Its being held up due to the work of a non-government employee as I understand it.
2023 Skagit/Sauk season is a go
- Thread starter GOTY
- Start date
As we were heading home from the coast this weekend, the thought crossed my mind: that could've been my last trip fishing winter steelhead on the coast. Was a bit sobering to think about it.
Pink Nighty
Life of the Party
In the article previously linked they place significantly more emphasis on being overworked (read: skagit isnt important to them) than they did on lawsuits or bycatch. This isnt some series of unfortunate events, this is NMFS knowing where its bread is buttered. I think most on this thread realize it's not a wdfw issue, it's the feds.
If NMFS were waiting on smolt counts or return indicators what have you from 2022, they can come out and say that. They could tell us months ago that there will be a delay while they gather that info. They didnt. They said they are too busy to get it done. Never mentioned waiting on anything, just said they are too busy with salmon and they are scared of lawsuits.
If they are "too busy" because they fear a WFC or some other ABC org lawsuit, maybe us anglers ought to sue them first for dereliction of duty. Lord knows the tribes and commercial fleet would hand them their ass in court if they were too busy for NOF.
All available data at time of application. <- This is important.
Nope. Not important at all. Actually a distraction from reality.
I am not understanding why you all fail to grasp the politics of the situation and substitute your own thoughts for the actual plain reality. If that plan was submitted without the data for all runs covered in the prior plan it is DOA. You and I know that everyone has a basic idea of that number (if not the actual #) well ahead of time however, due to the politics and potential litigation, tribal agreement is required in real life. This is not 1985. We all get to fish only with agreement of the tribes. The feds aren't approving plans like this without tribal agreement. In the same way, a complete data set for all of the years covered under the last plan is required, if not by code by reality. The plan is a 10 year plan that sets the parameters for future seasons. It will look very similar to the 5 year plan but the data from those 5 years are needed to justify the plan. If they don't look at the entirety of the years covered in the last 5 year plan, it is not getting past anyone.
Further, the timing of submittal would have been sufficient if not for a completely separate issue from steelhead run sizes. The real issue is that the bull trout issue came into play at all, as it's preposterous. The USFWS has very little staffing for these issues but had the work of a contractor in front of them. They can't ignore it. I am not sure that it won't take months or longer for this plan to get federal approval.
You all can go fish if you want. I could fish tomorrow with a clear conscience. It is important to recognize the actual barrier to the season in order to overcome it though. WDFW is not that barrier.
GOTY
Steelhead
Agreed. WDFW needs to learn how to communicate with anglers. The bulk of this mess would have been avoided if WDFW had simply came out and said something along the lines of "10 year plan is submitted and may take a few months for review". Instead, when they submitted the plan they essentially declared victory, stated that a season will probably occur starting in February, providing parameters around days, etc.
This type of directly misleading communication -- and a lack of follow-up/clarifications as we sit here 3 months later -- contribute to the complete lack of trust that anglers have with the agency.
You did point out in the OP that the season was still "(pending NMFS review)".
However, in hindsight, the parenthetical comment, which I initially glossed over, is clearly a much bigger deal then I had originally (incorrectly) assumed. That's on me, you called it correct from the get go - you nailed it.
So....for my own benefit, reformatting the original post to more accurately reflect how this situation is shaking out now that more info has surfaced.
GOTY
Steelhead
That's what I was referring to last post. The amount of attention I gave to the PENDING REVIEW part is far more than WDFW gave in their "VICTORY!" announcement that a season should occur Feb-April.
This very thread highlights how problematic that is. We are a super small subset of anglers, and lean towards the most informed and passionate end of the spectrum of anglers...and yet here we are pointing fingers in different directions at different people/organizations while not fully sure on what the actual issue is, where we stand in the process, what an actual realistic timeline looks like, etc. But this is what happens when atrocious and misleading communication is the norm: we are left to fill in the blanks while looking at the situation with skeptical lenses.
Pink Nighty
Life of the Party
Beautifully summed up. Frankly I dont care what WDFW said or did, I understand that this is out of their hands and I can accept the possibility that they believed NMFS would handle their end. It's the radio silence being maintained 60% of way through the season, particularly from NMFS. Have the balls to say you're not gonna open this year. Stop having people making plans, booking rooms and hiring guides when you knew this wasnt gonna happen.
Communicate with your f@%=(#(> constituents even when, actually especially when, you are screwing the proverbial pooch. We can hear her barking, quit acting like you dont know why.
Perhaps the following from the link provided by Matt B will illustrate how important with a short data set a single year can be. For this example, we'll assume that WDFW submitted an update 10-year plan July first 2022.
Year - - - Post season run size (escapement plus fishing impacts)
17/18 - - 6,197
18/19 - - 4,636
19/20 - - 3,892
20/21 - - 3,578
21/22 - - (3,833 pre-season forecast)
Using the 21/22 forecast as a surrogate for the post season run size the short term does not look promising and appears to trending below the 4,000 threshold for any spring season. Further with that trend I would expect there would not have been any season in 2022/23.
However knowing that the 2022 escapement was 5,805 is a game changer. Not only it makes the potential for future seasons more promising it also indicates that the population is more robust that the trend without that escapement information.
Curt
Year - - - Post season run size (escapement plus fishing impacts)
17/18 - - 6,197
18/19 - - 4,636
19/20 - - 3,892
20/21 - - 3,578
21/22 - - (3,833 pre-season forecast)
Using the 21/22 forecast as a surrogate for the post season run size the short term does not look promising and appears to trending below the 4,000 threshold for any spring season. Further with that trend I would expect there would not have been any season in 2022/23.
However knowing that the 2022 escapement was 5,805 is a game changer. Not only it makes the potential for future seasons more promising it also indicates that the population is more robust that the trend without that escapement information.
Curt
What would steelhead Jesus do?
That would involve valuable time away from updating their ever informative Facebook feed. Seriously though there is some great factoids about salamanders and toads to be had there.
There's an old saying which states, "You don't build trust by highlighting your victories. You in fact build trust by addressing your shortcomings." WDFW doesn't know how to do that. It's like the longest, sickest, most twisted advertisment of success to build excitement in an angling population that isn't really buying it anymore.
USFS knows this part right?
Not sure I could make this up if I tried.
So we can kill bull trout up to our daily limit somewhere on the Skagit system pretty much every month of the year except for February, but our by-catch during March & April on the Skagit and Sauk C&R season will be too much. Sure USFS...whatever you say man.
Not sure I could make this up if I tried.
So we can kill bull trout up to our daily limit somewhere on the Skagit system pretty much every month of the year except for February, but our by-catch during March & April on the Skagit and Sauk C&R season will be too much. Sure USFS...whatever you say man.
I just talked with the NMFS biologist. Boy, this thread is filled with a lot of stuff that doesn't apply. A few facts:
The co-managers, WDFW and the Skagit tribes submitted the application to renew the RMP in January 2022. Hardly late or even last minute. Note: the 2022 escapement estimate and 2023 runsize forecast were NOT necessary in order to submit a satisfactory application. This explains why WDFW made its announcement back in December and why NMFS said sooner than later last month.
NMFS completed its review process in January 2023, delayed due to loss of the biologist previously assigned to the Skagit review.
The NMFS RMP triggered consultation with USFWS regarding bull trout and any other ESA species under USFWS jurisdiction. USFWS began its Biological Opinion (BO) in late 2022. (In case we're looking for a scapegoat. Yes, it's about those very same ESA listed bull trout for which anglers are allowed to retain two over 20" whenever the Skagit system is open to fishing.)
USFWS is currently wrapping up its BO and waiting to get it signed (that would presumably be the USFWS Regional Director in Portland).
As soon as NMFS receives the USFWS sign off, NMFS will sign a couple documents and send across town to WDFW. WDFW can open the river ASAP at that point.
The co-managers, WDFW and the Skagit tribes submitted the application to renew the RMP in January 2022. Hardly late or even last minute. Note: the 2022 escapement estimate and 2023 runsize forecast were NOT necessary in order to submit a satisfactory application. This explains why WDFW made its announcement back in December and why NMFS said sooner than later last month.
NMFS completed its review process in January 2023, delayed due to loss of the biologist previously assigned to the Skagit review.
The NMFS RMP triggered consultation with USFWS regarding bull trout and any other ESA species under USFWS jurisdiction. USFWS began its Biological Opinion (BO) in late 2022. (In case we're looking for a scapegoat. Yes, it's about those very same ESA listed bull trout for which anglers are allowed to retain two over 20" whenever the Skagit system is open to fishing.)
USFWS is currently wrapping up its BO and waiting to get it signed (that would presumably be the USFWS Regional Director in Portland).
As soon as NMFS receives the USFWS sign off, NMFS will sign a couple documents and send across town to WDFW. WDFW can open the river ASAP at that point.
Last edited:
Give anyone who goes and casturbates on the Skagit hairy palms
Give not a man a fish. Teach a man to single Spey in the righteous water so he too may get the tugs.
And that is only your opinion, not fact.
And now we know the rest of the story!
