spending stimulus money on hatcheries will harm wild salmon

OMG.:rolleyes: Sigh.

Everyone has the answer, and donation money is the key. For 10+ years same people nay saying everything. And what has that gotten us?

Sounds like someone heard money was coming and wants it.:rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
I am sure that in SOME cases what Vanessa talks about is true. Opinion in WA state by the "experts" is that the largest wild Chinook population bottleneck is lack of habitat. Remove that bottleneck & the next bottleneck will kick-in. Each population will have it's own set of bottlenecks.
All wild fish would be the ideal; replacing 10 wild Chinook smaller populations with one large hatchery population reduces biodiversity. One part of this biodiversity is that during their lifecycle, different populations of Chinook exploit different parts of the ecosystem; when one ecosystem, has problems, Chinook from another ecosystem will survive, and over time stray into the harmed ecosystem & re-populate it. Right now we don't have the thousand or so years it might take for this to happen & IMO hatcheries are needed for the foreseeable future.
 
It's too bad that the subtle nuances of stock assistance are ignored in this NGO news release. Unfortunately common and unfortunately disingenuous.

I don't see hatcheries as a black and white topic. I think there can be legitimate and defensible reasons for using hatcheries - esp. when simultaneously doing habitat restoration. The Cowichan is likely the best planning model that I am aware of - in this regard: http://www.pacfish.ca/Cowichan/

I notice that these assumed "experts" never used the Cowichan as a model.

I think for me - I see a obviously missing component of many hatchery operations: what is the "measure of success" - how do we determine this? That's the check and balance I would like to see instituted in hatchery operations.
 
Lets also not forget that in some cases Hatcheries have restored Chinook runs to rivers that other wise would have none. I understand the native Chinook run in the Sooke River went extinct, but through the efforts of Anglers and the local community, a similar strain of Chinook from a nearby system was introduced into the Sooke River and has been highly successful in restoring the dead Sooke River Chinook run. I also understand that some of these introduced Hatchery Chinook now spawn naturally in the river. Anglers seldom get the credit for the volunteer and fund raising efforts that have supported the restoration of salmon species all along our coast. I have not seen the same effort by other sectors or the NGO's, certainly locally. It is the anglers I am aware of that get cold and wet volunteering in hatcheries, fund raising and cleaning out old shopping carts and tires from local Coho streams and restoring spawning beds.

What I find most frustrating is that we are not allowed to clip Sooke River Hatchery Chinook because of the inability of our Federal Government to show actual leadership, competence and the political will to resolve this issue. Indeed it seems to be getting worse and spreading to Coho where we have also not been able to clip local angler produced Coho the last few years. At one time this was not an issue but with all the recent restrictions on the sport sector by the federal govt. (that have nothing to do with conservation and everything to do with reallocation), being allowed to harvest our own sport sector produced Coho and Chinook and sport sector restored salmon runs is critical to our coastal communities.

Part of this is a funding issue, despite DFO having a multi billion dollar budget, very little, almost none really, goes into enhancing and restoring Pacific salmon runs and the reason why anglers have to fund raise to accomplish what little gets done. If the Federal liberals want to know why they cannot buy a seat on Vancouver Island, Coastal BC and for that matter all of BC, except for a few seats in the lower mainland where even there they have been loosing ground; perhaps they should reexamine their policies and priorities and start to support Pacific Salmon, Coastal BC Communities and Anglers. I am talking a lot more than a pathetic few million over x number of years announced with great fanfare for political purposes to give the illusion of progress while accomplishing almost nothing but further decline. So how about it DFO and the Federal Govt. Lets say an additional 650 million a year over the next 15 years to enhance and restore Pacific Salmon. If that sounds like a lot, remember these salmon generate billions in economic activity a year and I would say that is one hell of a good long term investment. Once they are gone, they are gone, along with all the future billions in renewable economic activity, not to mention a way of life for our coastal communities.
 
Last edited:
I asked a friend of mine who is a long term biologist at DFO and works on Salmon, his thought on this. His personal opinion was that the best thing that could be done for Salmon in general would be an international agreement to stop fishing Salmon outside the 200 mile EEZ, on the high seas so to speak. In order to prevent Russia and Japan from intercepting North American fish. Other than habitat restoration etc, he did say that hatcheries are part of the problem facing wild stocks. However, apparently even if we scaled back on Chums and Pinks, Russia/China and Korea would still be churning them out.
 
The only chance of us as sports fisherman having any sort of openings in the future is through hatchery enhancement.
Take away the hatcheries and it’s game over for us.


As to the overfishing outside our waters....that will never change until we actually have a dominant and powerful leader running our country. Even then...
 
Back
Top