OP Steelhead are not Endangered

HauntedByWaters said:
I know you like to stir the pot so I don’t know if it’s worth replying since you might not be serious but don’t you think it’s weird that anyone from anywhere can come to WA and guide for $1000 a year? Many commercial fisheries have a finite number of licenses that can be transferred but that’s it. As far as I know guiding sports fishing has no such thing and as many as want can come here to operate.
Click to expand...


There is only so many 6 pack licenses for salt water fisheries, there is no reason it can't be done for fresh water guides as well.
 
With co-management would banning guides accomplish anything other than moving their “encounters” to the commercial side harvest for maximum sustainable yield? I don’t know, honest question.

Less boat traffic would obviously be nice, even if no more fish 😂
 
HauntedByWaters said:
I know you like to stir the pot so I don’t know if it’s worth replying since you might not be serious but don’t you think it’s weird that anyone from anywhere can come to WA and guide for $1000 a year? Many commercial fisheries have a finite number of licenses that can be transferred but that’s it. As far as I know guiding sports fishing has no such thing and as many as want can come here to operate.
Click to expand...
I'm not stirring any pot. One of my best friends was a popular guide until he passed and he would be the first to tell you. 2many used to be 2manyguides but I reigned it in so I didn’t offend the softies.
Guides and the fisherman they educate have become a huge problem. IMHO
Our steelhead resources were once protected by a huge learning curve. Between guides, social media, and the internet that ship has sailed and so have the steelhead.
 
kg4lwp said:
With co-management would banning guides accomplish anything other than moving their “encounters” to the commercial side harvest for maximum sustainable yield? I don’t know, honest question.

Less boat traffic would obviously be nice, even if no more fish 😂
Click to expand...
I'm pretty sure it wouldn't. The co-managers develop a pre-season number and then let the chips fall where they may. The tribes do what they're going to do, and the non-treaty rec group does what the tribes allow us to. MSY is the lip service the co-managers pay to cover for a bird in the hand being worth two in the bush. MSY really has no role in chronically under-escaped fish populations. And unlike salmon, steelhead are not managed to an MSY objective.
 
2MANY said:
I forgot one of the other main problems.

Politicians and paper fish.
Click to expand...
Context?

Politicians could either be part of a solution or part of a problem. It depends on your objective and perspective. What might be a solution to you could be a problem to a real estate developer or a timber barron. And vice versa.

And paper fish are just symbols or stand ins to reference the real thing. That's pretty useful when you need to describe a population and cannot conveniently carry 10,000 fish around in a bucket to discuss management options.
 
kg4lwp said:
With co-management would banning guides accomplish anything other than moving their “encounters” to the commercial side harvest for maximum sustainable yield? I don’t know, honest question.

Less boat traffic would obviously be nice, even if no more fish 😂
Click to expand...

I’m not saying ban guides. Just have regulations limiting them. Or raise the costs of getting a guiding license to make it less easy for people to come from everywhere to guide. I think the idea of a guide is approximately a local person showing tourists a good time and that ain’t the case in WA. At this point guides are about as regulated as individual fishermen when they are obviously not the same.
 
HauntedByWaters said:
I’m not saying ban guides. Just have regulations limiting them. Or raise the costs of getting a guiding license to make it less easy for people to come from everywhere to guide. I think the idea of a guide is approximately a local person showing tourists a good time and that ain’t the case in WA. At this point guides are about as regulated as individual fishermen when they are obviously not the same.
Click to expand...
"At this point guides are about as regulated as individual fishermen when they are obviously not the same."

Bingo.
 
A slight tangent, but regulations in Canada are also endangering the recreational fishery. We currently face the possibility that recreational fishing for chinook and coho will be prioritized absolute last, after commercial fishing. This could be a devastating development for all recreational anglers and the associated industry. Pacific Angler did a good job of summarizing the situation in their Friday Fishing Report. https://www.pacificangler.ca/blogs/learn/pacific-angler-friday-fishing-report-january-16-2026 (scroll down to the Industry Events and Updates section)

If you live in BC, you should be contacting Fisheries and Oceans Canada in the next couple of days to express your opinion on this issue. We could lose any significant access to fishing for these species.
 
Recreational catch plays a minor role in that every fish that escapes is being caught at least once in many of these systems. I’m for restricting guides, but it’s spitting in the wind unless you tackle the biggest issue with many of these rivers. That huge issue is the loss of early returning and early spawning fish. They have been intentionally overharvested since the beginning of early times hatchery steelhead on the coast. The reason this matters so much more now is the changing climate. Spring water temps are increasing enough to mess with the ability of late fish to smolt and streams are now getting much lower and earlier which means later spawning fish can not produce fish in that habitat. An ESA listing might have helped force the managers to restore that segment of the run but now things will continue sliding until they fall off a cliff and restoration gets even more difficult.
 
Chris Bellows said:
Recreational catch plays a minor role in that every fish that escapes is being caught at least once in many of these systems. I’m for restricting guides, but it’s spitting in the wind unless you tackle the biggest issue with many of these rivers. That huge issue is the loss of early returning and early spawning fish. They have been intentionally overharvested since the beginning of early times hatchery steelhead on the coast. The reason this matters so much more now is the changing climate. Spring water temps are increasing enough to mess with the ability of late fish to smolt and streams are now getting much lower and earlier which means later spawning fish can not produce fish in that habitat. An ESA listing might have helped force the managers to restore that segment of the run but now things will continue sliding until they fall off a cliff and restoration gets even more difficult.
Click to expand...
Warming winter temperatures and more frequent rain on snow events aren’t helping the early timed fish, either.
 
Paige said:
There is only so many 6 pack licenses for salt water fisheries, there is no reason it can't be done for fresh water guides as well.
Click to expand...
They do it here in CA. Years back when the Eel and other coastal rivers went to shit from the green rush, the guides all started wearing out the Trinity. Before they knew it there was almost 100 permits out so they capped it at 100 for the stretch from Lewiston to Burnt Ranch.
 
Please correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems like the primary thing limiting salmon populations in Washington is sport and commercial harvest in BC and Alaska and the primary thing limiting steelhead populations (at least in Puget Sound) is marine mammal predation. Why are we wasting our time talking about limits on guiding? I think the Winston Churchill quote "this is a tempest in a teapot" applies.

Let's focus on the things that matter.
 
davew said:
Let's focus on the things that matter.
Click to expand...
Everything matters, but some things matter more or less than others. A key take away is that some of those "things" are within our ability to control or influence and some "things" are not. BC used to harvest a higher % of WA Chinook and coho than at present and still left many thousands of returning fish for WA state fisheries. Now, with lower interceptions there are few to no remaining harvestable Chinook or coho salmon. Ocean productivity has declined for several reasons, most of them beyond our ability to control or even meaningfully influence. Predation certainly limits steelhead returns, but don't overlook reduced productivity on the high seas. Some might say, "It's complicated."
 
davew said:
Please correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems like the primary thing limiting salmon populations in Washington is sport and commercial harvest in BC and Alaska and the primary thing limiting steelhead populations (at least in Puget Sound) is marine mammal predation. Why are we wasting our time talking about limits on guiding? I think the Winston Churchill quote "this is a tempest in a teapot" applies.

Let's focus on the things that matter.
Click to expand...

I spotted the guide.

It’s like this, a hypothetical steelhead fishery in WA will be open until 1000 encounters happen. A bunch of guides from all over the country come here to fish multiple anglers every single day to make money. They catch a bunch of fish and so the fishery closes. Then those same guides move to the nearest steelhead river and do it again.

It’s not just about how endangered the fish are. Its about how to have limited steelhead fisheries and the special regulations to make it happen and have it be worthwhile.
 
I would imagine it's a whole basket of reasons for the declines.

Regarding the guide issue in addition to what's been conveyed above, for me it's an experiential issue. I'm sorta medium old at 62 this year and caught my first steelhead in 74 at 10 y.o. on the Skykomish, back then I don't even remember guides being a thing on the local rivers although of course there were some, just a fraction of today's numbers. I've fished our W WA rivers every year from then to now for winters and like many others have seen the explosion of guides and guide pressure, it's kinda nuts IMO. These days I mostly fish the west end rivers and the amount of guides at peak is crazy, the flotillas and armadas on each reach are silly. I still fish and manage a few per season with a last mile first at dawn and first mile last till dusk strategy coupled with some food and a good nap in the middle. Although for years and years I mostly floated these days I hike and wade solo, it gives me more flexibility to separate briefly from the crowd. I'm grateful I can still bust brush, slide down banks, ford channels and hike the bars and still enjoy all of it immensely. Although the fishing and competition for water is vastly different than it used to be we are lucky to live in such a beautiful place with varied fisheries. I also fish off peak alot, lots of solitude and the occasional nice surprise. I would be in favor of some kind of thoughtful reorganization or regulation of guides on our remaining open sport fisheries. Just some rambling thoughts from a regular guy.
 
Glad those rivers are open. Guides just go where the rivers are open. Hmm just like you or me. We need to copy Oregon and get a Brood stock program going.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top