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.