Carcassman and Salmo g.....you both add so much to this web site, years of working for the State gives you insight to many things the average person could only wish they had close that same knowledge.

Thank you...…..

I'm hearing some complaining about the QIN netting schedule, late November and now into December...

Would sure like to be at the "season setting meeting"....

I posted the following on the "SCR" listing.....

I "heard" that the crab are being checked often for "soft shell". At this time there is not a QIN crab season taking place. I also heard that once the QIN starts their crab season.....its a 45 day period before the NT can start their season.

I also know that the in river "set and gill net season" is very liberal.....I did go to town, Aberdeen, and saw no gill net boats, only a few set nets. I've heard that many of the "long net fishermen", have hung their nets.....now choose to "do the crab fishery".

Nothing official about my post, just rumors and seeing whats going on in the river.

Chehalis River, where I fish, is about the same level as in September.....the river itself is so clear that I can count rocks on the bottom, in 5-6' of water.

Those aren't rocks they are fresh water clams mixed in among the round bale PVC wrap.

I imagine the drift netters quit because of the gin clear water. Fish get super spooky under these conditions and I imagine success goes way down when fish can see the gauntlet coming. Seems like the late crab soft shell issue is becoming common. The commercial starts have been late the last couple years in a row.

One of the things that makes management of any natural resource difficult is that the data is always in the past and management is always in the future. Like the stock ads "Past performance is no guarantee of future", so it is with fish.

For example, we figure out that the PDO has shifted after it occurs and then play catch-up. Catch-up is fun when the shift is from low to high productivity but sucks in the other direction.

That is why in-season management should be not only critical but the only way it is done. Seasons are conservatively set based on forecasts, or tradition, but not opened until data confirms. Soft-shell crab? The season opens when they are hard, per sampling, period. Like is done with razor clams. Salmon season? Conservative, very conservative, until the actual data says the fish are there in sufficient numbers.

Such a scheme will probably never be accepted because it does not allow sufficient certainty for business planning.

I cannot think of another commodity that has so many components listed as "endangered" that is still managed as to produce the largest yield for private commercial profit, to the point of collapse.

If commercial harvesters were allowed to hunt endangered species on this scale, for personal profit, say, tigers, the world world be in an up roar.

But tigers are warm-blooded. ESA wasn't meant for slimy things. And, the world keeps killing lions and tigers and elephants and rhinos because greed is Job One. That and aphrodisiacs.

With salmon fishing winding down many of us have wondered just how the runs performed, so I asked. Mikes reply is below but everyone should remember this is simply a snapshot of what staff sees at this point in time. It can and likely will change as all the data is collected when things are finalized. Hope this information helps everyone with questions. Oh a thanks to Mike and Kim for always being willing to share information, it is appreciated.


We are not close to knowing how the runs are going to end up. Looks like some of the index reaches have lot of Chinook, while others not as much. Preliminary spring Chinook escapement is around 1,100, so much better than last year and the forecast. I think the fall Chinook numbers are going to be close to the goal, but we are still doing surveys. Coho is a conundrum. The relationship between the Wynoochee trap counts and end of season spawning escapement is pretty good. I can model the end of the season escapement by comparing the counts to date and expand to end of season using normal timing, and apply to the model. As of this week that model produces an escapement of between 37,000 and 40,000 natural spawners. However, other indicators point to smaller returns, commercial catch for instance. As for chum, preliminary counts suggest that the goal will be achieved. Sorry I can’t give you actual numbers, we are still counting. When we get things closer to final, we’ll send you a message. Hope this helps. Have a good weekend.

Man, it's tough for salmon. Seems like every time we meet or exceed escapement goals, the ocean turns inhospitable (see the BLOB thread), resulting in poor marine survival to adulthood. Can't win for all the losing....

On the PM side about the preseason forecast, it was off. The key so far is that the run was under expectations but then the QIN & NT commercials harvest fell far short. Had the runs timing been normal ( rains moved the fish upstream early ) then commercial harvest would have blown escapement well to below what is required. If all remember the last time something like this happened the agency shut down the Rec inriver season. This year they navigated the issue differently and we seem to be coming out OK. Frankly from my point of view this years approach is the better of the two. Never been a fan of harvest wide open in marine, QIN & NT commercial, then things look off nail the inriver Rec for conservation. Just cannot buy that approach.

As people who fish more in the actual salt rather then the river these days I will say that I totally agree. I would rather have a shorter and tighter limited season on the salt if projections are falling short rather then penalize river fishers later on in the season. Only fair and reasonable. Of course, some larger boat owners may disagree. Bob and Melanie

Seems propping up whats left of any charter/sport ocean fishery along w/ any NT and tribal ocean commercial fishery is more important than anything else? When will the ocean/salt get a total shut down to find out what returns truly could occur in river? Just curious?

There are a couple of reasons why a wide-open oceanarium fishery (at least relative to real abundance and in-river fisheries is favored). Way back (pre Hoh v. Baldridge) the NI ocean fisheries consciously overharvested some weak stocks. The result was that inside fisheries (especially Tribes) were reduced/closed for conservation. While it did keep us close to escapement goals, certain Tribes were always on the short end of the allocation stick.

The decision, essentially, said that the Tribes can't be corked (trolled) out of their share. WDF said that "OK< we'll close the ocean and fish inside". Feds and Tribes said to fish anyway, just balance catches, and (essentially) **rew the escapement.

So, with the outside fisheries, the Tribes get a fixed schedule regardless of run size, to balance the catch. So, if we fish outside less then inside fisheries (if one actually wishes to balance catches) will need to be actively managed, catch counted, and so on with the real risk that Tribal fisheries would need to respond to weak returns in real time.

Autopilot, as shown by Asiana Air in San Francisco is just so much easier.

[Quote=BobR]If ALL (Alaska, Canada, rest of U.S.) fishing was shut down for 4 years I would agree with this, since that would be fair and everyone (except the fish) would suffer to benefit the runs. Since this ain't going to happen any suggestion that ocean fishing be shut down while other fisheries are allowed would result in some really nasty in-fighting. If you really want to turn fishermen against each other this is certainly the ticket! Either we fish together or we all sit at the dock together! Civil war otherwise. Bob R

Four years is nowhere near long enough. Wild escapements are in the 5-10% of "historic" and ecosystem needs. Recovery is a decades-long process that will require massive and permanent changes to the ways we interact with natural resources. If we want to have them.

I'm willing to bite the bullet for 10 years if everyone is on the same page. And I don't even know whether or not I'll be able to fish in 10 years! I'm an old man!

It would take an international agreement. (think of everyone who takes these fish)

We (US) can't even get past speaking to one another if we're from different political parties. Imagine trying to craft an international and by-partisan agreement to shut down anything...

What will shut it down is when the stocks completely collapse...and we probably won't have to wait long for that to happen.

Yep, Bay wolf, rather soon, especially in the southern end of the range.

Have a quote shared from US/Canada Treaty meeting in the late 80s/early 90s.

Spoken by a representative from the Lower 48 "Can Alaska and the US agree on this?"

As the year comes to an end I would like to wish all of the best for the holidays. While fish things are important to many of us in the end it is about our families and the future. So let us hope the coming new year is great for all.

Now to business. It has taken a bit to chase down information on just what is going on with the Wynoochee Mitigation. I will post up the documents mentioned after this post to help one attempt to get an understanding but to be honest it is complicated. So what we do know?

• Starting in 2016 Tacoma Power met with WDFW and the Quinault Nation. Tacoma and WDFW have met six times since November 2016. QIN attended the initial meeting, but has not participated in the meetings since. The quarterly committee meetings have been canceled when no progress has been made on the agreement since the last meeting. (letter attached)
• WDFW has prepared three separate proposals in 2018 to discuss with QIN to reach agreement on potential alternatives for the expenditure of the mitigation funds. The initial proposal was summarily rejected by QIN. The second proposal was modified by QIN in August of 2018. In September of 2018 WDFW resubmitted a modified third version of the proposal to QIN to address the revisions received from QIN in August of 2018.
• At this time WDFW has not provided to the public information on what the first two proposals were.
• On September 23, 2019 Tacoma Power notified FERC they had accepted the WDFW proposal. ( letter attached )
• In November 27, 2019 letter to FERC Tacoma Power expressed reservations about some portions of the WDFW proposal. I have since been told that these concerns are about the spending of mitigation funds for the Wynoochee Dam trap not the production of Coho and Steelhead proposed.
• On December 10, 2019 Regional Director responded to our concerns with the following. In early September 2019, WDFW and Quinault Nation staff developed a draft agreement to increase Coho and winter Steelhead hatchery releases in the Chehalis River basin using Wynoochee Mitigation Trust Funds. WDFW also held a public meeting on September 24th to discuss the plan with constituents. We received three letters following the public meeting. Two of these letters (both attached) are in support of the proposal and one, from you, offered several suggested alternatives. We have reviewed the suggested alternatives and, in consultation with the Co-managers, are requesting a review and approval of the plan (as proposed) from Tacoma Power and FERC. In addition, we are proposing to continue working toward a long term plan that would result in increased hatchery production capacity in the Wynoochee River. Our current capacity, as you point out, is limited at Lake Aberdeen. We have support from Representative Blake to work to explore and identify opportunities for capital improvements within the Wynoochee basin that would increase our production capacity. I know Representative Blake is busy but maybe there is an opportunity for a future meeting to discuss options as we move forward.

So where are we with the issue? WDFW appears to be determined to utilize Wynoochee Mitigation funds to subsidize Bingham Hatchery ( on the Satsop River) Coho production. Additionally documents readily available on FERC's website do not entirely support WDFW's staff version of how the proposal was developed. Then this, WDFW in the process previously outlined intentionally did not allow public participation or review of the proposal until it was finalized with Tacoma Power and the Quinault Nation. When the public meeting Larry Philips referenced took place in WDFW's mind it was a done deal. In other words it was simply another Dog & Pony show to allow them political cover claiming public involvement.

So where are we? Still trying to gather information, objecting to FERC about the process and proposal, objecting to Tacoma Power about this attempted end run on the Wynoochee Mitigation. As bad as this all sounds there is good news as FERC's website and staff has guided us to the information to begin us understand just what, when, and how WDFW proceeded to put the proposal together. This thing is not over yet.