Bass and Walleye Rule change on the Columbia and tributaries-CRAZY

[WSU]

I'm still waiting for a WDFW study that shows how many salmon or steelhead smolts get eaten by bass or walleye.  (Isn't part of the mission statement of WFW say that decisions that WDFW makes should be based on scientific study?)  If we were discussing this as part of WFW, I would think we'd request studies to support the decision to try to destroy some very popular fisheries.

Google "yakima river" "bass" and "fall chinook."

[Mfowl]

Agreed on the toxin levels in fish, I only keep enough for a few fish fry's a year.

[Curly]

I'm still waiting for a WDFW study that shows how many salmon or steelhead smolts get eaten by bass or walleye.  (Isn't part of the mission statement of WFW say that decisions that WDFW makes should be based on scientific study?)  If we were discussing this as part of WFW, I would think we'd request studies to support the decision to try to destroy some very popular fisheries.

Google "yakima river" "bass" and "fall chinook."

Will do. 

[plugger]

So if you stock a river with salmon/steelhead that are not native to that river, does that not make them an evasive species   They wouldn't be there if it wasn't for MAN putting them in there.  This may be the stupidest thing WDFW has ever done and that's saying something. There is no reason all fish cant be managed to create a quality fishery for all parties. How many native female salmon die from being released with how many eggs per fish. If your that worried about protecting them, you wouldn't be fishing for them. Some of you on hear need to get off your high horse, believe it or not we are all in this together. 

[lokidog]

Here are a couple of defintions as these seem to be used somewhat interchangeably here.

"Invasive species" means an alien species whose introduction does or is likely to cause economic or environmental harm or harm to human health.

"Alien species" means, with respect to a particular ecosystem, any species, including its seeds, eggs, spores, or other biological material capable of propagating that species, that is not native to that ecosystem.

Triploids technically do not fall into the Invasive Species definition because they are not able to propogate themselves.  Rainbow trout can fall into this category if the ecosystem in which they are placed has spawning habitat.  If there is no spawning habitat they cannot reproduce and therefore would not be invasive.

These definitions are federal definitions based on an executive order in 1999.  Personally, having a Bachelors Degree in Zoology, I would include the "capable of propogating" only in the Invasive definition because if it cannot do that, all mortality will lead to the elimination of the species without input from an outside source.  Ie. triploids are an alien species but not invasive whereas walleyes and bass are alien and invasive because they can self-propogate.

However, just because a species may not be invasive, does not mean that they have no environmental impact since they also need to eat and take up space, thus effecting the success of native species.

Scotchbroom is an invasive species but apple trees are not since they are both non-native but apple trees don't tend to do economic or environmental harm like Scotchbroom does.

Chinook salmon are an invasive species in the Great Lakes, though one that people don't seem to mind.  Zebra mussels, however, are definitely invasive.

[Sniper101]

What would keep me happy is to go ahead and increase the limits on bass, walleye and catfish, if they want but don't just remove all restrictions.  I'd like to see something like an 18" max limit on bass and maybe a 24" max limit on walleye.  Let those big fish go and thin out the smaller ones.  They shouldn't try to destroy world class fisheries where people come from all over the country to catch these fish.  They may be technically invasive, but the river conditions have made it such great habitat for them, why not let them coexist?  Shouldn't the WDFW have studies to back up the rule change?  I don't think the number of smolts they eat is all that great.......bass mostly eat crawfish, sculpins and perch.   

truest statement yet....don't forget shad!:P

[Sniper101]

 

So if you stock a river with salmon/steelhead that are not native to that river, does that not make them an evasive species   They wouldn't be there if it wasn't for MAN putting them in there.  This may be the stupidest thing WDFW has ever done and that's saying something. There is no reason all fish cant be managed to create a quality fishery for all parties. How many native female salmon die from being released with how many eggs per fish. If your that worried about protecting them, you wouldn't be fishing for them. Some of you on hear need to get off your high horse, believe it or not we are all in this together. 

[bobcat]

So if you stock a river with salmon/steelhead that are not native to that river, does that not make them an evasive species

I'm not a very good fisherman, so almost ALL fish are evasive to me.   

[lokidog]

So if you stock a river with salmon/steelhead that are not native to that river, does that not make them an evasive species

I'm not a very good fisherman, so almost ALL fish are evasive to me.   

 

What would keep me happy is to go ahead and increase the limits on bass, walleye and catfish, if they want but don't just remove all restrictions.  I'd like to see something like an 18" max limit on bass and maybe a 24" max limit on walleye.  Let those big fish go and thin out the smaller ones.  They shouldn't try to destroy world class fisheries where people come from all over the country to catch these fish.  They may be technically invasive, but the river conditions have made it such great habitat for them, why not let them coexist?  Shouldn't the WDFW have studies to back up the rule change?  I don't think the number of smolts they eat is all that great.......bass mostly eat crawfish, sculpins and perch.   

truest statement yet....don't forget shad!:P

Not sure they ever have real studies to back anything they do up, some anti group just tells them what they want, and they do it.   

[Curly]

So if you stock a river with salmon/steelhead that are not native to that river, does that not make them an evasive species

I'm not a very good fisherman, so almost ALL fish are evasive to me.   

 

Walleye on the Columbia are very evasive for me. 

[WSU]

So if you stock a river with salmon/steelhead that are not native to that river, does that not make them an evasive species

I'm not a very good fisherman, so almost ALL fish are evasive to me.   

 

What would keep me happy is to go ahead and increase the limits on bass, walleye and catfish, if they want but don't just remove all restrictions.  I'd like to see something like an 18" max limit on bass and maybe a 24" max limit on walleye.  Let those big fish go and thin out the smaller ones.  They shouldn't try to destroy world class fisheries where people come from all over the country to catch these fish.  They may be technically invasive, but the river conditions have made it such great habitat for them, why not let them coexist?  Shouldn't the WDFW have studies to back up the rule change?  I don't think the number of smolts they eat is all that great.......bass mostly eat crawfish, sculpins and perch.   

truest statement yet....don't forget shad!:P

Not sure they ever have real studies to back anything they do up, some anti group just tells them what they want, and they do it.   

At the risk of sounding like a broken record, try doing the google search I've suggested on this thread multiple times.  It will show you the study of Yakima smallies eating a ton of fall chinook smolts every spring.  I guess the saying is true: you can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink...

[plugger]

Oops Wrong word, One to many 7n7's I guess,    but I think you where I was going.

[Curly]

I'm still waiting for a WDFW study that shows how many salmon or steelhead smolts get eaten by bass or walleye.  (Isn't part of the mission statement of WFW say that decisions that WDFW makes should be based on scientific study?)  If we were discussing this as part of WFW, I would think we'd request studies to support the decision to try to destroy some very popular fisheries.

Google "yakima river" "bass" and "fall chinook."

Will do. 

http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10641-008-9375-1


http://wdfw.wa.gov/fishing/washington/606/

The lower Yakima River from Granger downstream to the Columbia River is well known for robust populations of smallmouth bass and channel catfish during the spring and summer months. Though some shoreline areas are open to the public, most of the better fishing areas are only accessible by boat.

Boat launch sites are located at Granger, Prosser, Benton City, Horn Rapids Park, Snively Road, Hyde Road, and Duportail Road. Smallmouth bass are generally under one and a half pounds, but fish up to six pounds are not uncommon. There is no daily limit on bass in the Yakima River but no more than three over 15 inches can be retained. Channel catfish are present throughout the lower Yakima River but the best fishing is usually in the lower ten miles during late Spring and Summer. There is no current minimum size restriction and no daily limit on channel catfish in the Yakima River.

The entire river including all tributaries and drains is closed to steelhead fishing. The Washington Department of Health (DOH) has issued this fish consumption advisory for the Yakima River due to DDT and DDE contamination: all anglers are recommended to limit consumption of carp, channel catfish, mountain whitefish, suckers, and Northern pikeminnow to one meal (8-ounce portion for adults, proportionally smaller for children) per week. For more information, contact the DOH Office of Environmental Health Assessments at (877) 485-7316 or visit the DOH website at www.doh.wa.gov/fish.

[WSU]

Here is an excerpt from here:

http://fish.washington.edu/research/oldenlab/pdf/2011/ReviewsFisheriesScience_2011.pdf

SALMON
Predation
Smallmouth bass consumes vertebrates (primarily fish) and
invertebrates (such as crayfish) in their native range (Warren,
2009). In the PNW, smallmouth bass consumes similar prey
items. For example, native crayfish (Pacifastacus leniusculus)
and sculpin (Cottus spp.) were the primary diet items of smallmouth
bass in Lake Sammamish,Washington (Pflug and Pauley,
1984). In the John Day Reservoir, sculpin is also the primary
diet item for smallmouth bass, with crayfish increasing in importance
further downstream toward the John Day Dam (Poe et al.,
1991). Smallmouth bass is a non-selective, opportunistic feeder
(Pflug and Pauley, 1984; Weidel et al., 2000; Warren, 2009). In
the PNW, this means smallmouth bass may consume juvenile
Pacific salmon when the two species overlap in time and space.
For example, in Lake Washington, predation by smallmouth
bass increases in spring (50% salmon by weight of diet items)
when juvenile sockeye salmon utilizes littoral areas occupied by
smallmouth bass during outmigration (Fayram and Sibley, 2000;
Tabor et al., 2007). No salmon were found in smallmouth bass
diets between July and September (Fayram and Sibley, 2000),
suggesting limited spatial overlap during most of the year in
Lake Washington. Not all of these studies (e.g., Lake Washington)
pertain to salmon that are threatened or endangered;
however, they do provide information about overall feeding and
potential impacts on salmon from smallmouth bass.
In areas inhabited by threatened or endangered salmon,
specifically in the Columbia and Snake River basins, the percent
of smallmouth bass diets containing salmon ranges from 0 to
65% by frequency and 0 to 89% by weight (Table 2). Smallmouth
bass predation on salmon differs through time and across
regions, leading to the large range in diet composition. For example,
percent salmon in smallmouth bass diets was 12.4%
(9.8% Chinook, 2.6% unspecified salmon) below Bonneville
Dam, 14.2% (7.7% Chinook, 6.5% unspecified salmon) in lower
Columbia River reservoirs, and 25.8% (12.6% Chinook, 2.5%
steelhead; 10.7% unspecified) in the lower Snake River annually
from 1990 to 1996 (Zimmerman, 1999; Table 2). Major
tributaries of the Columbia River show similar variation in the
percentage of salmon in smallmouth bass diets (Table 2). When
identified, Chinook salmon is the most frequently consumed
salmon species. At dams on the lower Snake River, salmon composed
a higher proportion of the fish consumed by smallmouth
bass at Lower Granite Dam than at Lower Monumental Dam or
Little Goose Dam in 2007 (Table 3).

[WSU]

More info from the same source:

The impact of smallmouth bass in some river systems is evident
from consumption rates that range from 0 to 3.89 salmon
consumed per predator each day (Table 4). More salmon are
consumed by an individual smallmouth bass in the Yakima
River than in locations along the lower Columbia River (Table
4). Relative to the mainstem and major tributaries, fewer
salmon are consumed by an individual smallmouth bass in the
Snake River basin. Similarly, Fritts and Pearsons (2004) estimated
that over 335,000 juvenile salmon were consumed annually
(March–June) in the Yakima River, a higher annual value
relative to other locations.With few studies available across the
PNW, data suggests that between 0 and 35% of wild salmon are
consumed during outmigration by smallmouth bass (Table 4).
Again, the largest impact of smallmouth bass on the percentage
of the outmigrating salmon consumed appears in the Yakima
River relative to the lower Columbia and Snake River locations,
although the paucity of data from other locations limits the generality
of this statement. Comparing between regions is tenuous
due to the low amount of data, differences in the number and
timing of outmigrating salmon, abiotic conditions, system size,
and sampling technique to name a few complications. Testing
the interaction between temperature and outmigration timing is
an important next step to understand the regional differences in
smallmouth bass predation on salmon. Overall, smallmouth bass
predation reduces juvenile salmon populations under certain
conditions, and this effect will only increase as smallmouth bass
populations continue to expand in range or number. Even low
predation rates by smallmouth bass at individual locations could
accumulate into a substantial impact over an entire salmon run.
Abiotic Conditions
Abiotic factors, such as changes in flow, water clarity, and
temperature, are capable of altering the number of salmon consumed
by smallmouth bass (Naughton et al., 2004). Low flow
conditions due to dams augment predation by increasing salmon
residence time, while simultaneously reducing energetic costs
for smallmouth bass (Tabor et al., 1993). Reservoirs also reduce
water clarity, making salmon more susceptible to visual
predators. Flow and water clarity highly influence predation,
thus requiring location-specific estimates even between seemingly
similar near-dam and mid-reservoir habitats (Vigg et al.,
1991; Petersen, 1994). In the PNW, temperatures greater than
15◦C have been shown to increase smallmouth bass consumption
rates and predation on juvenile salmon (Fayram and Sibley,
2000; Tabor et al., 2007). For instance, juvenile salmon have a
thermal refuge from smallmouth bass in the pelagic zone of Lake
Washington until they pass the littoral zone during outmigration,
when and where temperatures are warmer (Tabor et al., 2007).
Salmon Size and Origin
The ratio of predator to prey size helps determine prey
susceptibility and capture success. Smallmouth bass preferentially
prey on smolts due to their high abundance and small
size in the Columbia and Yakima rivers (Tabor et al., 1993;
Fritts and Pearsons, 2006). In the lower Columbia River, most
individuals consumed were less than 130 mm Fork Length (FL)
(Zimmerman, 1999). Smallmouth bass also selects for salmon
weakened by bacterial kidney disease as compared to healthy
individuals (Mesa et al., 1998).
Smallmouth bass consumes salmon of both wild and hatchery
origin. Self-sustaining populations of wild or naturally produced
salmon are the goal of conservation efforts, and the role
of hatchery-origin salmon in the recovery of salmon populations
is complex.Whether smallmouth bass consume hatchery or naturally
produced salmon is dependent on availability and characteristics
of the juvenile salmon. In Lake Sammamish (Washington),
juvenile salmon from the Issaquah Hatchery dominated
smallmouth bass diets (Pflug and Pauley, 1984). By contrast, up
to 85% of salmon consumed by smallmouth bass in the mainstem
Columbia and Yakima rivers were naturally produced fish
(Tabor et al., 1993, Fritts and Pearsons, 2004). In both systems,
the naturally produced salmon consumed by smallmouth bass
were Chinook salmon, which are smaller than their hatchery
counterparts and available over a longer period than the short
pulses of hatchery released salmon. In other systems, hatchery
fish are typically considered more susceptible to predation due
to maladaptive defenses (Maynard et al., 1995; White et al.,
1995; Fritts and Pearsons, 2004).