collapse

Advertisement


Author Topic: Pinks?  (Read 6171 times)

Offline Gobble Doc

  • Non-Hunting Topics
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Frontiersman
  • *****
  • Join Date: Apr 2010
  • Posts: 2680
  • Location: Snohomish, WA
Re: Pinks?
« Reply #15 on: July 30, 2019, 10:26:49 PM »
They should have closed the Snohomish in 2017 for pinks since there weren’t enough to have a season in 8-2. They probably wanted to sell some licenses though and kept the river open.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Online 7mmfan

  • Non-Hunting Topics
  • Trade Count: (+7)
  • Old Salt
  • ******
  • Join Date: Nov 2008
  • Posts: 5516
  • Location: Marysville
    • https://www.facebook.com/rory.oconnor.9480
Re: Pinks?
« Reply #16 on: July 31, 2019, 08:45:47 AM »
It really is a sad day when there aren't enough pinks to have a sport fishery. It has nothing to do with habitat or ocean conditions either, it's pure greed and over harvest. Not enough fish for a sport fishery, but there will be 15 seine boats in front of Mukilteo and Skagit Bay working them over I guarantee it. Let the damn things hit the gravel, why is that such a hard concept to handle?

The writing was on the wall though when Chums suffered the same fate a decade or so ago. I can remember fishing from Ben Howard to Lewis Street and catching 50 chums a day no problem. Hardly see one roll in there in November anymore. The Skagit was even better, and you got the bonus Dolly and Rainbow fishing behind spawning chums up there. Easy to catch 100 trout a day fishing beads below chum redds. The Chums are gone now and with them went the trout and Dollies. When the Indians are struggling to catch enough Chums for their CHUM HATCHERY (something that should never have to exist), there's a problem. Hell last year they were catching more Atlantics in their nets in the lower Skagit than Chums! Makes me want to slam my head through a plate glass window.

Chums and Pinks are two of the most prolific spawners in the salmon world. Literally just let a few make it to gravel and you'll have all you ever need. But letting anything spawn and decompose in the river is an enormous waste I guess.

Rant over, carry on.
« Last Edit: July 31, 2019, 08:51:30 AM by 7mmfan »
I hunt, therefore I am.... I fish, therefore I lie.

Offline Stein

  • Non-Hunting Topics
  • Trade Count: (+11)
  • Explorer
  • ******
  • Join Date: Sep 2013
  • Posts: 13147
  • Location: Arlington
Re: Pinks?
« Reply #17 on: July 31, 2019, 08:52:56 AM »
Yep, they will practically stretch all the way across between Muk and Whidbey.  WDFW likes to let them in nice and early so they get their fish even if the run is downgraded.

Online 7mmfan

  • Non-Hunting Topics
  • Trade Count: (+7)
  • Old Salt
  • ******
  • Join Date: Nov 2008
  • Posts: 5516
  • Location: Marysville
    • https://www.facebook.com/rory.oconnor.9480
Re: Pinks?
« Reply #18 on: July 31, 2019, 09:01:16 AM »
There really does need to be a huge management shift in Olympia. Get away from this ridiculous and scientifically defunct practice of maximum sustained yield, and start monitoring our fisheries and only let commercials hit them once enough fish have past. A few seasons of putting the fish first and my guess is they come back with gusto.
I hunt, therefore I am.... I fish, therefore I lie.

Offline Stein

  • Non-Hunting Topics
  • Trade Count: (+11)
  • Explorer
  • ******
  • Join Date: Sep 2013
  • Posts: 13147
  • Location: Arlington
Re: Pinks?
« Reply #19 on: July 31, 2019, 09:41:45 AM »
They could just look at AK, sure they have some issues like anywhere else but they only let fish into boats after the run materializes and have absolutely no qualms about shutting recs or commercials down in a heartbeat.

The Columbia was once the most prolific salmon river in the world and now we argue if we need barbless hooks and a 1 fish limit.

WDFW/ODFW play a huge part as do the groups suing to keep hatcheries shut.

Offline WSU

  • Political & Covid-19 Topics
  • Trade Count: (+1)
  • Old Salt
  • ******
  • Join Date: Mar 2009
  • Posts: 5529
Re: Pinks?
« Reply #20 on: July 31, 2019, 10:19:45 AM »
They could just look at AK, sure they have some issues like anywhere else but they only let fish into boats after the run materializes and have absolutely no qualms about shutting recs or commercials down in a heartbeat.

The Columbia was once the most prolific salmon river in the world and now we argue if we need barbless hooks and a 1 fish limit.

WDFW/ODFW play a huge part as do the groups suing to keep hatcheries shut.

AK is has a ton of problems of its own.  I don't think it's some shining example of how things ought to be done.

Offline knighttime25

  • Political & Covid-19 Topics
  • Trade Count: (+1)
  • Hunter
  • ***
  • Join Date: Nov 2015
  • Posts: 204
  • Location: Mount Vernon
Re: Pinks?
« Reply #21 on: July 31, 2019, 10:29:46 AM »
It really is a sad day when there aren't enough pinks to have a sport fishery. It has nothing to do with habitat or ocean conditions either, it's pure greed and over harvest. Not enough fish for a sport fishery, but there will be 15 seine boats in front of Mukilteo and Skagit Bay working them over I guarantee it. Let the damn things hit the gravel, why is that such a hard concept to handle?

Nothing to do with habitat or ocean conditions??? The cormorants and pinniped populations have gone un-controlled for years and warmer water temps and lack of ideal spawning conditions have had a significant impact. Pure greed and over harvest is also a factor but not the entire problem  :twocents:

Online 7mmfan

  • Non-Hunting Topics
  • Trade Count: (+7)
  • Old Salt
  • ******
  • Join Date: Nov 2008
  • Posts: 5516
  • Location: Marysville
    • https://www.facebook.com/rory.oconnor.9480
Re: Pinks?
« Reply #22 on: July 31, 2019, 11:08:36 AM »
Pinks and Chums can literally spawn in ditches and mud puddles. Successfully. If there is gravel and moving water they get it done. The shear numbers of these fish that we had while other salmon runs declined and struggled is a key indicator that the primary reason for their success was lack of commercial interest. As soon as chum and pink roe became a commodity, their numbers were crushed in less than a decade. Coincidence? No.

I suppose you can include predators like cormorants and pinnipeds into the habitat sector, but I view them purely as predators. You are right, they do need to be controlled and they are a contributing factor. However, once again, these two species of salmon had no issues until a few years ago, while these predators have been a problem for a long long time.
I hunt, therefore I am.... I fish, therefore I lie.

Offline WAcoueshunter

  • Trade Count: (+2)
  • Frontiersman
  • *****
  • Join Date: May 2007
  • Posts: 2622
Re: Pinks?
« Reply #23 on: July 31, 2019, 11:52:33 AM »
The shear numbers of these fish that we had while other salmon runs declined and struggled is a key indicator that the primary reason for their success was lack of commercial interest. As soon as chum and pink roe became a commodity, their numbers were crushed in less than a decade. Coincidence? No.

I personally don't buy that, at least for pinks.  There were tons of pinks as recently as 2015 (and 2013 and 2011 were strong too), and then they crashed in 2017.  I don't buy that the commercial interest suddenly took almost ALL of the fish that would otherwise have spawned in 2015 such that none came back in 2017.  Had to be other factors in play.
 


Offline Whitenuckles

  • Transplanted Cajun
  • Political & Covid-19 Topics
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Sourdough
  • *****
  • Join Date: Jun 2009
  • Posts: 1243
  • Location: Sno valley
Re: Pinks?
« Reply #24 on: July 31, 2019, 01:28:58 PM »
There really does need to be a huge management shift in Olympia. Get away from this ridiculous and scientifically defunct practice of maximum sustained yield, and start monitoring our fisheries and only let commercials hit them once enough fish have past. A few seasons of putting the fish first and my guess is they come back with gusto.
:yeah:
GEAUX TIGERS

Offline Stein

  • Non-Hunting Topics
  • Trade Count: (+11)
  • Explorer
  • ******
  • Join Date: Sep 2013
  • Posts: 13147
  • Location: Arlington
Re: Pinks?
« Reply #25 on: July 31, 2019, 03:49:04 PM »
They could just look at AK, sure they have some issues like anywhere else but they only let fish into boats after the run materializes and have absolutely no qualms about shutting recs or commercials down in a heartbeat.

The Columbia was once the most prolific salmon river in the world and now we argue if we need barbless hooks and a 1 fish limit.

WDFW/ODFW play a huge part as do the groups suing to keep hatcheries shut.

AK is has a ton of problems of its own.  I don't think it's some shining example of how things ought to be done.

They aren't perfect, but they are better.  Lake WA just had 16k sockeye return with 350k needed to open a season.  It just gets worse every year and we don't have a plan to fix it.

Ocean conditions play a role and pinks are some of the first to recover.  We had a great run four years ago but like other things we just cross our fingers and make sure we pinch our barbs.

Just like hunting, WDFW is not a strong advocate, they jump around and do the bidding of the politicians and cower every time an environmental group sues.  Where is the strong voice for what we need to do to recover salmon, elk, mulies and whatever else?  What is the plan? 

The latest hunting regs letter from the chief doesn't even mention why the elk tags are vanished or what we are doing, but does talk about some good recipes.  Blows my mind sometimes that there aren't pitchforks haven't came out yet.

Offline Bullkllr

  • Political & Covid-19 Topics
  • Trade Count: (+1)
  • Frontiersman
  • *****
  • Join Date: Aug 2007
  • Posts: 4942
  • Location: Graham
Re: Pinks?
« Reply #26 on: July 31, 2019, 06:07:31 PM »
IIRC, the recent downward trend in Puget Sound Pinks was due to some very high water periods after a huge escapement in 2015. They knew right away the run in 2017 would be way down, and it was. I'll see if I can dig up a link.

Yes, they can spawn almost anywhere, and they don't need a ton of freshwater rearing habitat, but if high water scours the gravel before spring, there goes your next crop of pinks.
Charlie Kirk didn't speak hate, they hated what he said. Don't get it twisted.

Offline Gobble Doc

  • Non-Hunting Topics
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Frontiersman
  • *****
  • Join Date: Apr 2010
  • Posts: 2680
  • Location: Snohomish, WA
Re: Pinks?
« Reply #27 on: July 31, 2019, 08:51:10 PM »
It really is a sad day when there aren't enough pinks to have a sport fishery. It has nothing to do with habitat or ocean conditions either, it's pure greed and over harvest. Not enough fish for a sport fishery, but there will be 15 seine boats in front of Mukilteo and Skagit Bay working them over I guarantee it. Let the damn things hit the gravel, why is that such a hard concept to handle?

The writing was on the wall though when Chums suffered the same fate a decade or so ago. I can remember fishing from Ben Howard to Lewis Street and catching 50 chums a day no problem. Hardly see one roll in there in November anymore. The Skagit was even better, and you got the bonus Dolly and Rainbow fishing behind spawning chums up there. Easy to catch 100 trout a day fishing beads below chum redds. The Chums are gone now and with them went the trout and Dollies. When the Indians are struggling to catch enough Chums for their CHUM HATCHERY (something that should never have to exist), there's a problem. Hell last year they were catching more Atlantics in their nets in the lower Skagit than Chums! Makes me want to slam my head through a plate glass window.

Chums and Pinks are two of the most prolific spawners in the salmon world. Literally just let a few make it to gravel and you'll have all you ever need. But letting anything spawn and decompose in the river is an enormous waste I guess.

Rant over, carry on.
Completely agree. Chum in the Skagit used to be stacked in a decade ago. The pinks were thick. November chum fishing was so much fun. The skagit is dam controlled so I just don’t believe that this is a function of water temp or levels. Hard for fish to make it through the nets.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Offline Bullkllr

  • Political & Covid-19 Topics
  • Trade Count: (+1)
  • Frontiersman
  • *****
  • Join Date: Aug 2007
  • Posts: 4942
  • Location: Graham
Re: Pinks?
« Reply #28 on: July 31, 2019, 09:13:19 PM »
FWIW here is a WDFW explanation for the low returns in 2017. I think there is at least some truth to it. As with most things relating to our fisheries it is affected by multiple issues.

http://www.spokesman.com/blogs/outdoors/2017/mar/02/pink-salmon-returns-puget-sound-not-so-hot-year/
It was river and ocean conditions in 2015 that are resulting in the low forecast for this year, said Aaron Dufault, a pink, chum and sockeye specialist with the state Department of Fish and Wildlife.

“They returned in 2015 when we were in the middle of a drought. That summer, we had river closures because of conditions,” Dufault said. “Water levels were really low, and the water was very warm.”

Because the fish returning in 2015 were smaller than normal, Dufault said, the agency expects fewer eggs were laid during spawning that fall.

The eggs that were laid and fertilized were then impacted by three or four floods during heavy rains in the fall.

“So, we had low numbers (of smolts) going out,” Dufault said. “When they got into the ocean, conditions weren’t great either.”
« Last Edit: July 31, 2019, 09:25:45 PM by Bullkllr »
Charlie Kirk didn't speak hate, they hated what he said. Don't get it twisted.

Offline WAcoueshunter

  • Trade Count: (+2)
  • Frontiersman
  • *****
  • Join Date: May 2007
  • Posts: 2622
Re: Pinks?
« Reply #29 on: July 31, 2019, 09:14:03 PM »
The Skagit actually floods more than most. It flooded in both November 2015 and 2017.

 


* Advertisement

* Recent Topics

My first blacktail! by Angry Perch
[Today at 10:04:22 AM]


Whats your play by Pathfinder101
[Today at 09:47:36 AM]


Bear Paw Outfitters Idaho Elk and Deer Hunt Units 77,78,79 by Woodchuck
[Today at 09:37:01 AM]


F150 Ecoboost Guys by Pnwrider
[Today at 09:26:57 AM]


Shadypass road / fs5900 closed by deadyote
[Today at 09:26:55 AM]


2025 blacktail rut thread by highside74
[Today at 09:11:17 AM]


How I Cape for a Shoulder Mount by HereDuckyDucky
[Today at 08:50:07 AM]


Trapline Taxidermy - wholehearted endorsement by vandeman17
[Today at 08:45:49 AM]


Duck Hunting Land Trust by PatoLoco
[Today at 08:19:17 AM]


Going to try my hand at calling. by Pathfinder101
[Today at 07:33:42 AM]


King of the mountain caught sleeping by Troutfins
[Today at 01:46:06 AM]


Colville lodging, any recommendations? by duckboy23
[Yesterday at 10:42:59 PM]


No upland with dog during deer and elk season? by Goshawk
[Yesterday at 09:51:23 PM]


Rabbits looking good so far! by Goshawk
[Yesterday at 09:48:30 PM]


HUNTNNW 2025 trail cam thread and photos by kodiak06
[Yesterday at 08:05:21 PM]


2025 deer, let's see em! by highside74
[Yesterday at 08:03:35 PM]


2025 Montana alternate list by Sakko300wsm
[Yesterday at 07:53:45 PM]


The 33 year quest by blackveltbowhunter
[Yesterday at 07:09:47 PM]


GM 6.6l gas 6 speed vs. 10 speed? by HntnFsh
[Yesterday at 06:20:25 PM]


It was a great year by NOCK NOCK
[Yesterday at 05:26:16 PM]

SimplePortal 2.3.7 © 2008-2025, SimplePortal