Removing the Chambers creek fish is not going to save or enhance these wild runs of steelhead. If we do nothing about the habitat, they will continue to decrease in most of the cases. Possibly the Skagit could be an exception as I have learned from others as it is a fairly healthy run already and it is already trending upward.

We are spending billions on habitat restoration. But only 150 million a year in PS and Hood Canal. That is not even close to enough to fix the problems. All it does is allow people to say we are doing something. When you drive over a construction area where they are replacing a culvert with a bridge, that project can cost from 5-10 million all by itself. Links available on request. Tell me the name and I will help you find it.

We know where the money comes from and every year there are budget fights to reduce spending. Fish and wildlife are actually sort of low on the list of priorities.

Do the math, if fisherman are no longer fishing, they don't write letters to their senators and congressman. So if they don't feel any pressure from their constituents, they have no reason not to trade away cuts to fisheries in exchange for something they hear from their constituents about every day.

How many times have you heard about cuts to NOAA's budget? That is where the bulk of the money for habitat comes from with the exception of the Columbia Basin which is mostly BPA money. (our power rates).

We have been putting together watershed recovery and management plans.
The ESA requires that we come up with a plan to restore these fish. And the plans encompass what it will take to restore the habitat so we will have even the slightest chance of restoring naturally spawning fish and also what it will take to ensure water for in stream flows, irrigation, and people.

Washington has 62 defined watersheds, Oregon has 74. The Yakima Basin Plan covers the upper Yakima and Cle Elum basin, the lower Yakima and the Naches basin which runs to the east side of Chinook Pass.

This plan alone is estimated to cost 4 billion over the next 30 years. The expectation is 300,000 to 900,000 salmon and steelhead based on historical records. It is us taxpayers who will pay for that. Not license sales, not use permits.

So multiply that by the number of watershed plans being drawn up. The ESA requires us to restore these fish. But we can still delay and fight. And when they ask for more rate increases and property tax increases to implement these plans, its going to be a tough sell. And an even tougher sell if these are fish we don't get to fish for.

So we could easily limp along for another 30 years, with a woefully under funded budget. And 150 million in PS will not accomplish much of anything.
The very last thing we need is to divide fisherman and stakeholders. And if the general public see's us fighting amongst ourselves, they will just shut us off. "I ain't voting for that" "those people are just living in a dream world".

" We need money for transportation and parks and recreation for everybody". "FIsherman are just a small and weak special interest group"