Federal Action On Protecting Puget Sound Habitat

[huntnphool]

Federal action a great start on protecting Puget Sound habitat

http://www.seattletimes.com/opinion/editorials/federal-action-a-great-start-on-protecting-puget-sound-habitat/

The biggest remaining challenge may be negotiating to acquire additional land that’s needed, including private farmland adjacent to the Skagit and Nooksack rivers. Negotiations must be fair and proceed with respect for the economic and cultural importance of agriculture.

 Sounds like "eminent domain" may be in store for some of you up North.

[JimmyHoffa]

I guess I'm too much of a pessimist.  I'm not seeing where the salmon will be roaring back; but might have a place to read some interpretive area signs and walk your leashed dog.

[snake]

Even if it produced more fish, the tribe will just choke the river off or just lay claim to it.

[freezerfull]

On the sack it's nothing but nets, don't believe habitat is the issue..

[CLARKTAR]

On the sack it's nothing but nets, don't believe habitat is the issue..

Or both are an issue.

Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk

[singleshot12]

There are so much politics involved with salmon and habitat it makes your head spin

[Special T]

I belive it's a combination of netting and habitat. I do think the Indians are right to go after culverts that impede fish passage. Unfortunately they have gone overboard. There are 2 projects that make men shake my head. The recent one was the closure of hwy9 just south of Big lake North of McMurray  that culvert was on Lake Creek that fed Big lake. The other was replaced many years ago on Lake Cavanaugh Rd on a small tributary Creek to Lake Creek.

Why would I find issue with repairing and uprising culverts that need it? Because down street in Nookachamp Creek there is a 20' waterfall that no fish can pass. Surely there are many different projects that have  an immediate impact before those 2... do they plan on a fish ladders for the falls?

[npaull]

Gotta stop ALL netting at or near river mouths. Give the fish a damn break. They made it that far, we should let em drop eggs.

[JimmyHoffa]

There are some streams in Washington that have habitat that has been preserved in pretty good shape for many years.  Far better than habitat projects in the Sound will return that land back to.  Those streams have declines too.  For instance, check the habitat for the Queets River (system).  A lot of really good habitat.  Nets six days a week.  Not much in the way of fish (considering what it should have based on the habitat argument).

[CLARKTAR]

There are some streams in Washington that have habitat that has been preserved in pretty good shape for many years.  Far better than habitat projects in the Sound will return that land back to.  Those streams have declines too.  For instance, check the habitat for the Queets River (system).  A lot of really good habitat.  Nets six days a week.  Not much in the way of fish (considering what it should have based on the habitat argument).

Perhaps you are not familiar with the habitat on the tribs to the queets. While it is FAR better than most Puget sound basins, it has a legacy of abuse and habitat issues...

Harvest is apart of the problem for sure. Likely more of a limiting factor on the queets than habitat.

Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk

[GBoyd]

I'm watching the Elwa. If they can't get the runs to recover with almost 100% of the spawning habitat in the national park, the other river systems in the area are in trouble.

+1 to JimmyHoffa. Interpretive signs are likely, only after 10 years of negotiations and a half billion of public money.

[Antlershed]

There are so much politics involved with salmon and habitat it makes your head spin