Effects of the Wild Salmonid Policy Bern Shanks, Ph.D., Director WDFW

Based on public and co-manager discussions and input, important aspects of the Wild Salmonid Policy (WSP) and its effects still need further clarification. The intent of several important elements have been prone to misinterpretation. We recognize this new WSP represents a substantial shift in focus for salmonid management, and many aspects of implementation seem complex. We are confident however that as we proceed with the policy, the benefits to fish, their ecosystems, and the citizens of Washington will become apparent.

The WSP will change the management direction of the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) from primarily regulating fisheries based on hatchery production to the detriment of wild salmonids within an environment of consistent habitat loss, to preserving, protecting, and perpetuating wild salmonids in their ecosystems so that sustainable productive fisheries can occur. Many past management approaches have been ineffective at sustaining either wild salmonids or viable fisheries. The basis and justification for the change in direction is described in the Final Environment Impact Statement, which provides a comprehensive analysis of the WSP. The overall function of the WSP is to guide WDFW staff decisions so that management actions are consistent with perpetuating wild salmonid stocks, capable of contributing to fisheries.

The concept that naturally produced salmonids limit fisheries and that hatchery production can sustain harvest levels in spite of continued habitat degradation has been shown to be false. Many of the locations that still support viable fisheries are where hatcheries were managed to be compatible with productive wild stocks. In addition to wild fish benefits, the management strategies in the FEIS will benefit hatchery fish by providing the best fish for broodstock and the necessary habitat to improve contribution to fisheries.

Potential impacts of the WSP on present fisheries has raised concerns among almost everyone involved. One reason for these apprehensions is that a proposed WSP objective, such as managing at or above a calculated maximum sustainable yield, can be achieved through a variety of specific actions. These actions for particular situations have not been described because the WSP directs WDFW to develop action plans with interested public and co-managers. The challenge is to work together to develop fish production and harvest strategies that allow sufficient numbers of natural-origin adults to spawn, increasing the productivity of wild populations, while maintaining access to hatchery-origin fish.

There are three basic strategies for fish population management: 1) harvesting wild stocks at unsustainable rates, 2) fishery closures, or 3) the WSP approach of harvesting wild and hatchery stocks at different rates through a combination of regular and selective fisheries. The outcome of the first two strategies has led to dissatisfaction with fisheries, the reduced viability of many hatchery and wild stocks, and the invoking of the Endangered Species Act. The following policy statements, standards, and strategies were developed to increase the abundance and productivity of wild fish and also improve hatchery production resulting in enhanced and stabilized fishing opportunities.

Already in some locations, WDFW and tribal co-managers are managing for productive wild stocks, in which over half the adult population is available for harvest. The WSP will build on these cases to increase the number of wild stocks that are healthy and contributing to fisheries. By managing fisheries through timing, location, and mass marking, the WSP contains the elements for restoring wild stock productivity while allowing harvest of hatchery-produced fish, where they are compatible with wild populations.

Hatchery production is necessary for successful selective fisheries, which are most effective when the ratio of hatchery to wild fish is large. But hatchery-based fishery programs must be managed so that the genetic and ecological interactions with wild stocks are not detrimental. Achieving this will be more challenging in some areas than others, but the alternative is a continued decline in fisheries and stock health.

To lessen confusion, we recommend that readers not assess one piece of the WSP without viewing how all the pieces fit and work together. Previously, many have focused on action plans for selective fisheries and hatchery/wild interactions, regarding all other practices as status quo, but the WSP integrates all elements as a package. For example, various strategies exist to limit genetic interaction of hatchery and wild fish. The presence of hatchery fish among wild spawners could be reduced by improving imprinting and homing, and by selective removal through fisheries and weirs. Thus, limiting interaction does not automatically mean reduced hatchery production.

Getting wild fish back to spawning grounds will mean that the absence of fish will no longer be a successful excuse to allow habitat to degrade. The WSP describes the habitat attributes wild salmonids need to be productive, and directs WDFW to be an advocate for functional fish habitat. The WSP directs WDFW to work with landowners, industries, and municipalities to find mutually beneficial solutions for conserving and creating additional salmonid habitat. Effective collaboration with government and community partners involved in habitat protection and recovery will be key to sustaining wild salmonids, and the WSP is a commitment to this process.