PL fisheries plan remains murky

PRIEST RIVER — An impassioned crowd met here to discuss and give their two cents on the future of fishing in Priest Lake and its tributaries on Monday.

The Idaho Department of Fish and Game is gathering public input on how it should manage the fishery from 2019-2024 as part of its regular fisheries management plan drawn up every six years, said Andy Dux, fisheries regional manager for IDFG. He prefaced the presentation by asking attendees to hold their comments until the end of the presentation and promised time to ask questions afterward. It is an emotional topic, he said, and said at a previous meeting in Coolin there had been disruptions during the presentation. While mostly attentive and respectful, there were interruptions in the audience at Priest River as well.

Dux explained that as officials revisited the fisheries plan for Priest Lake in 2012, questions emerged. IDFG was actively suppressing the lake trout population in Lake Pend Oreille in order to bring back kokanee and native fish there. Some people asked if IDFG could do the same at Priest Lake, and when officials took the pulse of the public, about half of respondents wanted them to manage Priest Lake similarly and bring back former populations, while the other half wanted to preserve the status quo. IDFG officials resolved then to keep digging to see if change was desired by an overwhelming majority or not.

IDFG formed the Priest Lake Fishery Advisory Committee in 2013. Christy Huling had been a member of the committee from the beginning. She said she was initially skeptical of IDFG, like many other attendees. After a long four years with many emotional discussions, she reported that the committee had been able to narrow down the options from 12 to three.

Those three options ranged from maintaining the status quo, to restoring the lake’s traditional fisheries ala the 1950s, with a third option of striking a tricky balance between the lake trout on the one hand and kokanee, westslope cutthroat, and bull trout on the other.

If the public wanted to restore the lake’s traditional fishery, Dux said lake trout suppression would require a liberal harvest, potentially unlimited harvest or incentivized angling. It would likely involve netting as well. Kokanee could also be stocked, and maybe bull trout also. The removal of lake trout could be coupled with stocking of kokanee and/or bull trout.

He pointed out that as was the case in Lake Pend Oreille, it may not be possible to restore the traditional fishery all the way back to their levels 50 years ago. Funding would be necessary to implement a lake trout suppression program, with costs likely declining over time. Lake trout would not totally disappear, and may grow to larger sizes, but the overall population would decline sharply. It would take 5-10 years to see the fishery changed, and perpetual suppression would be necessary to maintain low lake trout density, as is ongoing in Lake Pend Oreille. Dux said IDFG officials have confidence that they can do the job -- if the public desires it.

Residents in attendance asked questions about the costs of the various options. At its peak, Lake Pend Oreille lake trout suppression cost $750,000 per year, said Dux. Expenditures would be high early on. Eleven years later suppression costs have dropped at Lake Pend Oreille by 25 percent, he said, with hopes that it will continue to drop further. The department would have to search for and find adequate long-term funding for such work before beginning it, Dux said.

Dux cautioned attendees that the third, hybrid alternative was the most complex and difficult to achieve. Dux said with this option, “This one is hard, and it’s the least predictable and most uncertain.” If the public desires it, IDFG will pursue it, but when it has been attempted elsewhere it has not gone well, he said.

One resident voiced his concern that if government officials kept eradicating lake trout populations, pretty soon there wouldn’t be any lake trout left in Western lakes. Others expressed skepticism about the role of the Endangered Species Act and bull trout, saying that there would be a time when the federal government mandates that lake trout be taken out to protect bull trout.

Lake trout proponents were in force at the meeting. One called for things to remain the same as they are now, which drew applause from half of the audience.

In response to questions from Huling, Dux said even in its current state with additional sedimentation, lake trout can travel the Thorofare between Upper Priest Lake and Priest Lake. Regarding the proposal to siphon cold water from Priest Lake into Priest River, Dux said that wouldn’t change the lake fishery because a relatively small volume of water would be siphoned. “I don’t think it will affect lake trout at all,” he said.

Once IDFG gets direction on which course to take, Dux said the public guidance would be used in fisheries management plans for the next 10-15 years. Dux said he hoped the public’s guidance would be clear-cut, but in the event that public response was muddled, IDFG would continue with its current management strategy and not make any major changes.