Anti -Hatchery or anti angler?

[reelfast]

A couple of things...

First, are you suggesting that a run of fish no longer returning to a given watershed equates to the extinction of a specific species?

there are numerous scientifically sound investigations that support this notion. it is complicated by the fact that anadramous fish seem to either be 'home bodies' returning to their natal rivers or 'explores' populating nearby systems. this characteristic is more than likely what has enabled them to survive through the millenia.

Fix the HABITAT in those rivers, use hatcheries to restsart the runs and viola - "extinction" over. Doesn't take 100 years either.

and, of course, that is not going to happen. you are not going to remove the local mall that is built on a flood plan of your favorite river, you are not going to take out the hydro that everyone has come to depend on, you are not going to fix 100 years of overharvest of the forests, your are not going to shut down strip mining.............. While habitat is a convenient mantra to drap yourself with, neither you nor anyone else is going to reverse the damange already done simply because of the economics involved. so the best we can do is start to get concerned about variables we CAN control.

Second, are you suggesting that it is the existence of hatcheries that has playrd any kind of role in the removal of these salmon runs from these systems? That also is completely untrue and again, I believe you know that. Fear mongering and useless inflammatory rhetoric.

ah, yes that is also a scientifically demonstrated fact. i can understand your discomfort in accepting this fact but it is not going away. just think of your self as a wild fish. there you are sitting comfortably in your favorite chair, snacks and beverages at hand when the big yellow hatchery bus pulls up in front of your residence and 100 clones enter your space. you are now displaced! nothing to eat, no where to hide or rest. gone is your environment which was tough to begin with. the volume of hatchery smolt that has been the norm IS a causal factor in wild fish extinction. hatchery 'reform' in the US is targetting this notion by dramatically reducing the numbers of hatchery smolt being released each year. and actually, hatchery smolt put back NOTHING into our river systems. these programs were and continue to be, props to the commercial sector, nothing more. when you get a return rate of hatchery fish that is in the ONE PERCENT range, you know that you have created smolt incapable of sustaining life in the wild. now couple that with a 30% success rate at spawing, wild fish are at about 70%, and it should tell you that it takes far fewer wild fish to sustain a run.

Please get off the "wild fish are better" bandwagon, deal with all the facts, and consider the values of others as being as important as your own. .

my 'high horse' is focused on extinction. as a human being i feel obliged to school myself regarding what is going on with our anadramous fishes and take a stance that helps preserve our wild fish heritage. i know that i have been a part of the problem through the decades by harvesting wild fish from various rivers and salt water environments. i have had my day, i want my grandkids to have their's. the notion that hatcheries are preserving anything is a joke. they are there simply to support the commercial sector. they are much like your net pens in that the sea food industry demands them.

what we can do TODAY is to learn all we can about the impacts of hatchery smolt and start to mitigate those impacts. it has taken well over 100 years to put all of us in this pickle and we will not see this turn around in any short order. that means impacts of bag limits and season lengths. time to realize that this is not 1913, this is 2013 and we have a significant problem on our hands. arguing as if the runs were in the shape they were 100 years ago is not a reasonable positon to take and one that flies in the face of the facts of the matter.

 

[reelfast]

I can tell you for sure that there are a bunch of southern VI rivers that would be completely or nearly void of salmon if it wasn't for enhancement programs.

Mt St Helens blew up some years back. the Toutle river which drains its W flank and empties into the Cowlitz was running 'mud' for quite a while. previously it had been heavily stocked with chinook and steelhead to support hungry rec anglers. the basin was totally scoured, everything there was killed, everything. they began construction on a sediment retainment structure. that took about 3 years to complete. when they closed the gates, the river below started to clear. and there they were, wild chinook and wild steelhead. the fish had already found the river and were busy propogating. the river was closed to harvest because of the devastation. that didn't sit well with a group of rec anglers who were used to taking their 'share' of fish. so the pressure was put on WDFW to restock the Toutle with hatchery smolt. in the span of 2 years, the wild fish were gone.

interestingly enough a similar story is playing out on the White Salmon r. in WA. wild fish have already returned and are spawing in habitate newly available to them. and, of course, the rec anglers are up in arms as they were on the Toutle.

to argue that the fish who sustained themselves through devistation on our planet that we can barely understand, can't come back, is pretty nieve thinking. Van Isle and where i am sitting were both covered under 1,500' of solid ice, but the fish came back. what has to accompany wild fish recovery is restraint on the part of the rec angling community. it is, however, unlikley that many folks will give up their cherished bag limits to help the wild fish sustain themselves.

 

[Cut Plug]

The science is by no means consistent to support your arguments. There is good science on both sides of the equation. I'm by no means an expert but have read a little.

I do know that the science regarding species\watershed specificity it is far from conclusive, and in fact the larger body of science disagrees with that approach. For example, in Canada we have adopted a wild salmon policy and guidelines regarding transport and relocation of fish that is based on conservation units that span fairly large geographic areas and consider all of the salmon of a given species within that unit to be essentially the same in lifestyle and genetic make up.

To suggest that the introduction of of hatcheries is responsible for the demise of salmon in those systems requires you to believe that the salmon produced in those hatcheries are a different species than the original stock. I don't beleive that is true. See above.

I guess it all boils down to my original suggestion that we can have both, and why shouldn't we. Personally I am not offended if the salmon I see in a river or catch in the ocean is produced in a hatchery or in the wild. That being said, the idea that we still have completely wild, natural systems producing fish is comforting as a barometer of just how badly we're screwing up the planet. I am not naive enough though to assume we can turn the clock back and maintain any kind of reasonable salmon fishery by shuttting down all hatcheries and pretending that somehow Mother Nature is going to fix it all after we have irreversibly screwed up the production potential of our watersheds.

As stated, I firmly beleive we can, and should have both hatchery enhancement and purely wild systems and that healthy, productive fisheries are a critical part of the equation. I also believe that without well subscribed fisheries, we have no advocates for fish and that would be the final nail in the coffin.

CP

 

[reelfast]

To suggest that the introduction of of hatcheries is responsible for the demise of salmon in those systems requires you to believe that the salmon produced in those hatcheries are a different species than the original stock. I don't beleive that is true.

the original salmon stocking of the columbia r. used smolt raised on the McCloud r. in N california. they didn't survive. stocking programs commonly used strains of anadramous fish that were easy to raise in hatcheries. the pounds of feed consummed was the metric of concern, not their genetic makeup. fortunately, most of this backward thinking has been put to the test and stopped. hatcheries down this way have started using only fish from the drainages on which they are located, a significant step forward. hatcheries did not start the decline of our wild fish. the point is modifying hatchery practices is one variable we have control over and a significant one as hatchery smolt DO have a negative impact on wild fish recovery. its all about numbers and displacement on the spawing redds.

I am not naive enough though to assume we can turn the clock back and maintain any kind of reasonable salmon fishery by shuttting down all hatcheries and pretending that somehow Mother Nature is going to fix it all after we have irreversibly screwed up the production potential of our watersheds.
CP

nor am i. striking a balance is about as good as we can do in this day and age but with the sea food industry driving the show i don't see how that is going to happen. unfortunately, the rec angling community is all to eager to speak out when their bag limits and season lengths are changed thereby doing the bidding of the sea food industry who does not have to spend a dime defending their practices. if we are going to save additional wild fish runs from extinction, hatchery reform is going to have to cut much deeper in terms of the numbers of smolt released. an interesting metric is to look at the number of hatchery smolts vs the numbers of wild fish across about 3 decades. as you see the hatchery smolt increase you also observe the dramatic drop off of wild fish. the columbia r. along recieves 2.5 MILLION hatchery smolts each and every year. and to state the obvious, again, not a single run of anadramous fish have been recovered as a result of all of this. so supplementation which was sold as 'run recovery' is a total and abismal failure. now the idiotic thing to do is continue with the same approach, and that seems to be the most comfrortable for many in the rec angling community.

 

[profisher]

If all hatchery production ended tomorrow......how long could a resident killer whale or grizzly bear go on a concentration camp style diet? I think the whales and bears would be on your side CP for a mix of both...at least until hatcheries are no longer needed to augment some runs.

 

[reelfast]

at least until hatcheries are no longer needed to augment some runs.

you totally missed the point of today's, or yesterdays, hatchery system. providing fish for the sea food industry is their one and only purpose. that is how all of this started in the 1890s on the columbia river and how it continues today. run augmentation was never the goal, only a PR move to sell the idea. but not to worry, just as your net pens are not going away, neither will the hatcheries. when you have a billion dollar industry that depends on both notions, case closed.

 

[chris73]

Well reelfast, I can assure you that the vast majority of hatcheries on this side of the border are not mass producing units for a commercial fishery but rather ensure the survival of salmon stocks in compromised rivers. The few larger hatcheries up here that may have enough output to attract any commercial use are Robertson Creek in PA, Nitinat and maybe the Conuma. Maybe we have to specify exactly what we are debating here and not generalize hatchery = hatchery. I for one do not want to miss the roughly 1000 Chinooks that come back to the Sooke River for instance each year only due to the relentless efforts by the Sooke Salmon Enhancement Society (SSES). In 1981 Chinooks were extinct in this River - which had no hatchery then - go figure, they do disappear if left alone. The SSES reseeded the river and with their enhancement program a new Chinook population of annually about 1000 has been re-established. You want to tell me that is a BAD thing? And for the records, typically 3 and 4 years after the SSES was unable to obtain the desired brood stock amount you can see the returning numbers fall.

 

[reelfast]

In 1981 Chinooks were extinct in this River ....... You want to tell me that is a BAD thing?

depends on whether or not you see wild fish returning as a positive thing. i can say that those 1,000 hatchery zombies are a major reason why you won't see those wild fish. down this way, ESA listed fish are starting to determine just how the hatcheries are being managed, a very good thing.

 

[chris73]

depends on whether or not you see wild fish returning as a positive thing. i can say that those 1,000 hatchery zombies are a major reason why you won't see those wild fish. down this way, ESA listed fish are starting to determine just how the hatcheries are being managed, a very good thing.

Sorry but I think you are lacking a critical piece of understanding. And I think I know what it is: practical experience out on some creeks. I encourage you to go to one of your Washington creeks and talk to some streamkeepers and get involved in one of the many little hatchery operations and see for yourself what it is all about and how critical that work is in maintaining salmon populations that provide critical food for an entire ecosystem and only secondarily opportunities for fishermen. I think you will be surprised how different hands on reality can look like compared to some of the theoretical science written by and for booksmart paper pushers.

 

[GLG]

And for the records, typically 3 and 4 years after the SSES was unable to obtain the desired brood stock amount you can see the returning numbers fall.

Salmon populations would be finished without hatcheries.

This is what I find the most troubling with hatcheries.
We seem to be depending on them for the future of salmon.
I'm part of a group of guy's that have been running a small hatchery since the late 70's.
We have done upgrades and we are spending a ton of money to keep our run of coho alive.
We have adopted best practices from other hatcheries and continue to work on improvements.
The missing component that I saw was, we had no plan to work our way out of a job.
The hatchery was going year to year doing the same old, same old.
Our numbers were not increasing and in fact this year was the worst year ever.
(We knew it was coming because of smolt counts from 18 months ago.)
We are now planning to get off the hatchery treadmill and let mother nature do her thing.
It may take 10 or 20 years but we will do the things that bring us to that goal.
Clean up the river, check. Fix the estuary, check. Educate the landowners, check.
Get the fish farms off the migration routes, check. Fix the SOG, check.
As you can see we have plenty of work ahead but we have a goal and if all hatcheries did the same......
Well .... careful what you wish for as you might get it.
GLG

 

[lorneparker1]

This is what I find the most troubling with hatcheries.
We seem to be depending on them for the future of salmon.
I'm part of a group of guy's that have been running a small hatchery since the late 70's.
We have done upgrades and we are spending a ton of money to keep our run of coho alive.
We have adopted best practices from other hatcheries and continue to work on improvements.
The missing component that I saw was, we had no plan to work our way out of a job.
The hatchery was going year to year doing the same old, same old.
Our numbers were not increasing and in fact this year was the worst year ever.
(We knew it was coming because of smolt counts from 18 months ago.)
We are now planning to get off the hatchery treadmill and let mother nature do her thing.
It may take 10 or 20 years but we will do the things that bring us to that goal.
Clean up the river, check. Fix the estuary, check. Educate the landowners, check.
Get the fish farms off the migration routes, check. Fix the SOG, check.
As you can see we have plenty of work ahead but we have a goal and if all hatcheries did the same......
Well .... careful what you wish for as you might get it.
GLG

Didnt you have something that killed all your smolts or eggs or something? water temps maybe? I forget what it was, but i remember you talking about it at the SFAC. I'm sure that didnt help! Correct me if im wrong

 

[Rockfish]

Couldn't agree more. Salmon populations would be finished without hatcheries.

Not just the Salmon populations but the creeks themselves. Once a creek, especially an Urban Creek loses its trout and salmon there is no longer a driving force to keep it. It is then turned into nothing more than a drainage ditch, straightened to follow roads and eventually concreted over becoming nothing more than a large culvert and storm drain or a source for agricultural irrigation. That is exactly what happened to Bowker creek in Victoria. When I was a kid parts of it were still open along Shelbourne street, now it is a large culvert but at least some of the space it occupies is useful as mall parking; now that’s progress.

http://www.crd.bc.ca/watersheds/protection/bowker/

Without fish our streams and the water and space they occupy are considered expendable. The space they occupied gets used for yuppie housing, shopping malls. drainage and irrigation. We don’t want those lawns and parking lots flooding in the winter now do we and we have to keep those golf courses green in the summer.

I am convinced that restoration, enhancement efforts and hatcheries keep fish in streams and without them we would have a lot more Bowker Creeks and a lot less need for stream keepers.

 

[Aces]

I used to be a big supporter of the wild fish campaigns but have gotten more realistic.

After using hatchery fish to aid a local river to historic chinook populations we stopped enhancing it to focus our efforts on other rivers. It's populations crashed within 5 years, even after massive stream rehab.......quite disappointing to say the least.

WE are implementing an aggressive sea pen system as well as in stream plantings hoping for a quick turnaround

 

[GLG]

Didnt you have something that killed all your smolts or eggs or something? water temps maybe? I forget what it was, but i remember you talking about it at the SFAC. I'm sure that didnt help! Correct me if im wrong

Yup smolt's/fry died at some point in time in the river. No idea as to why it happened.
Since then our smolt count is back to normal so next year looks OK.

 

[reelfast]

The missing component that I saw was, we had no plan to work our way out of a job.
GLG

thanks for that thought as i believe it is the most critical part of this entire hatchery equation. bringing back runs of fish was believed to be the original goal of many who got into supplementation. unfortunately, and i really mean that, the preponderence of science based investigations point to the fact that those dediticated folks are not only not working themselves out of a job, they are contributing to the demise of wild fish.

of course all streams and eco systems are not created equal and many of them are lost forever. the example of the small stream running in Vic is but a single call out of what has happenned in most urban environments. those stream fishes are now extinct and lost, best to move on to systems that have some promise of recovery.

the Sol Duc had a small hatchery being run by a guides association. their thinking was the same as the folks running your small hatcheries, run with best practices, enhance a unique run of fish and help the wild fish recover. they only used spawing stock from returning wild fish but noted that all of their efforts were not doing much to increase run sizes.

that hatchery was shuttered last year, perhaps the last of the citizen operated ones in WA. the Sol Duc has now been declared a wild only stream with zero supplementation. this stream basin is unique in that the banks are rock solid, trees overhang the river system providing needed shade, woody debris is plentyfull and a real hazard to drifters. will anything result from these new efforts?? it's hard to say but here is another system that is getting a unique chance in this day and age to recover. the late return fish rival those of the fabled BC rivers in size and strength so this is really worth the effort and the time involved to see if it returns. the difficulty in actually fishing this river is also sure to keep the meat anglers at bay while providing an opportunity for a quality experience for the selective gear anglers.

 

[finaddict]

the difficulty in actually fishing this river is also sure to keep the meat anglers at bay while providing an opportunity for a quality experience for the selective gear anglers.

Interesting RF. Your last statement solidly supports the suspicion of the OP about Anti-Hatchery vs. Anti-angler. Me thinks your motives could be a tad "ulterior"

 

[reelfast]

Interesting RF. Your last statement solidly supports the suspicion of the OP about Anti-Hatchery vs. Anti-angler. Me thinks your motives could be a tad "ulterior"

not at all, just posting the reality of what is going on. i have not hunted steelhead for over 10 years now having accomplished all of my steelhead goals way back when the numbers of fish available put a smile on your face. if you want to fish down in OR, PM me and i'll point you at a hatchery steelhead fishery, assuming you know how, that will enable you to hook up with at least 10-12/day. i have a difficult time even thinking about hunting them on the OP nowadays as the wild numbers are way down. hatchery salmon, hey i am hell on wheels killing everyone i lay my hands on

the non-selective fishery on the Sol Duc, below the hatchery, remains a favorite with the meat group and more power to them cleaning out that hatchery trash. upstream from the hatchery, you sure better know what you are doing or at least have your life insurance fully paid up.

 

[Sculpin]

Interesting RF. Your last statement solidly supports the suspicion of the OP about Anti-Hatchery vs. Anti-angler. Me thinks your motives could be a tad "ulterior"

Just a tad?........ lol.

 

[reelfast]

How is the steel head in cowichan river? When the hatchery ran it was great...now its OK...but way less fish. Seems the wild initiative here isn't working.... Taking that away was a big mistake...

so how long has this been going on?? it took mankind well over 100 years to screw this up so don't expect some sort of sudden turn around by the wild fish.