We just lost the most productive, public duck hunting spot on the Westside

[Chesterdog]

The Skagit Island Unit is the most productive duck hunting spot by numbers on the west side of the state.  WDFW announced last month that this historic public hunting opportunity is being sacrificed for salmon habitat recovery.  To put that in perspective, it would be like the Eastsiders losing the opportunity to hunt Potholes or McNary.  THIS IS A HUGE LOSS!

If you hunt the Eastside and think, "oh well that doesn't affect me."  When additional trucks show up at your honey hole and you're wondering where they all came from, please pause and take some responsibility before throwing dirty looks.  A loss of hunting opportunity, especially one as huge as this, effects everyone.  Hunters will hunt.  If I can't hunt at Skagit, I'll be looking elsewhere and that may translate to increased pressure in your area.

I understand that this was a David vs Goliath fight.  When the state is looking to get their hands on those sweet of piles of Federal Funding and Orca Jay is on his soap box about the starving JPOD, us duck hunters realistically never stood a chance.  As a community, us westside duck hunters just aren't well organized from what I've seen. 

It's funny to me that the Natives in our state can claim cultural and historical hunting rights, and the state takes it as serious as a heart attack, yet the spot I learned to hunt on 30 years ago from someone willing to pass-on the knowledge of the Skagit tides and the ability to navigate the ever changing Skagit river, or the location of the best blinds to hunt based on wind direction including the "Scout blind" an eagle project over a half century old which is used almost daily, none of that is cultural or historic, or at least not significant according to the state.

The best we can hope for at this point is table scraps in the form of expanded opportunity elsewhere.  Anyone who understands duck hunting (clearly WDFW doesn't), will know that a quality opportunity for waterfowl requires a magical mix of feed, water, and a flyway that ducks want to use.  The Skagit Island unit bordered a national wildlife refuge.  I don't believe anything comparable is possible for WDFW to offer to the west side, but it's still worth it for us to put pressure on WDFW during these public comment periods to offer something. 

Finally, as a waterfowler from the Seattle area, I used to hunt units in the Snoqualmie Valley such as Cherry Valley, or Crescent Lake.  In the last 10 years WDFW has shown favor to pheasant hunters and installed signs at these spots that don't allow entry from 4pm to 8am.  Duck hunters know that the most favorable hunting occurs in the first and last hours of daylight.  By 8am the parking lot is full of pheasant hunters eager to hit the field.  What a bummer for duck hunters like me who used to enjoy those areas. 

Do I have an advocate within WDFW who cares that we've lost all 3 duck hunting opportunities within an hour of Seattle in the last 5 years? That has to be on someone's watch who's still there within the department.  I'd sure like to meet him/her.

Please send an e-mail, or register on the available zoom comment periods.  We've got to push back on these loss of public land hunting opportunities. When they're gone, they're gone and if no one cares, no one cares...  A loss elsewhere in the state hurts all of us as we keep getting squeezed.

[Stein]

It's sad for sure, that property was one of the only places where tons of people hunted.  They will either quit or be crammed onto the very few other public lands.

Sadly, WDFW chose to give up basically any piece of land the state own bordering salt instead of working to find other solutions that didn't involve a lose/lose situation.

I agree we are not well organized.  I know WWA put up a fight, but yeah, we don't have the resources to mount serious legal battles that could get results.

[Special T]

 

It is very hard to fight anything Salmon related.

I joined Washington Waterfowl Association because they are a  HUNTING org worried about sportsmen caress rights ECT.

Some of you may not know it but the farmed island was 2x as large 20 years ago when they turned it into habitat. I left that other waterfowl association  because they wouldn't speak against it and have been on the esa salmon test since then.

The only way to make progress is to join a team that wants to engage the department. I'm a proud member of the NW chapter (I've hunted the island)  and if you want to get involved or make things happen you should join like me.

www.washingtonwaterfowl.org

[Stein]

I don't see anything changing until there is some national level support.  There are national waterfowl associations, but as mentioned at least one of them is more of a hindrance than a help regarding destruction of waterfowl hunting areas in western WA.  None of them seem willing to go to bat for their members here. 

Local organizations are great in many ways, but they aren't large enough to have staff attorneys or the reach or influence required to give hunters a fighting chance.

[Special T]

I don't see anything changing until there is some national level support.  There are national waterfowl associations, but as mentioned at least one of them is more of a hindrance than a help regarding destruction of waterfowl hunting areas in western WA.  None of them seem willing to go to bat for their members here. 

Local organizations are great in many ways, but they aren't large enough to have staff attorneys or the reach or influence required to give hunters a fighting chance.

It will stop when the state restores every piece of intertidal property it owns. They will still come up short about 1000 acres in the state then they have to buy up private property.

[Chesterdog]

The state sure doesn't care about the prime salmon habitat along the Duwamish river under the 1st Ave South bridge that I drive past on my way to work every day.  It's a festering homeless site that resembles a scene from an apocalypse movie.  This is a tidal estuary that they don't have the will to keep clean in the only river that runs through Seattle.  That should tell you something.  I don't believe for a second that these people care about salmon or people.

[Stein]

They are complying with a court mandate, not managing fish.  I'm not sure they have any sort of salmon recovery plan but that's another discussion.  In WA, the courts seems to be the only ones really managing fish.

[h2ofowlr]

The Island hunted really good this season.  Probably over 10K birds harvested off of it this year.  Very unfortunate to see this happen.  WDFW goes where the money is and the state seems to want to throw money in this direction vs. actual fixes like habitat improvements up river and restricting net fishing and by catch.

[2MANY]

Washington is short for Lil' Cali.
The Rockies and Alaska is next.
Over population has no boundaries.

[Stein]

The Island hunted really good this season.  Probably over 10K birds harvested off of it this year.  Very unfortunate to see this happen.  WDFW goes where the money is and the state seems to want to throw money in this direction vs. actual fixes like habitat improvements up river and restricting net fishing and by catch.

WDFW largely relies on the court system to manage game.  Just do whatever the judge says, or better yet, just do what the plaintiff says so you don't even need to go to court.

There are good people in there, unfortunately the good ones only have so much latitude and the big decisions are out of their hands.  When you rely on appointed people and you have the guy we do, you will never get anything remotely science based.

[pianoman9701]

The Island hunted really good this season.  Probably over 10K birds harvested off of it this year.  Very unfortunate to see this happen.  WDFW goes where the money is and the state seems to want to throw money in this direction vs. actual fixes like habitat improvements up river and restricting net fishing and by catch.

WDFW largely relies on the court system to manage game.  Just do whatever the judge says, or better yet, just do what the plaintiff says so you don't even need to go to court.

There are good people in there, unfortunately the good ones only have so much latitude and the big decisions are out of their hands.  When you rely on appointed people and you have the guy we do, you will never get anything remotely science based.

If there's a ruling by a court that something is unconstitutional or violates city, county, state, or federal laws, the DFW has not choice, other than appeal, than to follow the ruling. Don't get me wrong; I have many problems with the DFW. Following the judgements of the courts isn't one of them. In those cases, my problem lies with the courts.

[Tbar]

The Island hunted really good this season.  Probably over 10K birds harvested off of it this year.  Very unfortunate to see this happen.  WDFW goes where the money is and the state seems to want to throw money in this direction vs. actual fixes like habitat improvements up river and restricting net fishing and by catch.

WDFW largely relies on the court system to manage game.  Just do whatever the judge says, or better yet, just do what the plaintiff says so you don't even need to go to court.

There are good people in there, unfortunately the good ones only have so much latitude and the big decisions are out of their hands.  When you rely on appointed people and you have the guy we do, you will never get anything remotely science based.

Stein,
Speaking to this specific project, do you want to go over or dispute the science presented in the process? The political element was 97-0 in the house and 44-4 in the senate. If you want to talk specifics we can get as specific and technical as you'd like. Keep in mind this was rooted in an agriculture driven process many years ago.  It's easy to armchair quarterback a process which will make you popular around here. 

[Tbar]

The Island hunted really good this season.  Probably over 10K birds harvested off of it this year.  Very unfortunate to see this happen.  WDFW goes where the money is and the state seems to want to throw money in this direction vs. actual fixes like habitat improvements up river and restricting net fishing and by catch.

WDFW largely relies on the court system to manage game.  Just do whatever the judge says, or better yet, just do what the plaintiff says so you don't even need to go to court.

There are good people in there, unfortunately the good ones only have so much latitude and the big decisions are out of their hands.  When you rely on appointed people and you have the guy we do, you will never get anything remotely science based.

If there's a ruling by a court that something is unconstitutional or violates city, county, state, or federal laws, the DFW has not choice, other than appeal, than to follow the ruling. Don't get me wrong; I have many problems with the DFW. Following the judgements of the courts isn't one of them. In those cases, my problem lies with the courts.

What's unconstitutional? Please enlighten me.   

[PatoLoco]

"Speaking to this specific project, do you want to go over or dispute the science presented in the process? The political element was 97-0 in the house and 44-4 in the senate. If you want to talk specifics we can get as specific and technical as you'd like. Keep in mind this was rooted in an agriculture driven process many years ago.  It's easy to armchair quarterback a process which will make you popular around here."

The political element? Are you referring to HB1418? (Recommending that public lands be reverted to intertidal first?) There was no vote in the legislature for the this project.

One wonders why, of the estuary projects on public land in NW WA, you have 100% conversion to estuary on three public hunting areas (Headquarters, Leque Island, and now the Island Unit), but a partial restoration/"compromise" on the Fir Island snow goose reserve, which has no public hunting. Will a project that converts the rest of that area be next, before DFW tries to buy private land to remove dikes?

[Tbar]

"Speaking to this specific project, do you want to go over or dispute the science presented in the process? The political element was 97-0 in the house and 44-4 in the senate. If you want to talk specifics we can get as specific and technical as you'd like. Keep in mind this was rooted in an agriculture driven process many years ago.  It's easy to armchair quarterback a process which will make you popular around here."

The political element? Are you referring to HB1418? (Recommending that public lands be reverted to intertidal first?) There was no vote in the legislature for the this project.

One wonders why, of the estuary projects on public land in NW WA, you have 100% conversion to estuary on three public hunting areas (Headquarters, Leque Island, and now the Island Unit), but a partial restoration/"compromise" on the Fir Island snow goose reserve, which has no public hunting. Will a project that converts the rest of that area be next, before DFW tries to buy private land to remove dikes?

Yes, 1418.

[DOUBLELUNG]

It used to be a common joke among WDFW's wildlife minority that FISH is the real 4-letter F word.

[Man Tracker]

If there is a definitive study that shows restoration works or is working please post it.  I have seen the 1st year studies which do show an increase in use, not an increase in total fish (to my understanding).  DFW has been asked how they will determine success from restoration.  What is the timeframe?  DFW has refused to answer.  It would be much easier to accept restoration and the loss of lands used to produce food for migratory birds as well as hunter opportunity if these questions were answered. 

Part of the anger towards DFW and restoration is the process used.  DFW went thru a long process to learn the pubic's desire on both Leque and the Farmed Island (in the 80's and this year) and then disregard. 

[Tbar]

If there is a definitive study that shows restoration works or is working please post it.  I have seen the 1st year studies which do show an increase in use, not an increase in total fish (to my understanding).  DFW has been asked how they will determine success from restoration.  What is the timeframe?  DFW has refused to answer.  It would be much easier to accept restoration and the loss of lands used to produce food for migratory birds as well as hunter opportunity if these questions were answered. 

Part of the anger towards DFW and restoration is the process used.  DFW went thru a long process to learn the pubic's desire on both Leque and the Farmed Island (in the 80's and this year) and then disregard.

Great question! I think you and I know there are few answers. The loss of one of the most iconic and successful waterfowl spots is going to be a tough pill to public lands guys including myself. First question, give me another 2k plus acres as stated in the plan and we can assess efficacy. This was also a clash of titans in terms of legislative mandates, agricultural influence, tribal support, federal agency guidance, interagency support vs waterfowl hunting. Going beyond to your fish numbers comment, again more moving parts that are out of our control, very specifically pinniped management as well as mbta and protection of predatory birds. Restoration as well as augmentation and production of fish create a false carrying capacity for  biologically maxed out predators. This is little more than the tip of the iceberg in this conversation. I will say I still refuse to give up on restoration. Restoration, development and ag are always going to be an extremely difficult mix that waterfowl hunting will not rank high in. Add to this the absolute commercialization of the waterfowl industry and the public land hunter is squeezed to a point of near submission.

[Special T]

If there is a definitive study that shows restoration works or is working please post it.  I have seen the 1st year studies which do show an increase in use, not an increase in total fish (to my understanding).  DFW has been asked how they will determine success from restoration.  What is the timeframe?  DFW has refused to answer.  It would be much easier to accept restoration and the loss of lands used to produce food for migratory birds as well as hunter opportunity if these questions were answered. 

Part of the anger towards DFW and restoration is the process used.  DFW went thru a long process to learn the pubic's desire on both Leque and the Farmed Island (in the 80's and this year) and then disregard.

Great question! I think you and I know there are few answers. The loss of one of the most iconic and successful waterfowl spots is going to be a tough pill to public lands guys including myself. First question, give me another 2k plus acres as stated in the plan and we can assess efficacy. This was also a clash of titans in terms of legislative mandates, agricultural influence, tribal support, federal agency guidance, interagency support vs waterfowl hunting. Going beyond to your fish numbers comment, again more moving parts that are out of our control, very specifically pinniped management as well as mbta and protection of predatory birds. Restoration as well as augmentation and production of fish create a false carrying capacity for  biologically maxed out predators. This is little more than the tip of the iceberg in this conversation. I will say I still refuse to give up on restoration. Restoration, development and ag are always going to be an extremely difficult mix that waterfowl hunting will not rank high in. Add to this the absolute commercialization of the waterfowl industry and the public land hunter is squeezed to a point of near submission.

First off I appreciate the fact that you address species that de-predate on salmon. I think many waterfowlers like me want more salmon but are very upset that this state will not address predators. The Washington Waterfowl association has been pushing for returning to a separate bag limit for Mergansers but has been blown off by the department. This state had a separate bag limit in the past (80's) but no longer does. Ive been told that the reason they have not pursued this is because we have high bag limits and the maximum number of hunting days.  The Pacific flyway is THE ONLY flyway without a separate bag bag limit.  I personally feel that sportsmen should pursue this with as many stake holders as possible to change this. I know that a return to separate bag limits can be had, but it will take the efforts of Sportsmen, Tribes, Commercial fisherman and others to make it happen. Pressure has to be brought to bear on Kyle Spragens, to push other states  in the flyway to accept this change. I know that "Concern" for hooded mergansers is the main defense against separate bag limits but if you look at other flyways they separate  red breasted/ common Mergansers from hooded. WDFW paid for a salmon smolt prediation study that showed common/ red breasted affected smolt. cant remember but it was Grant or Chelan country PUD that did it. It showed that late in the season rafts of mergansers had high predation rates on smolts. or  Currently "nobody" shoots mergansers because they don't want to interfere with their bag limit. I personally shoot a bunch of them and if those I take out don't shoot them are never invited back out hunting again.

I think part of what Man Tracker was trying to say is that the Farmed Island working group requested the science of the restoration and how effective it is  and was denied.  Since I was not on that working group I personally cannot speak intelligently  about it. It was however relayed at WWA meetings that the information was requested but not provided.

[Stein]

WDFWs goal isn’t to recover salmon, it is to get enough acres “restored” to comply with the court decision.  Big difference.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Tbar]

WDFWs goal isn’t to recover salmon, it is to get enough acres “restored” to comply with the court decision.  Big difference.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Which court decision? Can you also explain the  "big difference"?

[Bullkllr]

They're trying to do the minimum to stay out of court again. Actually recovering salmon would create endless work.
 

[Special T]

 Highlights.
                                   2016-17, 2017-18

Hooded Merganser  38,316 33,061
Other Mergansers   15,715 15,801

Mississippi Flyway
Hooded Merganser   50,207 47,789
Other Mergansers     12,613 11,140

Central Flyway        2016-17   2017-18
Hooded Merganser 10,474    8,268
Other Mergansers     1,446     3,515

Pacific Flyway
Hooded Merganser  3,740    5,218
Other Merganser     6,111    4,403

USA total 
Hooded Merganser 102,737 94,336
 Other Merganser      35,886 34,859

https://www.fws.gov/birds/surveys-and-data/reports-and-publications/hunting-activity-and-harvest.php

I totaled this summery up a  in Jan 2019. newer data is available but at the time it shows how the pacific flyway harvests significantly less mergansers. I need to look at the newer reports to see if the trend is similar but I will guess it is the same.

[Special T]

This is a scanned digitally remade document from a paper copy. I acquired it from the Washington Waterfowl association. It is an interesting read and details many of the facts.

As a side note, as a young hunter I was checked by John Garret once at the headquarters unit. I ran into to him several times after that and he apparently remembered me and in a good lite because he never checked me after the first time. Folks Ive run into either hated him or loved him. I didnt know him but he never gave me any troubles.

[LDennis24]

Ducks are everywhere and salmon have a very limited number of areas with suitable habitat. I kind of feel like you guys will do fine finding a new spot to hunt ducks. The salmon don't have that choice. Don't get me wrong, I am 100% with you guys on WDFW being a bunch of dummy's and not having any real method or plan in what they are doing but I for one would like to see more salmon habitat put away and preserved for the future.