhead plants......go to summer run steelhead. Would sure stop the encounters, plus summer run are generally better table faire, better weather, lower water conditions, longer hours to fish.....

Tribes would probably not like it, netting would be more difficult but price per pound would probably increase.

The old WDFW plan has not been working, the current "no fishing from boat" isn't going to cut it......SO WDFW lets see another PLAN !!!!!!!

I would suggest, along with Drifter, to totally eliminate wild winter-run plants of any kind where there is an established plan to recover wild fish. This includes wholistic habitat restoration, restoration of salmon to provide MDN, balancing predators with fish populations.

Where the habitat can't societally support a wild run that sustains harvests for NI and I, then hatchery winters are planted and the wild run written off.

As to summers, no stocking where there is a documented native run. In the absence of a native run, stock summers so as to provide a fishery. Let the net managers figure out how to avoid over harvest.

Actually set goals and, if the goal is not met, either do more or give up.

+1,
fb

In Grays Harbor the Wynoochee has had Summerrun Steelhead plants for many years. In the Chehalis Basin we do not have a natural run of Summerrun Steelhead so no genetic conflicts. Additionally it is a many generation hatchery fish that does not reproduce naturally with much success. ( seldom is a unclipped Summerrun caught in the Wynoochee ) Winter run Steelhead are primarily mitigation production for the Wynoochee and Skookumchuck dams. The Wynoochee production is not a native fish but rather a cross between early imported stock and early native Wynoochee which is called Van Winkle. Skookumchuck is of native origin but to what extent it is still genetically the same as wild fish I do not know but returning adults are captured at the dam.

At present WDFW Chehalis Basin Coho production is around 1,000,000 smolt a year. If that was Summerrun Steelhead the economic benefit would massively exceed any benefit from Coho production. It would end the non treaty impacts on Winter run Steelhead to be sure but it is hard to grasp what the spring and summer fisheries would be like but awesome comes to mind. I can not remember what I was reading but the Wynoochee Summerrun program has the highest cost / benefit ratio of any of our hatchery programs. It is a moneymaker.

Probably not applicable to this discussion but.............

The summer fishery in the Nooch in the late 70's and early 80's was off the charts excellent.

I believe they stopped stocking the upper green (King county) partially because the summer runs are not native. So, even that qualification doesn't appear to pan out well.

Agree.

I would never suggest planting hatchery summer run where there was a documented wild summer run population.



I agree with that...what many people DON'T KNOW, is that those summer steelhead were funded, food wise, by private individuals by collecting donations in and around Grays Harbor. Tom Pennt, Jerry Pavetich and other were the driving force to get those summer steelhead in the Wynoochee. WDFW did take over the program in 1980 or 81. It was one hell of a fishery for people that fished it in the early years.....I'd fish it early hours and many times not see another fisherperson...oh, for the good old days !!!!!

Well guys I think it is appropriate to post this. This is a comment made in an e mail by Bob. He ran Aberdeen Lake Hatchery was the driving force at getting the Summerrun program up and running.

You are right on with your comments. I have Parkinson's disease and now use a wheelchair. With the new regs for steelhead I will not be able to fish. I am 76 years old and put out to pasture with this new reg. I have fished my whole life. For 30 years I worked for the WDFW (starting with the Game Department) providing and improving the fisheries resources for the public. Now all of this is being stripped from the public. As a person with a physically limiting disease, the changes are more devastating. Where will it stop?

Bob Paulsen

I sent my comments to the Director and Commission.

Good Morning Director & Commission,

The E mail below is cut and paste of a conversation of between Mr. Osborn and Bob Paulsen ( in red ) the former head WDFW Hatcheries Division. Frankly sir I think your staff did not take into full consideration of their actions on disabled fishers or the legal requirements law has about handicap access. I would urge to immediately review your decision on limiting fishing from boats. A fisher could use something to identify themselves as disabled as is used in other things. In my mind sir the complete banning of fishers from a boat effects the handicapped disproportionately .

Dave

Actions have consequences, and WDFW isn't thinking (they do?) very clearly.

On a note about Bob P and Parkinson's, one of the "connections" I have read of is between rotenone and Parkinson's. I know now, at least before parole, that staff wore space suits when spreading the stuff. When I started, PPE was a paper mask while you unloaded the semi and nothing when applying. Couple that with all the waters that used to be done and.....

I feel for Bob and thank him for his service.
It used to be awesome fishing.

Since then WDFW has sold out and managed with a knee jerk motivated by the highest bidder.

I feel for Bob, too... But I understand why WDFW can't afford to make exceptions in this particular case. They simply don't have the personnel to patrol all the rivers and check boat anglers to make sure they qualify for an exception, and you can bet plenty of non-qualifying people will take advantage of that circumstance and count on the high likelihood they'll never get caught.

This is not a knock on WDFW; they ARE underfunded and can oly do so much with the money they have. Especially considering the catastrophic circumstances our state and local governments are about to suffer due to COVID-19, it's absurd for anyone to expect them to "find" budget to pay for enforcement of a rule that applies to an EXTREMELY small contingent of the angler user group. If the rule is "No fishing from a floating device," nobody fishing from a boat has a legitimate reason to be doing so, and that's the most realistic enforcement scenario possible.

The spirit of the rule intends to reduce encounters with endangered or threatened fish. I absolutely think we should do everything we can to make sure disabled persons have access to any reasonable opportunity, but in this case, NOBODY should have any opportunity to fish over the fish we're trying to protect in those lies that are supposed to be sanctuaries. Lest we forget, there ARE accommodations in place for anglers who are disabled and can't afford boats to fish from or guides; some in some pretty choice spots. I don't think this screws over the few disabled anglers much more (if any more) than it does the many non-disabled recreational boat users. Seems fair enough to me, IF the goal is to protect fish, as opposed to individuals' ability to catch them.

You make some good points but... The enforcement chore wouldn't be much different. Those people that would take advantage are still going to take advantage while drifting through those holes they don't think enforcement will have easy access to monitor. Cheaters gonna cheat.

I disagree, in the case of a Handicapped Jet boat owner........Washington State has a HANDICAPPED STICKER, sticker has a number and jet boat has a number....simple record keeping...... Have handicapped person take boat numbers and handicapped number to a Region Office, once there numbers are entered into WDFW computer system....... in the field WDFW LE could do a computer check on BOAT number...would also show Handicapped sticker number.

This beats the xhit out of a complete closure on handicapped boat owners....

I don't have a "other type of boat"......someone else can figure out a way,

If anyone thinks this is going to be a "1 year thing".....I DON'T THINK SO. Probably at least 2 cycles or more.

The river should not be open completely.......Chehalis River open to at least Porter, Wynoochee to White Bridge, Satsop to at least West Fork, Humptulips to Reynanne(sp) area..... Most of these areas are below steelhead spawning areas.

Drift boat handicapped owners, you'll have to work it out !!!!

I'm more upset that I couldn't use my jet boat, above Monty to fish for Coho salmon, until 12/31....hatchery Coho that could be surplused when they get to the hatchery.

Sometimes we have to take a step back in life to have the chance to take two steps forward and I know it sucks considering some of us enjoy fishing so much but let's be honest. Fishing is nothing like what it used to be and we're hanging onto memories. These hatchery fish are inbred so much that you see high light reels when someone posts a pic of a hatchery fish over 10 pounds and you'd think someone hit the lottery if the scale tips past 15... They've all but bred them to cookie cutters..

Sure, right place and right time can produce ample opportunities but the epic days are long gone in most places out there.

If I had a choice, I'd eliminate the winter hatchery steelhead production and plants, period... That means no more brood stocking and all, just get out of the winter steelhead hatchery game.. Get them off the spawning beds and eliminate the constant straying you see with these inbred fish. They simply are the #1 demise of our native steelhead populations, that simple.

Keith

Are you serious? 100% disagree...

#1demise to nates. WOW BOLD STATEMENT!

Te presence of the hatchery fish directly led to the demise of the wilds. The first, and probably most damaging and most difficult to repair, is the excessive harvest of wild fish when they returned with the more abundant hatchery fish.

Steelhead returned over a long period and spawned over a long period because that is what worked for the run. The long return time, extended spawning, repeat spawners were all required for long-term sustainability.

We have "saved" a fraction of what is needed; the later returning fish.

Then, especially after decades of inbreeding, that hatchery fish introduced maladapted genes so that simply spawning with a wild fish killed off its production.

I believe that we can one or the other in a watershed but not both.

just wondering, but how many programs also just spawned any returning wild fish with hatchery fish in the beginning, slowly integrating them into the hatchery program.

Probably all of them, at least before they started clipping fish!

Fish on...

Todd

The WDG winter steelhead for PS was developed at Chambers Creek. All the eggs were taken there and then distributed for grow-out. Local fish were not part of the program but rather a Mother Station.

Prove me wrong then? Countless amounts of data if you look deep enough that supports my statement.

Take this for example. The Lewis River Native Fall Chinook. It's the only run of Fall Chinook in the Columbia river basin that hasn't had hatchery integration or supplementation since the 1970's. It's also the only run that self sustains, exceeds escapement and allows harvest year after year. To top it off the Lewis river is 21 miles from Dam to mouth where it enters the Columbia so in theory only about 14 miles of habitat. I understand a Fall Chinook is not a steelhead but a salmonid is just that, a salmonid.

The neighboring river (EFL) has turned into a gene bank and has native steelhead populations that have rebounded tremendously since the hatchery plants being taken away.

First and foremost I hate to give up what I had as a kid fishing these two rivers, I happened to grow up on the EFL and have caught well over a 1000 steelhead out of that river. The selfishness in me wishes there were still 120K hatchery summer steelhead planted there and 100-140K hatchery winter steelhead planted there but seeing there were literally very few natives in that era to what there are now with no hatchery plants simply makes sense. I have no desire to concede in these ways knowing we will likely never get these plants back but,
the real question is when is everyone going to address the elephant in the room and give up the selfishness?

Keith

12/23/2020

On 12/19/2020, I suggested that cutting winter run steelhead plants and going to summer run steelhead plants would lessen the "fishing pressure" on Wild winter run steelhead. There were other postings suggesting also cutting winter run plants.

My comment is: If general public and retired WDFW employees can see this as a solution, what the hell is the "WDFW fish committee looking at other than "can't fish out of a boat", no bait, and single barbless hooks. Is there a long range plan in the works?????? If so, what are the things being considered?????? Open meetings should be a requirement BEFORE major changes that affect the public are "dropped on State residents like 12/14/2020.

More shades of WDFW and Tribal "closed door to the public" but out of the other side of their mouth talk about how open they are to the general public. Grrrrrrrr

Happy to chat with you about it when we are shooting.

The data and studies I'm looking at seem to squarely point the finger at upriver and estuary habitat loss as the largest threats and reasons of a declining (stable at best) wild winter steelhead populations on the EFL.

I would wager a large sum of money that if the studies were done today a new, easily identified threat would be the top culprit, or at least a high contender to the loss/destruction of habitat. The Ocean.

The Ocean and ocean conditions are currently not favorable to a steelhead and a lot of the salmonid species.

Unless I'm missing something, the current data isn't showing any type of significant rebounding effect for the EFL.

It's not crashing in the tank either....but seems to be chugging long at a neutral state with periods of high and low escapement.

Maybe these documents are Fake News.

https://www.ezview.wa.gov/Portals/_1962/...DFW_Feb2019.pdf

https://nativefishsociety.org/watersheds/east-fork-lewis

Historical escapement data says anywhere from 1,000-11,000 seems to fit "the norm".

Escapement goal is 875 wild winter runs.

Look a the escapement graphs. No where close to 11,000 fish....and seems to hang right around the 800 mark and meets escapement.

That just tells me the river isn't outright dying. Not rebounding significantly.

I'm not an advocate for hatchery steelhead, but making blanket statements about how a few hatchery strays and or some magical spawning bed competition and/or hatchery/wild co-mingling in the spawning beds is by far *not* the largest threat to an EFL wild steelhead.

Can flat out guarantee that with absolutely no hatchery turds in the EFL now and in the future, you're never going to see 11,000 returning wild winter runs to that river...... You're never going to see 5,000...or 2,500......

You may see another 1,400 and you're probably going to see sub-800 numbers are well.

Good data there but it takes us further in this conversation when we discuss escapement imho.

When you consider a river's carrying capacity and the fact that most native steelhead smolt hold over up to two years before out-migration, there's minimal natural food in the systems compared to 150 years ago (probably when it could have had 11,000 returning natives), ie. the percentage of salmon returning compared to historical numbers falls right in line with the % of carrying capacity in the river basin if that makes sense. The carcasses of those huge numbers of salmon that used to return were one of major contributing factors to providing nutrients and food to the river system.

In other words, I understand escapement at one point could have been 11,000, 5000 or 2500 fish but to sustain those sort of numbers salmon populations would have to be at near historical levels as well, yet they're not. So we have this circle of life that can't happen in any sizable numbers. Then, when you add smolt to a under achieving system you take food from those that inhabit the area, the native smolts..

So, I guess we can dream of larger escapements but until the whole system is balanced it's what the carrying capacity is in the moment that dictates the future escapements, if that makes sense. Does habitat factor in, most certainly but I still think that's a cop out as well and I don't think it's the deciding factor to the numbers rebounding. Drive up the EFL and look at the habitat the river has to offer, its as good as any other basin out there especially in the mid to upper reaches of the river system.

When it comes to ocean conditions, we could go in circles in debating that as well. Yet, the native NFL Fall Chinook returns were again off the charts this year in the worst ocean conditions that have been preached about since I remember paying attention and lord have mercy on this rivers minimal habitat, just a fluke I suppose...

Sort of brings us full circle and back to what's been done so far as a state or coast wide discussion isn't working or really moving the needle except for these very few places where hatchery fish haven't existed and or have been fully removed to see evidence of or rebounds in native populations. I sort of feel like we've been kicking the can down the road for 20+ years, somethings got to change. In other words doing what we as sportsman would like to see (flood the rivers with hatchery fish) won't happen so might as well remove the number 1 factor holding these natives back from rebounding imho, the hatchery fish and that includes the hatchery salmon smolts too...

Keith

One of the other things associated with salmon feeding steelhead is that as more salmon spawn and die, the steelhead smolt at younger ages. And, when the smolts are younger the carrying capacity for smolts raises. So, you put more salmon into the stream and you get more steelhead smolts out. At the same time, reducing salmon spawners increases age and reduces number of smolts.

So, steelhead carrying capacity to produce smolts varies with the amount of stream spawned and reared in and the amount of salmon that spawn. Conveniently, then, as reduce salmon escapements and/or habitat access (lose tributary spawning and such) the escapement goal declines which is just what recent analysis keeps showing.

And this is independent of what goes on in the ocean.

Yeah that. See, Paker does still have some biologist in his DNA!

I've written many times that hatchery steelhead don't do any favors for wild steelhead, but maligning those hatchery fish as the number one factor (i.e., proximate cause) of depressed numbers of wild steelhead does little more than deflect focus away from the factors that have significantly greater effects on returning adult steelhead populations.

Keith, since you cling to the studies showing where the presence of hatchery steelhead correlates with depressed wild runs, you could go a long way in explaining that the correlation is indeed causation. Show us why wild runs in river systems with or that have had hatchery steelhead fluctuate proportionately with wild steelhead runs in rivers that have never had any hatchery steelhead stocking at all. Ever.

There are many more steelhead streams on Vancouver Island and the BC coast that have never had a single hatchery smolt stocked than there are that have been stocked. Yet these forever unstocked rivers' populations fluctuate up and down the same as the populations in the Salish Sea and WA coast where hatchery steelhead have been stocked for a half century or more. Every biologist I've talked with about the subject believes that a factor common to both stocked and unstocked streams is the causative factor. And that factor is the fluctuating ocean survival.

How is steelhead carrying capacity even defined? Is there a mathematical equation? Does it vary with the volume of water per time times the time of the run? I've seen hundreds of fish stacked like cordwood moving up river. I've also seen so many salmon in the river they look like they are gasping for oxygen.

The number of returns equals the hatchery escapement plus the number of native and hatchery mixed fish spawning in redds. There's x number of smolts leaving the hatchery plus y number of fry leaving the beds. Maybe some of each die of starvation for competition over food in the river and the salt. There's predication of both hatchery and native. Birds and other fish have to eat. The hatchery fish provide a food source that reduces the number of native fish consumed.

Then there is the mortality caused by pollution, environmental and climate factors or disease in the ocean. Then there is take. There can be obstructions like culverts and dams that prevent the fish from returning.

Then there is the genetics which could affect survivability.

Is there a bio here that has a math degree?

Salmo,

I agree that ocean conditions are a factor to overall abundance on large or small years of returns. I didn't reference the ocean as a major factor as it's a given across the board with steelhead. I don't think it's quite the "same" as you put it though (same meaning populations fluctuating up and down along the coast line in consistency), at least not in the CR basin but maybe you have evidence to support that statement. One major factor is the massive amounts of straying that happens everywhere and it's a lot more than biologists see or believe happens. Example, I've caught hatchery summer steelhead in the grays river in September on multiple occasions, I've caught several steelhead over the years with spaghetti tags in river systems that didn't belong there, we catch snake river (upper columbia) steelhead in the lower Lewis in August consistently and in big numbers, both hatchery and wilds and the list goes on.

Salmon numbers do vary more imho though, when it comes to BC and WA/OR coastal rivers and very few rivers are absent of hatchery supplementation. I mean straying is a huge factor here as well and a solid example is the fact that the North Fork of the Lewis hasn't planted hatchery fall chinook since the 70's and it consistently gets 3-500 hatchery fall salmon back to the hatchery every year and that's over and above the hatchery harvest that happens in the river.

Without proof it leads me to believe that straying probably happens all over Vancouver Island and the BC coast line and again leads to hatchery fish on the spawning beds reducing the reproductive fitness of those natives.

Keith

Carrying capacity is not exactly fixed. First two years we trapped smolts on a creek we got 800 and 1200. BOTH were capacity as in the first brood year they only spawned about 2/3 of the anadromous zone.

Basically, the stream can produce as many smolts as it can overwinter. The better the habitat, the more smolts. For steelhead, the higher the productivity the younger the smolts. And younger smolts are more productive per unit area.

WDG made an estimate of steelhead capacity and WDF made a similar one for coho. Both were based on habitat. While it is easy to poke holes in what they did, the concept is sound and simply needs more data to fine-tune.

At the end of the day, there is a capacity but it changes annually depending on flows and area seeded. The idea that if we hit some magic number of spawners, or egg take, or release will give us an annually consistent fishery is simply foolish. There are too many variables beyond the freshwater that we don't know and that change almost faster than we can react.

Which is why terminal fisheries directed at maturing adults is the only way to consistently optimize escapement. Assuming you do in-season management and don't use auto-pilot.

Keith,

"Same" was not the best choice of words. "Similar" would be better. A "good" return to a LCR tributary like the EFL will correspond to a "good" return on the WA coast, PS, Van. Is., and lower BC coast. Correspondence dissipates by geographical region when their respective steelhead populations migrate to differing ocean foraging areas.

Straying does happen. But there are two different kinds of straying, and their difference is important. The first is the one that concerns you, where a hatchery steelhead strays into some part of the natural environment and spawns with a wild steelhead, thereby diluting the reproductive fitness and productivity of the wild fish. Chambers Ck hatchery winter steelhead do this, and the effects vary. They vary depending on whether there are any wild steelhead in the same place at the same time as the ripe hatchery fish. The presence of early timed spawning wild steelhead is usually associated with tributary streams with lower elevation headwaters. These instances are reported to occur more in LCR tributaries, Willapa tributaries, and too a lesser degree, along some WA north coast streams. The remainder of the coastal and PS watersheds headwater at higher elevations and a later spawn timing that does not coincide with Chambers spawn timing.

This is not to say that there is no genetic introgression of Chambers DNA in these populations of wild steelhead. Rather, the amount of such introgression is exceedingly small. At first by coincidence, and later by design, Chambers steelhead DNA has remained mostly absent, that is, occurring at a very small percentage, in PS wild steelhead populations, even though Chambers Creek itself is a south PS tributary stream.

One of the best examples of the inability of Chambers Ck steelhead to successfully interbreed with wild steelhead is lower Cowlitz River tributaries. the old WDG deliberately stocked literally millions of these Chambers Ck hatchery steelhead fry into 3 or 4 lower Cowlitz tributaries for several years. If ever there was an opportunity for these hatchery fish to swamp a wild population and become the dominant genetic type present in a stream, these were it. Comes now the Cowlitz steelhead genetic study, dated about 2010, and low and behold, while Chambers Ck DNA was present in wild steelhead in these tributaries, it was present at a very low level, with typical lower Columbia wild steelhead DNA being the dominant genetic presence. I think that this tells us that the selective breeding of the Chambers Ck hatchery steelhead made them very unfit to reproduce naturally in natural stream environments. And while they may have compromised the fitness of any wild steelhead that they spawned with, their long-term damage to such populations appears to have been minimal.

I mentioned there are two types of straying. The second is very common, especially with summer steelhead like you have experienced on the N Lewis. Summer steelhead dip ins happen all over the lower Columbia. The Columbia River runs warm in the summer, and the tributaries are cooler. So summer steelhead dip into various tributaries, like the N Lewis, Cowlitz, Deschutes (until recent years, when the Pelton-Round Butte tower came on line) to avail themselves of the cooler water temperatures. You should know about the Kalama Falls hatchery, where summer runs were Floy tagged and passed upstream. Then, when the fall rains came, those tagged fish that were strays backed downstream to the Columbia and proceeded upstream to the tributary streams that were their natal waters.

I think the same thing happens on the coast, where summer steelhead have sometimes shunned the Columbia, only to temporarily ascend the Hoh or Queets - that have cooler water - and stay for a while and later disappear. My hypothesis is that they eventually enter the Columbia and migrate to whatever tributary they originally came from, but I don't have the data proving it. The upshot is that while summer steelhead do stray into and spawn in non-natal waters, most of them don't.

I think your hypothetical straying by steelhead into BC tributary streams falls into this second category, where they dip in but most don't stay to spawn. To reiterate, I completely agree that hatchery steelhead don't give any favors to wild steelhead. However, suggesting that hatchery steelhead are the proximate, i.e., the number one, cause of depressed wild steelhead populations is very badly misplaced.

Your dead on with your hypothesis in regards to the straying of the summer steelhead, cold water is everything to do with it in relation to the CR they do disappear from the Lewis roughly late September but as late as mid October pending CR water temps. There's a handful of other sleeper rivers you hadn't mentioned that are a blast to hit when the water temps in the CR are north of 70.0 degrees as they dip into those as well.

In fairness, you've backed me into a corner here with your explanation. It's spot on to what we've witnessed while angling over the years.

I've drawn many conclusions with the Lewis River native fall chinook (LRW's), I can't wrap my mind around how that river with such poor habitat has such great results with no fall chinook hatchery interactions other than the strays that we see on occassion.

I guess it takes me back full circle, evidence in what you write would suggest the hatchery steelhead aren't as much of a concern on the spawning bed. Maybe it's something else with these hatchery fish that's causing the declines but to me they go hand in hand with the demise of the native stock and I hope someday science will put their finger on it.

Again, it's not something I want to be true as I'd love to see rivers full of opportunity again.

Keith

if we had wide spread timing on wild returns and are now limited to late river returns, it seems that would correspond with the early run hatchery fish effecting the wild fish, in ways other than integration. That was my question about spawning techniques. If, say at the hatcheries on the Kalama or Cowlitz mixed large numbers of wild fish with hatchery fish, never clipping any, and these fish do not successfully spawn I would think this could greatly effect a wild run without much DNA integration. Similarly, if they are competing for food, the fewer wild smolt would then face competition with the hatchery fish. Release timing, the effect fry releases vs. fingerlings, and other factors could all come into play. Then, if we have a predator base that is reliant on the hatchery smolts, it seems a complete removal could lead to the wild runs being decimated by the existing predator base. So much to consider, but it seems knee jerk conclusions by people who think one-dimensional are the norm.

Keith,

Fall Chinook are not a real good stand in for steelhead. Fall Chinook juveniles mostly rear in freshwater for 3 to 5, maybe 6 months before heading to the ocean compared to steelhead's 2 or 3 year juvenile freshwater residence. The N Lewis isn't great fw habitat over all, but it meets fall Chinook requirements pretty well. Consider first of all that there is no flooding of consequence to scour incubating eggs or smother them with silt. So egg to smolt survival is likely quite a bit higher than for fall Chinook in unregulated streams. Then those fall juveniles have a nice long estuary from the lower river all the way to the ocean, and it's rich with forage for juvenile fish. Predators too, however. So it's not all fun and games.

Krijack,

Wild winter runs used to be spread out in river entry timing from around Thanksgiving to the end of March or first half of April, with peak timing being March in almost every winter run river for which I've ever had information on. The main effect of hatchery winter steelhead on wild fish was the increased fishing pressure in December and January, when hatchery steelhead peaked in abundance. High harvest rates on hatchery steelhead during those months also included high harvest rates on any wild fish that were present in the same areas at the same time. The result in short order was that there were very few wild steelhead returning in December and January.

Now that wild steelhead are more protected from harvest throughout WA for a few years, quite a few on some rivers, we are seeing a few early timed wild steelhead in river systems where they had become very uncommon.

Mixing large numbers of wild steelhead in hatchery spawning never happens. I'm pretty confident in that. Wild steehead have very little incentive to enter hatchery entrances. It does happen, and when it does, it's noteworthy because it's infrequent. The main culprit when it comes to spawning is when a hatchery fish spawns with an early timed spawning wild steelhead. And that does happen; it just doesn't happen as often as some seem to believe. The reason is because of the difference in spawn timing for the overwhelming majorities of both hatchery and wild steelhead. When it does happen, the reproductive effectiveness of the wild steelhead partner is reduced, sometimes nearly to zero. This is the most logical explanation for the present day absence of Chambers CK hatchery steelhead DNA in wild steelhead in those lower Cowlitz tributaries where literally millions of hatchery juveniles were stocked years ago.

For the most part, hatchery and wild steelhead juveniles don't compete that much for food. Hatchery folks are pretty good at releasing their smolts at the time when they are ready to migrate. In the cases where they have been followed, they generally pass downstream to salt water in about a week. It's not that they don't feed in that time frame, they do, at least some. The thing to understand about salmonids is that they are extremely well adapted to periods of starvation. So even if hatchery and wild smolts are in the same place at the same time, competing for the same food supply, any shortage in food is likely to have an adverse impact on either the hatchery or the wild fish that is statistically close to zero.

Predators could have built up their numbers in response to the large numbers of hatchery smolts, but their presence in any one area is for such a short duration of time, that it doesn't seem too likely because it is not consistent with optimal foraging theory. And predator-prey relationships almost always have a perfect correlation with optimal foraging theory.

All in all, I'm back to where I began by saying that hatchery fish don't do wild fish any big favors, but trying to portray those hatchery fish as the proximate cause of depressed wild populations simply does not hold up under any close scrutiny that I have been able to apply. As always, I'm open to new and even contrary information. I subscribe to: "let us seek the truth, and go where it leads us."

I can think of a few rivers, though I am not sure how many, where the hatchery does not have a seperate channel but rather are stopped by a weir. Chambers creek, the Green off the Toutle, the Sooez (Neah Bay) are just a few. I suppose the barrier dam on the Cowlitz and the Dam on the Kalama would qualify, though I am not sure how many hatchery fish were stocked this high.
Many of the smaller, Hatchery creeks have weirs too, but these would not intercept as many. Without clipping, it would be impossible to tell the difference. Just seems like there is Death by a thousand cuts. With clipping, this could be easily eliminated, so it would not apply today, but it could be part of the demise, on top of harvest, that killed off the early run portion.

Having had the pleasure of working on some creeks where were marked all the smolts and captured all the adults that went back upstream we learned a lot about wild fish straying. They do, a lot.

With steelhead, about 1/3 of the adults had been marked as smolts. Now, some of the other 2/3 did come from downstream of the rack (1 mile of a 7.5 mile anadromous zone) they all didn't come from there. Plus, we marked all the kelts with numbered tags. Got a goodly number of repeats annually and NONE had been marked. We did get one marked recovery in the Union River and one in the Nisqually.

As to coho, we got better levels of return but still straying. One year, all the adults that had been marked in Salmon Creek returned to Snow. I know they are close, bit ALL?? And, Salmon got a decent unmarked eascapement.

We really don't know how much the wild fish stay because we don't mark and recover them with the same effort we give hatchery fish; it's easier to mark them. And, we don't have intensive recovery efforts.

A good friend that I knew that had worked with both wild and hatchery stocks was pretty adamant about straying. Wild Steelhead stray all over the place which was natures way of adapting but hatchery Steelhead not nearly as much as long as you released the smolt from a location that could capture returning adults. Salmon similar but stream conditions always shake things up. Low water Salmon will improvise and just plain find a place to spawn, high water move into an area that meets their needs.

When working in forestry years ago I was in a unit that had zero salmon spawning habitat. When going down a ravine in a rather heavy rain storm I was stunned to find a Coho beating its way up a foot wide run off channel. We have a tendency to think we know why fish do what they do when the fact is they run on pure instinct and frankly improvise a lot.

Well, on the other hand, when BC tried hatchery steelhead they reared them in one pond next to the river on Vancouver Island. When they came back, adults (because of cwt's) were found on approaching streams on both sides of the straits. They were all over. We recovers a cwt'd steelhead from Samish in a creek near PA.

I’ve caught 2 hatchery steelhead at Reiter ponds both with a missing rear ventral fin & adipose. They were both high jumping summer runs but when I sent a email to wdfw they had no idea where they came from.

Closing dates formally set

January 5, 2021

Conservation rules implemented on coastal tributaries update

Action: Updates rules for coastal tributaries regarding gamefish seasons, fishing from a floating device, Selective Gear Rules (Selective Gear Rules prohibit the use of bait including scents or scented materials) with only one single-point barbless hook allowed in all areas open to fishing and requires release of all rainbow trout.

Effective date: Immediately, until further notice.

Species affected: All species.

Rules:

All species: Fishing from a floating device is prohibited. Selective Gear Rules in effect, except only one single-point barbless hook is allowed.

Rainbow trout: Release all rainbow trout.

Locations (the following waters will follow the above rules and will close to all fishing until further notice beginning on the date listed next to the water; any exceptions to the rule will also be listed next to the water):

Bear River (Pacific Co.): Closed beginning March 1, 2021.

Big River (Clallam Co.), outside Olympic National Park: Closed beginning March 1, 2021.

Bogachiel River (Clallam Co.), from the mouth to Olympic National Park boundary: Closed beginning April 1, 2021.

Calawah River: (Clallam Co.), from the mouth to the forks: Closed beginning April 1, 2021.

Calawah River, South Fork (Clallam Co.), from the mouth to Olympic National Park boundary: Closed beginning March 1, 2021.

Cedar Creek (Jefferson Co.), from the mouth to Olympic National Park boundary: Closed beginning March 1, 2021.

Chehalis River (Grays Harbor Co.), from the mouth upstream, including all forks: Closed beginning April 1, 2021.

Clearwater River (Jefferson Co.), from the mouth to Snahapish River: Closed beginning April 1, 2021.

Cloquallum Creek (Grays Harbor/Mason Co.), from the mouth to the outlet at Stump Lake: Closed beginning March 1, 2021.

Copalis River (Grays Harbor Co.): Closed beginning March 1, 2021.

Dickey River (Clallam Co.), from the Olympic National Park boundary upstream to the confluence of the east and west forks: Closed beginning April 1, 2021.

Dickey River, West and East Forks (Clallam Co.): Closed beginning April 1, 2021.

Elk Creek (Lewis/Pacific Co.): Closed beginning April 1, 2021.

Elk River (Grays Harbor Co.): Closed beginning March 1, 2021.

Fork Creek (Pacific Co.), from Fork Creek Hatchery rack upstream 500’ at fishing boundary sign: Closed beginning April 1, 2021.

Goodman Creek (Jefferson Co.), outside of Olympic National Park boundary: Closed beginning March 1, 2021.

Hoh River (Jefferson Co.), from Olympic National Park boundary upstream to Olympic National Park boundary below mouth of South Fork Hoh: Closed beginning April 1, 2021.

Hoh River, South Fork (Jefferson Co.), outside of Olympic National Park boundary: Closed April 1, 2021.

Hoquiam River including East fork (Grays Harbor Co.): Closed beginning March 1, 2021.

Humptulips River (Grays Harbor Co.), from the mouth to confluence of East and West forks: Closed beginning April 1, 2021.

Humptulips River, West Fork (Grays Harbor Co.), from the mouth to Donkey Creek: Closed beginning April 1, 2021.

Johns River (Grays Harbor Co.), from the mouth (Hwy. 105 Bridge) to Ballon Creek: Closed beginning March 1, 2021.

Kalaloch Creek (Jefferson Co.), outside Olympic National Park boundary: Closed beginning March 1, 2021.

Moclips River (Grays Harbor Co.), from the mouth to Quinault Indian Reservation boundary: Closed beginning March 1, 2021.

Mosquito Creek (Jefferson Co.), from Olympic National Park boundary upstream to Goodman 30000 Mainline Bridge: Closed beginning March 1, 2021.

Naselle River (Pacific Co.), from the Hwy. 101 Bridge to the North Fork: Closed beginning April 1, 2021.

Naselle River, South (Pacific Co.), from the mouth to Bean Creek: Closed beginning March 1, 2021.

Nemah River, Middle (Pacific Co.): Closed beginning March 1, 2021.

Nemah River, North (Pacific Co.), from Hwy. 101 Bridge to Cruiser Creek: Closed beginning March 1, 2021.

Nemah River, South (Pacific Co.): Closed beginning March 1, 2021.

Newaukum River, including South Fork (Lewis Co.), from mouth to Hwy. 508 Bridge near Kearny Creek: Closed beginning April 1, 2021.

Newaukum River, Middle Fork (Lewis Co.), from mouth to Taucher Rd. Bridge: Closed beginning April 1, 2021.

Newaukum River, North (Lewis Co.), from mouth to 400’ below Chehalis City water intake: Closed beginning April 1, 2021.

North River (Grays Harbor/Pacific Co.), from the Hwy. 105 bridge to Raimie Creek: Closed beginning March 1, 2021.

Palix River (Pacific Co.): Closed beginning March 1, 2021.

Queets River (Grays Harbor/Jefferson Co.): Contact Olympic National Park for regulations. (360) 565-3000. nps.gov/olym/planyourvisit/fishing.htm

Quillayute River (Clallam Co.), from Olympic National Park boundary upstream to confluence of Sol Duc and Bogachiel rivers: Closed beginning April 1, 2021.

Quinault River, Upper (Grays Harbor/Jefferson Co.), from the mouth at upper end of Quinault Lake upstream to Olympic National Park boundary: Closed beginning April 1, 2021.

Salmon River (Jefferson Co.), from outside Quinault Indian Reservation and Olympic National Park: Closed beginning March 1, 2021.

Satsop River and East Fork (Grays Harbor Co.), from the mouth to bridge at Schafer State Park, and from 400’ below Bingham Creek Hatchery dam to the dam: Closed beginning April 1, 2021.

Satsop River, West Fork and Middle Fork (Grays Harbor Co.): Closed beginning April 1, 2021.

Skookumchuck River (Lewis/Thurston Co.), from mouth to 100’ below outlet of TransAlta WDFW steelhead rearing pond located at the base of Skookumchuck Dam: Closed beginning April 1, 2021.

Smith Creek (near North River) (Pacific Co.): Closed beginning March 1, 2021.

Sol Duc River (Clallam Co.), from mouth to Hwy. 101 Bridge upstream of Klahowya campground: Closed beginning April 1, 2021.

Sooes River (Clallam Co.), outside of Makah Indian Reservation: Closed beginning March 1, 2021.

Stevens Creek (Grays Harbor Co.), from the mouth to cable crossing downstream of WDFW hatchery outlet and from WDFW hatchery outlet to Hwy. 101 Bridge: Closed beginning March 1, 2021.

Thunder Creek (Clallam Co.), from mouth to D2400 Rd.: Closed April 1, 2021.

Van Winkle Creek (Grays Harbor Co.), from mouth to 400’ below outlet of Lake Aberdeen Hatchery: Closed beginning Feb. 1, 2021.

Willapa River (Pacific Co.), from mouth (City of South Bend boat launch) to Hwy. 6 Bridge (near the town of Lebam): Closed beginning April 1, 2021.

Willapa River, South Fork (Pacific Co.): Closed beginning March 1, 2021.

Wishkah River (Grays Harbor Co.), from the mouth to 200’ below the weir at the Wishkah Rearing Ponds and from 150’ upstream to 150’ downstream of the Wishkah adult attraction channel/outfall structure (within the posted fishing boundary): Closed beginning March 1, 2021.

Wynoochee River (Grays Harbor Co.): Closed beginning April 1, 2021.

Reason for action: These measures are being taken to protect wild steelhead stocks. The majority of coastal wild steelhead runs are expected to return below escapement targets as they have the past four seasons and have failed to meet management objectives. These rules are expected to result in a reduction of wild steelhead encounters by more than 50 percent.

Additional information: Please note that the Wishkah River, from 150’ upstream to 150’ downstream of the Wishkah adult attraction channel/outfall structure (within the posted fishing boundary), is open only to anglers with disabilities who permanently use a wheelchair AND have a designated harvester companion card.

This fishing rule change has been updated to include the waters of the West Fork Humptulips, West and Middle Fork Satsop, East and West Fork Dickey rivers, and Fork, Stevens, and Thunder Creek.

Information contact: Region 6 - Montesano, 360-249-4628

01/06/2021

Humptulips River, East Fork----Why would WDFW leave the East Fork of this river open????? Doesn't make good sense to me !!!!!!!

Pretty sure its closed most of the year in general is it not? Where does it say the EF is open?

Perhaps the default rule now is back to open unless closed.

Because they don't know what they're doing. Did they really mean to keep the West Fork and the Middle Fork Satsop open thru March?

Complete idiots.

Anyone catch the recent FHN where they talked about Cameron's protest out in forks and figured out that everyone donating to the cause was just donating to change.org? Helping fund their service and advertising network...

Just another one of the fine details these guys got wrong.

...does it not say that on the petition?

The Quinault Indian Nation just closed the Quinault and all its tributaries within the reservation, effective Sunday.

Fish on...

Todd

i figure with the Quins not netting the chehalis right now that the state will be shutting down the sports anytime.

Because they are netting the Queets from Monday till the middle of March 4 days per week?

I saw this was happening a few days ago. It's interesting they shut down everything on the Quinault that if I remember correctly was a little above Escapement. Yet they continue to net the Pristine Queets that is not meeting escapement and has been having trouble meeting it for years. No development, no pollution etc. Is it that they want to build their run back up since they make a lot of $$ off that fishery? Just curious. At least they aren't netting 5 days a week.

Wonder if the boat will get taken, like the guide on another GH river last week.

About the GH guide?
Ask monte square gas station..they told me and everyone else in line

No reefer, that's what I'm saying they're telling people at the monte store..they don't say the name either, I'd be just as interested to know as you.

Lol wow, someone is a bit triggered, maybe you're a fan boy it seems? Or maybe you know something that you aren't sharing with the group since your obvious hot to trot on this one.
Nice one trying to call out [Bleeeeep!] talking, several here have a license

Are you going to take this little temper tantrum of yours to 12 pages?

What happened at the gas station?

No, not if I have a say in all of this.

Oh wait, I do.

So what's going on here? Did a couple of guides get popped for fishing out of their boats?

Fish on...

Todd

For Pete's sake lets here it.

PM's accepted.

i want to hear it!!!

i dont think any guides would fish illegal

Don’t be a buzz kill, Paker. Let ‘em keep squabbling. Neither knows how to stop. The darkside has been boring lately.

02/09/2021

Well, I've not even seen a floating device on my home river, so I can't say if the rules are being followed but I can tell you this....

1st Launch site had 6 drift boat and looked like a big raft trailer

2nd site I went by....didn't see any bank fishermen, so I assumed the 3 cars were "turn around rigs"

3. I decided not to go to the other WDFW launch's but when I got to one of the few stop signs on the valley road, 2 trucks pulling drift boat were heading down the valley......so that tells me they either put in at the newest WDFW 7400 launch or the private launch about halfway to 7400 line.

The water color is PERFECT, there are LOT's of areas from 7400 line to tide water, to do some fishing from shore BUT a hell of a lot more to fish from a "floating device"....oh, for the old days from 7400 line down....mmmmm wow now only memories for me.

And! Lots of areas not visible for enforcement unless on the river in a boat to drop off and stage officers or lots of hiking. I doubt the latter, but some are still hard core. Would be fun in a race boat sneaking up on rule breakers.

I hear they are flying a Drone up and down the rivers looking for rule breakers..

True...but there are LOTS of places on the west end that seem really remote, and I have had gamies step out of the bushes to congratulate me on a nice and legal release of a native; they were watching all along from the hookup to getting to shore, netting, pic taking, and releasing.

Fish on...

Todd

Can confirm with drones and Todd comment.
Got buzzed on a river after our first float option fell thru yesterday.
Look up in the sky it's an eagle...no its a superman...no..wtf is that? Oooooo, sneaky sneaky

02/10/2021

I don't know how the fishing has been this year, I just drive to the local launches and common plunking spots. In all my travels this season, I've not seen a boat coming down the river.....must be my timings.

I can tell you that the following:

453 hatchery winter steelhead have been hauled above the dam and released
137 hatchery winter steelhead were taken back to hatch, brood stock
25 Wild steelhead were also taken back to the hatchery, I assume for brood stock.

Be safe

f

I was thinking old school. Drones make much more sense. Take a pic of a guy casting out of the boat and you got him at the next easy access location he floats by. Whole new world of enforcement!

if your sitting there and hear the noise it makes and u see the drone dont flip it off THEY dont like that..lol

Didn't hear it till it was too late, we play by the rules so they didn't get much of a show besides me pulling my white arse out of my waders in their general direction

I've fished with a few drones.

Some of them buzzing.

I remember Clay Butler when he was an Olympic Park Ranger came down out of a tree on the Queets to check my documentation after releasing an undersize chinook!

Bank ettiquette are you serious Parker are we talking at the ATM machine or drive up banking ???????
Peace Fly

02/24/2021

Winter steelhead is in my past..... Home rivers used to see me fishing many days a season, not the past 2 years.

2019-2020......Just too many boats, rafts on my river.....parking is a major problem, and with guide clients cars taking much of the available space, well not only guides but just lots of fishermen from other areas.

2020-2021........ I would have fished this season, Chehalis, BUT the no fishing out of a boat left this 80 year old, with no boat hours....ETech never got run after the 12/14/2020 "protect wild steelhead" went into effect.

Whoa! Blast from the past! Did you ever make to the Keys? If so how are they treating ya?