WDFW will not release 'early winter' hatchery steelhead this spring unless legal issues are resolved

Discussion in 'Steelhead' started by Andrew Lawrence, Apr 1, 2014.

  1. plecoptera419

    plecoptera419 Member

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2012
    Messages:
    76
    Media:
    20
    Likes Received:
    29
    Location:
    Mount Vernon, WA
    Total estimated cost of said project in 2005 dollars: $2,748,259. Nope didn't cost much.
    Total acres of accessible public land lost and not replaced: 175 acres. Nope no loss of opportunity there I guess.

    The tide gates don't work correctly. It doesn't drain as intended. You didn't get side channel habitat. You got a giant brackish water pond. I am truly happy to hear the fish are using it. I really could give a rip about lost hunting opportunity at this point. What I do give a rip about is public lands access, stake holders targeting public lands for restoration projects, and the loss of freshwater wintering and feeding habitat for a large population of wintering waterfowl in the area. I understand the issues on all sides quite clearly. I am an educated working professional in the environmental/ natural resources field by the way. As I stated I get caught up in both sides of these issues whether I want to or not. As to the rest of the conversation we should take it to PMs if you wish.

    I apologize guys. I had no intention of a thread hijack or ruffling any feathers here. I was merely pointing out that there was alot of things going on in fisheries at the time period questioned including a large and controversial fisheries restoration project. It should also be noted that WDFW came under severe budget cuts between to the tune of 21 million between 2007 and 2009. That might also explain some things being left undone.
     
    triploidjunkie likes this.
  2. Chris Bellows

    Chris Bellows Your Preferred WFF Poster

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2003
    Messages:
    1,915
    Media:
    13
    Likes Received:
    1,040
    Location:
    The Salt
    my understanding is this dates from an older lawsuit from WFC which sued wdfw for operating programs without permits in regard to endangered chinook. the judge gave wdfw 10 years to comply and now that 10 years has expired the WFC has re-sued. let's be clear that even if it is only from 2007, that's still plenty of time to get the permits necessary to run your programs if you truly give a shit. i'm sure individuals within wdfw do care, but as an agency it is clear they don't give a rat's ass about wild winter steelhead.

    of course, they may be using these reduced plants as they always have... as a public relations move to make those who oppose them feel increasing pressure from the public and politicians and not have to make the changes/do the work necessary.
     
  3. triploidjunkie

    triploidjunkie Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2010
    Messages:
    2,614
    Media:
    147
    Likes Received:
    1,661
    Location:
    Grand Coulee, WA
    I find it amusing when humans think they can "fix" mother nature. She has a way of regulating things in the end.
     
    Davy likes this.
  4. Chris Johnson

    Chris Johnson Member: Native Fish Society

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2006
    Messages:
    1,906
    Likes Received:
    359
    Location:
    Bellingham Wa.
    " History shows again and again how nature points up the folly of men", Blue Oyster Cult.
     
    David Dalan likes this.
  5. Chris Johnson

    Chris Johnson Member: Native Fish Society

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2006
    Messages:
    1,906
    Likes Received:
    359
    Location:
    Bellingham Wa.
    “It’s in everyone’s best interest to quickly reach an agreement that will promote the recovery of Puget Sound steelhead and provide for tribal and recreational fisheries,” Jim Scott WDFW.



    Mmmm, promote the recovery of Puget Sound steelhead, interesting idea.
     
  6. HauntedByWaters

    HauntedByWaters Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2006
    Messages:
    2,788
    Likes Received:
    143
    Location:
    Bellingham
    LOL. This appears to be such a clueless statement. I may be wrong. But I don't know anybody who works in restoration that thinks they are "fixing" anything. Nothing is that simple.

    Here is what we mainly do: fix culverts for fish passage, fix tide gates for fish passage, remove dikes that aren't necessary to reconnect habitat, and plant trees.

    If you think this work isn't important and that we are all numbskulls than I am afraid you are sorely wrong.

    In every case Mother Nature does the brunt of the long term work, but I doubt she is going to remove a culvert, improve fish passage, and keep a logging road functional, all at the same time.

    Think about it, does Mother Nature carefully remove an derelict dike to improve habitat and keep a neighborhood nearby from getting flooded by building a better dike which also gives more land to the river?

    The work we do is a never ending set of compromises, we don't get to come and and simply "fix" anything. We work with land openers constantly and they are almost always happy with what we do.

    Your comments raised hackles because it is clear you are against such projects. Some are better than others to be sure. There have been successes and failures. I won't deny that.

    But to say that we simply can just sit around and let Mother Nature solve our problems, carefully create compromises, is wrong.

    Mother Nature does not care about infrastructure. Or fish, or us for that matter.

    Mother Nature's "fixes" can leave us devastated by the way. She doesn't exactly paint with a small brush so if you ever are part of a "fix" just tell yourself it's better than all the engineers and scientists trying to help the habitat and fix infrastructure at the same time to create a compromise between humans and nature.

    I truly mean no disrespect to you, but if you think restoration groups are not working to improve fish habitat for salmon and steelhead for all of us and aren't being effective you would be wrong. We are all on the same side.
     
  7. David Dalan

    David Dalan 69°19'15.35" N 18°44'22.74" E

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2007
    Messages:
    2,156
    Media:
    44
    Likes Received:
    891
    Location:
    Walla Walla, WA
    We have long ago bested mother nature. Humans have wiped a large number of species out. They won't be coming back. Once it was thought to be impossible to over fish the seas and rivers. Once the forests were thought to be endless.

    "Mother nature" cannot fix the things we have broken. Rivers that have been damed, straightened, cutoff from their flood plains and "de snagged" (and maybe dredged too for good measure) will not recover themselves if we walk away.
     
    Chawhee likes this.
  8. freestoneangler

    freestoneangler Not to be confused with Freestone

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2006
    Messages:
    4,593
    Media:
    24
    Likes Received:
    913
    Location:
    Edgewood, WA
    Interesting that the gal at the counter made no mention of this when she took my $63 for the 2014 license -- seems they should tell us they'll be even less opportunity than last year (if that's even possible). Of course, this does fit well with the new mantra "paying more for less"; so I shouldn't be surprised.

    Frankly, The Wild Fish Conservancy can go fuck themselves as far as I'm concerned. This does absolutely nothing but harden the lines between the public, the WDFW and these over-the-top groups. Lawyers will get rich and the fish and the fisherman get screwed... simply stupid. 1146.gif
     
    Chawhee likes this.
  9. HauntedByWaters

    HauntedByWaters Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2006
    Messages:
    2,788
    Likes Received:
    143
    Location:
    Bellingham
    I like what freestone said minus the go f themselves part. ;)
     
  10. plecoptera419

    plecoptera419 Member

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2012
    Messages:
    76
    Media:
    20
    Likes Received:
    29
    Location:
    Mount Vernon, WA
    Unfortunately freestone, the gal behind the counter most likely doesn't have a clue. She's not even remotely a player in the game.
     
  11. Chris Johnson

    Chris Johnson Member: Native Fish Society

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2006
    Messages:
    1,906
    Likes Received:
    359
    Location:
    Bellingham Wa.
    For the last 4 years the state has closed all or part of the Nooksack in order to get enough fish back ( about 130 fish ), to get eggs for the program. They plant 99,000 and get a fraction of a percent back. Why should tax payers continue to pay for such a wasteful program? Obviously the wdfw is not going to change the way they do things without some incentive, ie the law suit.
     
    Kim McDonald likes this.
  12. David Dalan

    David Dalan 69°19'15.35" N 18°44'22.74" E

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2007
    Messages:
    2,156
    Media:
    44
    Likes Received:
    891
    Location:
    Walla Walla, WA
  13. freestoneangler

    freestoneangler Not to be confused with Freestone

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2006
    Messages:
    4,593
    Media:
    24
    Likes Received:
    913
    Location:
    Edgewood, WA
    We use this model for everything else...why should our fisheries programs be any different?
     
  14. Chris Johnson

    Chris Johnson Member: Native Fish Society

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2006
    Messages:
    1,906
    Likes Received:
    359
    Location:
    Bellingham Wa.
    Is that a model you support FA?
     
  15. _WW_

    _WW_ Fishes with Wolves

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2005
    Messages:
    2,023
    Media:
    58
    Likes Received:
    718
    Location:
    Skagit River
  16. Salmo_g

    Salmo_g Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2004
    Messages:
    7,902
    Media:
    6
    Likes Received:
    1,994
    Location:
    Your City ,State
    I like it. This could advance the question of whether the state and or federal governments are on the hook to provide hatchery fish for treaty fishing when natural populations are too depressed to do so. So are they, or aren't they?

    Sg
     
    flybill likes this.
  17. TomB

    TomB Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2004
    Messages:
    1,631
    Likes Received:
    67
    Location:
    seattle,wa


    Very good point, Sg! While we are answering that question, let me ask another: "If we are on the hook to provide hatchery fish for treaty fishing when natural populations are too depressed to do so, what happens when doing so adversely affects the very populations that are depressed, and which legal obligation, ESA or treaty rights, takes precedence?"
     
  18. Chris Johnson

    Chris Johnson Member: Native Fish Society

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2006
    Messages:
    1,906
    Likes Received:
    359
    Location:
    Bellingham Wa.
    ...and if the state is obligated to provide hatchery fish for tribes to catch, and hatchery steelhead adversely effect native steelhead, can they completely isolate them from the native fish?
     
  19. freestoneangler

    freestoneangler Not to be confused with Freestone

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2006
    Messages:
    4,593
    Media:
    24
    Likes Received:
    913
    Location:
    Edgewood, WA
    This will take the "Flight of the Phoenix"... circling around and around in circles of ever decreasing diameters...until it eventually flies up its own ass. What a stupid waste. 1146.gif
     
  20. _WW_

    _WW_ Fishes with Wolves

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2005
    Messages:
    2,023
    Media:
    58
    Likes Received:
    718
    Location:
    Skagit River
    The state and the feds are co-managers with the tribes. As a consequence they are only 50% responsible, morally and financially. :)
     
    (BigDave) likes this.

Share This Page