Gotta say having been intensively involved in this that I don't think its really a win in the long term for recs. For conservation sure, but that conservation is mostly on the backs of meaningful marine rec Chinook opportunity.

In the short term we made out fine. Its finally back to the 2000-2009 status quo. No nets in 2T/2U until mid sept.

In the long term, we lost the farm. No forks creek production will mean no decent fishing east of tokeland for chinook, which is where the marine rec fleet catches most of its fish. Kiss good fishing just downstream of southbend goodbye. Also forget about any willapa river chinook fishing.

The biggest loss is that this fight has cost us Wecker as a commissioner. The ramifications of that will reach far beyond Willapa

Is that speculation or is there something more substantive to that comment?

Well frankly you missed the boat on that one. The Recs never had access to the full Forks Cr production. At best after Commercial the Rec may have had access to adults produced at maybe 40%. That would be around the adults from 560K smolt. The new production of 300k is lower than necessary by about 50k AND if they got the PNOB up they could get it to around 600k to 650k. Then no loss in real terms as the nets are out to September 16th. Bulk hatchery production can but seldom is completely beneficial to Rec fishers as the impacts of the Commercial harvest drastically reduce access to returning adults & catch.

Now if ones problem is with hatchery reform then no one can help you much. The days of old are gone with just produce fish at a hatchery and damn the consequences. The fundamental issue with the Willapa hatchery complex is that Chinook production should not have reached the level it is. The baseline natural spawner population was way to small to avoid wiping out the gravel with commercial harvest. Then we have the straying of the Forks Creek Chinook production is about 20% of the returning adults AFTER harvest which resulted in 2 / 4 / 5 to 1 hatchery over natural in the gravel. Couple this with little natural brood in the hatchery egg take you end up with what we have.

Eyefish,

I don't have any firsthand knowledge nor crystal ball as to what will transpire with Wecker, but the Gov and D's in the Senate seem to be opposed to her serving further. In the long run that's not going to go well, unless the R's in the senate take a unified supportive stance and peel off a few D's to confirm her. The other option is the Gov eats crow on this. Not something politicians usually do willingly. The logical conclusion is that her service on the commission will end within the year. I dearly hope I am wrong.


Dave,

You are wrong. The marine recs did have full access to the forks creek hatchery production as they fished in front of the nets from 2000-2009-- the nets did not go into the bay until sept 15. The nets still got most of the fish, but the opportunity for the recs was there and anglers both local and from afar to great advantage.

The goal for any marine rec fisherman that was serious in this WB process was to return to something resembling the glory years. We got the seasons right, but absent hatchery production (10% of the plant of the glory years) to support a fishery. Now the recs will have to try and adapt and learn to fish the jaws of the bay and/or south bay to target hatchery chinook. That leaves the local populations of south bend/raymond (approximately half the rec fleet) mostly on the beach as it will be a big boat show.

An alternative to what we had now was to keep naselle primary, force a low harvest rate and leave willapa as it was:
Conservation goals met, check
Rec fishery intact, check.
Gillnetters unhappy, check.

WDFW staff decided they would rather place the conservation burden on the marine rec fleet than the gillnet fleet so they switched the primary eliminating meaningful rec fishery and maximizing chinook in the nets while meeting conservation goals.

The message to the marine rec anglers is that fish are in the ocean and south bay, go find them. It will be an experiment. I will certainly be taking the challenge, but in 2020 you will see the CRCs on chinook catch in MA2-1 tank and much complaining about how poor the fishing is out of southbend and raymond.

The funny thing is that the gillnetters will probably sue over a 50% reduction in their fishery, but the marine rec and willapa river fishers are cellebrating a decision that will reduce their fishery by 90%.

Its all very bizarre to me.

Oh I did not back up to 2000 as it is irrelevant with the production movement in the past decade. My point is at two places. 2009 when HSRG became mandated & 2010 when the former plan went into effect. Naselle primary would only have gotten the 10% differential for straying between primary and contributing. As to the 90% reduction, nah but it will be different to be sure. Then your good days had the inriver behind wall to wall nets with punitive season setting. So if all one gives a whack about is the 2T fishery it is ouch time to a degree a bit down the road. U in the long run should balance out. The freshwater seasons are the best in years and they were part and parcel of the process. The Rec should have good access to N with the later start of the nets as they do not get in much early time without burning NOR impacts.

You know not to beat a dead horse but HSRG is about rules one has to comply with. Staff could not have changed much as to Forks Cr because it does not have the ability to stop straying. They will have the same issue in Naselle Coho also as that weir comes out on or about Oct. 15 so the fish run past. So if ones thoughts are more fish for me and HSRG is BS I want to kill fish in my favorite fishery, your right you loose. If ones goal was a conservation driven management plan you and the fish win. I am in the second one as for me the fish come first.

Another thing is the entire matrix was with average ocean survival when it drops ( which it will ) the commercial fleet will have problems staying on the water without blowing the NOR numbers in a NY moment.

All I am saying is that a plan that met conservation goals and supported a robust rec marine fishery was possible, but not chosen due to the priority on commercial harvest.

Its called implementing the 2010 plan with hard caps on NOR chinook. You might have to lower naselle impacts to 14%, but it could have been done. Under the 2010 plan willapa R was stabilizing, which left forks cr production intact.

I agree the plan approved is not the worst possible outcome for the recs, but it s a long ways from the best possible outcome.

For those not involved in the WMP this may look like a bit of a dust up between Geoduck and myself but in reality it is not. The point made about stream designations was always a hidden driver in the WMP process. So lets try this.

 Primary—biologically significant, core, key, highly viable, important to recovery. Historically were a large segment of the population structure. Need to be at low risk of extinction.

 Contributing– of some significance, are viable but lower in abundance than Primary. Contribute to diversity.

 Stabilizing—a population, but may not have ever been a large segment of the population structure.

These are the three stream designations from HSRG. Each allow for a different degree of hatchery influence ( straying ) and requirements for PNOB. ( wild spawners incorporated into the hatchery eggtake ) In the previous Willapa Policy the agency basically assigned what ever stream designation to a stream that matched the production level it desired to reduce requirements for straying. For myself it is not a choice but rather you apply the designation that matches the historic value of the stream. For others not so.

The thing is as long as the WMP process was this issue was not fully vetted. Conversation to be sure but never & I mean never a in-depth look at the definitions and criteria for how they should be applied. So Geoduck has a valid point. That I have a different view is irrelevant, that it was not fully vetted is. Is the WMP different than how WDF&W has done it in other regions of the state? No idea but words have meaning. HSRG was not about what is best for the harvester but rather guidelines for how we produce fish for harvest without destroying the natural order.

It matters little what I or Geoduck feel at this stage of the game but what does matter is staff avoided a in-depth look at the issue in the WMP process. Now that should not have happened.

GeoDuck:

I don't fish Willapa Bay or any of the rivers, well not in 35+ years. I started going to the meetings to find out how WDFW could allow a net kill rate that was around 85-90 % of the fish taken during a season.....then wanted more.....

Who's going to feed the general public???? Was a theme that the netters, would bring up at meeting after meeting. People adjust, shortage here or there, go to plan B.

General attitude at many meetings was "gill nets" are the only way to fish Willapa Bay......mmmmmmm, guess we'll find out. Do I have an answer?, no, but I sure have to make adjustments when changes in the law force me to....ie, barbless hooks or having to fish, in Grays Harbor, above 2 different net fisheries, QIN and NT, and a major Marine fishery.

Change is very late in coming to Willapa Bay but Change is coming, just that the Native stocks have been depleted or non-existence in many of the tribs., for sure not the fault of the sport fishery.

Pain will be felt and only get worse unless selective fishery is the "norm" for Willapa Bay.

Riverguy,

I completely agree with your outlook. We disagree some, but mostly it doesn't matter. The policy is done and we've launched into an fisheries managment experiment where the one certainty is there will be more attention paid to NOR fish.

I think our difference comes for the fact that I have a higher tolerence for self criticism and I understand that when someone has invested as much as you and I have in the process we want to believe we've done good. Unfortunately I view my involvement in the processes as an abysmal failure, personally.

For example, the only habitat consideration in the aha model is a single integer input as a factor representing habitat quality. No actual quantitative modelling of habitat was ever made (unlike on the Big C). I think when AHA is used in this way, it is not much of an improvement over the previous models because habitat is not even really considered in a meaningful way.

I've argued all along that the WB stream habitat is margninal chinook habitat at best and that we should pick the very best habitat in the basin and focus on that stream. The 2010 plan did the same in theory (with primary naselle designation), but in practice WDFW didn't do anything to reduce harvest then declared nasselle primary a failure and bought the gilnnetter argument that it was habitat that was the problem.

The upshot is we gave up on arguable the best habitat in the naselle and switched primary to the Willapa for the sake of harvest expediency. This decision was not driven by any habitat analysis whatsoever.

I asked repeatedly for serious analysis of habitat quality and economic impacts of various allocation decisions, but failed to get any traction as the department didn't want to do either. Rather the focus was on getting to a policy that met management expediency criteria as quickly as possible without considering anything that might derail staff's management considerations or cause legal questions to arise.

As a scientific endeavor the process sucked. As a public policy exercise I also found it to be disappointing. I wish it could have been done better.

Oh I disagree! Your participation was very valuable but I think you got lonesome out on that limb trying to get science first. Hopefully that changes in the future, I take that back, it has to change in the future.



We have consensus! One thing good came from the process, the education in real terms as to what hatchery reform means post Phil Anderson. PNI, PNOB, PHOS all the terms that the Commissioners tried to get a hold of and understand in the beginning they now know what they mean ( and do ). Next time out the gate they will be ready regardless of what region of the state it is. That is what the Willapa process did for everyone. The Commission is no longer a rubber stamp for staff. They know the difficult decisions will have a price for all users & the fish. In the long haul your effort to bring science to the discussion did not get much traction. What you did do is get the bloody door open for the future & Commission. You can loose a battle and win the war. In the long haul your thoughts are correct and each time change comes science will continue to be a greater part of the discussion. You did not loose the discussion but rather staff dodged it AND the Commission knows this. You accomplished way more than you give yourself credit for.

Here it is guys!!!!!



FISH AND WILDLIFE COMMISSION
POLICY DECISION

POLICY TITLE: Willapa Bay Salmon Management POLICY NUMBER: C-3622

Cancels or Effective Date: June 13, 2015
Supersedes: NA Termination Date: December 31, 2023

See Also: Policies C-3608, C-3619 Approved June 13, 2015 by:
Chair
Washington Fish and Wildlife Commission



Purpose
The objective of this policy is to achieve the conservation and restoration of wild salmon in Willapa Bay and avoid ESA designation of any salmon species. Where consistent with this conservation objective, the policy also seeks to maintain or enhance the economic well-being and stability of the commercial and recreational fishing industry in the state, provide the public with outdoor recreational experiences, and an appropriate distribution of fishing opportunities throughout the Willapa Bay Basin. Enhanced transparency, information sharing, and improved technical rigor of fishery management are needed to restore and maintain public trust and support for management of Willapa Bay salmon fisheries.

Definition and Goal
This policy sets a general management direction and provides guidance for Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (Department) management of all Pacific salmon returning to the Willapa Bay Basin. The Willapa Bay Basin is defined as Willapa Bay and its freshwater tributaries.

General Policy Statement
This policy provides a cohesive set of principles and guidance to promote the conservation of wild salmon and steelhead and improve the Department’s management of salmon in the Willapa Bay Basin. The Washington Fish and Wildlife Commission (Commission) recognizes that management decisions must be informed by fishery monitoring (biological and economic), and that innovation and adaptive management will be necessary to achieve the stated purpose of this policy. By improving communication, information sharing, and transparency, the Department shall promote improved public support for management of Willapa Bay salmon fisheries.

State commercial and recreational fisheries will need to increasingly focus on the harvest of abundant hatchery fish. Mark-selective fisheries are a tool that permits the harvest of abundant hatchery fish while reducing impacts on wild stocks needing protection. As a general policy, the Department shall implement mark-selective salmon fisheries, unless the

wild populations substantially affected by the fishery are meeting spawner (e.g., escapement goal) and broodstock management objectives. In addition, the Department may consider avoidance, alternative gears, or other selective fishing concepts along with other management approaches provided they are as or more effective than a mark-selective fishery in achieving spawner and broodstock management objectives.

Fishery and hatchery management measures should be implemented as part of an “all-H” strategy that integrates hatchery, harvest, and habitat systems. Although the policy focuses on fishery management, this policy in no way diminishes the significance of habitat protection and restoration.

Guiding Principles
The Department shall apply the following principles in the management of salmon in the Willapa Bay Basin:

1) Prioritize the restoration and conservation of wild salmon through a comprehensive, cohesive, and progressive series of fishery, hatchery, and habitat actions.

2) Work with our partners (including Regional Fishery Enhancement Groups, nonprofit organizations, the public and Lead Entities) to protect and restore habitat productivity.

3) Implement improved broodstock management (including selective removal of hatchery fish) to reduce the genetic and ecological impacts of hatchery fish and improve the fitness and viability of salmon produced from Willapa Bay rivers (see Hatchery and Fishery Reform Policy C-3619). Achieve Hatchery Scientific Review Group (HSRG) broodstock management standards for Coho and Chum salmon by 2015, and work toward a goal of achieving standards for Chinook salmon by 2020.

4) Investigate and promote the development and implementation of alternative selective gear. The development of alternative selective gear may provide an opportunity to target fishery harvests on abundant hatchery fish stocks, reduce the number of hatchery-origin fish in natural spawning areas, limit mortalities on non-target species and stocks, and provide commercial fishing opportunities.

5) Work through the Pacific Salmon Commission to promote the conservation of Willapa Bay salmon and, in a manner consistent with the provisions of the Pacific Salmon Treaty, pursue the implementation of fishery management actions necessary to achieve agreed conservation objectives.

6) Within the Pacific Fishery Management Council (Council) process, support management measures that promote the attainment of Willapa Bay conservation objectives consistent with the Council’s Salmon Fishery Management Plan.

7) Monitoring, sampling, and enforcement programs will adequately account for species and population impacts (landed catch and incidental fishing mortality) of all recreational

and commercial fisheries and ensure compliance with state regulations. Develop and implement enhanced enforcement strategies to improve compliance with fishing regulations and ensure orderly fisheries.

8) If it becomes apparent that a scheduled fishery will exceed the aggregated pre-season natural-origin Chinook mortality (impact) expectation, the Department shall implement in-season management actions in an effort to avoid cumulative mortalities of natural- origin Chinook in excess of the aggregated pre-season projection.

9) Salmon management and catch accounting will be timely, well documented, transparent, well-communicated, and accountable. The Department shall strive to make ongoing improvements in the transparency of fishery management and for effective public involvement in planning Willapa Bay salmon fisheries, including rule- making processes. These shall include: a) clearly describing management objectives in a document available to the public prior to the initiation of the preseason planning process; b) enhancing opportunities for public engagement during the preseason fishery planning process; c) communicating in-season information and management actions to advisors and the public; and d) striving to improve communication with the public regarding co-management issues that are under discussion.

10) Seek to improve fishery management and technical tools through improved fishery monitoring, the development of new tools, and rigorous assessment of fishery models and parameters.

11) When a mark-selective fishery occurs, the mark-selective fishery shall be implemented, monitored, and enforced in a manner designed to achieve the anticipated conservation benefits.


Fishery and Species-Specific Guidance
Subject to the provisions of the Adaptive Management section, the following fishery-and species-specific sections describe the presumptive path for achieving conservation objectives and an appropriate distribution of fishing opportunities.


Fall Chinook Salmon
Subject to the adaptive management provisions of this policy, the Department will manage fall Chinook salmon fisheries and hatchery programs consistent with the Guiding Principles and the following additional guidance:

1) The Department shall initiate a two-phase rebuilding program to conserve and restore wild Chinook salmon in Willapa Bay. The progressive series of actions is intended to result in achieving broodstock management standards by 2020 and spawner goals by years 16-21. Within the conservation constraints of the rebuilding program, Chinook salmon will be managed to provide for a full recreational fishing season with increased

participation and/or catch anticipated in future years.

2) Rebuilding Program - Phase 1 (Years 1-4). The objectives of Phase 1 shall be to increase the number of natural-origin spawners and implement hatchery program modifications designed to meet broodstock management standards in the subsequent cycle.

a. Implement hatchery broodstock management actions to promote re-adaptation to the natural environment and enhance productivity of natural-origin Chinook salmon in the North/Smith, Willapa, and Naselle rivers:

• North/Smith – Manage as Wild Salmon Management Zone with no hatchery releases of Chinook salmon.

• Willapa – Implement an integrated program with hatchery broodstock management strategies designed to achieve broodstock management standards consistent with a Primary designation in the subsequent cycle.

• Naselle – Implement hatchery broodstock strategies designed to achieve broodstock management standards consistent with a Contributing designation in the subsequent cycle.

b. Pursue implementation of additional mark-selective commercial fishing gear to enhance conservation and provide harvest opportunities. The Department shall provide to the Commission by January 2017 a status report and by January 2018 an assessment of options to implement additional mark-selective commercial fishing gear in Willapa Bay. The assessment shall identify the likely release mortality rates for each gear type, the benefits to rebuilding naturally spawning populations, and the benefits and impacts to the commercial fishery.

3) Rebuilding Program - Phase 2 (Years 5 – 21). The combination of fishery and harvest management actions is projected to result on average in the achievement of spawner goals for the North, Naselle, and Willapa populations in the years 16-21. Additional fishery and hatchery management actions will be considered during this time period if the progress toward the spawner objectives is inconsistent with expectations.

4) Fishery Management Objectives. The fishery management objectives for fall Chinook salmon, in priority order, are to:

a. Achieve spawner goals for the North, Naselle, and Willapa stocks of natural- origin Chinook and hatchery reform broodstock objectives through the two phase rebuilding program described above.

b. Provide for an enhanced recreational fishing season. The impact rate of the recreational fishery is anticipated to be ~3.2% during the initial years of the

policy, but may increase in subsequent years to provide for an enhanced recreational season as described below:


• Manage Chinook salmon for an enhanced recreational fishing season to increase participation and/or catch including consideration of increased daily limits, earlier openings, multiple rods, and other measures.

• Conservation actions, as necessary, shall be shared equally between marine and freshwater fisheries.

c. Provide opportunities for commercial fisheries within the remaining available fishery impacts.

5) Fishery Management in 2015-2018. To facilitate a transition to the Willapa River as the primary Chinook salmon population, fisheries during the transition period will be managed with the following goal:

a. The impact rate on Willapa and Naselle river natural-origin fall Chinook in Willapa Bay fisheries shall not exceed 20%. Within this impact rate cap, the priority shall be to maintain a full season of recreational fisheries for Chinook salmon in the Willapa Bay Basin.

b. To promote the catch of hatchery-origin Chinook salmon and increase the number of natural-origin spawners, within the 20% impact rate cap the following impact rates shall be set-aside for mark-selective commercial fishing gear types with an anticipated release mortality rate of less than 35%:


Fishing Year Mark-Selective Commercial Fishing Gear Set-Aside
2015 1%
2016 2%
2017 6%
2018 6%

The Commission may consider adjustments to the set-asides for 2017 and 2018 based upon the Department’s reports to the Commission on commercial mark- selective fishing gear (paragraph 2(b)) or other adaptive management considerations.

c. No commercial Chinook fisheries shall occur in areas 2T and 2U prior to September 16.

d. No commercial Chinook fisheries shall occur in areas 2M, 2N, 2P and 2R until after Labor Day.


6) Fishery Management After 2018. Fisheries in the Willapa Bay Basin will be managed with the goal of:

a. Limiting the fishery impact rate on Willapa and Naselle river natural-origin fall Chinook salmon to no more than 14%.

b. No commercial fisheries shall occur within areas 2T and 2U prior to September 16.

c. No commercial Chinook fisheries shall occur in areas 2M, 2N, 2P and 2R until after September 7.

7) Maintaining Rebuilding Trajectory. If the postseason estimate (as presented at the annual Commission review) of aggregated natural-origin Chinook salmon mortality (impacts) exceeds the preseason projection, the Department staff shall make a recommendation to the Commission regarding an adjustment to the allowable impacts for the subsequent year. The recommendation shall be based upon the percentage by which the postseason estimate of impacts exceeded the preseason projection, but may consider other factors such as the predicted abundance or other relevant factors.

8) Hatchery Production. Within budgetary constraints, and at the earliest feasible date, the Department shall seek to implement the following hatchery production of fall Chinook salmon:

• 0.80 million at Naselle Hatchery
• 3.30 million at Nemah Hatchery
• 0.35 million at Forks Creek Hatchery


Coho Salmon
Subject to the adaptive management provisions of this policy, the Department will manage Coho salmon fisheries and hatchery programs consistent with the Guiding Principles and the following objectives:

1) Broodstock Management Strategies. Manage Coho salmon with the following designations and broodstock management strategies:

North/Smith Willapa Naselle
Designation Primary Primary Stabilizing
Broodstock Strategy No Hatchery Program Integrated Integrated

Coho salmon returning to all other watersheds will be managed consistent with a Contributing designation.


2) Fishery Management Objectives. The fishery management objectives for Coho salmon, in priority order, are to:

a. Manage fisheries with the goal of achieving the aggregate spawner goal for Willapa Bay natural-origin Coho salmon. When the pre-season forecast of natural-origin adult Coho is less than the aggregate goal, or less than 10% higher than the aggregate goal, fisheries in the Willapa Bay Basin will be scheduled to result in an impact of no more than 10% of the adult return;

b. Prioritize commercial fishing opportunities during the Coho fishery management period (September 16 through October 14); and

c. Provide recreational fishing opportunities.


Chum Salmon
Subject to the adaptive management provisions of this policy, the Department will manage Chum salmon fisheries and hatchery programs consistent with the Guiding Principles and the following objectives:

1) Broodstock Management Strategies. Manage Chum salmon with the following designations and broodstock management strategies:

North/Smith Palix Bear
Designation Primary Contributing Primary
Broodstock Strategy No Hatchery Program No Hatchery Program No Hatchery Program

Chum salmon returning to all other watersheds will be managed consistent with a Contributing designation.

2) Fishery Management Objectives. The fishery management objectives for Chum salmon, in priority order, are to:

a. Achieve the aggregate goal for naturally spawning Chum salmon and meet hatchery reform broodstock objectives (see bullet 3);

b. Provide commercial fishing opportunities during the Chum salmon fishery management period (October 15 through October 31); and

c. Provide recreational fishing opportunities. Recreational fisheries will be allowed to retain Chum salmon.

3) Fisheries will be managed with the goal of achieving the aggregate goal for Willapa Bay

naturally spawning Chum salmon. Until the spawner goal is achieved 2 consecutive years, the maximum fishery impact shall not exceed a 10% impact rate and no commercial fisheries will occur in the period from October 15-31. If the number of natural-origin spawners was less than the goal in 3 out of the last 5 years, the Department shall implement the following measures:

a. The predicted fishery impact for Chum in Willapa Bay Basin will be scheduled to result in an impact of no more than 10% of the adult return.

b. When the Chum pre-season forecast is 85% or less of the escapement goal, the predicted fishery impact for Chum in Willapa Bay Basin will be scheduled to result in an impact of no more than 5% of the adult return.

4) The Department shall evaluate opportunities to increase hatchery production of Chum salmon. If Chum salmon hatchery production is enhanced, beginning as early as 2018, fisheries in the Willapa Bay Basin may be implemented with a fishery impact limit of no more than 33% of the natural-origin Chum salmon return.


Adaptive Management
The Commission recognizes that adaptive management will be essential to achieve the purpose of this policy. Department staff may implement actions to manage adaptively to achieve the objectives of this policy and will coordinate with the Commission, as needed, in order to implement corrective actions.

The Commission will also track implementation and results of the fishery management actions and artificial production programs in the transition period, with annual reviews beginning in 2016 and a comprehensive review at the end of the transition period (e.g., 2019). Fisheries pursuant to this Policy will be adaptive and adjustments may be made. Department staff may implement actions necessary to manage adaptively to achieve the objectives of this policy and shall coordinate with the Commission, as needed, in order to implement corrective actions.

Components of the adaptive management will be shared with the public through the agency web site and will include the following elements:

1) Conduct Annual Fishery Management Review. The Department shall annually evaluate fishery management tools and parameters, and identify improvements as necessary to accurately predict fishery performance and escapement.

2) Improve In-season Management. The Department shall develop, evaluate, and implement fishery management models, procedures, and management measures that are projected to enhance the effectiveness of fishery management relative to management based on preseason predictions.

3) Review Spawner Goals. The Department shall review spawner goals to ensure that they reflect the current productivity of salmon within the following timelines:

a. Chum: September 1, 2016
b. Coho: January 1, 2016
c. Chinook: January 1, 2020

4) Comprehensive Hatchery Assessment. The Department shall complete a comprehensive review of the hatchery programs in the Willapa Bay region by June 2016. The review shall identify the capital funding necessary to maintain or enhance current hatchery programs, identify changes in release locations or species that would enhance recreational and commercial fishing opportunities, identify improvements or new weirs to increase compliance with broodstock management, and the use of re-use water systems, water temperature manipulation to increase production hatchery capacity.

5) Ocean Ranching Opportunities. The Department shall complete by January 2016 a comprehensive review of opportunities and constraints to implement ocean ranching of salmon in Willapa Bay.

Delegation of Authority
The Commission delegates the authority to the Director, through the North of Falcon stakeholder consultation process, to set seasons for recreational and commercial fisheries in the Willapa Bay Basin, and to adopt permanent and emergency regulations to implement these fisheries.

This guidance establishes a number of important conservation and allocation principles for the Director and agency staff to apply when managing the fishery resources of Willapa Bay.
While this policy establishes a clear presumptive path forward with regard to many of the identified objectives, those principles and concrete objectives are intended to guide decision- making and are not intended to foreclose adaptive management based upon new information. Nor does this guidance preclude the need to gather and consider additional information during the annual process of developing fishery plans and the associated rule-making processes that open fisheries in Willapa Bay. The Commission fully expects that the Director and agency staff will continue to communicate with the public, and the Commission, to consider new information, evaluate alternate means for carrying out policy objectives, and consider instances in which it may make sense to deviate from the presumptive path forward. That is the nature of both adaptive management, and policy implementation, when faced with a dynamic natural environment.

Anyone watching the water temp in the river? We are warming up fast ( the river now guys ) and had 70 for water temp today at the dock. I am in tide water and with the light tides the water is not going out much so it is always up a bit but this is a rather high water temp for this time of year. This warm weather has the river really out of sorts with algae and not much catching going with the fish thing.

I received the Power Point presentation by staff to the Commission on the Willapa Policy at the last Commission meeting. If anyone wants it e mail me and I will send it on to you. Some very good graphs on value of Rec & Commercial fisheries. Also a break down on Chinook status for our coast. I think some will be surprised to see the rate of decline.

Agreed. The river is full of green and brown goo, and it is alarmingly warm. I don't know how much the overgrowth of algae should concern us, but we know, based on the fact we have observed fish kills in the upper basin when temps have been only slightly higher than they are now, that the temperature is a real concern. The 10-day forecast suggests those critical temps may be reached much sooner this year and prolonged to a point that may be catastrophic for fish. Let's hope that doesn't happen....

Accu BS is not to good day to day but it the month button and walk up into August. Kids will love it the fish not so much!
http://www.accuweather.com/en/us/central-park-wa/98520/weather-forecast/2254018


And just when you thought it was done ...................... here comes rep Blake & cronies at it again. Some might want to track this hearing.


From: WALEG Committee Agenda Update [mailto:Committees@updates.leg.wa.gov]
Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 2015 8:36 AM
To: _________
Subject: Agenda Update; House Agriculture & Natural Resources

This message was sent to the subscribers of the
House Agriculture & Natural Resources Committee update list.
Having trouble viewing this email? View it as a Web page.
Remove work session on Coastal fisheries management and the Endangered Species Act. Add work session on Willapa Bay salmon harvesting and the Endangered Species Act.
Agriculture & Natural Resources - 6/25/2015 8:00 a.m.
House Full Committee
House Hearing Rm B
John L. O'Brien Building
Olympia, WA

REVISED ON 6/23/2015 AT 8:34 AM

Work Session: Willapa Bay salmon harvesting and the Endangered Species Act.
________________________________________
Please help us reduce our use of paper by accessing legislative committee documents online once the meeting has started: https://app.leg.wa.gov/CMD/meeting.aspx?cid=8221&agency=3&year=2015

________________________________________
Due to House and Senate committee changes, subscribers may wish to review the jurisdictions for House standing committees and Senate standing committees and change their subscriptions accordingly.
If you plan to visit the Capitol Campus in Olympia, please keep in mind parking is very limited. For directions, maps and information regarding parking, public transit and the free shuttle service please see: http://www.leg.wa.gov/legislature/Pages/Parking.aspx
________________________________________
This message was sent to the subscribers of the House Agriculture & Natural Resources Committee update list. Update your subscriptions, modify your password or email address, or stop subscriptions at any time on your Subscriber Preferences Page. You will need to use your email address to log in. If you have questions or problems with the subscription service, please contact subscriberhelp.govdelivery.com.
This service is provided to you at no charge by Washington State Legislature.
________________________________________

I'm very concerned about water temps. too. A buddy of mine who lives in the vicinity of the upper Willamette and it's tribs down in Oregon says they are already seeing springer mortalities from the warm water. Bright fish floating down the river belly up.

July and August are gonna suck around here if conditions don't change. I wouldn't be surprised to see more emergency closures on the horizon. Already had one on the Sol Duc.

If there was ever a year for daily management of the fisheries, this is it. If the streams are too low or warm for fish to move they will stage somewhere. This will likely lead to higher harvests as the fish just pile up.

Updates, if they ever do them, are based on fish moving through. If they don't move through, but just keep building, we will get a false sense of abundance.

In recent years, in the Fraser, sockeye escapement goals were actually raised to account for losses on in-river migration due to high temps. Maybe GH and WB should cut target harvests in half unless the water cools and flows increases.

I agree, hope WDFW and QIN, have a Plan B for both GH and then in the Willapa.

GH could be a Giant kill zone, from Johns River to South Montesano, UNLESS the rains of November come early. Even If 4/3 in in effect, and it is, the fish will go back and forth in the tide water......kill going up river, kill going back down river...

Rain dance need to start early and often.....IMO

Thank God for NON-biters!

Well just when one thinks things are settling down along comes the games. The bit below is a budget amendment to shut down the Nemah hatchery put forth by Rep Lytton of the 40th district who is also the Dem Floor leader. Now the question is why and who put her up to it? Well we have several likely candidates but Rep Blake is the most likely candidate. You couple this with the hearing redefined to look at Willapa then one can see it is game time again. One might ask Rep Lytton & Rep Blake just what are they doing?


1106-PS2 AMH APP JOND 061


By Representative Lytton
P2SHB 1106 - H COMM AMD (TO H-2884.1/15)
By Committee on Appropriations




1 On page 109, after line 29, insert the following:
2 "(11) The department shall relocate all fish production at the
3 Nemah hatchery to the Naselle hatchery. If the fish and wildlife
4 commission determines that fish production capacity is insufficient to
5 meet fish production needs at the Forks Creek or Naselle hatcheries,
6 the department may continue fish production at the Nemah hatchery."



1106-PS2 AMH APP JOND 061 Official Print - 1

Non-biters, only affect the "sport fishermen"..........think of all the fish that head up river "on the tide", gill nets and set nets will for sure pick off lots of fish. Once up river, still in the tidal influence, hit the high temps/low water flow and head back down river......nets of death take another share of the fish.

A couple of weeks of 4 days of netting COULD take a large amount of the September/October Chinook. My concern is the slowness to recognize a problem early enough to make decisions to help fish, not just fish the days scheduled. Once dead, is forever dead!!!!!!!