Plunk,

I don't have electronic copies of the graphs and numbers on me, but I'll get them and make a new post with those in there as soon as I do, especially since those are the basis for eliminating the exceptions to WSR.

Fish on...

Todd

Plunker, come to the meeting tomorrow night with Dave Montgomery and we will show you the charts and info.

Todd and Jerry,

Thanks! I'll be looking for Todd's post and will consider attending the meeting. No promises, just a firm maybe.

I might need that aluminum reflector hat the grandpa promised.

Todd I do right here in front of me.

Quillayute to the nearest 500 as that is what the graphs are in and actual spawner escapement followed by sport harvest numbers(had actual data point for 01 and 03)
1998 17000 Nearly 0
1999 16500 1500
2000 14500 1500
2001 12500 1790
2002 11500 1800
2003 9000 1930

Hoh little more granular rounded to the nearest 100 (had the acutal data point for last year) for spawner escapement followed by sport harvest number:
1998 3800 nearly 0
1999 3100 500
2000 3200 500+
2001 2800 600+
2002 2900 700
2003 1600 668

These were taken from department numbers and like I said a little rounding of the charts I have if any one would like a copy of them I can send this info there is a demand.

JJ

Thanks JJ,

Might you have recent numbers for the Skagit?

IF......the runs truly need protection, if they are truly depressed and on the decline, if everyone really cares about "the wild steelhead" then.....

SHUT THE RIVERS DOWN TO FISHING AND QUIT HARRASSING A DEPRESSED STOCK OF FISH!!!

Can someone tell me why that is so difficult? Why put in a law that allows harassment of something that "you all" say needs protecting?

If you think your better than the "bonkers" because you CnR, your foolish and in COMPLETE denial. And if the "Bonkers" think they are better than the commercials, they too are in denial. Same goes for the commercials to the natives. All in denial. etc.

We all have one desire and thats to fish.

Lets all get together and save the fish for fishermen. Whether thier bonkers or CnR or Tribal or commercial or whatever. Salmon and Steelhead are EXTREMLY resiliant and given half a chance will be just fine.

Why can't we get together and save this damn fish!!!!!

The energy put into this 18+ page post alone is proof of the energy here.

WSR is a tool not an answer. It is being touted as an answer and that is selfish and dangerous. This is everyones resource and legislation should incorporate everyones needs.

AFTER the damn fish has recovered. If there are harvestable fish. There should be a harvest season.

The answer is simple, if the river doesn't have a sustainable stock, shut it down to everyone.

If it does, put a just limit for all parties involved. 1 fish ,5 fish, 0 fish whatever is necessary.

It's called a managed fishery........

Skagit
escapement followed by sport harvest
1998 7500 0
1999 8000 1000
2000 4000- 200
2001 4500 0
2002 5800 0
2003 6900 0

Again with the typical rounding stuff applies. I think this years prediction is 6300 fish.

JJ

I'll tell you why it's a problem for me.

The fisheries belong to the people of the state. Not the agencies that are mandated to produce a fishery. Yet, @70% of all fish go to @2% of the population. The commercial and special interests have been a lucrative slush fund for the respective reelection campaigns for years. The benefits generated for the state by sportfishers is off the scale compared to the benefits produced by commercials and special interests. Yet sporties have no voice. The current management practices have run a muck for entirely too long. We vote them out, they are reappointed to a position with more authority. That's the problem, not a WSR program. It's how the WSR was implemented. The fox is in charge of the hen house. The sportsfisher has been paying, for what is to me, a sell off of our game fish for long enough. If we stand any chance of creating policies that will save fish it has to be done independent of those benefiting from the resource. So it doesn't matter who is the special interest, it does matter that at every opportunity, the largest group of interest is shut out when it comes to making that policy. I suspect a large percentage of residents in this state would accept WSR if they had input going into making that policy, or if they had ANY confidence in the people that make those decisions. They (I) don't.

If you're not going to have a fishery, don't sell fishing licenses.

Asinine, I don't think you believe that. I know for a fact there is merit here. You may even call it "Timely" merit.

I am going to pull a Todd!

I just got back from attending another Tacoma meeting. Boy! I have never ever seen Todd write so much in defense of his position. That tells me that he and WSC are extremely concerned about what the "little town" of Fork's is up to! I wish that Todd would give me that much attention when we debate issue, but then again, I am not the Mayor!

It will be interesting to see what the outcome will be on this issue.

Todd you told me and others to spend $150-$200 bucks and waste our money to get a legal opinion on this case if we wanted to take on the Commissioner about their decision. Well it looks like Fork's feels that they can justify to do it!

You said
Am I missing something here? Isn't Rod Fleck the "City Attorney/Planner" of Fork's? It sure looks to me that we are now looking at two attorneys who have two different opinions on this issue. I think that Ron Fleck has found the case law that I had posted to be of great legal interest. I guess we will all have to see who does any back peddling!

It would appear to me that you are a lot more worried then what you are saying about this issue being put before the courts. I could be wrong, but time will tell all!

Thanks for giving that huge counter argument! It should be great practice for you if this issue even gets to the court room. My gut feeling; there will be some counter offer to do "damage control!

Cowlitzfisherman

Wild Steelhead Coalition
Wild Steelhead in Washington Fact Sheet
February 2004

By Dick Burge, VP Conservation and Nate Mantua, VP Science/Education

1. In 1996 NOAA fisheries divided the west coast wild steelhead populations in California, Oregon, Washington, and Idaho into 15 Evolutionary Significant Units (ESUs), or discrete areas with similar genetic, life history and evolutionary traits. This was done for the purpose of evaluating the status of separate metapopulation units under the Endangered Species Act (ESA).

2. As of January 2004, eleven ESUs were either listed or a candidate under review for possible listing. Two of the 15 units were listed as Endangered (in danger of extinction), eight of the units were listed as threatened (in danger of becoming endangered) and one coastal Oregon Unit remained under further review.

3. In the mid 1950's, over 125 Washington rivers were producing catches of wild steelhead. Recently there have been only 15 to 18 Washington rivers open to wild fish harvest due to ESA listings and low spawner escapements. In the mid 1950's, about 60,000 to 90,000 wild steelhead were annually harvested by Washington sport fishers (harvest estimates are based on WDFW data and correction recommendations). In 2003, Washington sport fishers harvested 3,554 wild steelhead.

4. Hatchery fish now comprise 97.7 percent of the Washington sport steelhead harvest. In western Washington (Puget Sound and Coastal catch areas), hatchery fish comprise 90.4% of the sport harvest.

5. Washington's wild steelhead populations are either listed under the Federal Endangered Species Act, chronically under-escaped or in periods of recent population declines. Of Washington's 7 steelhead ESUs, 3 are now listed as Threatened, 1 is listed as Endangered, while the other 3 do not currently warrant listing. In spite of the “not warranted” status, wild steelhead have in recent years been chronically under-escaped in the majority of Puget Sound ESU and Southwest Washington ESU streams. In recent years, only the Olympic Peninsula ESU has wild returns that have usually exceeded escapement goals and are open to harvest.

6. Most of the Olympic Peninsula wild runs have been in a downward trend between their individual run-size peaks in the early/mid 1990's and the latest run-size estimates from 2003. As the Columbia River and its tributaries, Puget Sound, Southwest Washington, and Oregon rivers closed to wild steelhead fisheries and/or harvest, many guides and fishers have relocated their fishing activities to the Olympic Peninsula.

7. For the past few years, the Pysht, Quinault, Hoh, Queets, Dickey, Sol Duc, Quillayute, Calawah and Bogachiel River total runs and escapements have all been in a downward trend from their recent peak run-size returns.

8. Last year (2002/03) the Hoh River was under-escaped by 800 fish. The run-size would have easily exceeded the escapement goal of 2400 spawners, but the combined sport and tribal harvest drove the escapements well-below the escapement goal. This situation came about because of an overly optimistic pre-season run-size forecast that was used to establish the harvest fisheries for 2002/03. For 2003/04, the pre-season run-size forecast calls or 4453 fish, and the co-managers agreed to a harvest allocation of 1395 fish for the Hoh tribe and 668 for sport fishers. The co-manager's plan calls for a targeted wild steelhead escapement of 2360 fish, or 40 fish below the escapement goal! We can only hope that this year's preseason forecast underestimates, rather than overestimates, this year's actual returns, and that the harvesters fail to achieve their full allocations.

9. The Queets River has been managed for spawners below its desired WDFW escapement for the last 10 years due to tribal demands.

10. Sport catch data since the 5 fish annual limit was established in 2001 indicates the regulation change has not reduced the total annual sport harvest of wild fish. For example, between 2000/01 and 2001/02, the Quillayute escapement declined 1300 fish while the sport kill increased from 1790 to 1930 fish.

11. Harvest models have failed wild salmonids in the 20th and 21st centuries as they are too simplistic and do not account for environmental variations, the role of life history diversity in population resilience, and other factors that are critical for sustaining healthy wild salmonid populations (freshwater habitat degradation, negative impacts of hatchery programs, etc).

12. Ocean and terrestrial productivity continually changes without notice or prediction, and this has major impacts and changes in salmonid populations. The only way to plan for these changes is to manage wild stocks much more conservatively than they have been with “maximum sustained harvest (MSH)” guidelines.

13. The life history of wild steelhead is far more diverse than most other salmonids. Seasonal runs, multiple year classes within a run, repeat spawners, juveniles that spend 1 to 3 years in the river, a riverine only component (rainbow trout), and river specific genetics, if protected, will provide resiliency and stability to these fish, even during poor environmental cycles.

14. A growing majority of sport fishers clearly prefer a non-harvest plan for wild steelhead. In 1995, 42.3% preferred CnR, 14% preferred harvest, and 43.4% had mixed opinions. In 2001, 49.3% preferred Wild Fish Release, 11.5% preferred releasing all steelhead, 2% preferred to close the fishery, and 33.9% preferred continued harvest (with 3.4% having no opinion). Combined, 65% of those with an opinion in 2001 preferred either CnR or closure for wild fish, even when a river would meet spawning escapement needs.

Data Sources: Washington Department Fish and Wildlife and NOAA Fisheries.

I don't think there is a concern, just like many others, there is a need for more information, not opinions.

THANK YOU!!


TODD

Thios 2 year moritorium is NOT about catch and release. What it is about is that when WDFW determines seasons for fishing that ALL wild steelhead be released. If WDFW determines there won't be a CNR season(the Sky etc this year) the Wild Steelhead Coalition will support that decision. Do you get it yet?

I get it. Always have. Still very simple. If the stock on a particular river is threatened. SHUT IT DOWN TO FISHING WHEN THAT STOCK IS RUNNING/SPAWNING TO EVERYONE, NETS AND ALL. When and if it has recovered, manage it. We may have to give up some in the short run but don't we owe that?

,


Spot on. Plenty of evidence to show that untill they pull the nets, all stocks of fish will continue to suffer. It's proven to be the biggest factor for fish recovery in every state they've banned them in.

I think that this firestorm at Fork's has been brought on by your own actions guys!

In many peoples mind, it's not really about the "fish"; it's about the "process" that many of you are responsible for doing. Like it or not, many of those folks in Fork's are pi$$ed off because you didn't include them in an open public process. You claim that you have, but the facts show different! Instead, you purposely went through the back door process to get this new rule implemented. That may have been the biggest mistake of all that you have done. Even though your motives may have been noble, your approach to achieve it was not!

I understand their concern's, and feelings, and in part, that is why have taken the stance that I have. I care about both people and the fish. You really didn't play by the rules, and allow those people the same opportunity to voice there concerns to the commission as you did. I already know what your response is going to be on that one; they had the same opportunity as you did to come to the meeting and make their concerns known to the commission as you did. Anybody that has read the "other thread" (Wild Steelhead Kill Outlawed in WA for 2 Yrs!) knows that's all a pile of bunk!

In the end, you may get it your way, it all will depend on how the ATG office views this decision. Either way, you have again succeeded in dividing up the sport fishers into 2 separate groups again. That has been, and will remains to be, our fatal misstate to ever be able to come together as a single group and voice.

Instead of going through the back door process, as you've done, you could have included the people of Forks early on, and worked with them and presented them with why you believe that c&r could benefit their communities. You wouldn't change all of there minds, but you would have gotten a hell of a lot more of support from them then your now getting! Even if you do "win" your battle to keep it all WSR, you have turned the majority of the people in Fork's against you. Most likely the people who want to kill and eat a wild steelhead will continue to do so.


You have managed to turn people against your cause, and there are now rumors going around Fork's. The one I am hearing now, is that many of the people in Fork's now believe that this isn't really about protecting wild "fish" as much as it is about destroying the value of their land and property. The rumor I am hearing is that a bunch of rich city slickers are trying to destroy the local economy of Fork's so that they can come in later and get prime property located around these rivers cheaply, so that they will have a place of there own to come to fish and play.

I don't know if its true, but your going to have a had time convining them otherwise.

I could certainly see how this feeling may snowball. You have not been up front with those folks and they have a right to distrust your motives now. Your cause may have been noble when you first started, but now many people in Fork's, may be finding that pill a bit hard to swallow.

I guess it all depends now what the commissions decides to do and what type of damage control will follow. I would bet money that the people of Fork's are viewing this board and are even getting more pi$$ed off when they the way that this whole affair has been pushed down there throats. Time will tell!

I am fully prepared for all the harassment that will come to me on this board if this decision stays unchanged. To me that is not the issue here . . . for I have been there before! The issue here was that this process was NOT done fairly or OPENLY, and I will never change how I feel about that. If this rule stays, we will all have to live with it, but if it is changed or rescinded, that tells me that my efforts were not done in vain.

For years we have all complained about how the commercial boys have gotten away by do things in this order, and by going through the back door process. Maybe its time now that we all take the "straight face" tests in look into our own mirrors!


Cowlitzfisherman

I think your foil hat is too tight.

Both you and Sparky can tell that one to the people in Fork's!

I suggest that leave you tin foil home the next trip there and bring two of these instead to ware

Cow, do you truely believe what you post. Everybody has the same oppertunity to testify and present testimony, just because some people plan out what they are going to say and have a vision and a plan to accomplish that vision doesn't make it a back door thing.