IFPAG Meeting, Aug. 1, 2015

[Don Wittenberger]

WDFW's INland Fisheries Policy Advisory Group met today at the Spokane regional office. We enjoyed a great lunch of grilled walleye supplied by the Walleye club guys. The largest segment of this meeting was devoted to northern pike, which the Fish and Game Commission designated as a "prohibited species" in 2011, and which WDFW views as a serious threat to the Columbia River ecosystem. These fish have gradually migrated westward from eastern Montana through illegal stocking and access to river systems. Montana and Idaho have taken a laissez faire approach to these fish because they're popular with sport anglers, but Washington has "declared war" on them because of the damage they could do salmon recovery efforts. Pike can leapfrog downriver from an upriver favorable habitat area to the next one downstream, which means that even though much of the Columbia River system isn't good habitat for them, they could potentially establish themselves in pockets all the way down the river. WDFW doesn't believe it can eradicate them, but suppression efforts including spring gillnetting have greatly reduced their numbers in the Pend O'Reilles River. However, they are still advancing downriver, which is causing concern. A handful have been caught by walleye anglers at Kettle Falls and in Lake Roosevelt. WDFW's policy regarding this fish is that you can fish for them, but don't C&R them, all caught pike should be killed. Unlike walleye, which WDFW doesn't consider a threat, pike are eating machines capable of wiping out the prey species in a water body. The main message of today's presentation was that WDFW is battling to keep these fish out of Washington waters, and while some sport anglers might wish they were here, this is part of a high stakes effort to protect native salmon.

[harleypiker]

The WDFW devotes 40% of this season's salmon run to feeding the sea lions which shuts down salmon fishing.
And pike are a more serious threat than this? Wow.

[Don Wittenberger]

So far as I know, WDFW isn't feeding any of this season's salmon run to sea lions. Why do you blame sea lion predation on WDFW? Isn't it logical that state fisheries managers would regard both pike and sea lion predation as a problem?

Believe me, I'm well aware of the disagreement between pike fans and WDFW over how pike should be managed. But that battle is over, and it's time to move on. The Commission decided in 2011 to designate pike as a prohibited species in Washington. There's no reason to think that decision will ever be revisited by the Commission. Public hearings were held, both sides argued their case, the decision has been made, and it's over. WDFW staff made it as clear as they possibly could at Saturday's meeting that their management policy is to kill every pike entering Washington waters, or as many as they can, because policymakers have concluded the potential damage they can cause far outweighs any benefit to recreational anglers from having a pike fishery here. The state's professional biologists agree with that decision, and it's supported by sound science and factual data.

You can, of course, fish for pike in Washington. In fact, WDFW wants you to, provided you kill every pike you catch. However, the data presented to us on Saturday showed that state and tribal suppression efforts are killing far more pike than angling; in fact, the contribution of anglers toward reducing the Pend O'Reilles River's pike population has been negligible. On the other hand, state-tribal gillnetting has drastically reduced the pike population in the POR, to the point where I'm under the impression there isn't a fishable population there anymore.

Let me make something clear. The IFPAG group is 15 citizens from around the state who provide public input to WDFW fish managers on issues affecting freshwater recreational anglers. We don't make policy decisions. WDFW staff explains the department's policies and actions to us, and listens to our feedback, but this decision about pike was made by commissioners appointed by the governor and it's not something the IFPAG members can influence or change. And it isn't just our state-level policymakers who made this decision; the federal government and tribes are involved, too.

I understand the frustration among pike anglers, and I have no problem with anyone blowing off steam about it in forums like this, but the policy is what it is, and we have to live with it. If you like pike, and want to fish for them where they're abundant, go to Idaho or Montana. They have lots of them, and you don't have to drive very far from the POR to find good pike fishing. One caveat, though: Idaho and Montana are going to be threatened with financial penalties and other political pressures to act more aggressively against pike, so their fisheries policies may become less tolerant of pike in the future.

[harleypiker]

Thanks for the detailed and accurate reply, Don. I don't dispute any of your facts and response. I picked up the sea lion
info on this website late spring and distinctly remember the 40% and the banter back and forth it created. A couple
guides/commercials stated they would just have to accept it and switch to the numerous trout, etc. planted in nearby lakes. I looked around some and, unfortunately, couldn't find it. Anyway, its water over the dam now. Thanks for your efforts on the committee.

[Don Wittenberger]

Thanks. Regarding the sea lions, I don't follow that issue real closely, but I'm pretty sure sea lions are a protected species under the federal Marine Mammals Protection Act of 1972, which is administered by the National Marine Fisheries Service, and I'm pretty sure WDFW and its Oregon counterpart have to get federal permits to remove them, either by trapping and relocating them -- remember Herschel, the infamous California sea lion that kept swimming back to Washington every time he was sent home? -- or killing them. State animal control officers usually resort to "hazing" methods, such as noisemakers, to drive them away from salmon concentration areas, with limited success.

[muskyhunter]

hi,
I find this northern pike issue interesting. Why though in the musky forum? Probably the pikey page would be a better spot?

What all this also comes down to is folks not yapping so much about where the great the fishery is..in this state. Everyone knows the tribes and the state do not want them here..pretty straight forward on their end. Yet no one can keep quiet about it..kinda like telling everyone your favorite crappie spot you know what happens then right?Then you are suprised everyone is therein your spot.
Thanks for going to the meetings, Don..maybe next meeting ask about making Tapps catch and release mandatory rule for this year..? There are fish here..dont really know how many and the scheduled plant for this year did not happen..maybe just get a feeler eh? Thanks, Todd

[Don Wittenberger]

MH -- thanks. I know Bruce Bolding has read this thread, so I'm sure he's seen your comment about Tapps C&R. As you know, the Commission, not staff, has the authority to change fishing rules and it's hard to do. I know how you feel about releasing all muskies, but the 50-inch minimum size is almost as good, and I think the real problem we face is getting the public to comply with it. That requires both education and enforcement, plus we need ongoing stocking to keep fish in the lakes, so those are the things I focus on while serving on IFPAG.

Tapps, of course, has unique issues that are beyond WDFW's control. As you know, the lake was created for power production and is now managed for water supply, and recreational fishing takes a back seat to Cascade Water Alliance's management priorities. If the homeowners bought the lake and managed it for recreation, they would stock trout, not tiger muskies. That was the lesson of the events that led to Sen. Roach's public meeting. At least we have a kind of peaceful coexistence with CWA. Last winter's water level fiasco probably was a one-time mishap, although the drought, lack of winter snowpack, and weak spring stream flows may be with us for quite a while. If so, and it impacts the fishery, then the practical concern for Tapps muskie anglers will be WDFW's stocking response, not getting special regulations enacted for that lake. I intend to direct my efforts on IFPAG toward doing everything possible to keep Tapps on the list of tiger muskie lakes for the long haul.

[muskyhunter]

Don,
I agree with your rebutle about lake Tapps and the 50 inch limit buuuut, the DFW really won't know how the fishery is or was affected by the drastic draw down. There are muskies and bass in the lake along with some fat carp that made it. That is my concern. Until a study can be done there is no telling the effect really is. Therefore, there can be a temporary hold on the retention of any of the muskies. Maybe just this year or possibly 2 years..the plants can return next year as planned as let it be known CWA said it would help restoring the fishery. Its just an idea. My buddies in Utah that fish tigers at Pineview have a mandatory catch and release. Partly because of the VHS and their stocking program is still getting its foot set in sand to continue stocking their lakes. So we can wait and see I guess..Todd

[Lucius]

Believe me, I'm well aware of the disagreement between pike fans and WDFW over how pike should be managed. But that battle is over, and it's time to move on. The Commission decided in 2011 to designate pike as a prohibited species in Washington. There's no reason to think that decision will ever be revisited by the Commission. Public hearings were held, both sides argued their case, the decision has been made, and it's over. WDFW staff made it as clear as they possibly could at Saturday's meeting that their management policy is to kill every pike entering Washington waters, or as many as they can, because policymakers have concluded the potential damage they can cause far outweighs any benefit to recreational anglers from having a pike fishery here. The state's professional biologists agree with that decision, and it's supported by sound science and factual data.

You can, of course, fish for pike in Washington. In fact, WDFW wants you to, provided you kill every pike you catch. However, the data presented to us on Saturday showed that state and tribal suppression efforts are killing far more pike than angling; in fact, the contribution of anglers toward reducing the Pend O'Reilles River's pike population has been negligible. On the other hand, state-tribal gillnetting has drastically reduced the pike population in the POR, to the point where I'm under the impression there isn't a fishable population there anymore.

I understand the frustration among pike anglers, and I have no problem with anyone blowing off steam about it in forums like this, but the policy is what it is, and we have to live with it. If you like pike, and want to fish for them where they're abundant, go to Idaho or Montana. They have lots of them, and you don't have to drive very far from the POR to find good pike fishing. One caveat, though: Idaho and Montana are going to be threatened with financial penalties and other political pressures to act more aggressively against pike, so their fisheries policies may become less tolerant of pike in the future.

So I guess I can't bite my tongue any more on this matter. First off, the pike anglers never got a say or I should say a comment period on how to handle the pike situation....ever. After a study was performed on the POR with pike numbers higher than expected we pike anglers got the impression that we could provide insight on how we think the situation could best be handled. The following spring, the WDFW came in and told everybody interested in the pike what was going to be done....no asking for comments, no nothing. It seems like they took all the comments from people that didn't want the pike. Which I thought was funny because that was the very same year budgets were tight and the WDFW was trying to promote warm water fisheries because the salmon and steelhead fisheries were going to suffer due to budget cuts. The pike fishery, they didn't have to sink a dime in, just educate on trying to harvest a lot of the smaller pike to keep the fishery healthy. But anyway they decided what was the best path forward. Now, this was extremely disappointing to us pike anglers because we felt would could have worked together to accomplish something where everybody would be happy. No pike angler I spoke too wanted the pike to migrate past the POR. But our minds were made up for us. As you can see this pissed off all the pike anglers so we all decided if they have the solution they can implement it themselves and try and drum up some "pike anglers for hire" to help eradicate the pike.

Also, the data that kept being shown to us on how pike will devastate a fishery were from Alaska and Montana.....trout/salmonid only waters......is the Columbia a trout/salmonid only water? No. If there is only one thing for pike to eat, they will eat it, so the data trying to compare what the pike will eat and how they will devastate a fishery was not apples for apples. (Tiger Muskies and Curlew....what is the Tiger's favorite food....unless the data has changed, but last I was told by Mr. Bolding himself was the trout). There are over 60 different species of fish in the Columbia a lot of them co-exist with pike all across North America. CDA is a good example of how pike and kokanee and king salmon coexist with trout in other portions of the lake....ft. peck, lake Sakakawea are others that come to mind where trout/salmonids and pike coexist. So would pike totally devastate a trout/salmonid fishery with a vast array of other species, some of which they like to eat as well, I would bet not. Unless they have other data that shows pike will totally take over a fishery in like kind of the Columbia, I will take the other data with a grain of salt in terms of comparing it to the Columbia.

As for the anglers having an impact on the pike numbers, again how many anglers are actually fishing for them now that they are aggressively gill netting them? There a reason some of the local biologist are trying to promote the other species of fish in the river....because hardly anybody is fishing there. When fishing for pike was good, the angler pressure was through the roof....you couldn't find a parking spot on a Tuesday afternoon let alone a weekend. Now, you get first row parking on the weekend, maybe aside from a bass tournament every now and again. So yeah the gill netting is killing more and the angler pressure can be considered negligible because there is not angler pressure on them. Gill nets will always win that battle, but with that said, they also have to expect to be the only ones doing the work to remove the pike because it is not fun for anybody else, pike angler or not, when catching a pike is harder than catching a muskie. Are they also willing to continue this for the rest of our lives? Because all it takes a couple of pike spawning to start this whole process over again. Is the money and man power there to continue this effort forever? Is the money and effort now worth it if in a couple of years its all undone when the gill netting has stopped because the numbers were down to a desired level? I am not trying to be a smart ass either, I am seriously asking this question because I don't know the committed dollars or manpower effort to this, but knowing pike, it will have to be a continuous committed effort if they truly want to eradicate the pike.

All the BS aside, I know nothing changes and the war on pike will continue, which is kind of sad really because I truly believe this could have turned out differently if approached differently. And again not a single pike angler I know wanted pike to migrate past the POR, we wanted to help keep them in the POR. Even though we like pike fishing were are not that selfish that we want pike in every body of water. Some of us are actually big dorks on pike. We read the stocking data, and management data, and special rules and regulations studies on certain bodies of water, etc. and from all different states (Colorado, Nebraska, Minnesota, North Dakota, Montana, Maine, Michigan, Wisconsin, New York, etc.)

Even though we don't think they would destroy the columbia river fishery, we were fine with not giving them even a chance to prove us right or wrong because salmon and trout belong there and pike didn't.

I am not directing this at anyone really, just addressing some information that seems to paint pike anglers in a selfish light on this whole pike war. And I agree, this would have been better served on the pike forum, but it was here so rather than making my comment, on the pike forum, I posted here.

[Don Wittenberger]

I doubt WDFW made the decision. Higher federal, state, and tribal powers run this show. Huge sums have been/are being spent on Columbia River salmon, and there's big-time politics involved. The pike advocates were run over by a juggernaut. Realistically, you couldn't expect anything else.

[Lucius]

Yeah, we knew there were large sums of money involved which I guess implies the saying, " Money Talks and BS Walks..." So what your saying is I need to become a Billionaire and buy the pikes freedom....ok I will work on that!!

Ahhh the sound science of Money and Politics.

[Don Wittenberger]

Nah, just drive a few miles across the state line into Idaho. They have lots of pike. Big ones, too.

[harleypiker]

That's right and they got my $98 license and $20 invasive sticker and fuel money and ice money and campground money....and not Washington....

[Mark K]

I haven't spent a dollar in Pend Oreille County since the netting started. I used to be there fishing, buying food, gas, gear etc. dang near every weekend from March-October. Sure, this doesnt really effect the State, or Kalispels, but it does get noticed by the business owner up to the county level. Especially when, like Lucius said, the river has lost tens of thousands of angler hours per year. I really believe this was handled very poorly, and I hope Connor and his gang enjoy netting that river every spring for the rest of their working lives, because honestly, Gill nets are just a band-aid. They will never solve this "issue".

[Fish-N-Fool]

This is another case of the WDFW feeding us lies, just like the last time we went through this on the Box Canyon debate from 4 years ago. I am sure that pike in the Columbia would have zero effect on Salmon and Steelhead populations, just as the had zero effect on the trout population in the P.O. river. What I can guarantee you is that gill netting will kill more fish then the pike ever did just as it has in the P.O. river. It went from a world class pike and bass fishery, to a dead sea. The only fish that has survived the nets is the SM bass and they are booming in the PO. They are in my opinion far more invasive then Pike ever were. Once again the WDFW is looking to spend millions of dollars trying to fix a problem that doesn't exist.