It seems to me that back in the sixties, the Skagit had the equivalent of three hatcheries operating, or possibly more...but I don't know for sure.

Quote:
I believe the Director said two years for the EIS itself.

One guy at NOAA to do all 100+ plans.
two years = 500 work days.
Less than 5 days per plan.
Start the Skagit today - finish by Friday.

Why would we have to wait on the other 99 to fish the Skagit?

But in the 60s there were separate agencies and hatchery systems. WDF ran the salmon hatcheries and WDG the steelhead. I think the Barnaby Slough operation was the only steelhead facility, but Smalma would know for sure.

I added the remaining 15 Rivers, that were in the article. Now remember, that there are many rivers that aren't listed.

People didn't have to go far from where they lived to fish for steelhead AND chances of catching a fish were very good.

Doc-----because you "are young"....I remember the Humptulips, had a 3 fish limit, at the upper train bridge, xmas time of the year, there would be what seemed like 100+ fishermen and steelhead stacked on the bank.

Not many boats, in those days.......and access to the river for bankies was about everywhere.....from the Forks clear to tide water. If you weren't a drift fisherman....seemed that much of the lower part of the river had plunker places that always had people there.

Glad I got to fish.....THE OLD DAYS.......

We would float the hump in 79 and it was still a great fishery all the way through 90, many days we would put in below the 101 bridge and be done by the railroad bridge. Those early 80's where special for me, I can only emagine what the 60's where like.

How about Broodstocking the early portion of the run, to try to get more returners prior to the nets going in. You may not like the idea of broodstocking, but it will surely yield a better return then 1-1.25.

We always bring up nets and the WDFW and what are they going do. The fish are split 50-50. Have our member organizations, set down with the tribes and tried to make a better situation.
Maybe upper river boundries, if they make it past this line they are not to be harrased, or limit both net and fishing days on the water per week. They, like us understand that 50% of nothing is nothing...
If we can't get the nets out of the water, we need to work with them to make a more viable situation, concessions on both side need to be made

You mean "The great hatchery hoax"! Every fish that came from returned cards were multiplied by a multiplier that changed from year to year. Sometimes 2x. Like Smalma said, still lots more around then.

R&G,

It wasn't a hoax. There was no perceived need for steelhead data for a long time, let alone precise or accurate data. So when someone asked what the steelhead catch was, they did the simple math, multiplying the catch on returned cards by the total number of cards sold. The usual multiplier was three point something. Then, after US v WA, more accurate catch data was needed because the treaty fishing tribes intended to harvest 50% of some number. That was when WDG needed a very good number for the steelhead catch and the projected steelhead return based on hatchery plants. At that time there was zero data regarding wild steelhead run sizes, but that soon changed.

And yes, there were way more steelhead, hatchery and wild, around then.

Sg

SG:

If punch card data is important.....why not require all punch cards be returned?????

The computer age makes this very easy.....no returned card

1. Charge a fee for each card not returned

2. No license until #1 is paid.

Might not be the complete answer BUT sure better than what is done now...IMO

Requiring all cards to be returned would require that WDFW hire sufficient staff to process them.

"Back in the Day" WDG/W used to get the season estimate, from the just concluded season, out to the public by mid-summer/fall, if memory serves. They did this with two people doing the analysis. Obviously, given the delays we see now they would need how many people to match what was accomplished in the pre-computer age.

If they can manage to charge me $10 when I report my crab catch a day late they can manage to charge me $10, or $20, or whatever if I fail to report my steelhead catch, too.

The best thing, of course, would be to allow online reporting of all of our punchcard data.

Fish on...

Todd

Oh, they could do it. But there are higher priorities.

Not an easy fix, but pollution is what is killing most of the PS Steelhead. The toxins in our waters need to be cleaned up, pollution standards are too lax in my opinion. The fish will not recover until PS is cleaned up, and that is a HUGE problem.

Was referencing a Salmon Trout Steelheader Magazine article written about this subject. I think back in the late 80's. The article exposed how catch numbers were inflated. Not that the sportsman was being decieved. Out of inner circles, it was never really known how the Dept. of Game came up with the numbers back then.

One of the realities is that it took us 150 years to get to this point and we want it fixed before the next election. Our attention span is simply too short to fix anything major.

i don't know about that, unless you're referring that it was 150 years of screwing things up that gets us to this point. i think that if we could even put things back the way they were 20 years ago, most of us would consider it to be a resounding success.

Just make an STS game on the wii. Snag and floss away. Create different modes when you can be a co-manager or even dictate plant numbers as wdfw's supreme steelhead czar. Wholesome family fun for all ages.

Set the bar low enough and even WDFW can get over it.

20 years ago was the beginnings of the listings in WA.

CM, time really does fly when your having fun, doesn't it?