Coastal shutdown

[metlhead]

Yay! Don't gotta worry about fishing the Chehalis system at all this season. Seems we could have left it open through January with minimal impact. So, what happens to all the extra hatchery fish that return? Maybe they can pass them out to license holders. Never happen

[snake]

Yes! Shutdowns are the best!

[duckmen1]

It seems as if the run is gonna be really bad this year for chehalis systems. Even says the tribes agreed not to net. So I am in full support in the closure since it seems they are gonna go all the way with it. But my only thing is hatcheries still will make egg count which seems as if they could expand higher counts or make hatchery programs larger but they won't. But then they will surplus the rest of the fish once egg counts are met. Not sure why all the fish aren't released back after spawning. In a way I get that but also seems as if say 500 fish don't get put back in could and would benefit future return of steelhead. Hopefully we will see halfway decent numbers and we will at least get a late opener for a bit.

[ASHQUACK]

On one of the Chehalis tribs I've landed kelts. Multiple times in a single day. One of my bigger steelhead ever was a kelt. So, yes I agree with turning them back into the river when they are done with their job at the hatchery. However, in the last couple of years we were shot down on brood stocking the river, that needs to change.

[duckmen1]

100% agree we should be brood stocking every trib that has a hatchery. To my knowledge it is very beneficial in all the broodstocking programs. Take one prime example. Quinault tribe brood stock program. Can't argue with results. Yet state could follow and step up there game implementing same programs and I would thing it would be very beneficial.
I think one thing the state could do and if done right I think fisherman would be ok with is small fee donation or stamp to fish areas with those programs to help fund more. If fisherman saw good results and had good opportunity they wouldn't mind something like that. But of course we don't want to pay anymore when we see nothing good coming our way.

[Stein]

Hatchery fish are evil, just ask one of the many groups bending the ear of WDFW.

[duckmen1]

Hatchery fish are evil, just ask one of the many groups bending the ear of WDFW.

And broodstock are wild fish too.  let's just keep telling the other side that part

[Dan-o]

 

[ASHQUACK]

Funny thing is the broodstock programs are essentially free to the state. Other than normal hatchery costs. We do it at absolutely zero cost to them. But last year they took is off the river along with everyone else.  Such a loss to the programs that Actually work.

[HUNTIN4SIX]

If one does a little research you would find wdfw has cut hatchery production almost in half in many cases.  This has been done over the last twenty years.  Most cuts actually mirror the returns.  WDFW caved to special interest groups and created the new hatchery genetic management plan. That was implemented to phase out hatchery fish and create a wild fish utopia.  Hatchery fish are essentially wild fish.  Wdfw has in my opinion screwed this up and convinced user groups it’s environmental problems.  Simply raise more fish and get more returns, is plausible with some understandable indifference. Funny thing is this whole debacle has come full circle with the orcas “starving”.  The same type of folks against hatchery fish came crawling back to the state begging for more hatchery salmon production to feed the poor orcas.

[metlhead]

As unglamorous as the Skookumchuck is, being a terminal fishery should allow for harvest up top with little impact. Same with most rivers through January. I don't believe anyone knows for sure how many wilds return.

[steeleywhopper]

Funny thing is the broodstock programs are essentially free to the state. Other than normal hatchery costs. We do it at absolutely zero cost to them. But last year they took is off the river along with everyone else.  Such a loss to the programs that Actually work.

WDFW has never really had a track record of keeping things that work going... Nor does our Governor

[WSU]

I question why we even have steelhead hatchery programs on most rivers?  Fishing is dismal if it's even open.  Why spend the money?

I'm also not sure I'd point to the QIN program as a success.  Their returns have been very poor also, and the wild runs are doing poorly.  They also have the best habitat in the state to work with because of the national park.

[Bullkllr]

I question why we even have steelhead hatchery programs on most rivers?  Fishing is dismal if it's even open.  Why spend the money?

That's already been a thing. The state quit planting most of the streams in the South Sound several (?) years ago saying the return rate was near zero anyway. I don't have numbers at hand, but plants overall are waaay down from what they were. So I think when the returns are low enough it gives them the excuse to pull the plug. It's a shame that's the go-to rather than change/improve hatchery practices to continue to allow opportunity and some harvest.

Another example of the lowering bar of what's acceptable. Let's hope the writing isn't on the wall for the remaining programs.

It's all about the money at some point. It's obviously not the only problem, but unfortunately not enough people care about hatchery steelhead to make producing them a priority. Even back in the 80s my best friend's sister was a staffer in the state senate and she related that even then cutting back on "expensive" steelhead hatchery production was a major topic of interest in state gov't.

[WSU]

It's a terribly sad state of affairs.  I love steelhead and used to love fishing for them.  I quit fishing the OP as things got worse and worse because I felt like I was part of the problem.  I still would like to target hatchery fish (if they existed).

[duckmen1]

Even with the lower runs across the board including the Quinault. They continue to run a hatchery program for multiple rivers using the broodstock program. On low return years there run is still plenty strong. And they get a ton of fish. Where our rivers don't see any. Some years will have better returns then others due to factors at play but even so if the Res. Played the same game wdfw is they would have little fish at all returning there too no matter the location. But they produce a lot of smolt and release which in fact keeps a pretty solid run of fish to have a fishery up there. Cut there program like wdfw does and let's see if any guided trips continue. Look back on the puyallup river/carbon river. Used to be an amazing fishery for how many fish were pulled out. Before a lot of the younger guys times. But talk to old timers that used to fish it back when. They said awesome things. Then the program was diminished and well there are virtually no steelhead returning 20 plus years later. Antis got there was about hatchery fish being bad and the plants are gone. Well native fish never returned. Point is yes some habitat is better but even in the areas with good habitat and fish production you see cut backs in runs. The reason for hatcheries is if we need to mitigate for habitat loss, pollution, climate, reasons etc to see fish returns that's what we should be doing. Instead pointing the finger at all hatcheries are bad and having programs cut completely so far has not benefitted any areas for returning native fish. Now the Native fish numbers are even lower as predation also impacts solely them and other factors. I can go on and on with thoughts about it. But one thing I can say for certain is if we keep allowing our programs to be cut. Our license costs go up and opportunity is taken away. And we don't see any benefit to the species with anything we are hit with. I am happy to sit back on the sidelines and watch what I love rebuild. But with our department handling the way they are I will never watch it rebuild. I am watching it dissappear more and more every year in our great state with fishing and hunting. And its a sad thing. So everytime I have to modify for success that is what I do. But then thinking about it more that is more stress I and we put on other species of fish and game. Ultimately continuing the cycle of all populations of fish and game lowering any time we suffer from one loss. It will continue to make more loss elsewhere from more pressure.

[duckmen1]

Salmon Runs are suffering too. Does that mean we should cut all the programs there too? Or modify. Just trying to understand the thought about that comment of if steelhead runs are suffering why have a hatchery program.
It is more than just the fishery for our benefit. But also the benefit of the species.

[Stein]

If salmon recover it will truly be in spite of what the state is doing.

[Bullkllr]

Salmon Runs are suffering too. Does that mean we should cut all the programs there too? Or modify. Just trying to understand the thought about that comment of if steelhead runs are suffering why have a hatchery program.
It is more than just the fishery for our benefit. But also the benefit of the species.

I'm not arguing "should" for sure. At this point it is largely what the state is doing. I honestly think they'd be happier with a few remnant wild steelhead runs coming back as long as they don't have to deal with those 'pesky sports fishers'. Salmon continue to have more gov't/legislative support from the commercial fishing lobby (including tribes) and salmons' status as a food fish.

[Stein]

Be careful what you wish for there...

[duckmen1]

Salmon Runs are suffering too. Does that mean we should cut all the programs there too? Or modify. Just trying to understand the thought about that comment of if steelhead runs are suffering why have a hatchery program.
It is more than just the fishery for our benefit. But also the benefit of the species.

I'm not arguing "should" for sure. At this point it is largely what the state is doing. I honestly think they'd be happier with a few remnant wild steelhead runs coming back as long as they don't have to deal with those 'pesky sports fishers'. Salmon continue to have more gov't/legislative support from the commercial fishing lobby (including tribes) and salmons' status as a food fish.

No I get what you are saying. Just saying it from the point of anti hatchery view. To use the logic of one is suffering so get rid of it. Turns into get rid of it all. Because they do want salmon hatcheries closed too. We all mean a similar point of view on the topic here I believe. Just saying it from different perspectives of how others think. Which ends up coming off a bit wrong at times as to what we might think.

[Stein]

I would guess steelhead get less attention from WDFW largely because they get fewer steelhead related lawsuits.

[duckmen1]

100% agree. Like everyone keep saying here our department is run by political and not scientific or health of the fish and wildlife.

[Bullkllr]

Be careful what you wish for there...

I've been wishing for the exact opposite for as long as I can remember.

[ASHQUACK]

We are a very mobile fishing society, in fact transient. When a system starts to fail we, as a group move to the next system and fish it until it becomes a problem. Just look at how many guides no longer fish the Cowlitz and have moved to smaller systems that haven't/can't handle the pressure. If there was ever a reason to start producing "fishable" runs it would be that. If the "managers" could see it through actually saving the species instead of the financial cost it'd be amazing. but we all know how that is going to go. If no one (tribes included) steps up to raise more fish we will never see it again. Once the state takes something away we will never see it again. The Dosewalips is a prime example of that.