Walleye are invasives

[MeepDog]

Everyone is talking walleye but have not seen Bull trout mentioned as detrimental on the trout and salmon. Maybe folks need to quit looking at the forest and start seeing the trees

The forest is full of invasive trees like Russian olive and scotch broom. Same problem with the same solution: kill them not plant them.

[10Key]

I will keep the smallmouth, largemouth and the walleyes over the pipe dream to get the number of redbands up on Lake Roosevelt. If they are doing it in the name of salmon recovery, their energy is mis-guided...no fish ladders on Grande Coulee and the historical spawning habitat above that dam was best in Canada, not many decent tribs on the Columbia in Washington to support it. It is time to embrace spiny rays, especially on that body of water and maximize their use/benefit.

[HUNTIN4SIX]

And I will take the healthy Walleye fishery that doesn't rely on millions of dollars in hatchery fish to stay healthy. To each their own!

Hatcheries are like a bandaid on a gunshot wound

You sound like a WDFW biologist.  After working in hatcheries for many years I disagree....hatcheries are the only option.
In fact WDFW has actually cut production  over the last 20 years...you see where that got us.  I know the above mentioned “predators” are the least of our worries.  These predators have been in the Columbia long before the decline.  Your many years late for the party on this one.

[Russ McDonald]

We have had one of the greatest walleye fisheries in North America with lake Roosevelt and one of the greatest trophy walleye fishery in the lower Columbia.

It really is one of the greatest walleye fisheries in the world, but no matter how big they get or how many there are they still don't belong in the river. My father took me out walleye fishing just like you will take your kids out. There's resources in this world that are under threat from over harvest and in this river walleye is not one of them. Under harvest is more like it. 10,000 years ago there wasn't walleye in this river.

Not too long before that, in the grand scheme of things,  salmon where few and far between in the lower sections of the river and non existant in areas like where Roosevelt is today.  I will stop short of calling salmon invasive - maybe.  Probably no more invasive than Northern pike.

If the warm water fish are the problem, why are systems that have no influence by those species still on the same rate of decline?  And why would you target "native species" with a bounty?  Native being a relative term based primarily on time. 

Finally, why are there thriving "non native" salmon and stealhead populations in The Great Lakes and their tributaries?  Systems with far more warm water predatory species than you will ever see here.

You my friend are exactly right I grew up in the  mid west.  Salmon and trout all around in area with alot of walleyes and northern pike.

Sent from my SM-G998U using Tapatalk

[Karl Blanchard]

I'm not up to speed on the stats on this topic. How many years have walleye, SM, catfish, etc been in the Columbia River system. I know when someone says the words snake river I immediately think small mouth like they've been there since the beginning of time 

[Skillet]

I have to weigh in on this one -

Due to the way the Pacific Salmon Treaty is written, my living up here in AK depends largely upon a healthy chinook salmon run in the Columbia River.  I should be one of the loudest on here about eliminating the invasive walleye, smallmouth, channel cats, and others.

But I say - keep your eaters and let the ones you don't want to eat go.  I'll never, ever, bust somebody's chops for killing a 15# walleye.  But I wouldn't do it myself, as I'd much rather have half a doz 20-22" fish to eat.  That class of walleye is probably some of the best eating freshwater white fish there is.

The days of the native runs returning to the historical watersheds are over, boys.  The combination of dams, human population growth in watersheds, predation of outbound smolts by both native and non-native predators, and over harvest of returning fish have all combined to crush the runs.  You can try to limit the predation by fish (ie., pikeminnow derby, lifting limits on all invasives), but unless you move human populations out of critical watersheds and/or remove the dams you're pissing in the wind.

People and the dams are here to stay.  The first salmon runs to recieve ESA protection in the Columbia watershed were listed in 1991, back when the population of Washington was 5 million people.  Today it's 7.74 million, a 50% increase.  Population will continue to increase, salmon abundance will continue to go down.

Killing the big walleye by sportsmen will do absolutely nothing to change that.

What we can do to change the abundance issue in the near future is to dramatically pump up hatchery production, increase predation control below Bonneville, install technology that maximizes smolt survival when passing all of the dams, and spill more water from those dams during the peak outflow periods.  And my personal favorite, get back on the nuclear power program to make managing the dams for salmon passage much less costly to the ratepayers. 

This is, of course, just my $.02 from an admittedly biased point of view - but even I can see that destroying an emerging/established world-class fishery for walleye isn't going to do anything in the long run for the fish I depend on to make part of my living.

[NRA4LIFE]

Well said Chris.

[Trapper John]

It isn't just Predator Fish that kill the salmon.  River Otter eat 2/3rd of their body weight every day and most times it fish.

Our human population is going to keep growing (We doubled our population in America in the last 40 year)
and the fish population is going to keep going down, Fact

Killing walleyes is not the solution unless you are feeding yourself and family.
Just my 

[Karl Blanchard]

My name is Karl and I love killing walleye. Feels good to say it out loud 

[duramax]

 

My name is Karl and I love killing walleye. Feels good to say it out loud 

[Caseknife]

Might as well blame Roosevelt and his New Deal for all this chaos.  Don't think walleye were in the Columbia prior to the dams due to the fact that they are primarily a lake/reservoir fish, not many found in swift current.  You can remove all the dams in the system and all the predator fish in the watershed and destroy the commerce, flood control, and cheap electricity of the PNW, and we will still all be dead before the salmon runs return to historic levels.  Enjoy the fisheries that we have.

[HUNTIN4SIX]

Did the OP not know these species have been in the Columbia for probably 60+years?
Suddenly an issue?  Most salmonids (out migrating smolts) travel in deeper part of the water column and warm water fish will be shallower.  Most smolts travel in large schools and are in a hurry to get to salt as they start to smolt.  The last thing to blame is this wonderful fishery of bass and walleye we’ve had for years.  Anyone ever heard of the studies done on bird predation on the lower Columbia?  Pretty much the islands down there have a layer of coded wire tags from birds crapping them out....millions of them.  Like I said WDFW has significantly reduced hatchery production.  Wdfw won’t tell you that because some in charge are caving to special interest groups that want a utopia of only wild stock salmon. 

[Skillet]

Did the OP not know these species have been in the Columbia for probably 60+years?
Suddenly an issue?  Most salmonids (out migrating smolts) travel in deeper part of the water column and warm water fish will be shallower.  Most smolts travel in large schools and are in a hurry to get to salt as they start to smolt.  The last thing to blame is this wonderful fishery of bass and walleye we’ve had for years.  Anyone ever heard of the studies done on bird predation on the lower Columbia?  Pretty much the islands down there have a layer of coded wire tags from birds crapping them out....millions of them.  Like I said WDFW has significantly reduced hatchery production.  Wdfw won’t tell you that because some in charge are caving to special interest groups that want a utopia of only wild stock salmon.

Well, let's not get it twisted.  Walleye and smallmouth absolutely eat smolts, and are classic ambush predators.  They go where the food is, and don't worry about where they are "supposed" to be in a 100' vertical water column (big hint there for people who are having a hard time finding walleye in "classic" walleye habitat).  The outgoing scenario you describe only applies to free-flowing rivers - large impoundments like those on the Columbia change the calculus significantly.  These non-native predators are definitely a factor.  Saying they aren't part of the problem isn't going to help have an honest discussion about the realities of the situation.

The real questions, as I see them, are
1. Would removing them be effective?
2. Is there a better way to ensure a bigger salmon return (the ultimate goal, right?) than tearing down another thriving fishery?

I loved walleye fishing.  I've done it my whole fishing life, and tournament fished as well.  I traveled to Minnesota and Manitoba just to ice fish for them.  But if I could trade the Columbia River walleye fishery away for a consistent 1 million king return to the Columbia I'd do it in a heartbeat.  The problem is, in trading it away now, there's absolutely no way we get the king salmon back as a result.  We just lose a great recreational opportunity on a world-class walleye fishery.

I don't think that the juice is worth the squeeze there.

[Skillet]

My name is Karl and I love killing walleye. Feels good to say it out loud 

Hi Karl.

You're among friends here. 

[Karl Blanchard]

My name is Karl and I love killing walleye. Feels good to say it out loud 

Hi Karl.

You're among friends here. 

🤣🤣🤣 A fellow brother of the corn meal