The program started in 1997. 24 years. How many adult returns is that? How many closures have they had? Restrictions on gear?

Their fish must be different or something, more rugged…considering fish that are caught with barbed and sometimes treble hooks are netted, put in a metal box, then in a tank, live spawned, tagged and released above the hatchery…are observed to only have 2% mortality. Just built different I guess.

I still don’t know why you think the program on the Wilson and Trask are only a couple years old. 2023 will be the 25 year of the program. Washington steelhead must be pansies, or the state refuses to except something that works because it’s driven almost entirely by guides and sportsman. It couldn’t be that. They even admitted to not knowing what rivers have summer steelhead in region 6 outside hatchery plants….

I’ve asked around, talked to people that fish the area and when I’m sitting at home with closed rivers, they aren’t seeing any reduction in catch. Fish keep coming back, they keep catching those fish and those fish go to the same ocean. Again…Washington steelhead are just bitches. Must be.

The fact that 10% mortality is used to shut down fisheries…is laughable. “An abundance of caution”…so more than twice the mortality rate than pretty much any study worth its salt is and abundance of caution? Including the most well funded and peer reviewed research. The Idaho study is pretty definitive. 1-3% 5% if the fish is bashed around. More agencies, universities, sportsman and groups involved in that study than anything done in Washington.

Recreational fisherman face all the blame when they’ve done almost none of the damage. The state is lazy and just controls what it can, us.

The fact that they “renegotiated” 50/50 for hatchery fish goes to show you they do not have our best interest in mind…just afraid of offending the minorities (fly fisherman, anti hatchery lawsuit groups, tribes and preservation groups).

If fisheries are public and owned by the public…then we should be fishing these rivers. Period. Maybe privatization is the way to go? Not saying I’m for paying the tribes or whoever to fish the Wynoochee or humptulips…but I can guarantee you this…I’d have fish to catch. I’ve had bad days with my buddy fishing on the Rez, horrible 4/5 days..for both of us. So I guess it’s not always good…

Hey, I've still never found this "Idaho" study yet, only glowing news reports. Any idea which journal it was peer reviewed and published in?

Thanks,

It appears to be from a U of I dissertation.

https://www.lib.uidaho.edu/digital/etd/items/lubenau_idaho_0089n_12278.html

Just reread the IDFG article and looked up the U of I graduate student's name (Will Lubenau). Here is his this thesis on the subject:

https://digital.lib.uidaho.edu/utils/get...5079.1670609292

Interested in looking at it, hope you all are too!

Crossfire!!!

Thanks Darth

Looks like the rivers closed to sportfishing are the ones being fished by the Quinault Tribe. I wasn't there, so don't know who said what to whom. First I heard that WDFW and QIN didn't come to an agreement. However, a member of the QIN fish management committee said WDFW " . . . never got back to them." So who knows why recreational fishing is closed, but it more likely than not isn't due to conservation concerns.

I don't think we can believe anything anyone says in regards to situations like this. A few years back the Skokomish made a statement along the same lines. I was confused as I had been told by the state that an agreement was just about finished. Turns out that there was an agreement to open it up, but the other tribes nixed it, refusing to sign off on the season if the opening went forth. The state kept their mouths shut, while the Skok's stated the issue was never discussed. It was over a year later that the State told me what really happened, long after they were blamed for not even trying.

Good Morning XXXXX.
Thank you for your inquiry as to where things stand with regards to returning a sport fishing season on the Skokomish river. I can relay to you that this is also a priority for our new Director and our Agency. As you know we are getting ready to enter our yearly process to set salmon seasons called North of Falcon (NOF). Our new director, Kelly Susewind, has already had a face to face meeting with the Skokomish tribal leaders and both sides have agreed to meet on this very topic again in January, prior to heading into the NOF negotiations. Please know that the department is exploring all of our options as we move forward in time to not only re-establish a season on the river, but ensure opportunities for years to come.
As to what happened last year, I can tell you very plainly that tribal leadership from all of the Puget Sound Treaty Tribes agreed that the Skokomish boundary dispute would not be discussed during NOF. They indicated that if the State discussed a fishery in the river or made any attempts to put in a season , then the tribes would walk away from negotiations without an agreement on fishing seasons for everyone. Leadership at the Department felt it was better to keep talking and working on a long term solution rather than risking not having salmon seasons for anyone who fishes in and around Puget Sound.
I am more than happy to try and answer any further questions you may have on this manner. Please feel free to contact me directly at the information below.

Mark E Baltzell
Washington Dept of Fish and Wildlife
Puget Sound Fisheries Management
1111 Washington St SE


This is what the Tribe stated at the time....

Skokomish Tribal Chairman Charles "Guy" Miller said Friday there was "brief" discussion of the Skokomish closure during the salmon meetings but the tribes did not offer to reopen recreational fishing on the river. Miller said no further negotiations have been arranged with the state. Skokomish representatives are open to discussing solutions with recreational fishing groups and Fish and Wildlife officials, he added.
"We're certainly willing to meet," Miller said

I’ve never gotten an actual answer without hyperbole…what if the state just says “forget it, we’ll just set our own seasons and you set yours.”

What happens? Sanctions? Does the big bad federal government sue an entire state? It’s not like they can just walk in and absolve a state…the state SHOULD just tell the tribe and feds to kick rocks. These fish are the property of the citizens of Washington state. We won’t be controlled by small interest groups or foreign nations.

They won’t…

I mean…if the “treaty” is broken…who is going to come at the state? What can they really do if a state wants to fish inside their boarders?

Nobody has ever shown what actually happens when a state tells a tribe no, breaks a treaty and tells the fed to stay home.

The closest thing I’ve seen to an answer is the fed shuts down funding for fisheries in Washington, especially hatchery fish. Oh no…what ever will we do without the federal money lol

Uh, the Boldt Decision was the US (that the Feds) v. Washington. The Feds did sue the state. And won.

I know I'm talking about salmon vs steelhead, but this action has been bantered about in the past when it was discovered that WDFW didn't have the proper "permits" from the Feds to actually enact yearly ocean salmon fisheries. WDFW has continued (as far as I know) to piggyback on the required Tribal permits rather than actually apply for the Federal permits to operate WA State salmon seasons in-house.

The current process ensures that the Tribes not only have the "upper hand" in the card game during the NoF process, but THEY control all the rules as well!! Excuses were given by WDFW such as; we may miss a complete salmon season if we seek out our own permit (who cares, the seasons are quite skewed at times), there aren't the resources available to pursue the application process (hogwash), and we have to be good co-managers with the Tribes and work together for the future of the fisheries (I'm sure the Tribes don't mind the way the pendulum is swinging...).

As to dreaming about the day that Susewind would "grow a pair" by telling the Tribes to go "pound sand"...IF that were to happen, that concept would last as long it has taken you to read my post. 'Ol Jaybo would be in Kelly's office (with the Liberal Commission in tow), demanding that he rescind his RACIST order against the good NATIVE people of Washington! There's no way that Insleeze will allow any compromisation to his "political machine", including some key contributors/benefactors (Tribes and politicians alike). Gotta follow the money here, and unfortunately, sportsmen are SO royally [Bleeeeep!]-d in this State it's just laughable!

The thing that bothers me about the process is that Feds can't evaluate the Tribal fishery separately from the NI. If there is no NI fishery (or Tribal) the run sizes are different due to lack of catch so the exploitations rates per day are different.

If they were to evaluate the Tribal fishery separately (as they apparently did a few years ago) it had to be in the absence of any other fishing./ Otherwise, that had to have approved some NI fishing.

I think snit has it rather well parsed out; the tribes are in charge of just about all the fishing in the state (see CT fishing in the Stilly). Pretty sure that oil WDFW opened up an extensive walleye fishery in Lake WA the Tribes would oppose it due to impacts to wild whatever's.