Pink Nighty
Life of the Party
Anybody have any info on this? Havent heard a projection yet, seems to be late in the year for that.
2024 Skagit Steelhead
- Thread starter Pink Nighty
- Start date
HauntedByWaters
Life of the Party
“Have you steelhead fishermen considered bass and perch?” -WDFW later this week
I mean, there's a reason that bass is most of what I think about as far as fishing these days...
I hope that is the case and that the announcement is for a full season. I am curious what the season and forecast will look like. They have done the 5 days/ wk thing before, which shows that hey are willing to be creative. I wonder if there has been any consideration of having different closed areas. For instance, you could close the upper most section for a period of time (later) and open a lower section at the same that traditionally would have been closed. At what point should those Nookachamps fish already be up the nookachamps so that one could fish a portion below concrete and not expect to catch one? Could lower river impacts be further limited by having a lower section be a "no fishing form a floating device" section. I doubt shore bound anglers will be walking on redds down there.
I looked back at the comments from when the management plan was in it's comment period. One person who I know and respect commented that they would like to see a portion of the Sauk taken out of play for April if. This person has spent a lot of time on the river, working and fishing. After my initial cringe, I thought about it. I understood his logic. He felt that here were a lot of spawners there in April and that he drift boat hatch likely puts them off spawning. Seems logical.
The plan does a lot to assure little or no angling impact to the Nookachamps fish and early spawning lower river trib fish. I don't see the same value as others who pushed for that. No one is fishing the Nookachamps or those tribs. The squeaky wheel gets the grease and all that so the group who is super concerned with those fish got what they wanted. The "no fishing" line has been set well above he Nookachamps. At the same time, the plan allows the Sauk fish be fished well into April. I would love to see the historic raw redd count data on the Sauk. Is there a difference is where the fish are spawning given the absence or presence of boats and anglers? Is there a difference in spawn timing?
It seems like with all of the concern over angling impacts, it would be wise to actually learn from the angler monitoring and the red counts together. I suppose that one could get all of that info through a records request. I doubt that it would be as meaningful as being on the river all the time and looking myself but I have to work at my real job. I know that @Smalma has given some great insight into his perspective on changes in steelhead behavior from angling effort/ boats. I do not know if changes in behavior lead in any way to a decrease in spawning success or a change in future returns.
I like to fish. From that perspective, I like it when the whole river is open. I like the fish. From that perspective, I would like them to make the most amount of fish for the future that they can.
Pink Nighty
Life of the Party
My understanding is that the lower river (nookachamps) fish return and spawn earlier than upriver fish to take advantage of winter flow and temperature in the lower elevation drainages. These early lower fish have been the most impacted by hatchery fish/fisheries and fall salmon fisheries.
Maybe something like losing the sauk in April and adding a portion below concrete makes sense. Keeps people off the redds, keeps a large stretch of river open for the crowds and acknowledges the diversity of life history in the Skagit.
That is my thought. You phrased that far better than I did. thank you.
The lower river fish have been impacted by a number of factors. I think that some people/ groups really focus on the historic hatchery/ harvest impacts. I am not sure that the 5-10 miles below the Dalles bridge needs to be closed in late March/ early April to limit angling impacts to fish that spawn below that area.
WDFW has a tough job managing the Skagit fishery. Honestly, I think that they have done pretty well given the competing interests.
Pink Nighty
Life of the Party
Last years boondoggle notwithstanding, I've really liked the logical and creative approaches to the cnr season settings. Theres a number of fish, below which no season. Additional fish create additional opportunity. Cant complain about a process that's relatively transparent and logical, especially from govt agencies.
First off, it would be reasonable to debate whether the Nookachamps steelhead are reallly so genetically different from other Skagit steelhead. I think that delineation was made without a deep enough scientific dive. Second, Nookachamps fish would be pretty well protected, if such protection is necessary, with a fishing boundary closure at Hwy 9 or Gilligan Ck. I'd like to see some sound reasoning for using the Dalles bridge that can pass the red face or chuckle test.
Closing the Sauk for any part of April will reduce disturbance to fish. Closing water to fishing always reduces disturbance to fish. We see how that is clearly attractive to WDFW. I wouldn't want to give them any more ideas of that nature. Particularly so when it's unclear that the disturbance of fishing in April is reducing the productivity of Sauk River steelhead. I think we need to consider that Sauk steelhead are the most productive part of the steelhead population in the entire Skagit basin before making any Sauk River closure suggestions.
As for having open fishing area downstream from the Dalles bridge, I've always been a fan of that. However, it's not because there is a large population of steelhead down there. The Skagit downstream of the Dalles has the lowest number of steelhead redds per mile of any part of the basin. The reason I like to fish the middle Skagit (Gilligan to Dalles) is because almost the entire steelhead run has to pass through that area on its way to spawning grounds further upstream. I wouldn't want to trade a closure in one part of the basin for an open area in another part. I want more area open to fishing. That's what increasing angling opportunity looks like.
Pink Nighty
Life of the Party
Thank you for this, I'm not informed enough to know about how this sausage was made in terms of where and why they drew the boundaries. Fully agree that trading opportunity shouldnt be the goal. In fact if anything, they should open the lower river regardless of the sauk, as it allows fishing pressure to be spread out.
I want to fish the river below concrete because there is sweet water there conducive to long casts and slow swings.
At a risk of exposing how foggy my memory has become a discussion of how the Sauk/Skagit spring CnR steelhead fishery history would be helpful.
The Sauk piece lead the way with the first season happening in 1981. This season was forward by the then Department of Game with very little support from the angling community. At the time the Sauk had traditionally closed at the of February (a regulation that was decade old. Basically, the idea would to be add recreation opportunity with a two-month season added downstream of Darrington with the end date of April 30 chosen to minimize interact with spawning steelhead. At the time approximately 10% of the Sauk occurred prior to the end of April.
After a couple years as some interest grew in the Sauk fishery it was proposed that something similar be implemented on the Skagit. Now remember at the time the mainstem Skagit downstream of Marblemount was open through March under general regulations. The proposal was met with opposition with the catch and keep crowd concern about giving up their opportunity for something they had little interest in. After discussion from the different factions a compromise reach with the water below the Dalles remaining under the old regulations and the Dalles to Marblemount section going to CnR regulations similar to the Sauk. Like most compromises many folks on both sides of the argument were unhappy with that decision.
Now some 40 years later it may be time to review where we are and what best serve the resource and those of the anglers that chase those steelhead. I agree with Salmo_g that closing the Sauk for opportunity elsewhere in the basin makes little sense. Currently more than 60% of all the wild steelhead spawning happens in the Sauk basin (up from the historical 35%). With the ESA listing of those steelhead as we have learned any fishing targeting those fish will require monitoring. Such monitoring is expensive, and I assume that WDFW has limited resources to monitor that fish so they would be unlikely to support expansion of the fishery without increase in monitoring fund. In that climate closing a portion of the open water to be replaced with a similar piece that would not require additional funds to monitor might merit some discussion between WDFW and the anglers. For example, closing the mouth of Sauk to the Marblemount to open a similar length of river below the Dales (say down to Hamilton) could generate some interest. However, I would not expect much interest in a group of dedicated anglers to champion such an idea.
Much easier to bitch about something and suggest that some one should do the work rathe than stepping up to the plate.
Curt
The Sauk piece lead the way with the first season happening in 1981. This season was forward by the then Department of Game with very little support from the angling community. At the time the Sauk had traditionally closed at the of February (a regulation that was decade old. Basically, the idea would to be add recreation opportunity with a two-month season added downstream of Darrington with the end date of April 30 chosen to minimize interact with spawning steelhead. At the time approximately 10% of the Sauk occurred prior to the end of April.
After a couple years as some interest grew in the Sauk fishery it was proposed that something similar be implemented on the Skagit. Now remember at the time the mainstem Skagit downstream of Marblemount was open through March under general regulations. The proposal was met with opposition with the catch and keep crowd concern about giving up their opportunity for something they had little interest in. After discussion from the different factions a compromise reach with the water below the Dalles remaining under the old regulations and the Dalles to Marblemount section going to CnR regulations similar to the Sauk. Like most compromises many folks on both sides of the argument were unhappy with that decision.
Now some 40 years later it may be time to review where we are and what best serve the resource and those of the anglers that chase those steelhead. I agree with Salmo_g that closing the Sauk for opportunity elsewhere in the basin makes little sense. Currently more than 60% of all the wild steelhead spawning happens in the Sauk basin (up from the historical 35%). With the ESA listing of those steelhead as we have learned any fishing targeting those fish will require monitoring. Such monitoring is expensive, and I assume that WDFW has limited resources to monitor that fish so they would be unlikely to support expansion of the fishery without increase in monitoring fund. In that climate closing a portion of the open water to be replaced with a similar piece that would not require additional funds to monitor might merit some discussion between WDFW and the anglers. For example, closing the mouth of Sauk to the Marblemount to open a similar length of river below the Dales (say down to Hamilton) could generate some interest. However, I would not expect much interest in a group of dedicated anglers to champion such an idea.
Much easier to bitch about something and suggest that some one should do the work rathe than stepping up to the plate.
Curt
Smalma,
You can only get off with so much with respect to foggy memory since you were front and center when those Skagit regulation changes were made.
Until 1976 the Skagit was open from Memorial Day weekend in May through April 30, having a closed period of about 3 1/2 weeks. The Sauk was open from that same Memorial Day weekend opening through March 31. That may have been to protect outmigrating smolts, but my educated guess about WDG is that it just sort of happened that way and then became established tradition. Beginning in 1977, the Sauk closed at the end of February, and the Skagit closed at the end of March. This appears to have been in reaction to high harvests after the 1974 US v WA treaty fishing decision and suspected low spawning escapements, although the systematic enumeration of steelhead spawning escapements didn't begin until 1978.
In 1981, in response to a wild steelhead broodstock program sponsored by the Darrington Rod & Gun Club, the Sauk had an added CNR season in March and April, and the Skagit kill season ended March 15 but had an added CNR season from March 16 through April 30, but only upstream from the Dalles bridge. This may or may not have had something to do with a similar CNR season that was added to the Sol Duc River in 1980. The rough idea was that the CNR seasons created the opportunity to see if any ventral clipped marked steelhead from the wild broodstock programs were returning, as there was no terminal area rack for the fish to show and be counted. I hope you can remember that some WDG guy named Curt who could occasionally be found talking with anglers on the Sauk during this spring season. The upshot is that indeed, some marked broodstock program steelhead did return, but there was no way to estimate the total return of these fish. The seasons became popular and continued even after the broodstock program concluded.
I remember asking Regional Biologist Chuck Philips if we could get the CNR season extended downstream to Gilligan Creek or Hwy 9. The official Department response was no, not until spawner densities in the downstream area increased to what was being observed upstream of the Dalles. Of course, over time we learned that not all river reaches are equal in productivity, even under pristine habitat conditions. Nonetheless, the decision stood. Agencies find comfort in the notion of, "We've always done it this way." Change is hard.
This season modification continued through 2009 when the spawning escapement fell to the record low of 2,500 spawners. Change is hard, but given the ESA listing of all wild Puget Sound steelhead in 2007, closing the river system to fishing for wild steelhead came easy. What was hard was developing the inertia to reopen the Skagit to fishing for wild steelhead ever, regardless of run size. Enter the story of Occupy Skagit in 2013 and the reopening that finally occurred in 2018 after development of the Skagit Steelhead Resource Management Plan by the state and tribal co-managers.
I'm open to season and regulation modifications that are informed by science, along with popular consensus among anglers.
You can only get off with so much with respect to foggy memory since you were front and center when those Skagit regulation changes were made.
Until 1976 the Skagit was open from Memorial Day weekend in May through April 30, having a closed period of about 3 1/2 weeks. The Sauk was open from that same Memorial Day weekend opening through March 31. That may have been to protect outmigrating smolts, but my educated guess about WDG is that it just sort of happened that way and then became established tradition. Beginning in 1977, the Sauk closed at the end of February, and the Skagit closed at the end of March. This appears to have been in reaction to high harvests after the 1974 US v WA treaty fishing decision and suspected low spawning escapements, although the systematic enumeration of steelhead spawning escapements didn't begin until 1978.
In 1981, in response to a wild steelhead broodstock program sponsored by the Darrington Rod & Gun Club, the Sauk had an added CNR season in March and April, and the Skagit kill season ended March 15 but had an added CNR season from March 16 through April 30, but only upstream from the Dalles bridge. This may or may not have had something to do with a similar CNR season that was added to the Sol Duc River in 1980. The rough idea was that the CNR seasons created the opportunity to see if any ventral clipped marked steelhead from the wild broodstock programs were returning, as there was no terminal area rack for the fish to show and be counted. I hope you can remember that some WDG guy named Curt who could occasionally be found talking with anglers on the Sauk during this spring season. The upshot is that indeed, some marked broodstock program steelhead did return, but there was no way to estimate the total return of these fish. The seasons became popular and continued even after the broodstock program concluded.
I remember asking Regional Biologist Chuck Philips if we could get the CNR season extended downstream to Gilligan Creek or Hwy 9. The official Department response was no, not until spawner densities in the downstream area increased to what was being observed upstream of the Dalles. Of course, over time we learned that not all river reaches are equal in productivity, even under pristine habitat conditions. Nonetheless, the decision stood. Agencies find comfort in the notion of, "We've always done it this way." Change is hard.
This season modification continued through 2009 when the spawning escapement fell to the record low of 2,500 spawners. Change is hard, but given the ESA listing of all wild Puget Sound steelhead in 2007, closing the river system to fishing for wild steelhead came easy. What was hard was developing the inertia to reopen the Skagit to fishing for wild steelhead ever, regardless of run size. Enter the story of Occupy Skagit in 2013 and the reopening that finally occurred in 2018 after development of the Skagit Steelhead Resource Management Plan by the state and tribal co-managers.
I'm open to season and regulation modifications that are informed by science, along with popular consensus among anglers.
Comanagers Agree On Skagit-Sauk Wild Steelhead Forecast -
State and tribal comanagers have agreed to a Skagit-Sauk wild winter steelhead forecast of 5,215 fish, an almost carbon-copy of last season's prediction for the big North Cascades rivers.
nwsportsmanmag.com
Now we wait for approval from the Feds. Tic Toc ------ - hope they get to it before March. 
We wait only for wdfw at this point. Feds agreed to the 10 yr plan. We waited last year for that approval.Now we wait for approval from the Feds. Tic Toc ------ - hope they get to it before March.
The process of agreeing on a forecast is likely where the season was set.
We will find out.
From the article: "Next, WDFW, the Sauk-Suiattle Indian Tribe, Swinomish Indian Tribal Community and Upper Skagit Indian Tribe, and federal overseers will work through the processes of 2023’s 10-year resource management plan for the Endangered Species Act-listed stock before fishery regs are finalized, which could wrap up as early as next week."
This sounds a whole lot like the whole Puget Sound Chinook season setting process. In my mind, it should be far more straight forward. However, I suspect that it is similar in that they are taking the available impacts (500 paper fish) and trying to dish them out towards all seasons, both tribal and non-tribal. It should be easier than those salt water fisheries since there is not a whole lot of overlap in seasons between winter steelhead and other fisheries. The other seasons are essentially spring kings and Sockeye that overlap. I would think that the number of summer runs hooked or netted is pretty low given the population is pretty low.
This sounds a whole lot like the whole Puget Sound Chinook season setting process. In my mind, it should be far more straight forward. However, I suspect that it is similar in that they are taking the available impacts (500 paper fish) and trying to dish them out towards all seasons, both tribal and non-tribal. It should be easier than those salt water fisheries since there is not a whole lot of overlap in seasons between winter steelhead and other fisheries. The other seasons are essentially spring kings and Sockeye that overlap. I would think that the number of summer runs hooked or netted is pretty low given the population is pretty low.
Pink Nighty
Life of the Party
The sockeye/springer net fishery definitely involves take of steelhead, both in summer returns and downstream kelts. I've seen 2 kelts caught plunking sandshrimp in Burlington in july. Come to think of it, I'm pretty sure kelts are the only bycatch I've seen on that bar.
What about Summer run Wild Kings out of curiosity?
