I have no problems with it being closed. If the numbers are down, then shut it down. But shut it down for EVERYONE tribes included !!!!!

I downloaded the article from the Heeald. I like this quote:


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".

Poor ocean survival my ASS. How about poor RIVER survival. Pretty hard to survive a net.

BULL! Ocean conditions, what they dont tell you, is they have over harvested the sardines and other prey of salmon and steelhead. They net
sardines to sell to australia, to feed hatchery bred tuna, because of its high oil content. They have a harvest problem on Bluefin as well.
Maybe the ocean conditions include too many ghost nets.

Yes the sardines were hammered but at least they are on track with better monitoring and smaller quotas tonnage wise the Oregon ,Washington quotes were cut in half in 2007 from what they were last year and at least they are now establishing some quota's it was a free for all just a few years ago, as Bob is pointing out I expect the OP to see some of these closures in the very near future, I been fishing the OP for over 25 years and the last few years have seen drastic changes it is only a matter of time believe me!!!PEACE

Sheesh! No wonder the WDFW Commission doesn't feel like they need to listen to the sportfishing community. As a group we submit crap that doesn't survive analysis because we don't get our [censored] together.

Kid Sauk - you're posts are so full of BS today I wouldn't know where to begin.

Fishbreath - "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." Huh? All along Curt has been informing us that marine survival has been limiting PS steelhead production. Combine that with the 2003 flood and even fewer smolts than usual and you get a lower adult return. How are you going to stop floods like 2003 on the Skagit? Want more dams?

Coho - "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." The methods for estimating runsize and escapement are open and available to anyone who wants them, and it ain't a dart board. You're about as credible as Kid Sauk.

Leadbouncer - "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."
"BULL! Ocean conditions, what they dont tell you, is they have over harvested the sardines"
What commercial catch? There is no non-treaty commercial steelhead catch of consequence in Puget Sound. We already know there is some bycatch in the chum fishery, and we know it's very small, and more importantly, we know it isn't wild Skagit steelhead, so why would anyone need inspector's bycatch reports in this instance. (It sure would be nice to have them on the lower Columbia River, however.) And since the projected runsize is less than the escapement goal, the tribes' quota is zero.
BTW - sardines are not a primary prey of steelhead. Now what?

Fishhog - "Poor ocean survival my ASS. How about poor RIVER survival. Pretty hard to survive a net." The information on ocean and river survival has been posted here countless times. What net are you talking about? The wild steelhead run hasn't even arrived. Nobody's netting them.

It's one thing to go off on a wild rant, but you really can't expect the fish managers to take you seriously, no matter how legitimate your interests, when you spout off with crap. Maybe you get out of it what you put into it.

Sincerely,

Salmo g.

Salmo G - Being as you called me out....
A little FYI - The forementiond Skagit IS getting early nates. Buddy picked one up near Rockport last weekend. As far as nets, I saw one when I was on the Skagit, the weekend before last, assumed it to be tribal. Another buddy also picked up a chrome coho, and that fish is late.

Wild Rant, spouting off crap..... as you state, is incorrect. Legitimate interests, you got that one right. You are also correct that we need to get our [censored] together.

This thread has gone beyond the Skagit/Sauk issue and touched some nerves, righfully so.

There are many issues that atribute to declining fish stocks: Glabal Warming, Habitat, Sea Lice from fish farms, management or the lack thereof, Overharvest, Development to name a few. The reason I'm fired up is that runs are down, yet netting practices continue, and the state's only answer is to close it down. It boils down to dollars. State doesn't have the money, Commercial lobbies HAVE the money, and us sporties come up short. Why is it the rights of the few are outweighing the rights of the many? Should be the other way around. Trust me well, I'm all for closing it, especially if the nates are in trouble. But if it closes, it's closed to ALL. PRetty simple.
This also applies to ANY run that is in trouble. Why does it take things to get in such bad shape, before drastic measures are taken. It shouldn't take litigation, years of studies, analize statistics. And as we all know, statistics can be sqeued to suit whatever you want it to.
Bottom line is, if nothing is done and done soon, there will be no more fish.

I am passionate about my sport and your undermining comments to myself and the others.... Well you should be ashamed.

Hog out

Sg...as usual, that sage advice will fall on deaf ears.

If you want people to listen, you must blame it on the [nonexistent] nets, especially those damn Indians, and then throw in a CCA cheer.

Other than that, you're mostly pissing in the wind...the fact that all the stuff you talked about in that last post is not only available to the public in numerous channels, but has been discussed here...repeatedly...makes no difference.

You can't appeal to the average dude's logic when he'd prefer to have his inaccurate emotions stroked, instead.

There are numerous causes for the reduced number of steelhead available in the Sauk and Skagit Rivers, and none of them involve a quick and easy point at 'the' culprit, and a quick and easy solution to follow.

Steelhead don't hardly even eat sardines, but now commercial netting of sardines is the culprit? The only thing that would be better is if it were Indians netting the sardines...then we could really get whooped up about it.

I sure hope the folks that are planning on testifying at the WDFW have a lot more intelligent things to say than the inaccurate rantings posted on this thread...it's hard enough to get the Commission's attention when you are using things like facts and logic...use ridiculous arguments and they'll tune you out before you get three words in...you'd be better off saving the gas money and going fishing.

Rant Alert:

Contrary to popular belief, this is why the recreational angler gets screwed so much...they don't have a cohesive message or story to stick to like the commercials do...and a large part of that lack is due to the fact that many, if not most anglers prefer to remain ignorant of the facts, and instead prefer to rant.

That's where the "non-united" front comes from...it comes from those who take the time to educate themselves about the issues having to burn half their time and resources telling the rest to just STFU and stop making things worse.

End of Rant.

Carry on.

Fish on...

Todd

Fishhog,

I know the Skagit gets early natives, but you and I both know that the preponderance of the run doesn't enter the river until March. Picking at the loose ends to make a point . . . unfortunately doesn't make the point. The Skagit run isn't at risk due to netting, just like it isn't at risk due to sport fishing. Jumbling up a variety of issues into an incoherent stew that can't be sorted out or understood or answered does no good either.

I might be ashamed for picking on you guys when you begin criticizing WDFW for what they're responsible for instead of whatever seems to come to your collectively fogged minds. Remember, WDFW has just about zero influence over habitat degradation, development, logging, or any of the things that adversely affect fish. The strongest authority they have is to regulate fishing, so that's what they have to do. And it's only been discussed here a thousand times that WDFW has no authority over the treaty netting that so many of you keep getting your asses tied in a knot over, yet expect them to do something about it anyway. How frickin' dumb is that?

Sg

So in your little world, your solution would be???
Indulge my fogged mind.

Nice response, fishhog...here's a response for your "little world":

Make your little world bigger by figuring out what the hell you are talking about...the resources are out there, and free...all you need is the ability to research, and to read.

It's not that hard, really, but I'm always impressed by the amount of "experts" who can't even manage to do that...

Fish on...

Todd

I do love your avatar. However, it's hard to look at it and hear your "serious" argument against someone like Salmo...

...something about that pic makes it hard to take seriously.

Experts? Salmo and Todd. lol. One the expert of imperfect state funded technical reports and scientific studies the other the expert on our well respected and revered legal system. Both getting frustrated at the layman for using common sense and not understanding the convoluted system and imperfect science.

We have not overthrown the divine right of kings to fall down for the divine right of experts.

HAROLD MACMILLAN, speech, Aug. 16, 1950

There are as many opinions as there are experts.

FRANKLIN D. ROOSEVELT, speech, Jun. 12, 1942

I'll take the common sense of the working class sportfisherman everytime.

Lets try cutting back tribal netting. What could it hurt? Its the only factor that hasn't been strictly regulated. Howard Zinn, CCA, I don't give a shi+. The worst it could do is fail (everything else has). Instead holier than thou experts of a fuce+d system look down their condenscending noses at people who are fed up with the system and the result.

Goodbye fish.

I agree sardines are probably less than .05% of a steelheads diet Todd and SG but any change in the food chain in the pacific Northwest effects everything that swims out there including steelhead but I agree with what is being said by both of you it is going to be a long haul up a steep hill coming all to soon I applaud the things both of you actual do to try to bring positive changes to this situation keep up the good work guys it all matters even the little things like butting heads on some fishing forum's!!!PEACE

I caught one two years ago with a whole barely digested sardine in its gut. For what thats worth.

Geez todd, I didn't realize I had to one-up Salmo with a witty response.
I thought this was a discussion forum and I was expressing an opinion.

Opinions are fine...educated ones are a lot better, and you don't have to have 30 years of work in the field like Sg does, either...like I said, the resources are out there, they're free, and all they take is a little research and reading.

farmed it, cutting tribal netting where there is virtually none would do...virtually nothing.

I take that back...it would make a bunch of dudes who blame everything on harvest, and don't care about the other 98% of the factors that are screwing our fish runs, it would make them feel better, for a little bit, at least, until they saw that it did absolutely no good whatsoever.

Then they'd be bummed, because then they'd need another scapegoat to blame it on...

Any plan that is based in large part on an impossible dream of ending tribal netting, especially when the tribal netting catches almost no wild steelhead on the Skagit, is the type of plan that is a complete waste of time and energy...

Like I said, it's "plans" like that that divide sportsmen...if you really want to get people behind a common plan, first sportsmen are going to have to be educated about what the issues actually are...it's unfortunate, but for many the discussions that take place on this BB are the only education that they ever get about our fisheries, and so long as there are folks ranting emotionally...and inaccurately...about how to solve our problems, then there will be others to point out how ridiculous that is.

I don't even care if it changes the minds of those who hold the factually incorrect positions...it might, however, prompt another person to put in the very little time required to do their own research...and that makes it worth it right there.

Fish on...

Todd

The first year the sardine fishery started off the mouth of the Columbia the Quinaults did have a few boats in the fishery. They quit early on though because they were not comfortable with the chinook bycatch. Hard to get whooped up about that.

Like many here, I'm disappointed I won't be able to fish there this year. That obviously colors my thoughts on the issue. Selfishly, I want to be out there even if there are hardly any fish. I'm disappointed in losing what those days provide me besides having a fish on the end of the line.

Is it good for fishing? No. But is it good for the fish? Probably. It certainly isn't bad for the fish. The exception to this is not having steelhead caretakers, the fishermen, present to limit poachers and other river schmeg.

As for the heated discussions, I think there are people looking at this from different angles. Some primarily want to fight for the fish the that get pulled out. Others want to fight for the fish that are missing entirely. In this case, it is hard to argue the nets are the problem. There are plenty of places and runs in which that is not the case. In those situations, seeing the blanket of nets evokes a guttural, sickening response because you are watching the slaughter happen.

Twisted in all this is "management" and "science" (in that order). They both create and rely upon numbers which, due to factors such as wildly inaccurate netting numbers, number of fish poached, and sometimes wildly inaccurate fish counts, are highly questionable. In the end, even though I lose, it is good that the WDFW will close down the fishery. At least they are leaning towards conservation, which is something they have clearly failed to do in the past.

The question from me is, "What is with the WDFW's timing of these announcements?". Was this not predictable long before now? I'd ask the same question for the upper Nooksack closure. Where is the new information that warrants these special, mid-season rule changes that inevitably aggravate people? I pity the out-of-state fool trying to fish in Washington. Besides choosing a terrible fishing destination, he'd need to study detailed maps to figure out regulations and river segmentation (i.e. "from yellow marker at FFH barn in Deming") and a recent Internet connection to see which rules have changed.

Bummed,
Kaiser D.

Post to all:

At the Commission meeting this Saturday at Vancouver is a public comment period to receive public comments on items that are not part of the day's agenda. Are you going to do the work yourself or just complain?

Sorry been a long time since I've posted anything... had to on this one since this closure probably effects Robbo, Myself and a handfull of other guides that make a living guiding the Skagit System more than most.

Shiat happens!! We'll survive and so will a few more fish... pretty much end of story! Why don't I get politically involved in all or any of the sports groups out there (WSC, CAA, Etc) ... Look at this entire thread again!! As a whole we can't even agree to disagree. This board has always had some real good sound advice by some its members, with the education and science to back their comments, and members that I personally respect as a whole, even if I will at times, agree to disagree with them. (My hat is off to Smalma, SalmoG, Todd, Bob, Vedder and others... even if at times some of them let their emotions cloud things at times IMHO)

On Brett's defense he is a great bio for us up here and while we may not agree with many of his decisions he does try his best to stay on top of the fishery. (Wish he would contact Robbo and I more on a regular basis to keep more on top of the actual fishery at hand, after all we're out there on the river just about every single day... we should have been notified of the closure first hand before the rumor mill started... and the fact remains that we are already seeing some 3 salt fish in the system now. )

Robbo and I, along with a handfull of others, have been taking scale samples from wild fish for the past few years for Brett, and it is true that there was not a great sampling of 2 salts concerning this years return. Brett is for the fishery and is also a fisherman but does have his hands tied when it comes to other issues concerning the system. Like the tribes...

We have 3 tribes up here on the Skagit sytem and they can't even agree to disagree! ( Especially when it comes to netting schedules, allotments, etc.) ~Want to get a little more riled up when it comes to the Steelhead fishery here on the Skagit call the Swinomish / Sauk Suiattle netting hotline (360) 466 - 4112 This does not include the Skagit Tribe netting schedule either.

The Tribes definately take a heavy toll on all the fisheries are not being held accountable for their actions (One thing I think everyone can actually agree on and everyones hands are tied on this one.) Bob, I truly feel for you guys out there on the Nince!! Have heard all you guys are going through with all the netting going on.

Peace out, keep your chin up and smile... life is too short!!

Johnny Coho - Always a class act. He and Robbo are two of the nicest guys I know and damn good guides. It's a damn shame the river they love will be closed. let's hope the bio is right and it's only a one season closure.

JC is right about us sporties being the most disorganized bunch on the planet. If you want to help bring about change join a group. Pick whichever one you like, there are several good several, but as they say, If you aren't part of the solution you are part of the problem.

We have a lot of emotional posts here. Now lets see how many of you attend the meetings, join an advocacy group, or write to the commission.