Save the Cowichan

[whitewater_cowboy]

Hatchery fish represent poor genetic diversity and this may cause problems down the line...that's why you don't sleep with your sister. Needless to say, while I haven't kept a steelie I won't critisize those that do. Those sanctimonious people out there may wish to contemplate the effect of numerous catch and releases on wild steelhead breeding potential. How many times can a fish be caught and still maintain sufficient energy to successfully procreate? If we were truly serious we would shut the river down for a four year cycle and let these fish breed. I'm afraid even I'm too selfish for that to happen. I spoke with you at the Vimy pullout, ChosenOne, regarding hatchery plants in the Cowichan. Plants seem to have a very poor return rate...like the rest of the east coast Island streams. No one seems to have any answers.

 

[Gooey Bob]

I really don't have a problem with people keeping hatchery fish as from what I've learned, that is indeed the reason they are put in to the system - for people to catch and keep in the fine and ancient tradition that is the fundamental reason people started to fish in the first place. If we end up in a pure catch and release environment, IMHO we have little moral ground to stand on in the face of organizations like PETA.

What I wish would happen, however, is that whoever is responsible for deciding the future of Steelhead would designate certain rivers "hatchery rivers" and certain rivers "wild rivers".

Wild rivers can then be managed on a catch and release basis for those who are offended by "meat hunters" and "genetically inferior" fish. The reason I suggest C&R for these stocks is that IMHO they would be quickly depleted if opened to retention - it appears that unenhanced stocks can't handle a lot of pressure.

On the hatchery systems I'd suggest that they be managed for maximum return. ie pump as many out as possible and produce those big number days all of you internet heros like to brag about, while also providing the opportunity for people who like to eat steelehad to bonk a couple.

IMHO the criteria for selecting systems should be based on the health of the wild run, are hatchery fish already present in the system, potential access, boat access, and proximity to population centres.

I don't know, I think the whole problem has been over complicated by zealots on both sides of the debate. It is possible to give people what they want, we just have to find a few folks in governement with the balls to do it.

For what its worth...

Gooey.

 

[whitewater_cowboy]

You've got my support, Gooey. Give people some alternatives. Why we haven't stocked rivers, like the poor barren Campbell which has been compromised for so long, with tonnes of fish is beyond me. Certainly, this would relieve some of the pressure on systems like the Cowichan. Seems with the license fees the province has collected there should be no shortage of money for these projects...or enforcement for that matter. Is this money simply going into general coffers? As residents, we pay our taxes so why aren't our license fees kept to maintain the fisheries, ie. hatcheries, stream rehabilitation, enforcement, etc. Join a club like the Steelhead Society of BC and have your voices heard...and please be gentle with those wild gems of the Cowichan.

 

[Born_Again]

While it would be nice if we could have some more fish on the cowichan,
their is a bigger issue. The Federal Government is trying to sell our rights as fisherman, to the commercial guys. No more Stamp, no more Cowie, no more Gold, now I dont know about u guys but I'm going to be writing a letter, it makes sense. Atleast Im trying[B)]

 

[Born_Again]

While it would be nice if we could have some more fish on the cowichan,
their is a bigger issue. The Federal Government is trying to sell our rights as fisherman, to the commercial guys. No more Stamp, no more Cowie, no more Gold, now I dont know about u guys but I'm going to be writing a letter, it makes sense. Atleast Im trying[B)]

 

[Dennis Germazian]

Watched 7 driftboats float by the house yesturday, including what looked like 3 "merican" boats. A willy with 2 guys, front guy with long flowing golden locks! Looked real happy to be on the river, saw what looked like a "care package" in his front right pocket. A fishrite with 2 guys, one of witch looked drunk and stoned! Reminded me of the gentleman on the front page of that sportfishing mag, saw him casting whith what looked like no terminal? What gives a bare hook? And a beautiful clackacraft, one gentleman in that boat. Overherd him saying he had 5 fish on but his boat was a real ***** to row!!

 

[Time]

Chosen One:
Did I understand you correctly that only 15 pairs of steelhead are caught for broodstock in the hatchery program on the Cowichan (and 20 on the Stamp)?

Can I assume that each male is only used to fertilize one females eggs?

If so, then yes, I can see the concern about maintaining genetic diversity.

Anybody have any references -preferably web based- for background on how the hatchery operations work that I could use to help educate myself.

Thanks

 

[Shermanater]

"Can I assume that each male is only used to fertilize one females eggs?"

"If so, then yes, I can see the concern about maintaining genetic diversity"

Time,

The proper way to spawn them is a 1:1 ratio. Meaning 1 females eggs with the milt from 1 male. If you add milt from more than 1 male you decrease the genetic diversity.

 

[Fishslayer]

Lets have a dinner and eat steelhead.Come on people if Dfo thought the situation was bad they would soon put a stop to killing hatcherys like they did on the crapalano.Have some faith in yr biologists.There for harvesting.If ya dont want to kill em go to a river weres its catch and release if it makes you feel better.Bleeding hearts.

 

[darmin]

hows the water in the Cowie this morning im in Nanaimo and thinking of heading that way

 

[The Chosen one]

yeah they spawn one to one at the hatchery. This year it looks like we'll only be getting 12 or 13 pairs as they have reached their egg count already. Would really love to see them take more pairs but I have no control over it.

 

[Time]

Ok, thanks.

 

[Fish-Rite]

Hey Blackleech look at your posts from last year about killing hatchery fish???You argue we should rlease them all??Now Moe cuts production cause we did rlease them all apparantly!!WoW does this stink!!

 

[Blackleech]

Shutting down the hatchery could actually be a good thing in the long term. First of all, 90% of the steelhead caught in the Cow are wild fish, and they are truly a magnificent race of steelhead. The hatchery fish produced in Duncan are inferior and over time will pollute the genetic pool - ala the Stamp.
Secondly, the broodstock program captures 15 pairs of beautiful wild steelhead every year, sometimes more, and quite likely these fish are heading above Stoltz (as the November-December fish tend to do) where they could be spawning naturally and producing quality offspring. No matter how you look at it, 30 adult steelhead is a large number of fish to remove from the a wild population that can be less than 1000 fish in total...
Lastly, there are "fishermen" who only come out for meat. I understand that for many this is a central and traditional aspect of steelhead fishing, but we can't have our cake and eat it too - if we don't want the Cowichan to turn out like the Stamp I think it's gotta be wild only.
BL

 

[RVP]

- blackleech -

...so, then it really should be ok with a majority of the angling public to then bonk and take a fish home if an angler so chooses to do so - which is then contrary to what you have writen in the past as your beliefs and ethics to be.

Just my observation and not meant to be determined as a hack or flame towards anyone.

Cheers,
RVP.

quote:Originally posted by Blackleech

While it is legal to keep 2 hatchery steelhead on V.I., anybody who keeps a steely from the Cowie is totally irresponsible and should be dealt with by the angling community and removed from the system. If you want to eat fish that bad then go to the lake and keep your limit of hatchery trout - that's what they're there for. There is simply no reason to keep a steelhead anymore, especially from the Cowichan, you people need to give your head a shake! It's 2007 and given the state of the steelhead species as a whole we need to think about conservation.
BL

 

[Blackleech]

Again, taken out of context. I'll stand by that anyways - if you want to keep a limit of fish go to the lake! The Stamp and Vedder are prime examples of what retention rivers become in this day and age. Should we open the Skeena drainage or the Gold to retention? Unless you've forgotten, retention PRECEDES hatcheries - in other words, had we not kept wild fish in the past, we wouldn't need to supplement with hatcheries.
Do you remember the 80s? Steelhead runs were strong, and everyone kept their limit on the Cowichan. In the 50's, loggers on the H snagged the adults from the summer pool by the logging camp. That run used to be 500 fish, now there are less than 100 at best. Then the 90's came around and with the poor ocean survival and retention on the east coast rivers we cleaned them out good. You can talk about ocean survival all you want, but keeping adult fish that have survived all of the obstacles and made it back to the river to spawn has the biggest overall impact on steelhead populations - history has proved this.

 

[RVP]

...in the relm of what you had posted on the third thread down on the very first page it is about hatchery retention and how you feel that all steelhead should be released, hatchery or wild - but then today you have a different view on how there should be no hatchery fish in the Cow what so ever, because they are inferior...so which is it? Wild only release for the future? If so, that is fine.

Then it should be safe to let anglers kill the hatchery fish that are in the system as anglers are permitted to do so and stop calling them on it if and when they do.

Since there is no concern on this flow, there is no need to argue for, or work toward further hatchery ogmentation of this flow.

No matter how you spell or say it - it is one or the other...I guess it's a very strong wild run - good luck!

 

[highlights]

keeping fish because "it's our right"

Give me a break. It takes more than that to convince me that it is the right thing to do. Just because they say we can take a limited amount of hatcheries doesn't mean we have to. The wild and hatchery stocks have long sinice inter bred. So get over it. Oddly enough this is much like a double edged sword. I am pro Cowichan. We all are. The whole Catch and release thing will always have it's issues. Along with the idea of supplementing a river with a hatchery program. I want more fish we all do. NO , and I don't mean keeping fish for my table. I have caught thousands of steelhead over the years and have only ever bonked one because of a deep hook set.But that is here nor there. We all have our motives. That is no ones business except our own so long as we are in our legal( as written by our trusted government)rights.[xx(] I want more fish in the system. I am not certain that a hatchery program will answer those needs. Unless you want another stamp river. I don't know about you guys, but those pinners are just not cutting it compared to those beautiful silver gray slabs of the Cowichan. The more hatchery fish that are in a system , inevitably the more pressure will be put on the wild stocks. I am not pointing any one out here. But we have all injured fish regretably and continued in vain to release it anyways. The mortality rate of our wild stocks is at an unexceptable level in attempts to go home with our legal limit of hatch. I have long been an advocate of catch and releae. If done properly. Thats the problem. Most don't do it properly. If a wild stock is healthy enough to harvest then I think that is one thing. But to catch ten wilds for every hatch, well even with a 10% mortality rate , that is 4 dead wild fish for every 4 hatchery's you take from the Cowichan. Thats not right. It would be better to catch your two fish and be off the water for the rest of the day then endangering even more of our precious wild fish. I am not offering a solution here but , I do beleive that those funds generated from our stamps would be better used in habitat restoration and ocean survival measures. Dumping more fish into an unhealthy ecosystem does not really make much sense. We need to detect the root cause for the demise of an extremely capable river before we expect it to sustain any amount of numbers .
The Cowichan is begging for our assistance, lets not pillage more of her fish before she can even sustain them for herself. If we continue to supplement with hatchery fish then we will certainly be by the way of the Stamp. That is too much like the local lakes. NO thanks, I don't need to catch a 100 10" trout. I'd rather have a healthy self sustaining highly regulated trophy fishery. Look at the numerous Alaska river systems. Maybe even our own Skeena system. NO hatchery programs there.Just alot of serious people who know whats at stake.
If there is to be a hatchery progarm on the river it needs to be serious. That river as it stands now is experiencing a major identity crisis. Is it deemed a wild river? or is it to be a hatchery stream? It really can't be both. What the government has done to this point in attempts to satisfy our demands is **** poor. Only doing a little bit here and there to satisfy all user groups is not enough of anything to really justify the River's needs.

Take care guys,

HL

 

[RVP]

HL - part of your post is awesome, but part of it also digs at me...where, or when is angling for wild fish an opportunity to protect them. If as your post says that there are very few hatchery fish being caught, hooked or released - then in a stronger ratio being that of more wild being hooked, handled, stressed etc...then why are we fishing on this dwindling system - leave the fish alone, stop fishing that system all together and let the powers work on a recovery plan - then as an avid angler, help the system where ever possible.

Stop angling on systems where wild are of concern...

Hatchery fish are named put and take for a reason...they are meant to eleviate the presure placed on wild by the would be anglers who chase steelhead for their personal enjoyment and pass time or hobby as such, rather than, for the benifit of the fishes life.

There must be a happy medium whereby growth in natural numbers can help sustain the system - or else, close it to all anglers, until it can handle the presure.

Also, it is obvious that bonking limits every time an angler goes fishing is not healthy for any fish stock [wild or otherwise] - but it is still available as an option for anyone who wishes to take a hatchery fish home once in awhile. I have no issue what so ever with that, at all!

Cheers,
RVP.

 

[highlights]

RVP. I am certain you and I are on the same page as far a being somewhat versed in what is important in regards to our precious resource.

I am not totally certain where your concern lies with my observations, but I will take a stab at it anyways.

"where or when is fishing for wild fish an opportunity to protect them?" Well for starters if the powers that be deem water to be of non concern due to lack of interest in it then why do anything to protect it.
Again , another catch 22 here. The greatest conservationnists going are those who dump thousands of their hard earned dollars to enjoy a little hunting and fishing. We hold on to these treasures so dearly because we simply want to relive those glorious moments or to get the chance to teach our own children and have them share in our experience of the great outdoors. If there is an interest in a particularily sensitive system , then rest assured "they" will have to listen. Unfortunately for the idea to really have impact on written legislastion is for a mass gatherinig of us to make a fuss over current protocall.

Hope that clarifies my intensions.

No matter what type of fishing we partake in , we really do need to join forces and help protect what is very quickly vanishing.