Thought this might produce an interesting discussion for the New Year.

There is growing support for state-wide wild steelhead release (WSR), even at run sizes that traditionally supported harvest of wild steelhead. In the past WSR was a management tool that was used to provide access to hatchery fish when wild runs were below escapement goals. The current push for state-wide WSR seems to be advocating mandatory CnR of wild steelhead regardless of the run size. While this is a fair enough idea there remains some questions under which conditions such management should applied.

The first is should the use of mandatory wild steelhead CnR be limited by the wild fish run size? Which of the following best fits your ideas of when we should be allowed to target wild steelhead?

1) fishing at any run size
2) fishing only on runs at least 80% of MSY.
3) fishing only on runs at MSY.
4) fishing only on runs at least 80% of carrying capacity.
5) fishing only on runs at carrying capacity.

(I used the MSY escapement choice as that is what is used by the State and Federal Courts and carry capacity as a commonly proposed alternative to MSY as an escapement objective. Currently WDFW allows wild fish CnR fish at runs at 80% of the escapement goal).

How long into the spring (spawning season) should the wild steelhead CnR fishing be allowed?

1) Fishing only until the end of the hatchery run.
2) Fishing should end prior to the peak of the wild fish spawning.
3) Fishing all spring.

I would also be interested in how you support your choices.

May the New Year bring you willing fish and good times!

Tight lines
Smalma

WSR should be first implemented on rivers with 100% marking of hatchery fish. Secondly, rivers with no gillnetting. Otherwise it is somewhat of a joke. Before the bashers begin I might add that I have never kept a wild steelhead from any river.

I support C&R of wild steelhead on all runs all the time. I place a lot more value on the experience of catching a wild steelhead than on eating one.

C&R should cease prior to the prime spawing. I want to C&R in the future.

I have to second what granpa2 says here...until something is done about the gill netting, what's the point? Especially when "foregone opportunity" comes into play? I can release wild fish until I'm blue in the face and a gill net comes along and undoes it all in a heartbeat. There must be a way to harvest hatchery fish without dramatically endangering the wild runs...fish traps possibly. Something where the un-targeted fish can be released reasonably unharmed.

edit: OK, I never answered the question....
C&R until 100% escapement....Think about it....it we did this, there would be no need for a season length limitation at all.....but the trick would be to monitor that escapement remains at 100% or better. (Boy, am I dreamin'!)

Grandpa - Fun5Acres

I can’t buy your logic. I too abhor gillnets. I would ban them tomorrow IF I could. But they are there, so now let's work with what we have.

To my knowledge most gillnets are in the lower river. Most steelhead are hooked by sportsman above the gill nets. Which to me means that the fish has successfully made it past the gill nets. Why would you want to kill one of the survivors, just because his journey was mighty dangerous? Would you advocate shooting a rhino just because there are a lot of poachers doing so? If your friend jumped off a cliff . . . (Sorry about that cliff thing – just thought a bit of humor might help here.)

As far as allowing catch and kill on runs our game department declares healthy, I'm mighty skeptical. Aren’t these the same folks who "managed" more than half our runs into extinction of endangered status? I do not trust them to make the call. I do know that a healthy wild steelhead that has made it past the damn gillnets is a real treasure.

I also agree whit whomever it was who pointed out that C&R should be restricted near spawning time/ areas. I think the Thompson is a good example. Those few fish that get past the gill-netters in the Fraser. Sit in about a five-mile stretch of the Thompson for five months. They get bombarded every day. I have seen some whose mouth looks like a pincushion. They need protection.

I think people need to show some restraint before looking to the Goverment to legislate. How anyone can fish a depressed resource even C&R is beyond me. I walked away from our rivers 20 years ago until this past year. My 4 year old son loves to fish and has me back on the rivers teaching him how they work. I have questioned my judgement in fishing these rivers based on what I have seen since Aug.

AS for C&R being the answer look at the hit and miss success of artificals and C&R on trout streams in this state the last 25 years. A big Flopola IMHO. Nothing short of shutting things down for 6 years and then a limited entry draw system will help some of these now urban streams.

First, I would agree with Mr. Vedder relative to our management of these "finite" resources. IMO we have done a mediocre job protecting the wild Steelhead!
All you need to realize this is look back the last 30+ years...you know, the old hind sight thing.

I am all for Statewide MANDATORY CnR of all wild Steelhead stocks. However, in doing so are we subject to forgone Opp. and therefore the effect becomes moot???


Everyone would need to play by the same rules for there to be truely positive impact, otherwise it's the monkey and the football all over again.

Smalma,

Good topic to start conversation especially for those us at work counting empty offices.

I am going to limit myself to MSY talk as I just dont' see the Department using CC as a viable number plus I have never seen any numbers on what these numbers actually are.

I personally would support WSR on all Rivers Year round no exception. Of your choices and limiting only to your choices I think the first two are good options. I am not sure if allowing fishing at any run size is right but if you say 80% almost all rivers would be closed now starting first of December or so because if you say start at 80% the Sky and stilly don't meet that so they should be closed all together. There may be a different percentage to use. Especially with the fact the mortality rates at winter water temp with artificials is from everything I have read below 5%.

As for how late to fish in the season. Peak spawning timing seems to be a good start. But the departement is making a push for consistency so say maybe April 15th.

Now of course this is only for the wild winter fish. Those wild summer fish probably need protection starting Jan 1 and give them time to spawn unmolested. Dave brought up the thompson. It closes Dec 31st to allow those summer fish to have a chance to spawn unmolested. So not sure how many rivers in the state are managed for wild summer and winter runs.

Dave thank you for bring up the points about the nets. And I did get a chuckle out of the cliff comment as if you think aobut it it is ver true to this situation. We as sport fisherman need to have our house in order before we start pointing fingers at others.

Other things that I personally think would help our steelhead stocks
1) Keep rivers with the wild winter runs closed unitl June 15th to give the Kelts an extra two weeks to get out of the system and back to salt without being caught.
2) Ban bait in June-Sept 15 to limit impact on the wild parr. Mortality rates on parr are very high with bait. Still allowing others to use bait for fall salmon though so it might have to end August 31st.

You know in an ideal world we should be able to have year round fishery on all runs as people would self regulate themselves and we would have to worry about people abusing the resource but I don't see that in the world we live in.

JJ

Theking brought up an interesting subject that i have thought about for quite some time. That is; a limited entry drawing system to not only protect endangered runs but to create quality fisheries on rivers with healthy runs. There is a strong precidence for this from hunting seasons managed for quality hunts. This could be done with portions or the whole length of selected streams and rivers. So, any thoughts or should this be a thread of its own?

With that being said I would pay 10x for a permit /license to be assured it was being policed. Heck you pay more than that to go to waters in Alsaka and BC for the quality. You get what you pay for and we are getting a $30 opportunity.

Then comes the argument that it becomes a rich mans sport. IMHO steak cost more than burger and that is the duality of the free market we live in.

Smalma,

before putting up my opinions on this, I'll add a few more things (beyond the good stuff that's already posted) that I believe should be considered in this discussion.

1. history tells us that preseason run-size forecasts for wild steelhead are usually wrong; this situation isn't likely to change anytime soon

2. even the complete elimination of fishing can't guarantee that we'll bring depleted steelhead populations back from very low numbers, or keep our "healthy" stocks from dropping like most of the others. In the long run, eliminating fishing might even be the last straw for declining stocks because steelheaders are among the few special interest groups that (sometimes?) demand political protection for healthy rivers and ecosystems. And political protection is critical.

What we also know is that there is no doubt that fish that aren't harvested will very likely increase the number of spawners.

So, how to fit these and other considerations into a WSR management plan ... my feeling is that an improved management plan would allow for a lot of "slop" (prediction errors) in the system, and would focus on keeping harvest rates (either direct or indirect from CnR mortality) to no more than ~10% for each component of the run size. There's nothing magic about 10% other than it's a lot smaller number than the typical ~40% target for MSY management, and ~10% should be adequate to account for "indirect CnR harvest" while allowing ample fishing opportunities.

As for season timing for wild winter runs, spreading the impacts favors the highest "CnR harvest" during the times of the highest returns (March-April), rather than limiting the fishing and impacts to Nov-Feb to coincide with most hatchery returns. One consequence of past fishing practices has been very high harvest rates on the early returning wild fish, but much lower harvest rates on the March-April returns. This kind of fishing has surely reshaped the populations by squashing the relatively small-numbered early returners, and those early fish may be very important to the long-term health of the population.

I am also a firm believer that status quo approaches are not in the best interests of fishers or the fish. If regional trends in wild steelhead abundance (over the past 50 years) continue, it's seems like a safe bet that we're looking at statewide emergency closures due to low escapements in the very near future. We're only a few river systems away from that situation today, and so far we have a pretty poor track record for reversing steep declines in wild steelhead numbers. There are exceptions (Deer Creek comes to mind...), but not many, not yet at least.

The long term solution to turning the long-term downtrends around has to include agressive actions to restore and protect habitat in streams and estuaries, as well to change the hatchery and harvest practices that are shrinking the abundance and diversity of our wild fish populations. Reducing harvests is a quick but clearly limited start on what needs to be a much bigger effort.

I like the idea of alowing CnR on waters that are at or above 80% of carrying capacity (Native fish). 80% of carrying capacity would also be the number alowing tribal harvest. If the system isnt at 80% (Native fish) or above no fishing of any kind. If the system cant produce atleast 80% carrying capactiy on its own, (Native fish) due to whatever problems, hatchery supplimentation could be used to help it but no fishing untill it reaches 80% native capacity.

Also no comercial By-Catch aloud on un-healthy stocks to harvest healthy or hatchery stocks atleast no the reckless ways we alow it now.

Anything above the 80% can be split between the tribes and non tribal fishers the same as it is now. Non Tribal in Terminal areas would use their half for CnR oportunities.

As far as seasons go I like the idea of cutting it short to protect fish during peak spawning. This should be done on a system system basis. Like on the Quileute system I like the April 15th thing down below, but in the middle It should be March 31 and at the top March 15th.

I think 80% or above is much safer than MSY. If mistakes are made and a few to many fish are taken by the tribes or killed in CnR fisheries we would still have the safety nett of extra fish and diversity to rebuild without the danger of colapse.

The following is a quote:

"Dave thank you for bring up the points about the nets. And I did get a chuckle out of the cliff comment as if you think aobut it it is ver true to this situation. We as sport fisherman need to have our house in order before we start pointing fingers at others............."


Dave...Remember that I am for WSR. My house is in order. Pointing out some loopholes is not pointing fingers or killing Rhinos because poachers do....Far from it...I never said that BECAUSE gill netters harvest wild steelhead we should catch and kill wild steelhead to make things fair and square...What I am saying is that we should catch and release all wild fish but not sit on our laurels for doing the right thing but we need to push hard for a comprehensive policy that shuts down harvest of wild fish by EVERYONE...Sports people are the ones making constant sacrifices while the tribes and commercials have to be forced to. So force the *******s! Mark all hatchery fish...no exceptions. Get rid of this "forgone opportunity" crap if conservation is the reason to stop killing wild fish.

If I don't drive in the carpool lane by myself and watch many single drivers in the carpool lane doesn't mean I am going to jumpp in that lane until all the lawbreakers quit. What it does mean though is that I can be pi$$ed and turn them in. May not do a whole lot of good but I can still try to make it fair for all.

Grandpa,

Since it was my quote that you pulled. I will applogize for it. The way I read it was that you didn't support this until the nets were gone. I agree with you that we need to stop harvest of wild steelhead in all forms. We can't sit around and not push on others to do the same but what I was saying was that we as sports anglers have to push the state to make the change before we can ask the nets to make the change. I agree with your last posts. Sorry if I misunderstood your first post.

JJ

Grandpa: What Jeff said. I too thought you were advocating killing wild fish. Now that I understand your position I agree 100%. I was WRONG!

Bump

My biggest problem with mandatory WSR in the state is knowing how the WDFW works. Let's face it, rarely do sportsmen ever get something back. If anything, we conceed more. Once mandatory WSR goes into effect, I'll be large sums of money that in a few years, it'll be closed completely. After all, I think just about everyone would agree that sportsmen are not the problem. Does anyone seriously think run size will dramatically increase with mandatory C&R? Of course not. I have no doubt, that eventually, mandatory WSR will go into effect. However, that will not solve the problem. So what will the state do next? Eliminate commerical fisheries? Of course not! Cut back on tribal harvest? Heavens no! They'll just completely shut down C&R fishing. By restricting sports fishing, the state can claim they are making moves to improve the fish situation but it's just lip service because it will not do any good.

A few years ago, Puget Sound Rivers were open to C&R through the end of March. Then, they closed the Snohomish system at the end of February and the Green closed March 15. Now, last year, the Green closed the end of February as well. Pretty soon, they'll be closing mid Feb. The more sportsmen give up, the more the department will take.

I do not advocate the killing of wild steelhead either. I have never killed one, nor do I plan on it. I'm perfectly happy releasing native fish, however, I don't want to lose opportunity to fish and I have no faith at all in the department.

Jacob, I would not be so quick to say that the sportsfishermen have nothing to do with the decline in wild steelhead. I'm not saying that we are the primary reason, but without question we have an impact. I would recommend that you look at what happened to the great late winter run on the Nisqually. In that case, I don't think that there is much doubt that the sports pressure was the main impact on the decline of wild steelhead.

The other issue that has been brought up here is one of credibility. If we, as a sportsfishing community, say that we have no responsibility for the recovery, how can we expect the other user groups to make effort for recovery?

Thought this would have generated more discussion!.

Why do you think the management of the steelhed resource should be any different that salmon or other trout management?

NM raises an interesting point. The pre-season forecast are often wrong because survivals vary so much. How do you think that variability should be incorporated into the management (see comments on the Escapement goals and WSR discussion post by FishnPhysician)?

Jacob - regarding your concern about shorter seasons. One of the early hatchry/wild issues recognized was the spawning of hatchery fish with wild fish. To reduce the likely hood of that occurring WDFW over that last 20 years or so has reduced the latest portion of the hatchery spawning until today the early-timed hatchery females have completed spawning by the end of the February - 20 years ago they spawned through most of March. This change has greatly reduced the spawning between the early-timed hatchery and wild steelhead. Most would view this a postive step.

A result is that the hatchery run is done by the end of February. Thus in rivers where the fishery is targeting hatchery fish only there is no need to have a longer season to access the hatchery fish. If the wild fish are going to be underescapement and there are no hatchery fish would you adovate continuing to fish on and impacting the wild fish?

Tight lines
Smalma