New limits on bass, walleye, channel catfish in effect for select lakes & rivers

[bearpaw]

WDFW NEWS RELEASE
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
600 Capitol Way North, Olympia, WA 98501-1091
http://wdfw.wa.gov/

February 18, 2020
Contact: Steve Caromile, 360-902-8315
Public Affairs contact: Ben Anderson, 360-902-0045

New limits on bass, walleye, and channel catfish now in effect for select lakes, rivers throughout Washington

Corrects information about allowable size limits for largemouth bass.

OLYMPIA – As of Monday, Feb. 17, anglers on 77 lakes, as well as rivers, streams, and beaver ponds across Washington are allowed to keep more bass, walleye, and channel catfish as part of their daily limit under new permanent rules approved by the Fish and Wildlife Commission late last year.
The rules, approved at the Commission's December meeting in Bellingham, were the result of legislation passed in 2019 by the Washington State Legislature, and intended to help aid the endangered Southern Resident Killer Whale population by reducing the risk of predation on salmon smolts by these warmwater species.

"These measures were implemented in part to help meet the recommendations of the governor's Southern Resident Orca Task Force, and we presented commissioners with a range of options to choose from," said Steve Caromile, inland fish program manager with the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW). "We believe we landed on a set of rules that address those recommendations, while still allowing for robust fishing opportunities for these popular species."

The following changes to size and daily limits went into effect Monday in 77 lakes around the state:

•   Largemouth bass: Change from 5 to a 10-fish daily limit; anglers must release fish between 12 and 17 inches, and only one fish may be over 17 inches.
•   Smallmouth bass: Change from 10 to a 15-fish daily limit; only one fish may be over 14 inches.
•   Channel catfish: Change from 5 to a 10-fish daily limit. No minimum size.
•   Walleye: Change from 8 to a 16-fish daily limit; only one fish may be over 22 inches.
Additionally, all size restrictions and daily limits for these species are lifted in rivers, streams, and beaver ponds statewide. You can find a list of all affected lakes online at https://wdfw.wa.gov/sites/default/files/2020-02/2shb1579-lake-list.pdf

Several other freshwater rule changes also went into effect Monday, including:

•   Restoring a year-round fishing season on the portion of the Colville River that extends from the mouth upstream to the bridge at the town of Valley.
•   Implementing a permanent fishing closure in the upper Green (Duwamish) River in the Tacoma Municipal Watershed from the Tacoma Municipal Watershed Boundary Marker (approximately 1.3 miles downstream of the Tacoma Headworks Dam) to the Friday Creek confluence.
•   Removing eastern brook trout from the trout daily limit in Patterson Lake (Okanogan County), removing the daily limit of lake trout in Lake Chelan, and removing trout and cutthroat special size restrictions on Black Lake (Thurston County).
•   As is the case with trout, kokanee caught with bait will count toward the daily limit whether kept or released.

For more information on all of these rules, view the rule filings at WDFW's rule-making webpage at https://wdfw.wa.gov/about/regulations/2020#19-13-052.

[bigtex]

It's interesting that in 2018 WDFW released their new model of simplifying fishing regulations and making the reg book smaller. Then the bill that directed WDFW to enact this new rule passed the legislature in 2019 and as a result we will now see the largest/thickest fishing reg book WA has ever seen. Why? Because many of those 77 lakes previously fell under the statewide regs and didn't have specific seasons so they weren't listed, now those lakes have specific seasons, thus they have to be listed name-by-name.

[Mr Mykiss]

WDFW....increasing bag limits on warm water species in LAKES....to save SALMON...to save ORCAS...hats off folks...hats off.

[C-Money]

Appears Moses, Banks & Potholes limits will not be affected? Glad of that.

[blackpowderhunter]

these increase in limits are directed at lakes that salmon pass through for spawning, or that fry come out into.
so yes, moses, banks, and potholes are not on the list.
lake wa, samammish, union, etc have high levels of predatory warm water species eating salmon fry which are pushed out of rivers early due to reduced habitat.

WDFW could offer everyone free licenses and there'd still be some people who complained and expressed their hatred.

Is this a perfect idea? no.  nothing in this world ever is.

in my opinion in many of the lakes not much will change, how many people are keeping 5 large mouth or 10 smallmouth a day as it is?  most of those fish are catch and release.

[Sandberm]

My old timer neighbor who used to fish for walleye below Ice harbor dam on the Snake R. said he was talking to one of his old fishing buddies who still gets out often. That guy said the fishing below Ice Harbor for walleye is terrible because the limits were lifted.

For what its worth.

[Bill W]

Appears Moses, Banks & Potholes limits will not be affected? Glad of that.

I went thru the list of lakes also.  I think almost all of the listed lakes do not hold walleye.  Westside bass waters took a big hit.

[Southpole]

these increase in limits are directed at lakes that salmon pass through for spawning, or that fry come out into.
so yes, moses, banks, and potholes are not on the list.
lake wa, samammish, union, etc have high levels of predatory warm water species eating salmon fry which are pushed out of rivers early due to reduced habitat.

WDFW could offer everyone free licenses and there'd still be some people who complained and expressed their hatred.

Is this a perfect idea? no.  nothing in this world ever is.

in my opinion in many of the lakes not much will change, how many people are keeping 5 large mouth or 10 smallmouth a day as it is? most of those fish are catch and release.

Non u.s. type people...

[KopperBuck]

That's kind of a *censored*ty statement.

[Chesterdog]

Sammamish has been getting gillnetted for a few years by the muckleshoot tribe with the states approval, to remove walleye, suckers and bass.  I'm shocked that such an operation can happen so quietly without public input, but with a .07 percent survival rate on planted Chinook smolts and a dying kokanee population, I guess they had to do something and maybe the tribes are able to act more immediately with less bureaucracy. 

I remember when lake Washington/Sammamish salmon runs were epic.  Warm productive bass lakes will exist in the future. Clean/healthy salmon spawning lakes... not so much. 

http://nwsportsmanmag.com/lake-sammamish-gillnetting-raises-questions/

[KopperBuck]

We've found nets in smallmouth spawning sloughs on the Columbia the last couple years.

[Southpole]

That's kind of a *censored*ty statement.

Is that for me? Is foreigners that don't speak english a better term? I've seen on many occasions where a big family of Russian/Ukrainian/east European folks keep bass.

[blackpowderhunter]

That's kind of a *censored*ty statement.

Is that for me? Is foreigners that don't speak english a better term? I've seen on many occasions where a big family of Russian/Ukrainian/east European folks keep bass.

eh...i said how many people. not what type of people. so you took it there.

[Southpole]

That's kind of a *censored*ty statement.

Is that for me? Is foreigners that don't speak english a better term? I've seen on many occasions where a big family of Russian/Ukrainian/east European folks keep bass.

eh...i said how many people. not what type of people. so you took it there.

Oh, my comprehension skills are off, carry on 

[Katmai Guy]

In all lakes and rivers used by salmon it should be mandatory catch and keep for bass and walleye.  Invasive species (wolves of the water)

[Southpole]

I don’t know anything about walleye, but can you really hurt the large mouth bass population, in larger lakes, if most everyone kept a limit every time they went fishing. They seem like prolific reproducers like perch, not to mention hardy and tolerant.

[Bullkllr]

I get the "invasive species" argument, but the real issue with this for me is it's typical WDFW grabbing at the lowest hanging fruit.

They're taking an easy and cheap option that will likely have negligible impact while continuing to ignore enormous factors that would require more expensive and less PC solutions.

I'd say there is a very strong likelihood that this results in some more ruined warm-water fisheries while having near zero positive effects toward saving salmon or orcas. This is why we can't have nice things.

[bassquatch]

I get the "invasive species" argument, but the real issue with this for me is it's typical WDFW grabbing at the lowest hanging fruit.

They're taking an easy and cheap option that will likely have negligible impact while continuing to ignore enormous factors that would require more expensive and less PC solutions.

I'd say there is a very strong likelihood that this results in some more ruined warm-water fisheries while having near zero positive effects toward saving salmon or orcas. This is why we can't have nice things.

That's called 'common sense' and not allowed in Washington! 

Meanwhile, I will be fully implementing my new 'handling' standards for all my salmon, trout and steelhead going forward. WDFW and the huggers can kiss my bass. 

[Skillet]

Meanwhile, I will be fully implementing my new 'handling' standards for all my salmon, trout and steelhead going forward. WDFW and the huggers can kiss my bass. 

Well, I for one wish you wouldn't... I don't see how it would benefit you or the warmwater fisheries in any way?