I know that there are many members who are strong "wild fish" advocates on our board. But on the Cowlitz, the original "wild fish" have long since been eliminated through many decades of nothing but hatchery production. So this is strictly a "management" question poll; it's not about wild fish vs hatchery fish; it's a question about "how" the Cowlitz should now be managed. There has been no "new stocks" of "winter run steelhead" introduced or used in the Cowlitz hatchery since 1967 (30 years ago). All Hatchery winter run brood stocks have come from returning Cowlitz adult fish since 1967. All run timings have been intermixed by the hatchery until 1997. So here's the pole for the Cowlitz:

Cowlitzfisherman

Just wondering CFM, it is my understanding that the state defines Wild and native differently. Don't know if this make a difference with you or not but thought I would mention it.

BW

In this case, WDFW are making them both "wild" and "native"! It's all because of ESA listing of wild steelhead in the lower Columbia and their wild salmonid policy.


Cowlitzfisherman

thought i'd explain the way i voted a little.

The cowlitz should be maintained as it is currently. The focus should be on returning steelhead for as long of a season as possible via hatchery production with as wide of range in run timing as possible. Just my opinion but i think the upper river and tribs should be left alone and steelhead kept below Mayfield so that anglers have opportunity to catch and harvest them.
We have been begging WDFW to just leave one stream alone and not plant anything in it but they refuse but they;ll go and spend all the money to fail in fabricating a fake wild run on the Cowlitz?? this is the pinnacle of stupidity.

Ditto Rob's comments.

If this question were asked in the mid to late 70s, my answer might be different. Hugh wild fish were still returning to the Cowlitz.

But in 2003, the Cowlitz is performing a very valuable service as a productive hatchery/harvest oriented river. I fish mostly fly, prefer to fish for wild fish, and am a strong C&R advocate.

BUT . . . I enjoy fishing the Cowlitz. It's been managed for hatchery/harvest very successfully. Why mess with something thats working??? We need rivers managed for hatchery/harvest (think BC's Vedder) just as we need to protect those river systems still supporting native runs of steelhead. One does not exclude the other.

My .02,

Brian

Rob

I don't understand your statement; "Just my opinion but i think the upper river and tribs should be left alone and steelhead kept below Mayfield so that anglers have opportunity to catch and harvest them."

Left alone for what? More development, more tiger musky programs, more plants of smolt eating trout or maybe just a few more dams?

Why not use all that 240 plus miles of river to help increase the hatchery stocks. Can you even image how many more summer and winter steelhead there would be for the sport fishermen to catch if we were allowed to use that 240 miles for natural production of the Cowlitz hatchery fish? Think of it like this; you would have over 240 miles of "prime water" to fish from your drift boats or banks! No sleds, no noise, just you and nature! People from all over the state would want to drift fish these virgin waters. Talk about a win-win for fish and fishermen both! Trips could go for days in some reaches. How stupid can our WDFW get? And people wonder why our state is running huge deficits.

I dare any one to show me just one good valid reason why that would not work. We could have the best of both worlds. But instead, the people who are supposed to be responsible (WDFW) have limited the amount of fish and income that the Cowlitz is so very capable of producing. WDFW should get out of the "fish rearing business" on the Cowlitz and let private enterprise take it over. That way, both the fish, and the fisherman would not be suffering from there stupid political games that they have been playing on the Cowlitz for the past 40 years.

What the heck is wrong with using hatchery fish for enhancing the natural producing of more hatchery fish on the Cowlitz? This is not a "wild" stock river anymore and hasn't been one for decades.

When I think of the meaning of the word "stupidity"; I immediately think of WDFW!

Fishery Management should reflect the needs of both man and fish instead of just the needs of the "managers!"


Cowlitzfisherman

Cowlitz..

My rationale is that there are native species up there that benefit from there being few or no steelhead up there. I am sure there are probably bull trout ( ESA listed) up there that do very well due to the lact of anadramous fish.
Also simply putting fish above the dam (s) doesn't equate to helping natural reproduction. If the science was there to suggest that they could reestablish a self sustaining population of steelhead up there then i'd be all for it. but till then I would rather see the money spent on such a project be placed towards restoring runs that already exsist.

Cowlitz.. how much public (bank) access is there on the upper watershed? Any boat launches?? I only fished the Cispus once about 15 years ago don't remember anything about the area..