OldBlackDog
Well-Known Member
Bob Hooton
2h ·For those who may be planning on participating in the BC Wildlife Federation's March 26th and 28th webinars on the efficacy of a "conservation hatchery" approach to salvage a future for what remains of Interior Fraser Steelhead (a group that supposedly includes Nahatlatch, Bridge, Seton, Stein, Thompson and Chilcotin stocks), here are some points that might be worth considering.
Thompson (IFS) Webinar – Why do we need or want a conservation hatchery?
1. From the inception of the BCWF’s investigation of the conservation hatchery option for Thompson/IFS stocks the product was referred to consistently as a report. Almost two years later and after numerous exchanges of messages between myself and the ED of the BCWF on the status of the report, all of a sudden a report is replaced by two webinars. That is hardly a credible substitute for the promised report that would have given all concerned parties a thorough understanding of what was done, by whom, what information sources were considered, what the results were and what recommendations were made.
2. Less than half a steelhead generation ago, the province was telling us there was no accepted conservation problem for Thompson steelhead because the anadromous genes were alive and well in the healthy population of resident rainbow trout.
3. The worst is yet to come for Thompson steelhead. The record setting Nov 15, 2021, flood that tore apart the Nicola system, in particular, undoubtedly reduced the juvenile steelhead population substantially. The consequences of that event will be seen over the next 2 or 3 years. Brood stock available for hatchery intervention is certain to be in even shorter supply than it is presently. All contemporary science would instruct it is a very bad approach to be further reducing what remains of the diversity of the stock by removing fish for a hatchery program.
4. The 27-day (self-policed) rolling window closure for First Nations fishing on the lower Fraser could only be implemented if the Thompson recreational steelhead fishery was closed. What happens if, against all odds, BC somehow manages to orchestrate an adult return sufficient to restore a recreational fishing opportunity? How would that not be interpreted by the FNs as approval to abandon the limited closure (i.e. 1/3 of the IFS run timing window) of their net fishery. What sense would it make to invest exceedingly scarce biological capital and inestimable sums of money in growing fish for harvest by gill nets?
5. The airwaves are replete with the supposed news of “Alaska’s dirty secret”. That is in reference to interception of Skeena and Nass origin steelhead by the net fisheries of Alaska’s Districts 104 (Noyes Island) and 101 (Tree Point) that operate on the migration route of BC steelhead. How about if the organizations actively campaigning for provincial and federal governments to address that situation apply similar pressure to steelhead catch reporting by Fraser River First Nations? We don’t need to look to Alaska for evidence of steelhead catch non-reporting. We’re surrounded by it in the FN and commercial fisheries in our own back yard. DFO has been fully complicit throughout.
6. There are two sockeye programs similar in concept to what is being debated for IFS. One is the Sakinaw stock, the other Cultus. Both have been in operation for decades. Both produce returns that amount to an annual treadmill of replacing the brood stock from which they originated. The cumulative cost of these programs is certain to have exceeded seven figures. Is this what the future of fisheries management for the steadily growing list of threatened and endangered steelhead and salmon stocks is going to be?
7. There was a toxic spill in the Cheakamus River short years ago. In order to “save” the steelhead stock, a hatchery program became the prescription. The result was the remnant population of wild juveniles outperformed the cultured fish and dominated the adult population in the hatchery return years. If no brood stock had been removed to support hatchery intervention there would likely have been even more adults returning from those same brood years.
8. Winter steelhead in lower Fraser tributaries and in adjacent rivers such as the Squamish and Cheakamus have not revealed the same catastrophic declines in abundance the Thompson and other IFS stock have. The only difference between the winters and summers is the latter’s exposure to net fisheries, particularly in the lower Fraser. The most direct and effective method of recovering Thompson/IFS steelhead is to stop killing the returning adults.
