April 12, 2019

Chehalis River will not open to fishing for spring chinook salmon

Action: The Chehalis River was scheduled to open May 1 but will remain closed to salmon fishing.

Effective date: May 1 through June 30, 2019.

Species affected: Spring chinook salmon.

Location: Chehalis River, from the mouth (Hwy 101 Bridge) to the Hwy 6 Bridge in the town of Adna, Grays Harbor/Thurston/Lewis counties.

Reason for action: The number of spring chinook forecast to return to the Chehalis River basin is less than the spawning goal. There are no fish available for harvest.

Additional information: Steelhead and other gamefish fisheries will remain as described in the Sport Fishing Rules 2018/2019 Pamphlet.

Information contact: Mike Scharpf, district biologist, Region 6 (360) 249-1205

So, I am assuming this means for EVERYONE! But, you know what assumptions get you. Can anyone confirm there will be NO TWINE in the river?

Its too bad the Chehalis springer run, can't make the spawning goal.....I asked for the catch figures back 20 years.....in the late 90's there were some impressive numbers caught for a little known fishery.....I never got in on that fishery. In the early 2000 - 2017, there would be some years the river was open, most of the time it was closed.


I did catch one, 3 or 4 years ago...…..It was a good eater!!!!

I don't understand why it isn't closed by default, and only open it up if there's enough fish to justify opening it. Seems like they end up closing it by "emergency" every year.

This action holistically typifies NOF Co-Management, and serves as a prime example of exactly why the process is a dysfunctional sham.

Were there any true "co-management" taking place, this notice would have been jointly issued by both WDFW and NWIFC...in harmony, w/their respective letterheads and lead Manager's names displayed prominently in plain sight. I see nothing that implies or infers that the Tribes are involved, supportive, or in agreement.

Maybe its just a hasty effort, or a poorly constructed communication---but, come to think of it---nearly ALL these rule changes, adjustments or cessations look exactly the same--only one party of the two parties involved is coming forward.

Baywolf's POV appears to be spot on regarding this less than "cooperative" management action.

My take, if the river was completely closed then the Chehalis tribe would not be able to fish.

2 years in a row I asked, 1st NOF meeting in Montesano City Hall, I asked if the sport fishing was to be closed, how about an emergency closure on the whole river......NO RESPONSE FROM WDFW staff.

"Dysfunctional sham." Great description and with more of the recreational community coming to this conclusion who is going to change the direction of WDFW?

I'd say it should be and will be the Commission but after the CR Reform about face I am rapidly losing confidence that they as a group they have the right perspectives to accomplish the mission of leading WDFW.

Don't forget about the Willapa FU! Ron Warren had his fingers all over that, as he does so many of the back door deals. Frankly, with all the recent and blatant mis-management we've seen from the Commission, I don't think we can trust them any longer. Like I've said before. Something is smelling really bad here. They promised to be transparent in their decisions, yet the exact opposite is taking place. Hell, they have people who are running around cutting deals who aren't even employees of WDFW, on the Commission or in some cases, even on an advisory board!

God knows what is being agreed to in the Tribal/WDFW North of Falcon Meetings. All the Public input NOF meetings are window dressing. They meet with the Tribes and cut the CR-101 and CR-102 before even briefing what was decided in the damn meetings. Dysfunctional sham is a perfect description!

If the Tribes dip a freaking net in that river when it's closed due to no harvestable fish, there better be a cry from the public so loud it shakes the foundation of the capitol building.

I could be wrong, but I don't think that the Chehalis Tribe reports it's catches to WDFW, or anyone else. Someone correct me if I'm wrong.

I think you are correct. Now, just pondering.....what would happen if one or more Chehalis basin stocks were to the ESA listed? Would that change the current management paradigm and alter practices of all the co-managers?

Yes and no on reporting catch just depends on what year it was / is. WDFW has used tracking down buyers to get numbers with some success we were told but who knows. On Springers the Chehalis Tribe has offered before to forego Springers if the QIN & WDFW did the same and were turned down as I recall.

I don't think that NOAA will ever mess with just one or two populations again, so the entire Washington Coast Chinook ESU (Willapa Bay up to but not including the Elwha River) would have to be listed. If that were to happen though, these Chehalis spring Chinook would undoubtedly become a critical population to recover this ESU. Like all of the western Washington Chinook ESUs, spring Chinook populations are pretty rare and therefore would likely have to be healthy to the provide the diversity necessary for de-listing. I think there are only one or two other spring Chinook populations in this ESU (Sol Duc and Queets) and probably one of these would likely have to be healthy as well.

The Sol Duc spring Chinook population may have already become somewhat compromised by hybridization with summer Chinook in the spring chinook hatchery program, and it appears that very little is known about the status of the Queets population including whether the managers can even decide if it is a spring run, summer run, or spring/summer run. I suspect that listing this ESU would lead to a major change for a lot of these populations as well as changes in the WB and GH management plans.

That makes a lot of sense! But sense seems to be in somewhat short supply in regards to our Fisheries.

Given the problems that NOAA is about to have with Chinook and SRKWs I suspect that they won't list more anadromous fish unless forced to by courts. Even then, they'll probably plead poverty and not do the analysis.

Too much of political hot potato what with three countries (AK, Canada, US), 4 states, and all the tribes.

I agree Carcassman. They would not do it of their own accord, but as you say, there are always citizen lawsuits or petitions.

ESA was first enforced on the Charismatic Megafauna. Basically, mammals and birds that nobody "used" anymore and whose retention caused rather minimal disruption to us. I am speaking about ESA in the US as we seem to discount locals when "saving" elephants, lions, and tigers.

Where ESA ran into problems was when it conflicted with the economy. Snail Darters, vernal pool inverts, Sagehens, and resources that meant important people (read campaign donors) would have to change their ways.

Salmon are the poster child for impacting too many important people. They need reasonably intact watersheds (logging, mining, hydropower, agriculture, manufacturing, domestic water), they need intact ocean systems (forage fish, proper temperatures and currents, lack of toxics), and song controls on predation (SRKWs, pinnipeds, humans). Too many of those activities impact too many people who have power.

At the Virtual open House, the state said the Chehalis tribe will harvest 1 Spring Chinook for ceremonial purposes.

Effective May 13- June 30: Rule Change:

Chehalis river, south fork Chehalis river, north and south forks Neuwakum river and Skookumchuck river closed to all fishing.

I heard the same thing.....but I'm wondering if they didn't mean like 1 fish per tribal fishermen???? Wish I would have thought to have follow up question.

I like what the tribe in the Puget Sound area did......15 springers for ceremonial purpose.

It is just one, not per ? just one.