I left a voice mail voicing support for an immediate opening.

Whoa! Take a breath folks. Please.

This is not a fly v gear thing. Or a PETA thing. And Occupy Skagit is NOT a fly fishing only group. OS is a mixed group of anglers whose sole mission has been to re-open the Skagit system to the same wild steelhead season that we had from 1981 through 2009, that has been closed since the 2010 season.

OS has encouraged, maybe been a catalyst, and the state and tribal co-managers finally developed a Resource Management Plan (RMP) as required under ESA regulations. NMFS has been reviewing the Plan since Nov. 2016 and preparing the Preliminary Evaluation (PEPD) and Environmental Assessment (EA) and biological opinion (BO) since that time. The PEPD was open for public comment from Dec. 8, 2017 through Jan. 8, 2018.

Most of the comments were supportive, some were opposed, and some were supportive but with conditions. Certain of those commenters claimed to support a Skagit season, but want to wait for recover (without identifying what recovery is or even looks like), or want more resource data - to a degree never before done anywhere for any fishery in the world that I know of, and more detailed monitoring than what the Plan specifies, which would amount to far more monitoring than NMFS requires for any other fishing that occurs where ESA-listed fish are present. In short, these comments intend to require conditions that will never be met. That leads me to believe that those commenters do not really support having a season and would prefer that the river remain closed forever.

I began receiving information the other day that even though the comment period closed a couple months ago that NMFS was getting a lot of last minute input in opposition to the Skagit season. That is why I asked interested anglers who support the season to contact Barry, just in case he has any lingering doubts.

In candor, is the RMP perfect? Of course it isn't. Perfect is not one of the choices on the menu. Those who insist on perfect, like some of the opponents, will never get a season. Nonetheless, make no mistake, the Skagit has been the most conservatively managed steelhead fishery in the entire state. Skagit steelhead are not endangered nor threatened. The Skagit River is a victim of geography. If the Skagit were north of the 49th parallel and in B.C., it would be the healthiest steelhead population in southern B.C. It can support the traditional CNR recreational fishery and the incidental and directed take by the treaty tribes. The Plan is designed to continue the conservative management of Skagit steelhead.

This is not a gear type issue. It's not a treaty v non-treaty issue. The issue I've asked you to weigh in on is between middle of the road reasonable people like you and me, and the radical, I want it may way or no way of certain dot org commenters. Besides, we already know that in a perfect world the regulations would just be designed to keep Todd and his pink worms off the rivers (jk).

Sg

Thanks, WW, I had seen that one.

There is a letter there that is signed by several groups opposing the opening.

RUNnGUN,

Be strong with your opinions on the WFC or NFC on the opener...but do know that the WSC has come out with full support of the fishery, as they should, the closures of the CnR fisheries in Puget Sound in 2000 was the reason for the creation of the Wild Steelhead Coalition.

I think that over the years they have frequently ended up being exactly the same as the NFS or WFC, but on this one they seem to have remembered that they were formed by anglers who were trying to strike a balance between making fish museum pieces and being able to fish for them...and I am very gratified to see it.

Fish on...

Todd

Here is the Native Fish Society's letter in opposition to the opening:

https://nativefishsociety.org/news-media/to-open-or-not-to-open-the-skagit-steelhead-fishery

It is signed by:

Native Fish Society
Wild Fish Conservancy
Pacific Biodiversity Institute
Conservation Angler

Here is the Wild Steelhead Coalition's letter in support of the opening:

http://wildsteelheadcoalition.org/2018/01/skagit-basin-steelhead-management-public-meetings/

The WSC is, however, advocating for no fishing out of boats, and I do not agree with that position. Couching that position in terms of reducing impacts by reducing access to fish is not a particularly bad idea, but it smacks of rather serious hypocrisy to not advocate for banning motor boats in this fishery altogether.

It seems that the increased access to fish only is a problem when it is gear anglers fishing out of boats...it apparently is not a problem with fly anglers who scoot up and down the river all day in jet sleds to access more and more river bars to swing off of.

It's good for the goose, but not for the gander, is how it looks.

Fish on...

Todd

Point noted. Struggling with the fishing out of a boat/jet boat issue. On one hand it's a shame to limit opportunities for all. On the other I can see how it could offer some safe zones for fish. I could work with either one, however IMO bombing around on the Sauk in a sled is a tough one to swallow. Thanks for sharing WSC letter. What is the difference between WFC and NFC. Both titles are included in their letter.

Boat fishing regulations are a little bit tricky. Under the standard "Special Gear Regulations" one cannot fish from a motor boat. On the Skagit mainstem that was modified so that one cannot fish from a motor boat with the motor running. This was a waiver created because boon-dogging was the most popular method for drift fishing with conventional steelhead gear, where the old Skagit scows were controlled by an oarsman with a set of "sweeps" (oars) as the boat drifted down through a piece of water. Nowadays with jet sleds equipped with a main jet powered motor, a gas kicker, and an electric, they might be SOL if they don't have a set of oars to use while drifting and fishing, but you cannot use a motor while fishing under Special Gear Regulations.

As for the Sauk, anglers are (or were) allowed to fish from drift boats or rafts, but not a boat equipped with a motor. WDFW cannot regulate navigation, so some folks have run jet boats (me included) up the Sauk and then got out and bank fished. A caveman however, would sit on a log, or maybe a dugout canoe, and fish from that . . .

See nothing wrong with that. Back in the day it was open to sleds but not under power, only paddling.

If that’s what they decide I don’t want any Spey guys bitching and moaning about a bunch of spoon and drift guys ruining “their” bar.

I remember many years ago seeing John farrar's Boat flying up and down the lower Sauk. Speaking of the main stem, I intentionally built my 17 foot jet boat with oars so I could have the flexibility.

If you don't know what they are, how will you know 'em when you see 'em?

The kicker for WDFW is that they can manage time, place, and manner. They can't prohibit you from being in a boat on a body of water. They can prohibit "fishing from" or "hunting from" a boat. Not even sure if they can flat out ban motorized boats from a waterbody.

The actual use of the waterways is, I believe, a county or city responsibility.

I know what they look like.

As far as sleds legal to run around on the Sauk, even for transportation? I can see a mess a comin. Can regulate them off by limiting horsepower. Would like to see a 24 footer trying to run up on a 9.9.

Regulating horsepower is up to the County. Talk to them about it.

The Sauk and Skagit are "Wild and Scenic Rivers", which I believe prohibits motor boats...but the Skagit has an exemption from that requirement.

The Sauk does not.

I think that's the current situation.

Fish on...

Todd

This conversation isn't going as I'd hoped.

I've been fishing the Skagit and Sauk Rivers since 1972. It has been rare for me to experience any conflict between gear types or boat and bank fishing methods. There have been a few times while I was fly fishing from the bank and boon-doggers in a boat floated and fished through the water I was fishing, but overall it has been really uncommon. So in my opinion all the ranting about fly and conventional gear conflict and boat and bank fishing conflict is being way over blown.

The conflict that has me concerned, and I hope it concerns you as well, is between those who want the river to remain closed to steelhead fishing and those of us who want the season to open. That is why I started this thread, and I thank all of you who have called or emailed to express your support for the Skagit season.

Sg

Email sent

In my view, WFC's letter looks like it is designed to set up (or at least make it look to NMFS like WFC is setting up), a legal challenge under NEPA. That's why, among other things, the letter repeatedly asserts that the proposed fishery is "controversial." (The degree a proposed action is controversial in terms of environmental impacts is one factor NMFS must consider in determining whether an EIS is required.)

If NMFS were to conclude, based on its EA, that an EIS is required, we can kiss goodbye not only this season, but likely next year's season as well, because preparation of an EIS normally takes well over one year (especially for an agency as bogged down in NEPA and ESA paperwork as NMFS).

The good news is that NMFS can respond to the concerns raised in WFC's letter in its EA (or elsewhere in the administrative record) and thereby create a more favorable record should a legal challenge be brought. That may be one reason for NMFS's delay in issuing the go-ahead (just my speculation).

Although I moved about 6 years ago down to Oregon, I still dream of returning to fish the Sauk and Skagit at least a few more times before father time catches up to me. Those rivers and their steelhead are simply magnificent. A sincere thanks to all who have volunteered their blood, sweat and tears to the effort to re-open the Skagit and Sauk.

Here's my email.

Mr. Thom – The Skagit River steelhead harvest management plan is duly conservative; DOJ has good lawyers to defend your EA; call the Wild Fish Conservancy’s bluff; open the Skagit!

Best regards,

Brian McLachlan

Emails sent to Both Mr Thom and Susan Bishop.

The sand is slipping through the hourglass on a season, time to sh!t and get off the pot!

I agree that the important part is getting it open, and I also agree that gear conflicts are very minimal...but confining us all to the small amount of decent fishing bars on the Skagit and Sauk will certainly increase the conflicts.

I was just noting that it's not surprising that attempting to limit fishing from boats negatively affects all but one type of fishing gear...and that the purported reason for it...decreasing access to the fish so they can have a better chance at avoiding the fishery...is hypocritically addressed only by stopping one type of fisher, but not the other (who uses sleds to access lots of water they'd have one shot at if they confined themselves to drift boats and rafts).

Fish on...

Todd

Just a thought about bank fishing from observations....

Steelhead that are close to spawning generally lay in tail outs...generally in 2-5' of water.

Bank fisherman (gear type excluded) tend to target these fish as they are aggressive and gear presentation can be much easier. Thus equating to a fish that is easier to catch.

Problem is, many sport fishermen unknowingly walk all over these spawning areas and this time of year those footprints land on reds.

Gear types, fishing from boats, walking on the bank...however you want to slice it, all C&R fishing has a negative impact.

We, as anglers, must accept all methods of enjoying these fish. (except bait)

If there are enough fish to fish over and the run can continue to be sustainable then lets all cut the [Bleeeeep!] and work together. This bickering has been going on for far too long.