Fished one of my Puget Sound haunts this weekend and was just disgusted!!! 13 fin clipped mature hatchery kings released at the boat which real I still cant understand when every other area in the state gets a season on these fish at some point,what can we do to unite to get this changed for next summer any ideas guys (area 10) I know it is getting old!!!PEACE!!!

I think they are trying to protect blackmouth or ESA chinook.

If they are mature Chinooks, and fin-clipped, there is absolutely no logical reason we can not keep these fish. Good grief, WE PAY FOR THEM.

Being hatchery fish, what the heck else are they for if not to be kept by the taxpaying fishermen that support the %$#**&^ hatchery???????????

Yeah, I am 100% in agreement with Fastwater on this issue.

SAME problem exists here in the Skagit. There are probably thousands of these Kings returning each year, hatchery fish, and yet we can't catch or keep them. What the heck else are they for if they are hatchery bred??????

Anyone who doesn't think they are thicker than he11 in the river here should spend an hour sitting one evening on my back deck, and listen to them jumping, rolling and rolicking all over the place just yards away.

Mike B

Easy Mike
We don't want you to blow a gasket!
Come to the meeting September 8 in MV
I know there are a lot of Kings in the Skagit I've watched them just like you have. Take two of these and call me in the morning.

The reason we cannot target MA10 Chinook is primarily due to the Lake Washington watershed stocks. Even if a selective chinook fishery was opened in MA 9 or 10, the potential mortality rate on wild fish could amount to a great impact on these runs. Shilshole Bay is closed to fishing Coho through August for this very reason.

Homer:

I'll be there unless some biz emergency cuts into my time that week. It's on the calender.

BTW: Sitting here, late, with a second Yukon Jack (with a little water to soften the bite).

Sky Guy: Closing Shilshole Bay probably isn't putting much of a dent in the catch/release of the Kings. We CnR'd one (hatchery fish) last Friday, and heard of a dozen others (unknown origins) being released, as well. Folks are CnR'ing them (Chinook) before they enter the actual Shilshole Bay.

I do see your point though.

Sorry guys, it's been a hellofa day. My business is down, bills are up, in-laws coming to visit soon (and stay for 5 days), wife just bought new furniture, and the "recently taken custody of" 13 y.o. daughter wants to be 21. (Thank God she starts school on Wed., as I work at home most of the time).

Sept. 16th can't come soon enough for me. I need to kill some fish....bad.

Mike

Mike -
great to hear that there are good numbers of kings in the Skagit. However before you get too excited about lost opportunities you may wish to check some facts.

While there are decent numbers of hatchery spring chinook in the Skagit (2004 forecast was 2,116 hatchery and 1,168 spring chinook) there are relatively very few hatchery summer/fall chinook in the Skagit (the fish you are seeing rolling now in the middle river- the springs are all up river spawning right now. The 2004 forecast for summer/fall fish was 461 hatchery and 20,354 wild - would not say that the river is exactly full of hatchery fish (97% wild). While the above figures are just forecasts and the actual run will likely be different the relative % between hatchery/wild should be about the same.

Regarding the coho fishing starting on the 16th - unless are ok with keeping wild fish you will likely have to sort through a fair number of wild fish for each hatchery one - forecast 22,788 hatchery and 155,814 wild. Or nealry 7 wild coho for each hatchery and that is before any of the selective fisheries in the salt.

Tight lines
S malma

Fastwater, this kinda sounds like a "North of Falcon" issue to me. Like all the allowable impacts on Puget Sound fall chinook have been taken off the coast and in the Straits in June and July before they get to mid Sound in late August. Maybe some more lobbying for some mid-Sound selective fall chinook fisheries next spring at NOF is in order.

Mike, easy on the Yukon when your all worked up You might fall down and hurt yourself. Take it from one who knows, I'd hate to come up to MTV on 9/8 and see you with a broken hand or something

Beezer

Smalma:

I figured you are Salmo would step in and shed some significant light on the issue. Thanks for your input. I knew that not all these fish were hatchery, but didn't realize the percentages were so high on the wild side.

I do wonder why so few hatchery fish. Don't they release enough to get a bigger return? Seems to me if your going to release hatchery stock, it would be in sufficient numbers to support a fishery on the returning fish...what else are they bred in the hatchery for?

Beez: Good to hear from ya! Broken hand? Fall down? Not me! (you?). You know I'm a lightweight...and I got just a few sips of that second drink and it was off to the land of nod. Hope to see you on the 8th!

Mike

Fastwater, a selective King fishery for areas 9 & 10 is on the agenda for next year as well as a year round blackmouth fishery. If enough people keep the pressure on the WDFW for these to happen maybe our "co-managers" will let us keep some hatchery Kings soon. It's a North of Falcon deal.

Maybe they can consider a late season hatchery king fishery in MA 9&10 that begins maybe the middle of Aug. Seems like that's when people are out there targing silvers anyway so the mortality from C&R shouldn't be impacted that much. Maybe, maybe not.

Anyone rememer the 60's when you could almost walk across the Kings on the Skagit in the fall. There was a boat house on the river that rented wooden row boats with 5 or 10 horse motors. You would go out and anchor and plunk spinners or spin and glows if I remeber right. The wall of the boat/bait shop was covered with pics of huge fish. I bugged a neighbor renlentlessly to take me and he finally did. I dreamed about big kings from that day on. Now we talk about the memories of the biggest fish from that river and fight over the scraps that are left. I quit fishing the rivers of Wa. for 20 years and would do it again if my son was not dreaming much the same as I did at that age.

There are lots of kings being CnRd right now. I fished in front of Edmonds last weekend and had to let 2 of them go. I talked to other guys who had release as many as 6 - some in the 20 lb class.

Smalma:

Got to thinking about the numbers you posted for the fall King runs, and was wondering how many fish are needed to make the "escapement" goals. IE: At what level (numbers) do we need the wild fish to be before we can harvest a % without harming the growth rate of the fishery? (I know the calculations may take some of that "black magic", but I'm hoping there are stats somewhere?


I don't have any issue with keeping a wild Coho (or King), providing that the retention of a % of these wild fish will not harm the continued growth; ie: plenty left-over to not only re-populate the run, but continue to increase it.

I believe the hatcheries are providing a renewable source for the fish, to suppliment the wilds, BUT, if we can get the wilds back to some large, historically high numbers, then maybe the hatcheries can apply their efforts elsewhere. Maybe, instead of making Coho, then can create a healthy hatchery SUMMER run of steelhead on the Skagit??? (t'wood be nice!)

Just some thoughts...

Mike B

We used to go fish the lower Skagit for those big springers. We used a piece of cable and a spinning blade on anchor in the slot. The big pigs would cream it. In the 1950's, and probably before that, the movie stars would come up from hollywood to fish it.

The 60’s were fun for kings and Steelhead on the Skagit!
Going down to the Carnation Plant in MV and fishing when my Dad was at work.
These brings back great memories.

Mike -
The escapement goal for the Skagit summer/fall chinook is 14,900. It is important to remember that these are ESA listed fish it is likely than what is needed prior to any target fisheries is a history of producing consistent returns well above escapement needs prior to target fisheries on those stocks. Over the last 10 years the escapement goal has been met once twice and 4 times out of the last 20 years.

While the run is certainly expected to larger than the escapement goal it is key to remember that a variety of fisheries intercept these fish prior to them reaching the river. For example it is exepted that only 65% of the forecasted run will actually escapement the fisheries to spawn - once again the escapement will likely be below the goal. This year 3.5 to 4% of the run will likely be caught in Alaska fisheries, 24 to 25% in Canadian fisheries, 3.1% in various Washington sport fisheries (most in hooking mortalities and blackmouth fisheries) and 4% in various Washington commerical fisheries (more or less evenly divided between treaty and non-treaty).

As you can see it is likely to be an uphill battle for any in-river chinook fisheries targeting these wild fish. It will taken improved survival conditions (better marine survival and improved habitat) and in the future river anglers taking part in the North of Falcon process so that some of the harvestable fish are allocated to a river fishery rather than increase marine opportunites.

No offense but I find it laughable that folks are comfortable harvesting wild salmon when the "science" says there is harvestable salmon yet find the same science lacking when it comes to steelhead.

tight lines
S malma

Smalma:

Many thanks for the education, Smalma. I know there is a ton more than that in all the science that goes into figuring what those ultimate numbers are. I appreciate your taking your time to share it in a language most of us can understand.

No offense taken. My opinion of the issue is that, while us "laymen" can understand the basics or even some of the more technical issues, those of you who do this for a living (and have the education to go with it) know a heck of a lot more about the "Big Picture", hence, I have no problem following the regs., but have a need to ask "why" things are what they are.

I hear (and read) stories on the board about "the way things were"...well, I would love to see them back that way again...no reason it can't happen, it just means some sacrifice and effort on ALL fronts...and that is the problem...fish are $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$, and so long as people keep buying them whole in the stores there will be folks fighting over the rights to net them in huge numbers.

As to steelhead in particular, I love catching 'em, but have no issue with returning wilds to the rivers to go and make lots of babies. If I get a few nice hatchery fish for the BBQ, that's cool, but there are plenty of good eating Coho to be had this year (and most) and they fill-the-bill just fine.

Mike

I hate to rub salt in a wound, but there are two main reasons the recreational fishing for Skagit kings was so good in the 1950s and 1960s was because there was more high quality freshwater habitat and the state severely prosecuted Indians who tried to exercise their treaty fishing right. The treaty catch of salmon in those days was about 2 to 3% of the total salmon harvest, so of course, there were a lot more fish available to the sport fishery. Some of you may want it like it was, but the courts have decided that the tribes are entitle to their treaty share, and society in general gives far more lip service than functional action to habitat protection and restoration.

Sometimes when something seems real good, it's because it's coming at someone else's expense.

BTW, most of the hatchery kings in the Skagit are produced as part of research and salmon recovery experiments, excepting the Clark Creek springs.

Sincerely,

Salmo g.

When the Skagit wild steelhead run reaches 155,000 I might keep one or two. For now, I'll have to settle for a few silvers.

Regarding the better in river Skagit king fishing during the 1950s and 60s. Salmo is correct in that those were there because they were not being caught by another user group. If you will recall the biggest chunk of the harvest is currently in Canadian waters - in the 1950s and 60s that effort - both the troll effort as well as the sport fleet was much smaller thus moer fish got back to our waters.

Cupo -
I can understand your comments but consider for a momment. Many have said that despite runs that at times exceed 20,000 wild steelhead even the Quillayute can not support harvest of steelhead. The wild chinook summer/fall forecasts for 2004 (see WDFW web page - fishing - forecasts under North of Falcon) for the Quillayute and the Hoh were 6,491 and 4,240 respectively. The Hoh spring forecast was 1,450. For wild coho in 2004 the forecasts were 21,212 and 8,100 respectively.

Many of the same adrent wild steelhead release supportors seem to have no problem with bonking wild salmon for those two systems. It is also good to remember that unlikely most steelhead fisheries most of our wild salmon fishing impacts occur in mix stock areas - like the ocean. If the argument is that small run sizes make the resource fragile as you seem to indicate in your Skagit coho comments then how can an angler concern about wild salmonid resources fish for and even consider keeping an unclipped (wild) chinook or coho in the Quillayute, Hoh or the ocean?

The wild chinook run in those two systems are smaller than the recent wild steelhead runs in the Skagit and the Hoh wild coho run isn't much larger.

I'm sorry but those wild steelhead release at all cost supportors that turn around and kill wild chinook or coho salmon in the above situations or condone the taking of those fish lose their credibility as a wild fish advocates with me!

I realize that the above comment is heresy but so be it.

Tight lines
S malma

SMalma (or Salmo),

In consideration of the numbers of wild Coho returning to the Skagit this year, do you feel it is wrong for us to take wild Coho here?

The WDFW set a limit of 3 fish (wild or hatchery)..and that tells me they (WDFW) feel this run is strong and healthy and could support that harvest.

Not arguing at all, but you guys are the experts with this stuff and your opinion does matter..

Figuring out what to catch, what is "keepbable", and where, seems to be a bunch of "Black Magic" to me.

Mike

Smalma, you have a good point and I agree with you. With the exception of a couple of attempts at coho from the beach, I don't really fish the salt. When I see pics of unclipped kings from the coast I wonder where those fish were headed.

Mike -
In regards to keeping some Skagit wild coho or any other wild salmonids for that matter my approach has been to balance my desire for fresh fish with the health of the resource I'm fishing on and the value of individual fish in the population to the fishing experience. Fish (this discussion should apply to more than just salmon) are both a healthy and tasty food source. I also believe that the retention of some fish is an important part of the fishing experience.

In practice I harvest wild fish that come from robust populations (recent examples would last year's pinks, this year Lake Washington sockeye, Puget Sound ling Cod, etc). In stocks where there are marked hatchery fish as well as wild fish I try to focus my harvest on those marked fish and only keep unmarked fish that are potentially mortally injuried (assuming it is legal to do so). There is an unmarked coho in my frig right now that will tonight's dinner.

Examples of cases where I feel that individual fish have high value to the fishing expereince and I have opted to release all of the them include wild steelhead, sea-run cutthroat, Dollies, stream resident trout, large bass, etc.
Please note the above is based on my values alone. The more that one fishes on some of these populations the more important it is the release all those caught - reserve if you will you impacts to the hooking mortality and not compound ones impacts by keeping some additional fish. In the examples above I geneally fish often enough and with enough success that my CnR mortality on those fish over the years is likely as high as most angler's harvest of those species. I recognize that and I have opted not to harvest those fish. The alternative to limit my own impacts on the resource would be to fish less. I should not that 99% of the fishing I do is with barbless hooks regardless of the fishery and most of it with flies.

To be fair I should mention that with the last of the kids out of the house (off to college) it doesn't take a lot of fish to satisfiy the wife and my needs.

In short Mike it is up to each of us to develop a fishing ethic that we are comfortable with and that is within the biologically and social limits of the resource that we all enjoy so much.

tight lines
S malma

Can anyone confirm whether or not the kings caught from the Edmonds pier are hatchery origin or not? In the time that I fished it, I was a very amateur fisherman and didn't know my fish very well so I didn't pay attention to the adipose fin region whenever a fish was caught.