Who's in charge? I want the name of the person who signed the dotted line.

The bio in charge of this is going to be buried in paperwork. Since he works for the state, all their work is public record, and I can request any information I want and they MUST provide me with said information. I am going to request any and all records pertaining to escapement counts, inculding stream surveys, tribal counts as received by the state, and all documents that work primarily from the theoretical models used to project run size. Should be about 3 years worth.

I am a mathematical genius and I will be the first to say that the run estimation models are flawed. It's not analytical statistics, so you cannot base solid numbers on undefined variables. I worked through several proofs in my head regarding numbers provided by the state and they missed a crucial step in their estimations. Hard to define in layman's terms, but we can cross that bridge when we get there.

I have the money and the time to hire private attorneys to debunk the flawed models. I'm going for the throat this time because I am tired of seeing how the decisions of few influence the seasons for many. I also have the knowledge to prove gross negligence based solely on the flawed theories that have been used by the state for several years. People will lose jobs over this....mark my words.

The SRM will reign.



BTW, the Sky has had enough returning fish by the end of February alone to make escapement for the entire Snohomish system. When is the last time a state bio fished during the closed season to establish numbers of fish present in the system? I'm talking Keith Archer's eggs and circle hooks(minimal mortality) or it doesn't count.

The state needs to quit putting the bio's in charge and do like the rest of the state does.......HIRE CONSULTANTS! If the tribes want to co-manage the resource, then they can co-pay the consultants. Split the fish, split the cost.

Brother J bird! Pimpin Aint Easy...but we do it!

Amen Trav, brah!

I'll be your deckhand in the Spring if you need me. I will probably spend all my earnings in P-town at the "clubs"

This has been the best thing I have read so far in this entire thread. I for one would love to see this come to fruition!!

KS,

Count me among those who can't wait to see you do this.

Sincerely,

Salmo g.

Kid,

The name on the dotted line reads "Dr. Jeffery Koenings"...start there.

From the information I've been getting over the past few days, there are enough fish in the forecast to have an opening under the Wild Salmonid Policy...5400+ fish. That's right at 90% of the escapement goal, and the WSP sets a pretty low bar at 80% of escapement goal required to have a CnR season.

Koenings signed, however, because 5400 fish is below the goal of 6000 fish, and the ESA listing combined with that makes a strange context to open the river.

**Conspiracy Alert**

I'm completely shooting from the hip on this one, and have seen no actual evidence to support this, but I wouldn't be at all surprised if Koenings signed such an order to "punish" those who supported yet another ESA listing under his watchful eye...those who most support the recovery of Puget Sound steelhead are, not surprisingly, steelhead fishermen.

**End of Conspiracy Alert**

Kid, conspiracy or not, this is a purely political decision, not a biological decision, so don't blame the bios...look straight to the top for this one.

As most of you know, I'd trade the other eleven months of the year for my April on the Sauk and Skagit...this bums me out quite a bit. Looks like I'll be part of the additional April crowding on the coast, since I'm usually done out there after the third week of March.

Fish on...

Todd

Let me get this right. The river is closed to sportfishing because the runs are bad? Or, WDFW wants to make it C&R so the tribes can still justify a fishery to retain wild fish.

Anytime you have a sportfishery that closes to protect a depleated stock, it is insane to let the Tribal nets fish them.

That's as bad as letting a sex offender run the daycare. Not in anyones best interest.

Federal Endangered Species Act
Federal Government has to step in before you are going to change anything the natives are able to do. Changing anything with regard to an Indians way of life today is a dream at best.

In the beginnning the Indians used the fish ang game for food to live off. Now they sell it to make a profit. But yet we give them money. It's a double whammy. Get off your ass and become something.

Remember we screwed them years ago and we will pay for it forever. We've wrote with an ink ball and featherhead at one time. Now we have better tools for the job.

It's a simple supply and demand concept.

Take away the demand for indian gillnet fish and you will have nobody to supply it. You can't sell what nobody wants. Get the picture?

Todd there is no way that is a conspiracy theory that is way too much like right. The director hates recreational fisherman and especially the steelhead fisherman because some of us have been a pain in his back side and we all know he is doing this to punish us. But I have to say if the numbers don't support close it down.

I am sure they will hide behind the 4(d) thing but if that was the case the river should never have opened because there will be incidental take right now so it should have been closed until they gain it.

JJ

Justin,

I think Todd still has your boots...

Kid Sauk -
If you go to the following -

http://wdfw.wa.gov/fish/papers/steelhead/index.htm

Go to the appendex list and click on the one with the Puget Sound data and scroll through it to the Skagit system you will find all the data you need.

My understatnd in talking with both guides and WDFW staff that last year there were very few 2-salt fish in last year's Skagit returns (fish that were smolts in 2005). Do you happen to remember that little flow event that happen in October of 2003. Because of the timing and size of that event the young fry hatched that spring would have taken a very large hit so it did not surprise me that year class of fish did poorly.

The poor 2-salt returns last year leads the biologists to expect to see few 3-salts this year. That coupled with potnetially fewer repeat spawners due to the low escapement last is likely more than enough explaination for the expected poor return.

You guys tear me up - constant whinning about mis-manage and the need to take better care of the fish but whenever some one does step up to the plate to err on the side of fish you come unglued.

Todd -
The old steelhead management plan talked about the 80% of the escapement level to allow such fisheries as CnR fisheries. Many thought that was pretty liberal.

The new FEIS on the latest steelhead management plan calls for no fisheries that are essentially targeting wild fish whenever the expected escapement of the Management Unit (MU) is below the goal. Apparently with the ESA listing the State has opted to use the latest draft as a guideline.

If folks have issues with that approach maybe they should hvae been providing that input during the process that developed that plan.

BTW -
Less anyone thinks I'm happy to see this situation think again. I put a lot very hard work into those CnR season long before such things were fashionable and it saddens me greatly to see those opportunities shrinking or going away but as I mentioned early we are now in new era.

Hopefully by step up to the plate now that State's plan will have some influence if marine survival improve and we see stronger runs and we'll be fortuante to see future opportunities and not have to wait until the fish are "offically de-listed" to see such seasons.

Tight lines
Curt

Koenings hands may be tied politcally........but......he has to get the numbers from somewhere and I guarantee that he ain't gettin' no REAL numbers sitting behind a desk. The bio's, both state and tribal, provide the numbers based primarily on THEORY mixed in with some actual information(e.g. stream surveys, creel surveys, etc.). The bio's info is subject to review by the director, who may ultimately make the decision, but he has to get the info from somewhere. The info provided is the root of the problem. Can't blame the president when his advisors give him false info, capiche?

I want something more substantial than theoretical models which are put on a graph so that's it's easier for the WDFW(and us) to understand. The real numbers of returning fish are 3 dimensional and all theories or models applied mathematically must be read as such, and that cannot be interpreted with a 2 dimensional graph. The welfare of living creatures is being sacrificed by 8th grade math. The livelihood of economies based on sportfishing are lost because somebody "couldn't do the math".

"Reality dies because of theoretical lies" Kid Sauk

Curt,

I agree with everything in your last post...the 80% baseline is in the WSP, as you know, and until the SMP is done, it is the controlling policy document.

The forecast is for 5400+ fish next year...under existing policy (whether or not I agree with existing policy is not relevant to this point) that is sufficient to conduct the fishery.

Personally, I would like to see the Dept. err on the side of fish health more often...if they did, perhaps we wouldn't be in the mess in the first place.

Fish on...

Todd

I'll save this one for later

I'd be real careful about burning any bridges.....knowledge is good, but it has to be supported and you don't want it on the other side of the river

So great, they close it down and like magic the numbers go up and we have more fish. I believe they've been doing that on the Nisqually now for at least ten years yet still no fish and no season. Twenty years ago that river was on fire with fish. Doesn't seem to be a polution problem or habitat problem on that river. As one member said on a post, the state now manages the rivers from a wild stand point but does nothing to increase the numbers other than go to a C&R season or cut the season back. If we are going to do something about the run size I think it's time we step in and help mother nature in smolt counts so we can get more fish back on the beds. Fishing in Washington is really starting to suck!

I think you are giving them too much credit saying this is done with sophisticated math---dont ya know, they use a dart board with the target=Escapement needed for Sporties and the remainder of the board showing numbers to shut the Sporties down.


___________________________

Published: Thursday, January 10, 2008

Popular fishery to stay closed

By Wayne Kruse,
Herald writer

Bad news for local steelhead fishermen comes with the word that the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife will not open the popular Skagit/Sauk river catch and release fishery this year. The long-running late season, often noted for producing some of the best steelheading in the area and particularly for large fish, is normally open March 1 to April 30 on the Sauk, and March 16 to April 30 on the Skagit.

Reason for the closure, according to the agency's District 14 fish biologist Brett Barkdull, in La Conner, is that the wild winter steelhead preseason forecast of about 5,200 fish is below the spawning escapement "floor."

"We need a minimum of 6,000 returning wild winters on the Skagit system to open a recreational fishery," Barkdull said.

He said the good news is that he doesn't expect this closure to represent a trend.

"It's more likely to be a one-year anomaly," he said. "Fish managers up and down the coast have experienced poor ocean survival on steelhead and salmon smolts which went to sea in 2005, and it's showing up in returns of several species on other rivers. Last year was not a great coho year around here, for instance, and those fish were from the same 2005 smolt class."

Then ... why do we still allow an increase in the coastal net fishery and no change to the sport harvest, especially when we now know that sport traffic will double and hatchery returns have been fair at the very best?

Licence dollars/their paychecks. Who in the hell would buy a fishing licence if the whole state gets shut down?

Thats not why they come unglued. They come unglued, because they are consistently on the end of the run and consistently the group that is asked bear the brunt of the policy. If the state expected a lower run, show me the cuts in the commercial and tribal quota and show me the reports of ride along inspectors to record an accurate bycatch harvest. Show me that.

As far as the whiners are concerned. All of you, have something you can join right now. Get involved now, We have been relying on the state to provide us with fish. Stop relying on the state.

If you want power in Washington DC is takes money. If you dont trust the ship that just dock here recently, thats too bad. They are the only ship that stocks cans of woopazz. The only reason they werent here five years ago, was because all of the fishaddicts had not hit bottom. Your intervention has been going on since march of 07. When the courts step in to shut down the rivers, the fish will already be gone and the effort will be impossible. When the DNA is gone its gone.

With the ESA listing The Northwest Region of NOAA Fisheries is the Agency in charge. Bob Lohn is the director so his name is on the bottom line. If you want to go up the ladder a bit higher he ultimately is responsible to the
Secretary of Commerce who is appointed by the President.



It is a new era, there are several regional models of how to survive in this new era. There is the approach that the logging industry took to the spotted owl listing, fight the rules, play all the political cards, and delay real solutions for as long as possible. One can look to the Columbia River basin salmon listings where rules were established but it is a continued battle in court to settle how they will be enforced. Or better yet, is the response to the listing of Puget Sound chinook. All of the public has made some sacrifices but it seems the plan is working though it could be derailed if some group feels they gave up too much and goes to court.



Good advice, and from another thread another bushbear quote which I think sums up what we have to remember in this new era.