Post by: thatdamguy on March 02, 2016, 07:48:15 PM
http://www.saveourhatcheries.org/petition/save-hatchery-programs/
Post by: Lucky1 on March 02, 2016, 08:22:30 PM
I signed it.
Post by: simondude on March 02, 2016, 09:02:11 PM
Post by: REHJWA on March 02, 2016, 09:08:59 PM
Post by: Mark251 on March 02, 2016, 09:19:39 PM
Post by: Skillet on March 02, 2016, 09:21:40 PM
Post by: mossyoak arrow slinger on March 02, 2016, 09:28:25 PM
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: scottcrb on March 02, 2016, 09:32:34 PM
Post by: jasnt on March 02, 2016, 10:22:19 PM
Post by: fisheral87 on March 02, 2016, 10:44:16 PM
I'm in the minority, but I'd rather give up fishing salmon in Puget Sound for the next 20 years so my grandkids could have stable wild fisheries.
Al
P.S. Lets start a petition to begin seal and sealion hunting. Without hatcheries those buggers are going to starve to death.
Post by: thatdamguy on March 02, 2016, 11:37:41 PM
I don't think some hatcheries in Washington have done as much as other strategies focused on wild fish could, given that hatcheries still make up 90% of the catch.
I'm in the minority, but I'd rather give up fishing salmon in Puget Sound for the next 20 years so my grandkids could have stable wild fisheries.
Al
P.S. Lets start a petition to begin seal and sealion hunting. Without hatcheries those buggers are going to starve to death.
Shutting down hatcheries hurts everyone. :twocents: However I completely agree that we need to start killing seals and sealions.
Post by: PolarBear on March 03, 2016, 12:17:27 AM
Post by: REHJWA on March 03, 2016, 06:48:53 AM
I don't think some hatcheries in Washington have done as much as other strategies focused on wild fish could, given that hatcheries still make up 90% of the catch.
I'm in the minority, but I'd rather give up fishing salmon in Puget Sound for the next 20 years so my grandkids could have stable wild fisheries.
Al
P.S. Lets start a petition to begin seal and sealion hunting. Without hatcheries those buggers are going to starve to death.
These groups that want the hatcheries closed don't want us to fish at all. Look at the way they even attack catch and release....
Post by: Henrydog on March 03, 2016, 06:57:18 AM
Post by: fisheral87 on March 03, 2016, 08:57:37 AM
Quote
Shutting down hatcheries hurts everyone. :twocents:
This may be true in the short term but the cost of managing these operation in the long term is not sustainable IMO. In many cases hatcheries are effectively susidized farm raised fish for public consumption. For the amount of time hatcheries have operated in Washington State I feel our expectations of wild fish recovery should be higher than 10% of the take.
I don't support groups that want to take opportunity away, I do think we could do better at managing for sustainable wild fish without hatcheries.
I understand it is not black and white. My understanding is there are some very effective hatcheries that use wild fish for brood stock.
Al
Post by: REHJWA on March 03, 2016, 09:38:58 AM
The problem with our fisheries is the same with most human interventions, we only manage part of the problem and ignore the ones that become obvious, like predators and habitat destruction. It's 2016 and we still have a major city dumping untreated sewage into the sound.QuoteShutting down hatcheries hurts everyone. :twocents:
This may be true in the short term but the cost of managing these operation in the long term is not sustainable IMO. In many cases hatcheries are effectively susidized farm raised fish for public consumption. For the amount of time hatcheries have operated in Washington State I feel our expectations of wild fish recovery should be higher than 10% of the take.
I don't support groups that want to take opportunity away, I do think we could do better at managing for sustainable wild fish without hatcheries.
I understand it is not black and white. My understanding is there are some very effective hatcheries that use wild fish for brood stock.
Al
Agree with you about cost of management but this another example of demand that exceeds the resource. I wish we could support demand with natural reproduction,you can tell the difference at hook up between a wild and hatchery fish. However Humans have had much more successful population growth than any other species on the planet.
Until we improve natural reproduction habitat, the hatcheries do more to reduce the pressure on native resources than harm.
Post by: Skillet on March 03, 2016, 09:49:00 AM
QuoteShutting down hatcheries hurts everyone. :twocents:
This may be true in the short term but the cost of managing these operation in the long term is not sustainable IMO. In many cases hatcheries are effectively susidized farm raised fish for public consumption. For the amount of time hatcheries have operated in Washington State I feel our expectations of wild fish recovery should be higher than 10% of the take.
I don't support groups that want to take opportunity away, I do think we could do better at managing for sustainable wild fish without hatcheries.
I understand it is not black and white. My understanding is there are some very effective hatcheries that use wild fish for brood stock.
Dams. Lions. Tribal, commercial and sport take. High river temps, high ocean water temps (the "blob") that bring more predators farther north. There are many factors working against the salmon, most of which are outside of the control of the WDFW, BPA and upstream power producers. You cannot manage a wild stock to former glory unless you have the authority to effect the changes needed to do so. No single entity has that authority at this time, and short of conversion to a dictatorship, won't. If we want the opportunity to fish in the future we need to invest in that by keeping the hatcheries going. 10% is just a reflection of a number based on another number. The hatcheries have supplied the near record-breaking runs we've seen in the last few years, giving everybody the opportunity to go fishing. 10% of a record run is a darn sight better than 100% of a handful of fish.
Hatchery fish are NOT farm fish - not by a long shot. I do not worship at the altar of wild fish for wild fish's sake. They both went out through the river, they both survived the treacherous ocean for several years, and they both made it back up to the place they were spawned. How is that not a successful fish in nature's eyes? Who is a better judge of what is a "good" fish vs. a "bad" fish - nature itself, or some extreme elitist political group like Wild Fish Conservancy? IMHO, we need the hatcheries going, keep doing what needs to be done to ensure strong returns that provide an opportunity for everybody to partake in the bounty that nature has to offer. The different pressures on the wild fish that are outside of WDFW's control are too great to depend on the wild fish to repopulate on their own.
Post by: Da stump on March 03, 2016, 01:05:41 PM
:'(
Post by: npaull on March 03, 2016, 01:22:16 PM
Quote
I don't think some hatcheries in Washington have done as much as other strategies focused on wild fish could, given that hatcheries still make up 90% of the catch.
I'm in the minority, but I'd rather give up fishing salmon in Puget Sound for the next 20 years so my grandkids could have stable wild fisheries.
Al
+1.
I HATE hatcheries! Put the money into making the streams healthy - they can make MORE than enough fish to sustain a healthy fishery without an inefficient, government-subsidized waste of taxpayer money to keep weak, unhealthy, genetically inferior fish around. It's a backwards scheme to make money for a few on the taxpayer's dime at the expense of actually getting back to a healthy fishery.
Post by: huntnphool on March 03, 2016, 01:53:05 PM
I'm in the minority, but I'd rather give up fishing salmon in Puget Sound for the next 20 years so my grandkids could have stable wild fisheries.
I'm with you on the sea lion issue, do you realize they have now estimated that 50% of the spring salmon on the Columbia are being killed by them?
Now, would you care to explain to me how closing down salmon fishing for the next 20 years (assuming you mean sport angling) would do anything at all to the wild stock?
Signed by the way. :tup:
Post by: singleshot12 on March 03, 2016, 02:32:50 PM
QuoteI don't think some hatcheries in Washington have done as much as other strategies focused on wild fish could, given that hatcheries still make up 90% of the catch.
I'm in the minority, but I'd rather give up fishing salmon in Puget Sound for the next 20 years so my grandkids could have stable wild fisheries.
Al
+1.
I HATE hatcheries! Put the money into making the streams healthy - they can make MORE than enough fish to sustain a healthy fishery without an inefficient, government-subsidized waste of taxpayer money to keep weak, unhealthy, genetically inferior fish around. It's a backwards scheme to make money for a few on the taxpayer's dime at the expense of actually getting back to a healthy fishery.
Billions can be spent on trying to make streams healthier which can't hurt but the bottom line is this regions populace growth will effect wild runs no matter how salmon friendly we become. Most habitat is lost and will be lost forever. Wild or native fish are something of the past anyhow,netted to extincion mostly. Most fish these days with an adipose are hatchery or have hatchery blood in them :twocents:
Post by: singleshot12 on March 03, 2016, 02:53:56 PM
Post by: Mfowl on March 03, 2016, 03:06:48 PM
Post by: Mfowl on March 03, 2016, 03:07:49 PM
Post by: Lucky1 on March 03, 2016, 03:45:01 PM
Well said. I agree and signed.QuoteShutting down hatcheries hurts everyone. :twocents:
This may be true in the short term but the cost of managing these operation in the long term is not sustainable IMO. In many cases hatcheries are effectively susidized farm raised fish for public consumption. For the amount of time hatcheries have operated in Washington State I feel our expectations of wild fish recovery should be higher than 10% of the take.
I don't support groups that want to take opportunity away, I do think we could do better at managing for sustainable wild fish without hatcheries.
I understand it is not black and white. My understanding is there are some very effective hatcheries that use wild fish for brood stock.
Dams. Lions. Tribal, commercial and sport take. High river temps, high ocean water temps (the "blob") that bring more predators farther north. There are many factors working against the salmon, most of which are outside of the control of the WDFW, BPA and upstream power producers. You cannot manage a wild stock to former glory unless you have the authority to effect the changes needed to do so. No single entity has that authority at this time, and short of conversion to a dictatorship, won't. If we want the opportunity to fish in the future we need to invest in that by keeping the hatcheries going. 10% is just a reflection of a number based on another number. The hatcheries have supplied the near record-breaking runs we've seen in the last few years, giving everybody the opportunity to go fishing. 10% of a record run is a darn sight better than 100% of a handful of fish.
Hatchery fish are NOT farm fish - not by a long shot. I do not worship at the altar of wild fish for wild fish's sake. They both went out through the river, they both survived the treacherous ocean for several years, and they both made it back up to the place they were spawned. How is that not a successful fish in nature's eyes? Who is a better judge of what is a "good" fish vs. a "bad" fish - nature itself, or some extreme elitist political group like Wild Fish Conservancy? IMHO, we need the hatcheries going, keep doing what needs to be done to ensure strong returns that provide an opportunity for everybody to partake in the bounty that nature has to offer. The different pressures on the wild fish that are outside of WDFW's control are too great to depend on the wild fish to repopulate on their own.
Post by: hitman2 on March 03, 2016, 03:48:20 PM
Post by: Antlershed on March 03, 2016, 05:32:29 PM
I'm curious...who can make "more than enough fish" if we do away with hatcheries?QuoteI don't think some hatcheries in Washington have done as much as other strategies focused on wild fish could, given that hatcheries still make up 90% of the catch.
I'm in the minority, but I'd rather give up fishing salmon in Puget Sound for the next 20 years so my grandkids could have stable wild fisheries.
Al
+1.
I HATE hatcheries! Put the money into making the streams healthy - they can make MORE than enough fish to sustain a healthy fishery without an inefficient, government-subsidized waste of taxpayer money to keep weak, unhealthy, genetically inferior fish around. It's a backwards scheme to make money for a few on the taxpayer's dime at the expense of actually getting back to a healthy fishery.
Signed!
Post by: JimmyHoffa on March 03, 2016, 05:33:32 PM
The rivers I spend the most time on have pretty good habitat and water quality. They have reduced carrying capacity, though. Except for when the pinks run, I don't see or smell carcasses on the river (well, occasionally fish dumped by WDFW or tribes or left by otters). But the pinks are every other year and they stay low in the river with fry heading out immediately after spawn. You used to come across all kinds of dead spawned out salmon, even only a decade ago. I just don't see a magical wild fish comeback unless enough fish of all varieties can replenish the nutrients year round to raise the carrying capacity of the rivers. The hatchery smolts are released at specific times so they out migrate almost immediately, so hardly any influence on wild fish/carrying capacity. Maybe some competition at sea, but seriously pales in comparison to the huge amounts commercials are harvesting of herring, shrimp and other forage for things like pet food and fertilizers. None of that WDFW can control. Might get more wilds if WDFW collected more hatchery fish from the traps and stuck a bunch in the freezer, then spreading out the nutrient enhancement over the year.
Post by: 3dsheetmetal on March 03, 2016, 06:00:19 PM
Post by: Snappy on March 03, 2016, 06:47:12 PM
Post by: snake on March 03, 2016, 07:07:40 PM
Post by: fisheral87 on March 03, 2016, 07:57:20 PM
The assumption that the only way to generate revenue from a fishery, is to kill fish, is not a position I agree with. That's coming from a guy who has done his fair share of killing fish.
No one can make more than enough fish in the short term to make up for the loss of hatcheries. I'm suggesting that the position that this is the best we can do is in part what is holding back the posibilitiy of a longer term solution around wild fish. There are bigger problems that aren't being resolved and hatcheries are used as a crutch to avoid those problems. I say that we can forego the opportunity to fish in an effort to have sustainable wild runs of fish for future generations. Then even more money can be put into habitat efforts.
In my experience there is noticeable degradation of genetics when non native runs are introduced to a system. I don't believe that all finned fish are wild, that's really part of my point.
Signed.
Post by: fisheral87 on March 03, 2016, 08:03:48 PM
Quote
Bleeding hearts... Sooo much money tied up in the salmon industry. I doubt they would win a court battle with the tribe on this. The tribe needs the hatcheries so they can stretch a gill net 200 ft in front of the inlet and call it ceremonial, with their 150 hp yamaha.
I agree that there would need to be significant compromises with tribal stakeholders but framing the discussion with this tone of divisiveness is part of the problem.
Al
Post by: huntnphool on March 03, 2016, 11:29:48 PM
In my experience there is noticeable degradation of genetics when non native runs are introduced to a system.
Really? How do you explain this "non native" degradation of genetics introduced to this system? (Image attached below)
http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php/topic,191712.msg2536873.html#msg2536873
No one can make more than enough fish in the short term to make up for the loss of hatcheries. I'm suggesting that the position that this is the best we can do is in part what is holding back the posibilitiy of a longer term solution around wild fish. There are bigger problems that aren't being resolved and hatcheries are used as a crutch to avoid those problems. I say that we can forego the opportunity to fish in an effort to have sustainable wild runs of fish for future generations.
:chuckle: So you are suggesting that closing sport salmon fishing in Puget Sound for 20 years will result in such a wild run proliferation, that there will no longer be need for hatcheries, and our kids/grandkids will enjoy seasons stacked with natives? :chuckle:
The only solution that will bring back native runs to their "glory years" regardless what you believe the effect sport fishing has, is removing the commercial sale of salmon, which will never happen. :twocents:
Post by: fisheral87 on March 04, 2016, 07:22:35 AM
Quote
:chuckle: So you are suggesting that closing sport salmon fishing in Puget Sound for 20 years will result in such a wild run proliferation, that there will no longer be need for hatcheries, and our kids/grandkids will enjoy seasons stacked with natives? :chuckle:
No.
Quote
I'm talking about no commercial and potentially very limited catch and release sport fishing.
Quote
Really? How do you explain this "non native" degradation of genetics introduced to this system? (Image attached below)
If you start with really good native brood stock that goes a long way to improving genetic quality of wild fish. Not all hatcheries are using native fish as brood stock. But only natural selection will give the variation within a run. Bigger doesn't necessarily mean better.
I think closing commercial fishing should be on the table. But as long as the government subsidieses commercial fishing through hatcheries, that won't happen.
Al
Post by: Mfowl on March 04, 2016, 08:25:56 AM
Without commercial fishing and potentially limited catch and release only sport fishing, where do you propose the revenue will come from? Why would a guy spend $50k on a boat and load it with gear and electronics to CnR some fish a couple times a year? What are you gonna tell the commercial fisher or charter boat captain that looses their livelihood? Just wait 20 years and try again? Are we gonna be expected to pay yet another fee attached to our annual license purchase, perhaps yet another fuel tax? Do you think people are gonna support increased fees for diminished opportunity? You stated that you've caught your share of fish and experienced plenty of success. That doesn't mean the next guy feels that way. The next guy needs their chance at success, they need to validate their expenses in one form or another. If you take that from him, he has no reason to put his money in this resource.
I get the sense from your posts that you are an experienced and passionate fisherman as am I. Though our opinions differ on the subject, people like us need to find common ground to stand on or we're gonna lose this battle against special interest groups that want to take away what we care about. These groups don't care about your passion, they care about their goals and they will gut you to achieve them. We can't afford to give them another inch. :twocents:
Post by: HUNTINCOUPLE on March 04, 2016, 08:35:35 AM
Post by: fisheral87 on March 04, 2016, 03:04:04 PM
I agree with you and you are correct in your criticism, I don't have solutions for the loss in economic value in the short term. That's something that I think would be important to come up with good solutions as sportsmen so that groups that don't have our best interests at heart can't take advantage of our community not having completely thought through how best to handle the transition away from hatcheries. If you ever want to sit down and solve this over Jameson, the first one is on me. :tup:
I've spent a fair amount of money to CnR fish. That's part of the problem in my mind, the defenition of an "opportunity" is tied to harvest. The experiences I have had have been of varying quality, I want those guys coming up to fish for native fish in home waters because that experience is a better one than any of the hatchery supported fisheries I have experienced. I still find myself falling into this category a lot. But it's not a sustainable mindset.
To be clear, I signed this and I think people should signs this to preserve the system as it is. My purpose is to encourage additional discussion because, while I have my opinions, as I said above I damn sure don't have answers.
Al
Al
Post by: snake on March 04, 2016, 06:00:01 PM
Post by: Skillet on March 04, 2016, 06:29:49 PM
:twocents:
Post by: snake on March 04, 2016, 06:48:44 PM
That's a bit harsh snake. While I disagree with Fisheral and other wild fish advocates on nearly all points, I get the sense he is an intelligent and reasonable guy. We've got plenty of extremist opposition on this issue, no need to go around personally attacking people you could actually have a conversation with.
:twocents:
Its a matter of opinion, I was actually being nice btw. Its much deeper than the short paragraph i have written. Its a way of thinking. We are talking about Washington State for god's sake!Tree hugging, Dirt worshipers with no idea of conserving wildlife or a certain way of life.(Fishing,Hunting, Trapping) Open your eyes! People need to stand up and speak against uninformed stupidity, it spreads like a disease.
Post by: Mfowl on March 04, 2016, 07:08:34 PM
That's a bit harsh snake. While I disagree with Fisheral and other wild fish advocates on nearly all points, I get the sense he is an intelligent and reasonable guy. We've got plenty of extremist opposition on this issue, no need to go around personally attacking people you could actually have a conversation with.
:twocents:
Amen, disagree don't disrespect!
BTW: I'd have a drink with you FisherAl, we need differing opinions to bring all points to light.
Post by: snake on March 04, 2016, 07:16:40 PM
Well you guys can go drink and sing kumbaya. Yah take our fishing, hunting and trapping rights, go ahead, just don't "disrespect" anyone. What a joke, Grow a set of balls. Look where its got Washington. Too worried about offending someone to stand up for yourself.That's a bit harsh snake. While I disagree with Fisheral and other wild fish advocates on nearly all points, I get the sense he is an intelligent and reasonable guy. We've got plenty of extremist opposition on this issue, no need to go around personally attacking people you could actually have a conversation with.
:twocents:
Amen, disagree don't disrespect!
BTW: I'd have a drink with you FisherAl, we need differing opinions to bring all points to light.
Post by: Bullkllr on March 04, 2016, 07:21:18 PM
That's a bit harsh snake. While I disagree with Fisheral and other wild fish advocates on nearly all points, I get the sense he is an intelligent and reasonable guy. We've got plenty of extremist opposition on this issue, no need to go around personally attacking people you could actually have a conversation with.
:twocents:
Its a matter of opinion, I was actually being nice btw. Its much deeper than the short paragraph i have written. Its a way of thinking. We are talking about Washington State for god's sake!Tree hugging, Dirt worshipers with no idea of conserving wildlife or a certain way of life.(Fishing,Hunting, Trapping) Open your eyes! People need to stand up and speak against uninformed stupidity, it spreads like a disease.
Then it is my opinion that you musn't have read his posts very thoroughly.
To be clear, I signed this and I think people should signs this to preserve the system as it is. My purpose is to encourage additional discussion because, while I have my opinions, as I said above I damn sure don't have answers.
Really, it's gotten to be such a complicated issue there really is no black and white. If purely wild fish were the answer, we'd need harvestable numbers that we may never see for a multitude of reasons? If hatchery fish were the only answer, why has 100+ years of intense salmonid culture gotten us where we are today?
Post by: Mfowl on March 04, 2016, 07:23:20 PM
Well you guys can go drink and sing kumbaya. Yah take our fishing, hunting and trapping rights, go ahead, just don't "disrespect" anyone. What a joke, Grow a set of balls. Look where its got Washington. Too worried about offending someone to stand up for yourself.That's a bit harsh snake. While I disagree with Fisheral and other wild fish advocates on nearly all points, I get the sense he is an intelligent and reasonable guy. We've got plenty of extremist opposition on this issue, no need to go around personally attacking people you could actually have a conversation with.
:twocents:
Amen, disagree don't disrespect!
BTW: I'd have a drink with you FisherAl, we need differing opinions to bring all points to light.
I have no issue with offending you!
Post by: snake on March 04, 2016, 07:31:13 PM
My point exactly, so why would we close all hatcheries and suspend all fishing including catch and release for 20 years.That's a bit harsh snake. While I disagree with Fisheral and other wild fish advocates on nearly all points, I get the sense he is an intelligent and reasonable guy. We've got plenty of extremist opposition on this issue, no need to go around personally attacking people you could actually have a conversation with.
:twocents:
Its a matter of opinion, I was actually being nice btw. Its much deeper than the short paragraph i have written. Its a way of thinking. We are talking about Washington State for god's sake!Tree hugging, Dirt worshipers with no idea of conserving wildlife or a certain way of life.(Fishing,Hunting, Trapping) Open your eyes! People need to stand up and speak against uninformed stupidity, it spreads like a disease.
Then it is my opinion that you musn't have read his posts very thoroughly.
To be clear, I signed this and I think people should signs this to preserve the system as it is. My purpose is to encourage additional discussion because, while I have my opinions, as I said above I damn sure don't have answers.
Really, it's gotten to be such a complicated issue there really is no black and white. If purely wild fish were the answer, we'd need harvestable numbers that we may never see for a multitude of reasons? If hatchery fish were the only answer, why has 100+ years of intense salmonid culture gotten us where we are today?
Post by: 7mmfan on March 04, 2016, 07:45:49 PM
The point is that if we give these fish a chance, a majority of the systems could sustain wild harvest. Puget Sound rivers are a different story. I've seen the Sky closed to catch and release for about 15 years now with limited recovery of that stock. No one really knows why but I hope they figure it out soon.
Hatcheries, if run with wild brood stock from the river systems they are on, could lend a huge helping hand in recovering basin specific stocks, just ask the Nez Perce, they nailed it with their fall chinook in Idaho.
Snake noted that fishing is a thing that is passed down from generation to generation. He's correct. You have to plant that seed early and keep it fed to keep it alive in kids. They are offered so many different sources of entertainment today that fishing can easily go by the wayside. He is also correct that when fisherman are gone, there will be no one left to care if there are any fish left in our rivers. However, if the cost of passing that torch is catching the last fish, then whats the point?
In closing, I think the real point here is that something needs to change. We can't keep on keepin on and expect things to get better. A hatchery system is necessary, most of our river systems have changed to dramatically to support historical fish runs, and that won't change as our area continues to grow at an exponential rate. The hatchery system needs to change from the one we're using now.
Also, Snake, just a heads up. Fisheral has been, done, and seen FAR more than you ever will when it comes to fishing. I've watched that guy fillet as many fish in a day as you probably caught in the last 10 years. It takes those experiences to make one realize how piss poor things are here, and why they should change. Wake up.
Post by: snake on March 04, 2016, 08:07:53 PM
I don't think that is a plan, as much as an idea guys. Fisheral's post stemmed from a conversation him and I had after my trip to the coast this last weekend. I fished the Clearwater Thursday, hooked 8 fish. Fished the Queets Friday, hooked 9 fish. Saturday and Sunday were basically nill. Just so happens that on the days we didn't hook hardly any fish, Indians were drift netting the Queets at the mouth of the Clearwater, and had nets set crisscrossing the river down from that.Thanks Great, I wish i had a nickel for every time i heard someone say how many more fish they have caught than everyone else. I am glad you know exactly how many fish both fisheral and myself have caught. I am not here to prove my knowledge or experience in the fishing industry. I can assure you mine is more than sufficient to have this conversation. As I stated before we could talk for hours about all the damage done. Sadly it is too late to return all of our rivers to "wild" fish. Hatcheries are our only hope to keep the heritage alive. Yes they can improve their effectiveness, yes they can do things to incorporate more or these "wild" fish you speak of. If seeing a fin gets you off maybe you can talk them into not clipping so many. If you think the last 100 years was hard on salmon, my bet is the next 100 years will be even worse.
The point is that if we give these fish a chance, a majority of the systems could sustain wild harvest. Puget Sound rivers are a different story. I've seen the Sky closed to catch and release for about 15 years now with limited recovery of that stock. No one really knows why but I hope they figure it out soon.
Hatcheries, if run with wild brood stock from the river systems they are on, could lend a huge helping hand in recovering basin specific stocks, just ask the Nez Perce, they nailed it with their fall chinook in Idaho.
Snake noted that fishing is a thing that is passed down from generation to generation. He's correct. You have to plant that seed early and keep it fed to keep it alive in kids. They are offered so many different sources of entertainment today that fishing can easily go by the wayside. He is also correct that when fisherman are gone, there will be no one left to care if there are any fish left in our rivers. However, if the cost of passing that torch is catching the last fish, then whats the point?
In closing, I think the real point here is that something needs to change. We can't keep on keepin on and expect things to get better. A hatchery system is necessary, most of our river systems have changed to dramatically to support historical fish runs, and that won't change as our area continues to grow at an exponential rate. The hatchery system needs to change from the one we're using now.
Also, Snake, just a heads up. Fisheral has been, done, and seen FAR more than you ever will when it comes to fishing. I've watched that guy fillet as many fish in a day as you probably caught in the last 10 years. It takes those experiences to make one realize how piss poor things are here, and why they should change. Wake up.
Post by: 7mmfan on March 04, 2016, 08:13:50 PM
Post by: snake on March 04, 2016, 08:21:18 PM
Post by: 7mmfan on March 04, 2016, 08:27:14 PM
Doing this would require a major shift in thinking for the state, a major investment in hatchery infrastructure, and a major shutdown of special interest groups.
I would also be fine not fishing for a few years if it meant that everyone else stopped fishing for a few years to allow some of our worst performing rivers to gain a foothold again.
Post by: snake on March 04, 2016, 09:02:08 PM
Post by: plugger on March 07, 2016, 07:34:02 PM
Post by: Snappy on March 08, 2016, 09:07:12 AM
Post by: snake on March 08, 2016, 04:55:00 PM
Post by: fisheral87 on March 08, 2016, 08:35:49 PM
Quote
Fisheral87, you are a disease to sportsman everywhere. You have no comprehension of what you are talking about. You need to get out more.I don’t believe we are so far apart on the subject for you to be so critical and I would prefer you were critical of my position rather than my person. We agree on predators and have some of the same values when it comes to heritage.
Quote
The only things the salmon have going for them unfortunately are the tribes and the sportsmen.
Quote
The tribe needs the hatcheries so they can stretch a gill net 200 ft in front of the inlet and call it ceremonial, with their 150 hp yamaha.So you can criticize the commercial tribal fishery, but I can’t? I understand that public involvement is critical and that’s why I’d be in favor of a catch and release fishery until the runs we more sustainable. As several people have said, not all hatchery programs are created equal. I think some of our operations could do better and that might mean closing some of the ones that aren’t cutting it either because of brood stock, operations, etc. with the end goal of not needing hatcheries.
Quote
Don't give me the " I fished here for 35 years BS"I never said this. I did say that I have spent a lot of time fishing, and of that time a lot of my effort/money has been put towards catch and release fisheries.
Quote
It is obvious you live in a big city and don't get out much. I never call people out like this but you need it. Tell me, when everyone stops fishing commercially, recreationally, and tribally for the next 20 years, who is going to be there to give 2 *censored*s about the fish?I feel that the harvest of fish in the state is too high to give many runs much hope of recovery. So, as I said before, I would be willing to have a catch and release only fishery if it meant that there would be no commercial fishery in an effort to allow runs to get to a sustainable level where instead of subsidizing fisheries we were at a point of managing naturally reproducing fisheries. There are definitely additional challenges like habitat and economic productivity that have been put forward which I already admitted to not having solutions for.
Quote
Becoming a good fisherman takes many years, from the first time you pick up a rod as a child to your last cast. It is something you pass down to your kids. Same with hunting. It is a heritage passed down. If we do not teach our children to fish they will not fish or care about the salmon runs.Couldn’t agree more, This past year my wife and I were out fishing coho’s and happened to catch and release her first king salmon. I’ll never forget that experience. I hope to have similar experiences with my children as I hope you have with your family.
Quote
Sorry to burst your bubble but the "wild" fish you speak of do not exist. There is no perfect genetically superior fish that will fill our rivers when if we shut the hatcheries down. We did the damage with dams and logging. we could talk for hours about all the damage done to habitat. We have to deal with what we have left. Public interest is more valuable than you think. Get a clue and shut up about closing the hatcheries.My terminology is probably wrong and I don’t understand biology well enough to understand the extent to which the genetics have been tainted, but I never said there was a perfect genetically superior fish that would solve our problems, I’m sorry if I gave you that impression. It is my opinion that genetically good fish reproducing independently in a stream are better (And cheaper long-term) than superior genetics out of a hatchery.
Al
Post by: singleshot12 on March 10, 2016, 11:51:03 AM