In 2013 the Puget Sound Steelhead Technical Recovery Team produced a report looking at historical populations.

In that report they suggested that Puget Sound steelhead could be divided into what they called Demographically Independent Populations (DIPs). There are 32 DIPs -27 winters and 5 summers. By my count of those 32 populations currently only 7 are planted with non-rescue hatchery fish. One would think the State would have little trouble finding suitable candidates for their "gene banks".

In those DIPs were the planting of Chamber's or Skamania hatchery were terminated none have shown any corresponding increase in wild fish abundance. If WDFW us truly concern about Puget Sound wild steelhead consideration might be given to expanding this idea of "gene banks" to one of Wild Salmonid Management Zones (WSMZ). One example of such management is the Sauk which has managed under WSMZ type regulations since 2008.

Or as some has suggested they could move to eliminate hatchery fish from the Puget Sound basin. It would then quickly follow that all the rivers could be closed to steelhead fishing. Such actions would eliminate any steelhead fishing related mortalities from the equation and allow society to use any productivity the various PS rivers may have to support non-fishing uses. Under current regulations having ESA listed fish is not a huge issue and as long we as a society can keep population levels above the razor edge of extinction full advantage can be taken of "non-essential habitats" for such things as water, power, logging, farming, development, etc. Not the future I had hoped for Puget Sound steelhead but it seems to be the default position we are creeping towards.

Curt