The one yard line

Salmo_g

Well-Known Member
What incentive do the tribes have to make this fishery work?
Mainly they won't have the ESA steelhead take limit restricting their spring Chinook fishery. And when steelhead runs are large enough, they can directly target steelhead for harvest, which they regard as beneficial.
 
Step one in the preservation and restoration of steelhead in puget sound.

Stop urbanization.

If we are unwilling to do that we are unwilling to restore the region's fisheries.
Time for WDFW and NOAA to come out with that as their official position.
 

inland

Active Member
While I think this monitoring is a good thing for data collection...lets not forget there are many rivers up and down the coast and inland with identical 'threatened' status on SH. Next to ZERO (rivers) require jumping through these kinds of hoops just to conduct a C&R recreational fishery. This tells me no one trusts the data on the Skagit regarding run size (for good reason). Nor do they trust the data regarding angler impacts (as in fish to net or hand). For good reason again.

If this thing actually gets up and running, how many 'catches' are they going to allow for the season before its shut down? What mortality rate are they going to use?
 
That doesn’t answer the question. Who decides what data is valuable and what data is noise?
It does answer the question.

At this point with 30 years of failed efforts to preserve and restore the runs NOAA and WDFW should be forced to justify closures with data that proves the closure WILL result in long term benefits.

Point blank these organizations know why the fish are struggling, we have known for decades. They also know that for political reasons we cannot do what needs to be done. Time to admit it and let us fish.. its about for them to be honest.
Harvest, hydro,hatcheries, habitat.
The main things are the plain things..
 
While I think this monitoring is a good thing for data collection...lets not forget there are many rivers up and down the coast and inland with identical 'threatened' status on SH. Next to ZERO (rivers) require jumping through these kinds of hoops just to conduct a C&R recreational fishery. This tells me no one trusts the data on the Skagit regarding run size (for good reason). Nor do they trust the data regarding angler impacts (as in fish to net or hand). For good reason again.

If this thing actually gets up and running, how many 'catches' are they going to allow for the season before its shut down? What mortality rate are they going to use?
Read the whole thread or one of the several others. That information has already been posted multiple times. Or you could read the RMP.
 

Smalma

Active Member
Inland -
You do raise an interesting point. For whatever reason both the State and the feds have held Puget Sound fisheries to higher standards than many other areas. I don't mind being held to those standards but it would be nice if they were do the same for the other "Hs"; if so might see something besides declining runs.

Curt
 
Inland -
You do raise an interesting point. For whatever reason both the State and the feds have held Puget Sound fisheries to higher standards than many other areas. I don't mind being held to those standards but it would be nice if they were do the same for the other "Hs"; if so might see something besides declining runs.

Curt

Maybe other portions of the state don't have the same barriers to recovery?

For instance i think WDFW would argue the most if not all Lower Columbia tributaries are fully seeding the available habitat and the lowest of it's tribs are not even ESA listed at all.

Or the more likely scenario. Olympia and DC don't give a rip about the rest of the state.
 
Last edited:

Shad

Active Member
Shad-
Distilling this issue to the bare minimum - Any fishing for Skagit wild steelhead is fishing on/for an ESA listed species. Because there is some mortality associated with even a CnR fishery that impact/take has to be permitted by the responsible agency (in this case NOAA). As a condition of that permit; just like the Chinook fishing in Puget Sound monitoring is required. That monitoring is to insure that impacts from that fishery do not exceed those impacts allowed and that the managing agency (in this case WDFW) can take appropriate actions if those limitations are reached. Bottom line the harsh reality is that without monitoring no fishing.

However a bigger picture view is that the monitoring will demonstrate a fishery can be mounted directed towards an ESA listed species without increasing risks of extinction or retarding recovery. In todays world that is information that likely provide invaluable.

Curt
Thanks!

I guess I had let the three-letter acronym "ESA" slip out of the scope of my reasoning. For that matter, I thought the Skagit run was slightly better off than that; hence the proposal to open fishing. That was poor form, letting this topic go so far without understanding that.

Indeed, ESA explains the enforcement requirements, but I still question what we expect to learn that we didn't already know. I'm not sure how interested I am in proving how "safe" it is to C&R endangered fish. I would never intentionally target an endangered species. If that's what we're lobbying for, I'm out.
 

bk paige

Wishin I was on the Sauk
Thanks!

I guess I had let the three-letter acronym "ESA" slip out of the scope of my reasoning. For that matter, I thought the Skagit run was slightly better off than that; hence the proposal to open fishing. That was poor form, letting this topic go so far without understanding that.

Indeed, ESA explains the enforcement requirements, but I still question what we expect to learn that we didn't already know. I'm not sure how interested I am in proving how "safe" it is to C&R endangered fish. I would never intentionally target an endangered species. If that's what we're lobbying for, I'm out.

But you are willing to fish on the Hoh that hasent made escapments in 15-20 yrs or any coastal river that is in worse shape than any PS river? Seems hypocritical to me!
 
But you are willing to fish on the Hoh that hasent made escapments in 15-20 yrs or any coastal river that is in worse shape than any PS river? Seems hypocritical to me!
Well none of the species currently listed will ever recover and become unlisted so might as well fish for them.
 

Latest posts