Over the last year year or so in our discussion regarding steelhead management and CnR regulations it has often been cited that the majority of us prefer CnR/WSR management over "bonking nates". As I recall the number cited was 61% (a super majority).

However today when looking at the creel census reports from the Quillayute

http://www.wa.gov/wdfw/fish/creel/coastal/steelhead.htm

it struck me as odd that most folks are keeping the wild fish they are catching. The most recent check showed 30 wild fish caught of which 29 were kept. With a 1 fish limit and assuming that the fish released was not caught by someone who kept a fish it appears that only 1 out of 30 are releasing their fish.

For the season so far the checkers report 179 wild fish caught with 157 kept and 22 released. That is only a release rate of 12%. Looks like at least on the Quillayute folks are "voting" for keep seasons.

Are fish being kept because folk's freezer are not full with the normal amount of "brats"?

Are the CnR boys not fishing?

Are the "bonkers" just catching more fish?

An inquiring mind wants to know.

Tight lines
Smalma

Conservation of our resources is a good thing so I never keep more than I need but it's always nice to have some meat in the cooler before I start releasing the excess.

I sure wish the Skagit had some retention opportunity.

I sometimes think that in our discussions on this board, we assume we are the entire fishing population. In fact, we probably only represent a tiny part of that group.

Having said that, the numbers still look odd compared to what I usually see on the rivers.

I can help you with this one Smalma.

It is true that most anglers that fish on the West End both local and visitors want to kill a fish and they dont care if its wild or hatchery. There is a percentage that is strictly CnR that fishes out here but it is very small compared to the percentage that will kill natives.

It is easy to see that people come here to take a fish home. The majority of anglers fish where you can kill natives id say its 20 to 1 people fishing in non-selective areas verses people fishing in CnR areas.

The Creel samples on the WDFW site are not completely accurate, (Fair and Balanced) in my opinion as most of the samples are done in areas where you can kill natives and not in CnR areas. I know some are done time to time in the CnR areas but not often, then agian there are far more anglers in the non-restrictive areas because they can harvest Natives, and lets face it thats the biggest attractant to the Quileute System..

Rich-
If your estimate is correct that only 1 out of 20 is fishing the CnR areas then the checkers should be checking those upper river areas about 1 day a month. Is that a fair estimate of the frequency that they are they? If so what is the bias?

I would think that if the coast is offering some of the best fishing west of the Cascades it would be just as much of a magnet to the CnR fishermen as those interested in harvesting fish. This is especially true given all the water that is set aside with selective gear restrictions and no retention of wild steelhead. I don't know of any other river system with so much water sit aside with selective gear restrictions at this time of year!

Still confused.

Tight lines
Smalma

I don't have the time this eveing to write you a lengthy reply .. but something's obviously not right with the numbers. First off, I can think of 8-10 fish we reported released on a couple of trips, so that accounts for "half" of the released fish. Something smells a little fishy ...

Secondly, the water has been very high for some time now and the plunking bars have been taking the majority of the fish until the past few days. How many fish get released on the plunking bars??

Thirdly, I know of 15 or so fish released by the "Chin" party we fished over the week-end that were never checked.

Fourthly, I haven't been checked once in C&R only water for as long as I can remember.

Fifthly, fish retained for the Snider program are considered harvested fish, so about 40 or so of these fish that would normally have been released go in the harvest column.

Without trying to be too pissy about this, I think this is a case of the real-world vs. the state office world.

Bob -
Thanks for taking time for this discussion. Know you are very busy at this time of the year, especially with the rivers dropping into prime shape.

I'm not sure that I understand your last comment. Which is the real world - the numbers from the on water creel checks or the preference estimates from the angler survey?

If your comment was directed towards me I freely admit to being "office" bound and have very limited knowledge of the Quillayute system. I just commented that this situation looked odd to me. I'm further confused with lack of effort in the CnR water, especially after your report of 7 or 8 fish days. For folks on the east side of the Sound that is very good fishing and I would have thought it have been attractive to the CnR crowd - even more so this year given the poor (horrible) fishing here. Yet Rich reported very low effort in the CnR - maybe only 5% of the effort in the keep sections. Unless the fishing in the CnR is much worst than that downstream it again appears that the anglers are "voting" for a keep fishery. Is the fishing above hwy 101 anything comparable to that downstream?

Your point about the high water is a good one and it may account for some of the difference. Went back to the web site for numbers from last year and it looks like effort this season is about 80% of last years so maybe the high water is small part of the answer.

Your remark regarding the Snider Creek program is helpful. Was not aware of how the brood fish were counted. The checks without the Sol Duc were 116 wild fish caught with 18 released (15.5%), not much different.

Now I'm curious!

Tight lines
Smalma

____________________________________________________________________
Quote from Bob:
"something's obviously not right with the numbers. First off, I can think of 8-10 fish we reported released on a couple of trips, so that accounts for "half" of the released fish. Something smells a little fishy ..."
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
Bob,
- I don't understand your implications.
- Are you implying that the checkers are too incompetent to accurately record what is reported?
- Or even worse, falsifying records?

During the period from Dec 6-8 on the Bogachiel/Quillayute 3 wild steelhead were reported released by 86 anglers.

During the period from Jan 27-30 eight anglers reported 4 wild steelhead kept and 6 wild steelhead released on the Calawah.

Those are the only reports of more than 2 wild steelhead released in any given report period.

«» » »« « «» » »« « «» » »« « «» » »« « «» » »« « «» » »« « «» » »« « «» » »« « «»

I find it interesting that so far this year just over 12% of the wild steelhead have been released compared to nearly 35% at this time last year.

This year anglers have, as of Feb 2nd, released about 8% of the hatchery fish caught compared to about 16% at this time last year.

Only 284 hatchery fish have been retained compared to 886 at this time last year.

I wonder how many anglers have decided to postpone their feel-good release ethics long enough to make up for their lack of hatchery fish in their freezers?

Smalma,

The OP is the only place that wild fish retention is aloud in our state, (I think). So everybody from all over Washington and other places for that matter that want to kill natives come here. They cant do it on the Skagit, Sky, Stilly, Lewis, Kalama, Dungi, Elwa, Stilly nope they come to the OP to do it.

CnR anglers dont have to come to the OP if they dont want to but freezer fillers do.

Since the OP is the only place you can bonk natives there are always gonna be more meat fisherman out here than CnR fisherman.

Perhaps what Bob was saying was that the creel census is only a snap shot and does not represent the larger picture. The census takers do not need to be inaccurate or falsifying data to come up with numbers that do not cover all of what is going on. They mostly get data from where they can contact the most anglers in a short time frame. Thusly, most of the floats and bank sections are not being reported in the census.

Also take into account a lot of guys will not report a release (remember when we were "required" to punch them on the card?) because those numbers are added in to the magical mathmatical formula that determines mortality, and our harvest looks higher.

Sounds like too many natives bitin' the dust to me though!


GS

Rich
A valid point. I realize that OP is the only place that wild fish maybe kept. However that has been the case for a couple years now. Has there been a dramatic increase in the number anglers there due to this change?

As plunker points out way is the release ratio only a 1/3 of what it was last year?

Even with the wild fish harvesters outnumbering the CNR folks I would have expect closer parity between the kept and release numbers. The harvesters are constrained by the 1 fish limit (won't pretend that the 5 fish annual limit constrains the harvest) and the area they can fish (downstream of hwy 101) while the CnR folks are not. I would expect that on the average with equally skilled anglers the CnR boys will average more fish caught than those that keep fish.

In my experience steelhead fishermen today are like ball parks in corn fields - if the fish are there they will come. From reading reports from you, Bob and others where for good anglers catches are typically measured in fish/day rather than days/fish as it is in Puget Sound I would think that OP would be attractive to both the CnRs and harvesters. I could see that they may separate themselves by the type of regulation (CnR verus Keep). However you pointed out that few folks are fishing the CnR water. Bob pointed out there has been lots of high water this year - that likely means that those upper sections should have more than normal numbers of fish this year. If it is the case that upper rivers is where all the early wild fish go as many have postulated then it should doubly so this year.

Are all the fishermen there locals or are the guide's dudes and others from east of Forks?

I had another thought on checking the CnR areas. It may be that the Department is not trying to estimate effort but is more interested sampling the catch (scales). In which case they would likely not spend much time (any?) in the CnR areas.

Again thanks for your thoughts. As I stated before I'm not as familiar with your rivers as I am with those on the "dry" side of the Olympics. As such my questions are based on the creel numbers, and observations of those more familiar with those waters such as yourself, Bob,and others on this site.

Still curious!

Tight lines
Smalma

I think its clear that No. 1, the lack of hatchery fish has prompted more people to kill wild steelhead this season and No. 2, frequent high water over the last few weeks has resulted in prime conditions for plunkers, who tend to keep fish as opposed to releasing them and, finally, despite a vocal minority, most steelhead anglers in Washington want the option of taking home a wild fish now and again in rivers that have healthy populations of wild fish -- and I know the issue of healthy populations is highly debatable. Smalma, you troublemaker, may I call you Salvelinus????

Kind of funny. All the Puget Sound rivers used to have "healthy runs" of natives too. Oops, not anymore.

from what it sounds like, with all the killing of native fish (which really sucks) there wont be any "voting" of catch and kill, cuz there will not be any wild steelies to harvest in the future, and they will turn it into another nisqually, i wonder why washington allows wild steelhead harvest and idaho dont, cuz maybe hey see the importance of wild run fish..

Interesting discussion, it does make me wonder just what proportion of steelheaders are truly C&R. I think Plunker and salmonbelly hit on the head; the lack of winter brats has to have an effect on the number of natives being whacked. I think it also brings to light the notion that in order to have a truly successful C&R fishery, you have to have hatchery fish. Without them, folks will either pressure for more and longer native keep seasons, or will quit fishing. The Canadians found this to be the case in the first few years of native release in BC.

Other thoughts: In most Puget Sound and western WA streams (all but the Oly P.) folks are geared toward early brat seasons and late native seasons. During the brat show you have lots of folks fishing, catching, and bonking hatchery fish. Come March, the show thins out considerably, and I find myself fishing with an entirely different set of people. Maybe I'm just used to it, but it seems conducive to switching mentalities.

On the Peninsula, however, you have native runs that begin much earlier, and its my impression that there is not near as much temporal separation between runs so you get bonkers and releasers out at the same time. I also get the impression though, that like in Puget Sound basins, the number of C&R anglers increases dramatically as you get past mid-February (is this true?)

It would be nice to get creel data by month to compare keep/release trends over the course of a season and over a number of years to compare years where hatchery runs are large vs. lean. I hope the department doesn't use the data that Smalma cited to determine the will of the people. Can't help but think that the thin brat year has something to do with native harvest.

Personally, I am less confused, or surprised, by these statistics than I am by the complete LACK of statistics on rivers that have had their fisheries closed for the protection of the resource. And why is it, that we rely so heavily on such unreliable and incomplete information as creel reports to understand and manage our wild steelhead fish populations anyway?

Sadly, it seems that once fishing (selective or otherwise) is no longer allowed on wild fish we consequently have no idea as to the relative health or viability of these runs. Or so it would seem. Perhaps WDFW knows more than they are saying but I'm not convinced of that either.

Stilly says "not anymore". I have to wonder, especially on a few of these PS rivers, where strong runs had more to do with quality than it did quantity. On some of these rivers their habitat may be as good or better than before they were closed. You'd think without pressure that these runs would be on the rebound. Rivers like the Cedar and the Nisqually to cite a couple. But does anybody truly know the current status of these runs?

My point is simply that if protection of wild fish is that critical to the state then why don't we hear more about the condition of these runs, particularly where they were so "depressed" that it required a complete ban on fishing. It appears however that once fishing is discontinued on a fishery all interest in the resource is lost never to be heard from again. Maybe never to be fished again. Am I missing something here? Or are there other mitigating factors that are not being discussed openly as part of the "wild steelhead" issue?

No wonder I am confused.

As to the creel reports for that day, we all know that the numbers are open for interpretation and although interesting, they do not present a complete picture. It would be unfair to assume that they are dishonest. But while I would expect someone who has legally harvested a native to be "proud" enough to honestly report it, I find it incredible that anyone who has C&R'd a fish would be disingenuous enough to not report it, thinking that this would in some way help to keep a viable fishery, selective or otherwise, open. That is lunacy; because if you don't speak up then you might not have the opportunity to "report" in the future. Plus how would C&R ever be seriously considered as a monitoring method on rivers that might be potentially reopened if the success of capture and release is not reported.

By the way that "Catch & No Release" moniker, is intended for my wife and brats only. No similarity intended, of course.

Glad I'm not the only one who's confused...

By Mooch:
[QUOTE] [ But while I would expect someone who has legally harvested a native to be "proud" enough to honestly report it, I find it incredible that anyone who has C&R'd a fish would be disingenuous enough to not report it, thinking that this would in some way help to keep a viable fishery, selective or otherwise, open. That is lunacy; because if you don't speak up then you might not have the opportunity to "report" in the future. Plus how would C&R ever be seriously considered as a monitoring method on rivers that might be potentially reopened if the success of capture and release is not reported. QUOTE]

Exactly where the WDFW gets all of their numbers (creel census is one way), and what exactly they do with them, are on-going mysteries to many, myself included. There is a lot of distrust. But then maybe I'm just overly jaded and have a bad attitude after witnessing decades of horrible and on-going mismanagement.

Maybe they are using C&R data in some way that is positive to the fish and/or anglers, but I have yet to see evidence of this.

I think its a pretty big stretch to say that they're shutting down entire fisheries because of unreported C&R. From experience, observation and association I KNOW it not a stretch to say that many anglers may not be honest all of the time with WDFW fish checkers.

Possible motives?
Takes us back to that "lack of trust thing". What are they going to do with those numbers?...escalate tribal harvest...shut down early because of C&R mortality...Who knows? Certainly not I; and I'd like to hear the story from someone who does. I know that when they ask you how many "shakers" you catch in the salt a huge % are written off as mortality! If nothing else, full reporting to the checker (who talks to LOTS of fishermen, and is probably one him/herself) is a great way to have your hotspot pinpointed by a horde of other anglers the next day.

Last time I checked, disingenuouness and lunacy were not crimes. Nor is it a crime to not report to a "checker". Right or wrong it happens all the time. I would probably frown on it more if I was not so CONFUSED!

GS

GS,
It would have been a stretch indeed. I apologise if I lead you or anyone to believe such a thing. Far from it, but I think that C&R may have the potential to be used as means of monitoring certain rehabilitating runs of steelhead that are currently closed to fishing, maybe indefinately. But this could only be seriously considered if the practice continues to be legitimized by those who practice it. And this will only happen if there is a trust and understanding that comes from honest reporting and a repoire that is cultivated with the proper authorities, in this case the WDFW. Although the practice of C&R is not new to fishermen by any means, it is only fairly recently that authorities like the WDFW have begun to look favorably on the practice as part of their overall management schemes. And frankly as a group, "steelheaders" have not done nearly as much as others, like our flyflicking lake and stream fishermen, to legitimize the practice of C&R. While "native" steelhead fisheries become more prevalent with the demise of hatcheries, which is inevitable (like it or not folks), it behooves us as fisherman to be honest and work together with these folks to maximize our fishing opportunities.

I don't know whether I am confused because I do not trust or if I distrust because I am confused. But I don't think that being "disingenuous" will make matters any better. Not telling the truth may not be against the law, but it certainly doesn't make it right. The fact that there it is not "crime" is all the less excuse to have to lie. If someone has a problem with giving information then have the huevos to say "I refuse to report". Let's stop pi**ing in our own water. There is absolutely no good reason why C&R fisherman should not have as much or more integrity as "bonkers". But lying and deceiving won't make it so.

Salmonbelly-
I'd be honored to be called Salvelinus - an honorable fish - I have been called much worse.

Obsessed -
It may well be that you are on the right track. Last year the creel checks showed that the release rate was 33% in Janaury, 41% in February, and 55% in March; increasing just as you suggested. It well may be that many of us need to keep several fish before becoming comfortable with practicing CnR.

Mooch -
Regarding your concern that once waters are closed to fishing that they are never opened again. Most of our Western Washington steelhead populations are monitored measuring the numbers of wild steelhead spawning through spawning surveys. If populations rebound we have see fishing opportunities restored. In the early and mid 1980s many of the steelhead populations were managed with wild steelhead release (WSR) regulations all season. As the populations rebounded to levels above escapement goals WSR was relaxed; to the chagrin of many on this board.

You asked about the Cedar (sorry don't have Nisqually info handy). During the sea-lion predation activity at the locks the number of wild spawners fell sharply. After the problem animals were taken carry of the population numbers rebounded some but have once again fallen (like most of the Puget Sound populations). The escapements the last 3 have all been less than 50 fish (less than 40 in 2002). These are shocking low numbers. It is unlikely we'll see steelhead seasons on the Cedar until the population rebuilds to at least 10 times (likely even more are needed) the current levels.

In your last post you mentioned that "it is only fairly recently that authorities like the WDFW have begun to look favorably on the practice as part of their overall management schemes". I Don't know how long you have been practicing CnR of wild steelhead but there have been CnR steelhead seasons in the North Puget area for 25 years (going back to 1977). I doubt that there are very many readers that have practiced total wild steelhead release for that length of a time.

Gsiegel-
I found your post(s) to be most troubling. How in the heck can we expect our managers to do a good job when anglers are actively sabotaging the system by giving false information. If they are supplied "crappy" information we are apted to get "crappy" management. As far as I'm concern if someone is giving mis-leading information (PC for lying) they have forfeited their right to complain about management actions or the results of those actions.

If you have trust issues with WDFW I suggest that you call your local region office and talk with one of the biologist. Who knows you might be surprised - one may actually engage in a conversation with you. Honest conversations and exchange of ideas often result in both parties learning something.

Tight lines
Smalma

A quick note on Obsessed's post and then I'll save the rest for when I get my hands on all the creel data from the fish checkers out there:

Most early season traffic is local or PA ... the vast majority of which still regularly harvest wild fish. In fact, I'm pretty sure one of the PA clubs still holds their season-long derby ...

As we get into the later months, and other rivers close across the state, we do see more out-of-town boats and that may very well account for much of the increase you see there.

As I mentioned, I'll be talking with the local counters and I'll see if I can get exact locations (plunking bars vs. open kill vs. C&R water) of sampling ...