Celebrating 70 Years





Deep water Slough Phase II

  • 24 Apr 2014 9:01 PM
    Message # 1543215
    Anonymous member (Administrator)

    Last week HQ has a whole mess of politico's out walking around and talking about removing the dikes on the rest of the islands.  Might be a good time to call your rep and tell them to leave the area until some data is published on how effective the phase I was.

     

    Reb

  • 25 Apr 2014 8:36 AM
    Reply # 1543412 on 1543215
    Anonymous member (Administrator)

    The farmed island has been prioritized for fish restoration by the Puget Sound Nearshore Restoration Partnership or PSNRP.  WDFW hired a restoration coordinatoor a year or two ago, Loren Brokaw, and part of his salary is paid for by PSNRP.

    Snow Goose reserve will be partially restored over next couple summers, and despite $3,000,000 spent on the first farmed island fish restoration project (including building new dikes) rest of farmed island likely is next on the dike removal agenda.

    DU is on the record with a study that says waterfowl management areas are not needed in the Skagit area and for better or worse is actively receiving and soliciting funds from the Salmon Recovery Funding Board for fish restoration projects.

    Because of our opposition, WWA is no longer informed by WDFW of these restoration planning efforts on our public hunting access lands.

    Have you heard of the WWA's Heritage Lands Program?  Lands managed forever as farmland allowing public outdoor recreation access and fish and wildlife management.  This program needs your financial support to get started, but then will support itself after about 500 acres are in the program.  The goal is to spread the program across the State of Washington.  you can learn more under the programs section of this website (link to the left)

    Last modified: 25 Apr 2014 8:39 AM | Anonymous member (Administrator)
  • 29 Apr 2014 1:47 PM
    Reply # 1545014 on 1543215
    I want to like DU but the way the have enthusiastically lead the charge to do salmon projects at the expense of public hunting areas has turned me off completely. 
    Have you ever noticed how these studies that start with a premise always justify that premise?

    Funny thing is I am restraining my real feelings right now!
  • 30 Apr 2014 8:18 AM
    Reply # 1545373 on 1543215
    Anonymous member (Administrator)

    thanks Mike....

    It is important for folks to understand that I don't include DU to "bash" them.  I include the information because WDFW personnell have told me that the DU "carrying capacity" study for the Skagit area is being used by fish restoration interests to promote the idea that waterfowl management areas can be restored to fish habitat.

    Interestingly, I have also had DU biologist tell me that Western Washington also is not important breeding habitat.  Combined, with the above carrying capacity study, the two findings would seem to suggest the Skagit area is not breeding area and has enough winter food present.  So we don't need any waterfowl management in the region.  These findings tie directly into the fish restoration plans on our regional wildlife areas.

    It is also important to realize that the Governor's office (Gary Locke at the time I think) created PSNRP and has direct authority over it.  Because of resistance to fish restoration projects on WDFW lands and the support of our opposition to these projects by some WDFW personnel (including the WDFW Commission), WDFW had difficulty making fish restoration projects happen fast enough.  So, the powers that be have now written the PSNRP into our State laws/rules as having jurisdiction over restoration projects in the Puget Sound Region.  Now, PSNRP now can essentially tell WDFW what restoration projects to get done because it is the Governor's baby and Governor has power over WDFW...just not the WDFW Commission.

    its a finely woven web that is moving us toward fish restoration projects.  The resources being put into it are astounding.

     

  • 30 Apr 2014 2:12 PM
    Reply # 1545598 on 1543215
    I am not wanting to bash them either, but it is sad to watch the ongoing restoration project that cost public hunters so greatly.

    The reality of these projects is they matter very little since the real issues from the rivers source to their mouths will never be addressed without taking out all dikes and ending all pollution and severely limiting watershed uses. These projects are far too little and too late to accomplish the goals.

    The rest of the story is no more catch and release steelhead fishing in the Skagit and no more hatchery plants either, fishermen and hunters in this system are seeing the beginning of the end. It has only cost a couple of billion public dollars in the last decade or so to watch this states wild salmonoid runs wind down the inevitable trail of the American bison.



  • 27 May 2014 7:08 PM
    Reply # 1557917 on 1543215
    Anonymous member (Administrator)

    Sorry to just jump in guys but I have several members in the GH Chapter that quit DU. I have no problem bashing DU. I have pulled my support for them now and will continue to recruit their members.

    The Salmon restoration project in the Skagit Delta has been a failure from the start. All the area that was exposed to the tides is now choked to death with large long leafy plants. A fart couln't get through it.

  • 21 Sep 2014 7:26 PM
    Reply # 3104176 on 1543215

    The death knell of public funding sounds on the farmed island.

    http://www.goskagit.com/all_access/skagit-salmon-projects-get-m-in-state-funding/article_34f858e3-8e4c-5f15-84c9-5512c779f393.html

    This is going to save me a lot of time and gas money driving up to hunting that area. No more stops in Conway to buy food and gas either. 

    No more crappy boat launch at the HQ either! No more fighting the tides and wind or the crowds!

    I will be able to go golfing on nice days without feeling like I am missing out.

    Just spending lazy days saving my money and doing others things while I am waiting for all those king salmon I am going to be able to catch on the Skagit river someday, lol!


    Last modified: 21 Sep 2014 7:31 PM | Anonymous member
  • 21 Sep 2014 7:34 PM
    Reply # 3104179 on 1543215

    Looks like link failure, here is the article.


    Posted: Friday, September 19, 2014 6:00 pm | Updated: 6:18 pm, Fri Sep 19, 2014.

    By Kimberly Cauvel | 0 comments

    Of $24.8 million the state awarded this week to salmon recovery in Puget Sound, more than half will go toward projects in Skagit County.
    Eight Skagit projects were awarded a combined $15.5 million through the Salmon Recovery Funding Board and Puget Sound Partnership, the state Recreation and Conservation Office announced Thursday.
    Skagit County organizations are “ambitious” when it comes to salmon recovery, Recreation and Conservation Office spokeswoman Susan Zemek said.
    “The reason that so much money went into Skagit County projects was because the Whidbey Basin, and the Skagit River particularly, produce 30 percent of all Puget Sound salmon, so it’s a really important area for Puget Sound recovery,” Zemek said. “Also, a lot of the organizations there had projects ready to go … and they’re good quality projects.”
    The bulk of the money was awarded to the state Department of Fish and Wildlife, with $13.6 million designated to improving fish habitat on the agency’s Fir Island Farm property near Conway.
    The agency will move back a mile-long dike on the property to restore 131 acres of natural tidal flow to Skagit Bay. The project is expected to open up enough tidal marsh and tidal channel habitat to make room for 65,000 migrating juvenile Chinook.
    Projects on Illabot Creek east of Rockport brought in the second largest amount of money for Skagit salmon recovery.
    The Skagit River System Cooperative, which helps the Sauk-Suiattle and Swinomish tribes with natural resource management, received $1.1 million to restore the Illabot Creek alluvial fan. The Skagit Land Trust also received money for restoration work on the creek.
    Local watershed groups, Puget Sound Salmon Recovery Council and Puget Sound Partnership ranked and prioritized projects eligible for the grant money. Twenty-eight projects were selected in 10 counties.
    The grant money is from the legislatively approved Puget Sound Acquisition and Restoration Fund, which is funded by the sale of state general obligation bonds.

    Last modified: 21 Sep 2014 7:35 PM | Anonymous member
  • 22 Sep 2014 7:39 PM
    Reply # 3106185 on 1543215
    Anonymous member (Administrator)

    This SRFB grant is not the "farmed island". 

    It is for a portion of the Snow Goose Reserve farther out on Fir Island.

    So, you'll have to keep spending that gas money and hunting the farmed island....at least for awhile.

    Rone

  • 22 Sep 2014 8:40 PM
    Reply # 3106229 on 1543215

    Thanks Rone, my mistake then. I don't hunt up there much anymore since they did away with the HQ and the failed plantings on the island the birds are there like they used to be so neither am I!

    I am just ending my long standing resentment.....


Powered by Wild Apricot Membership Software