Smelt are no more....

[BIGINNER]

my dad took us out smelt dipping a couple times,.....  pretty fun,   had to change my pants once when a sealion popped up out of the water about 2 yard away!!! 

[NRA4LIFE]

We used to smelt dip in Lake Michigan when I was young.  We used huge 8' X 8' dip nets that you winched up and down off the breakwater in Port Washington, WI.  There was no limit and some night we caught 2 or 3 garbage cans full of them.  Good times.  We'd come home and zip smelt open until the sun came up.

[xxlx7]

Is this different than the smelt we catch in places such as deception pass?

[ICEMAN]

Is this different than the smelt we catch in places such as deception pass?

I don't believe so. Wildlife only listed the one type on their webpage for smelt....

[300UltraMagShooter]

1. Environmental factors man has caused 2. Commercial overharvest - in that order..

Smelt are one of the main food sources for sturgeon too especially on the Columbia (NOT GOOD!)

What exact "Man Caused Environmenatl Factors" are you speaking of?


p.s.
I've never even seen a smelt so have no idea and can't relate to any of this.

[ICEMAN]

1. Environmental factors man has caused 2. Commercial overharvest - in that order..

Smelt are one of the main food sources for sturgeon too especially on the Columbia (NOT GOOD!)

What exact "Man Caused Environmenatl Factors" are you speaking of?


p.s.
I've never even seen a smelt so have no idea and can't relate to any of this.

Over sedimentation of riverbeds due to logging practice etc....the normal complaints associated with salmon spawning grounds.... just my guess....

[singleshot12]

Since smelt spawn on certain beaches I would say silt and algae bloom from nitrates could be detrimental to their eggs.
Smelt are mainly plankton feeders so contaminated plankton from pollution maybe?

[JimmyHoffa]

and pulp mill discharge, light pollution, rising ocean temperatures due to climate change.....
Still somewhat on topic.  I'm not trying to determine the impacts as much as trying to make sure my timeline is somewhat on.
So maybe a few of you can correct me where I'm wrong on this....but back when logging was first practiced here in the northwest (late 1800's/early 1900's), it was much less environmentally conscious----built roads, crossed streams, cut every tree standing.  They pretty much kept similar logging practices until what the 1960's?  1970's?  And huge runs of nearly every kind of fish were still reported year after year.  These declines in fish stocks they keep talking about all seem to focus on mid-1990's on.  So....the fish were still doing great during, what 90 years of 'horrible' logging practices; but in the years (more than 5 cycles of runs worth) with 'better', eco-friendly logging methods the fish are now not hacking it? Is my timeline off?  Were the runs dropping noticeably back in the 30's? Or the 70's?

[singleshot12]

Good point Jimmy, then I would have to say most of it would be the herbicides,pesticides and fertilizers associated with logging and agriculture that are used now.

[Antlershed]

I wonder how many the commies will still get....

[D-Rock425]

Is this different than the smelt we catch in places such as deception pass?

I believe there are two different kinds of smelt.  The kind you catch at deception pass Are not the same as the Columbia river smelt.

[280ackley]

and pulp mill discharge, light pollution, rising ocean temperatures due to climate change.....
Still somewhat on topic.  I'm not trying to determine the impacts as much as trying to make sure my timeline is somewhat on.
So maybe a few of you can correct me where I'm wrong on this....but back when logging was first practiced here in the northwest (late 1800's/early 1900's), it was much less environmentally conscious----built roads, crossed streams, cut every tree standing.  They pretty much kept similar logging practices until what the 1960's?  1970's?  And huge runs of nearly every kind of fish were still reported year after year.  These declines in fish stocks they keep talking about all seem to focus on mid-1990's on.  So....the fish were still doing great during, what 90 years of 'horrible' logging practices; but in the years (more than 5 cycles of runs worth) with 'better', eco-friendly logging methods the fish are now not hacking it? Is my timeline off?  Were the runs dropping noticeably back in the 30's? Or the 70's?

Your point seems to be spot on.  If silt was is a major factor why are there any fish in the Tutle-Cowlitz-Columbia after May 18th 1980.  Personally I think overharvest by all and the fact we don't have a clue what is going on in the Pacific has more to do with it then anything.  Pollution (all forms) is greatly lower now then in the industrial age yet the fish populations aren't growing.

[280ackley]

A couple more things to think about.  Dredging the river probably is helping anything either.  And what about the man made islands that the have become Turn havens.  Seems like alot more opportunity for predation. 

[woodrat]

Things were not all peachy in the early days of logging either. Runs were damaged, but there was such a much larger number of fish and healthy runs to begin with the decline wasn't as drastic as it was in later years. Salmon runs were in noticable decline in the 1890s, which was the motivation for the beginning of the hatcheries.

Also the kinds of pollution we are putting in the water now is way beyond simple sediment. And the logging practices are just as bad as ever, and they are clearing things way faster and on a larger scale than was possible in the pre-chainsaw and heavy machinery days.

[BigGoonTuna]

you didn't have thousands of miles of rooftops and asphalt going up in the early part of the 20th century either.  we are just starting to get to the bottom of the damage done by bad logging practices, though(it's been said it takes 40 years to truly see the results in many cases).