HOUSE BILL REPORT

SSB 5146

BYSenate Committee on Environment & Natural Resources (originally sponsored by Senators Owen, Craswell, Kreidler, Lee, Stratton, Sellar and Conner)

Providing a Hood Canal marine fish preservation area.

House Committe on Fisheries & Wildlife

Majority Report:  Do pass as amended.  (6)

      Signed by Representatives R. King, Chair; Morris, Vice Chair; S. Wilson, Ranking Republican Member; Bowman, Brooks and Vekich.

Minority Report:  Do not pass.  (5)

      Signed by Representatives Basich, Cole, Haugen, Smith and Spanel.

House Staff:Robert Butts (786-7841)

AS REPORTED BY COMMITTEE ON FISHERIES & WILDLIFE

FEBRUARY 22, 1990

BACKGROUND:

Hood Canal supports commercial, tribal, and recreational fisheries.

Commercial salmon fishers harvest primarily chum, coho, and chinook salmon using gillnets and purse seines.  For the years 1985-1988, approximately 3 percent of the total non-Indian commercial Puget Sound chinook salmon catch was caught in Hood Canal.  The Hood Canal percentage for coho salmon was 7 percent, and 40 percent for chum salmon.

In addition to commercial salmon fishing, a limited amount of beach seining for sea perch and set netting for dog fish occurs.  In 1989, the Legislature prohibited commercial bottom trawling in the canal.

The tribal salmon fishery catches primarily chum, coho, and chinook, with gill nets being used in the canal and in several major rivers.

The recreational fishery focuses on chinook and coho salmon, while a limited amount of marine fish and chum salmon are caught.  The total recreational salmon catch has dropped from an average of approximately 22,000 fish in the early 1970s to approximately 5,000 fish in the period of 1985-1987.

There are five salmon hatcheries on the canal:  three are operated by the Department of Fisheries, one by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and one by the Point No Point Tribal Council.  In addition, there are several "coop" net pen facilities.  In 1987, approximately 80 percent of the releases from these facilities were chum salmon, 15 percent were chinook, and 5 percent were coho.

SUMMARY:

BILL AS AMENDED:  Non-Indian commercial harvest of food fish in Hood Canal is incrementally reduced 25 percent, 50 percent, 75 percent and 100 percent in the first four years following enactment of the legislation.  A commercial net fishery may be allowed in the close proximity of a fish hatchery discharge, or within one-half mile of the mouth of a river that has a fish hatchery, if a surplus of salmon is expected to return to the hatchery.  Commercial fishing is allowed for herring that will be used as fish bait.  The harvest of food fish produced by private aquaculture also is allowed.

If Indian tribes that have fishing rights on fish destined to go to Hood Canal claim foregone opportunity to increase their catch, the restrictions on commercial harvest shall be nullified for that salmon run until an agreement can be reached between the state and the tribes.

AMENDED BILL COMPARED TO SUBSTITUTE:  The amended bill allows commercial net fisheries to occur in "close proximity" to hatchery discharges and to river mouths of rivers with hatcheries instead of within one-half mile.  Language requiring the director of Fisheries to allow adequate escapement of Hood Canal origin salmon in areas outside the canal was removed.

Fiscal Note:      Available.

House Committee ‑ Testified For:    Senator Brad Owen, Prime Sponsor on Senate Bill; Dennis McBreen, Save Our Salmon; Duane Linkemyer, Kitsap Poggie Club; Barry Jenkins, Trout Unlimited; Ron Flerx, self; and Jim Hayes, Hood Canal Oyster Company.

House Committee - Testified Against:      Robert Zuanich, Purse Seiner Vessel Owners' Association; Steve Arbaugh, Puget Sound Gillnetters Association; Doug Karlberg, Salmon for Washington; Vincent Barcott, Purse Seine Vessel Owners' Association; and Director Joe Blum, Department of Fisheries.

House Committee - Testimony For:    Sport fishing in Hood Canal has declined dramatically since the early 1970s.  The major reason for the decline is the incidental catch of coho and chinook salmon by the commercial fishing industry, and the heavy emphasis placed on chum salmon production by the Department of Fisheries.  If the canal is ever to regain its former status as an excellent sport fishing area, commercial salmon fishing needs to be phased-out or restricted to specific locations.

House Committee - Testimony Against:      The downturn in sport fishing in Hood Canal is not caused by the incidental catch of salmon by commercial fishers: it is caused by the large number of Hood Canal origin salmon that are caught in the Strait of Juan de Fuca and in the ocean.  It is bad public policy to enhance the sport fishery at the expense of the commercial fishery.  Instead of fighting over the allocation of fish, we should be working together to enhance the resource.