Post by: TheHunt on February 08, 2012, 02:55:36 PM
Sol Duc wild steelhead management zone established;
Snider Creek program to end
Snider Creek program to end
OLYMPIA - The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) has announced it will end a hatchery steelhead program at Snider Creek next year to establish a wild steelhead management zone in the Sol Duc River.
After next spring, no hatchery steelhead will be released into the Sol Duc River, which will be the first wild steelhead management zone formally established in the state under the department's Statewide Steelhead Management Plan, said Ron Warren, regional fish program manager for WDFW. Snider Creek is a tributary to the Sol Duc River in Clallam County.
Wild management zones, also known as wild stock gene banks, are designed to preserve key populations of wild fish by minimizing interactions with hatchery-produced fish, said Warren. Research has shown that hatchery fish are often less genetically diverse and can impact wild stocks through interbreeding or competition for food or habitat.
WDFW is also looking to identify other streams that could be candidates for wild management zones, said Warren. That effort includes working with an advisory group to identify specific streams in the Puget Sound region.
"Establishing wild management zones is part of a broad effort aimed at modifying our hatchery programs to be compatible with conservation and recovery of naturally spawning salmon and steelhead populations," Warren said. "Shifting hatchery steelhead production away from the Sol Duc River - where we have one of the largest wild steelhead populations in the state - is an important step in that effort."
Changes designed to support naturally spawning salmon and steelhead populations are driven by plans and policies adopted by the Washington Fish and Wildlife Commission, such as the Statewide Steelhead Management Plan and the Hatchery and Fishery Reform policy, Warren said.
The Statewide Steelhead Management Plan is available on the department's website at http://wdfw.wa.gov/conservation/fisheries/steelhead/ , while the commission's hatchery and fishery reform policy is available at http://wdfw.wa.gov/commission/policies/c3619.html .
While the hatchery program will no longer take place at Snider Creek, WDFW is working with stakeholders to re-establish a similar effort in the Bogachiel or Calawah rivers, where the department already releases hatchery steelhead, said Warren.
The program will end next spring, when 25,000 winter steelhead smolts are released into the Sol Duc River, Warren said. Last year, WDFW also discontinued its summer steelhead program on the Sol Duc River, after releasing 20,000 smolts.
Before making that decision, WDFW conducted three public meetings and reviewed about 400 public comments on the future of the Snider Creek program.
While fewer and fewer hatchery steelhead will be returning to the Sol Duc River in the coming years, anglers will continue to have opportunities to fish for salmon and other game fish, as well as retain one wild steelhead per license year on the river, said Warren.
The Snider Creek program was created in 1986 as a joint project with the Olympic Peninsula Guides' Association to increase fishing opportunities for steelhead on the Sol Duc River. The program is unlike most other hatchery efforts in that it produces offspring from wild steelhead rather than hatchery fish.
Post by: Button Nubbs on February 08, 2012, 03:14:47 PM
Post by: Dhoey07 on February 08, 2012, 09:30:09 PM
Post by: huntnnw on February 08, 2012, 10:39:19 PM
Post by: TheHunt on February 09, 2012, 05:23:27 AM
The indians will just net the mouth... The only way to crack down on this is to raise the fines to 100,000 dollars or something enough to ruin a business for buying native steelhead. Than start stings with the buyers and people buying the native steelhead.
Post by: asl20bball on February 09, 2012, 06:04:18 AM
Post by: Dhoey07 on February 09, 2012, 06:41:46 AM
This is a bad idea! :bash: :bash: :bash: Now you can only keep 1 steele on the duc per year and the overall numbers will drop by a lot. Sounds like a push from our left wing folks in tree huging Olympia.
But the fish will be so pretty to look at :bash: :bash:
Post by: Sporting_Man on February 09, 2012, 07:17:12 AM
Post by: teal101 on February 09, 2012, 07:33:56 AM
This is a bad idea! :bash: :bash: :bash: Now you can only keep 1 steele on the duc per year and the overall numbers will drop by a lot. Sounds like a push from our left wing folks in tree huging Olympia.
Or it sounds like a push from Bios to restore the natural Steelhead runs to the river. Why dont you stop and use that brain of yours for a minute and do some research as to why they are doing this, and stop thinking with your greed. Hatchery fish are terrible for the population as a whole. They are weak inbred fish that are "watering" down the wild population slowly but surely. Eventually all the wild Steelhead will contain the weak hatchery gene and the population will slowly disappear to nothing. Hatchery fish have a much lower survival rate in the wild. Hatchery fish are destroying genetically unique Steelhead populations. Hatchery fish are competing with wild fish for redd locations. In order to sustain Steelhead fisheries in the future, we need to evaluate what waters contain large runs of wild fish and save them from the hatchery plague. You both sound like the stereotypical gear throwers all the fly fishers like to bash because of your selfish me first, fish later attitude.
Yes the numbers will drop, and yes you will only be able to catch one. As the wild population rebounds due to better management practices there will be more fish, and eventually a better fishery for yours and mine kids. Steelhead research has made huge strides in the past decade and old management practices are being revised or eliminated in order to properly manage the fish. The hatcheries are one of these old management practices that does more harm than good in the long run. Stop thinking about the short term, and think about the long term. If you do not, there wont be ANY Steelhead for you, nor your children to catch in the future.
And agreed on the point about the dammed rivers. I have a feeling they will not implement this management practice on rivers with dams, at least without further research. The dams are one of the some of the most important pieces of infrastructure in the PNW, yet at the same time they are the number one killer of Salmon and Steelhead. Can you imagine catching wild Chinook and Steelhead on the Sanpoil? You were able to until Grand Coulee was built. For 4 years after the construction anadromous fish continued to return to the dam site to try and migrate up river, until that 4th year when none were recorded. That dam wiped out countless individual populations of anadromous fish. In order to understand the significance of this you have to have an understanding of how anadromous fish populations work. Each creek has its own population with its own genes. Transplanting fish from one creek to another generally has a very low success rate. In the wild, anadromous fish use their homing senses (still debating as to what senses are used, but it is generally accepted smell is one) to find their home creek. Every year fish will stray from their home creek to another. This promotes finding new habitat to breed in as well as preventing genetic inbreeding among populations. These are FRAGILE ecosystems with creek specific populations, many of which we have forced into extinction.
Kudos to the state for finally making a sound Steelhead management move. :tup:
Post by: Dhoey07 on February 09, 2012, 08:06:16 AM
This is a bad idea! :bash: :bash: :bash: Now you can only keep 1 steele on the duc per year and the overall numbers will drop by a lot. Sounds like a push from our left wing folks in tree huging Olympia.
Or it sounds like a push from Bios to restore the natural Steelhead runs to the river. Why dont you stop and use that brain of yours for a minute and do some research as to why they are doing this, and stop thinking with your greed. Hatchery fish are terrible for the population as a whole. They are weak inbred fish that are "watering" down the wild population slowly but surely. Eventually all the wild Steelhead will contain the weak hatchery gene and the population will slowly disappear to nothing. Hatchery fish have a much lower survival rate in the wild. Hatchery fish are destroying genetically unique Steelhead populations. Hatchery fish are competing with wild fish for redd locations. In order to sustain Steelhead fisheries in the future, we need to evaluate what waters contain large runs of wild fish and save them from the hatchery plague. You both sound like the stereotypical gear throwers all the fly fishers like to bash because of your selfish me first, fish later attitude.
Yes the numbers will drop, and yes you will only be able to catch one. As the wild population rebounds due to better management practices there will be more fish, and eventually a better fishery for yours and mine kids. Steelhead research has made huge strides in the past decade and old management practices are being revised or eliminated in order to properly manage the fish. The hatcheries are one of these old management practices that does more harm than good in the long run. Stop thinking about the short term, and think about the long term. If you do not, there wont be ANY Steelhead for you, nor your children to catch in the future.
And agreed on the point about the dammed rivers. I have a feeling they will not implement this management practice on rivers with dams, at least without further research. The dams are one of the some of the most important pieces of infrastructure in the PNW, yet at the same time they are the number one killer of Salmon and Steelhead. Can you imagine catching wild Chinook and Steelhead on the Sanpoil? You were able to until Grand Coulee was built. For 4 years after the construction anadromous fish continued to return to the dam site to try and migrate up river, until that 4th year when none were recorded. That dam wiped out countless individual populations of anadromous fish. In order to understand the significance of this you have to have an understanding of how anadromous fish populations work. Each creek has its own population with its own genes. Transplanting fish from one creek to another generally has a very low success rate. In the wild, anadromous fish use their homing senses (still debating as to what senses are used, but it is generally accepted smell is one) to find their home creek. Every year fish will stray from their home creek to another. This promotes finding new habitat to breed in as well as preventing genetic inbreeding among populations. These are FRAGILE ecosystems with creek specific populations, many of which we have forced into extinction.
Kudos to the state for finally making a sound Steelhead management move. :tup:
Do you understand what the snider creek program was all about?
Post by: asl20bball on February 09, 2012, 09:01:00 AM
No need to take shots .... idiot. :chuckle:
Post by: teal101 on February 09, 2012, 09:58:02 AM
teal101: I do like native steelhead to. However, I'm first and foremost a fan of steelhead- hatchery, native, whatever. What I am not is ignorant ...think about it genious...in the long term will this increase the steelhead population in the duc? No, but it will increase the native population but doubtful the native only population will be as great as the current native + hatchery until we take some other measures such as limiting the netting of natives.
No need to take shots .... idiot. :chuckle:
Think about this. In the long term leaving the hatcheries will destroy the native genes leaving weak inferior hatchery fish. This will decrease the native population as well as the population as a whole. The state will constantly have to supplement the river with fish to keep a population. Not only is this the wrong approach (pushing a Steelhead population into extinction) it is a VERY expensive one as well.
This will increase the NATIVE steelhead population to as large as the river with current management practices can sustain. This is the goal. The goal is not to provide a massive fishery, it is to restore the native wildlife. This is what people who oppose restoration do not care about, or are ignorant of. Why dont you do some research and take a look at the goals are and re-asses your stance. If all you want is a mass population of fish to catch regardless of genetic nativity you are no better than the indians who are netting these fish.
I do 100% agree the native netting needs to stop, although there is a treaty and a federal government standing in the way of this. Unfortunately the politics involved with the indians outweighs the need to restore native fauna at the cost of us, the sportsmen.
Post by: teal101 on February 09, 2012, 10:10:28 AM
This is a bad idea! :bash: :bash: :bash: Now you can only keep 1 steele on the duc per year and the overall numbers will drop by a lot. Sounds like a push from our left wing folks in tree huging Olympia.
Or it sounds like a push from Bios to restore the natural Steelhead runs to the river. Why dont you stop and use that brain of yours for a minute and do some research as to why they are doing this, and stop thinking with your greed. Hatchery fish are terrible for the population as a whole. They are weak inbred fish that are "watering" down the wild population slowly but surely. Eventually all the wild Steelhead will contain the weak hatchery gene and the population will slowly disappear to nothing. Hatchery fish have a much lower survival rate in the wild. Hatchery fish are destroying genetically unique Steelhead populations. Hatchery fish are competing with wild fish for redd locations. In order to sustain Steelhead fisheries in the future, we need to evaluate what waters contain large runs of wild fish and save them from the hatchery plague. You both sound like the stereotypical gear throwers all the fly fishers like to bash because of your selfish me first, fish later attitude.
Yes the numbers will drop, and yes you will only be able to catch one. As the wild population rebounds due to better management practices there will be more fish, and eventually a better fishery for yours and mine kids. Steelhead research has made huge strides in the past decade and old management practices are being revised or eliminated in order to properly manage the fish. The hatcheries are one of these old management practices that does more harm than good in the long run. Stop thinking about the short term, and think about the long term. If you do not, there wont be ANY Steelhead for you, nor your children to catch in the future.
And agreed on the point about the dammed rivers. I have a feeling they will not implement this management practice on rivers with dams, at least without further research. The dams are one of the some of the most important pieces of infrastructure in the PNW, yet at the same time they are the number one killer of Salmon and Steelhead. Can you imagine catching wild Chinook and Steelhead on the Sanpoil? You were able to until Grand Coulee was built. For 4 years after the construction anadromous fish continued to return to the dam site to try and migrate up river, until that 4th year when none were recorded. That dam wiped out countless individual populations of anadromous fish. In order to understand the significance of this you have to have an understanding of how anadromous fish populations work. Each creek has its own population with its own genes. Transplanting fish from one creek to another generally has a very low success rate. In the wild, anadromous fish use their homing senses (still debating as to what senses are used, but it is generally accepted smell is one) to find their home creek. Every year fish will stray from their home creek to another. This promotes finding new habitat to breed in as well as preventing genetic inbreeding among populations. These are FRAGILE ecosystems with creek specific populations, many of which we have forced into extinction.
Kudos to the state for finally making a sound Steelhead management move. :tup:
Do you understand what the snider creek program was all about?
Uhh supplementation of the Steelhead population via artificial rearing of native and non native strains of Steelhead. It's what nearly every hatchery program is about, tailored to the water the hatchery is on.
Just for reading, nearly all of my points are met in this review of the hatchery,
http://wdfw.wa.gov/publications/01187/wdfw01187.pdf
Points such as:
Hatchery fishing bringing negative genetic and domestication traits into the wild strain.
Hatchery fishing negatively effecting spawning of wild fish.
Removal of wild broodstock fish reducing fish spawned in the wild, etc.
Post by: Houndhunter on February 09, 2012, 10:16:21 AM
Post by: Button Nubbs on February 09, 2012, 12:04:45 PM
Look at some of the rivers that have massive hatchery plants and relatively low netting. A lot of these systems are having trouble getting wild fish and hatchery fish back. Here's why imo. 1: If you continue to inbreed fish they will become less and less genetically diverse which will lead to poor survival rates. When genetically inferior fish spawn with wild fish it makes the survival rate of the now "wild fish" lower. 2: urban expansion continues to take away habitat put silt and chemical runoff into the river destroying the chances of the vulnerable smolts survival and valuable spawning areas. Dams are another issue which we all know about.
Now let's look at some of the coastal rivers that get the shi+ netted out of them. Comparatively the habitat is left pretty much unchanged. These rivers still get great runs of wild fish, which leads me to believe that netting is not the single greatest cause of the wild steelheads demise. Rather habitat destruction is.
Removing hatcherys from rivers is not the end all be all cure but it is a great strp in the right direction for the recovery of these northwest icons.
We have the gentics to rival the fisheries of b.c. And with the right managment plans I believe the oly pen could once again be the motherland to steelheaders. But there are several pieces to this puzzle. Decreasing Netting, removing hatcherys, and restoring habitat are just a few places to start in restoring these fish we all cherish.
I hope my future children will be able to enjoy these great fish as I have.
Wa needs to take a look at B.C.'s managment plan and start there. :twocents:
Post by: Dhoey07 on February 09, 2012, 12:09:38 PM
This is a bad idea! :bash: :bash: :bash: Now you can only keep 1 steele on the duc per year and the overall numbers will drop by a lot. Sounds like a push from our left wing folks in tree huging Olympia.
Or it sounds like a push from Bios to restore the natural Steelhead runs to the river. Why dont you stop and use that brain of yours for a minute and do some research as to why they are doing this, and stop thinking with your greed. Hatchery fish are terrible for the population as a whole. They are weak inbred fish that are "watering" down the wild population slowly but surely. Eventually all the wild Steelhead will contain the weak hatchery gene and the population will slowly disappear to nothing. Hatchery fish have a much lower survival rate in the wild. Hatchery fish are destroying genetically unique Steelhead populations. Hatchery fish are competing with wild fish for redd locations. In order to sustain Steelhead fisheries in the future, we need to evaluate what waters contain large runs of wild fish and save them from the hatchery plague. You both sound like the stereotypical gear throwers all the fly fishers like to bash because of your selfish me first, fish later attitude.
Yes the numbers will drop, and yes you will only be able to catch one. As the wild population rebounds due to better management practices there will be more fish, and eventually a better fishery for yours and mine kids. Steelhead research has made huge strides in the past decade and old management practices are being revised or eliminated in order to properly manage the fish. The hatcheries are one of these old management practices that does more harm than good in the long run. Stop thinking about the short term, and think about the long term. If you do not, there wont be ANY Steelhead for you, nor your children to catch in the future.
And agreed on the point about the dammed rivers. I have a feeling they will not implement this management practice on rivers with dams, at least without further research. The dams are one of the some of the most important pieces of infrastructure in the PNW, yet at the same time they are the number one killer of Salmon and Steelhead. Can you imagine catching wild Chinook and Steelhead on the Sanpoil? You were able to until Grand Coulee was built. For 4 years after the construction anadromous fish continued to return to the dam site to try and migrate up river, until that 4th year when none were recorded. That dam wiped out countless individual populations of anadromous fish. In order to understand the significance of this you have to have an understanding of how anadromous fish populations work. Each creek has its own population with its own genes. Transplanting fish from one creek to another generally has a very low success rate. In the wild, anadromous fish use their homing senses (still debating as to what senses are used, but it is generally accepted smell is one) to find their home creek. Every year fish will stray from their home creek to another. This promotes finding new habitat to breed in as well as preventing genetic inbreeding among populations. These are FRAGILE ecosystems with creek specific populations, many of which we have forced into extinction.
Kudos to the state for finally making a sound Steelhead management move. :tup:
Do you understand what the snider creek program was all about?
Uhh supplementation of the Steelhead population via artificial rearing of native and non native strains of Steelhead. It's what nearly every hatchery program is about, tailored to the water the hatchery is on.
Just for reading, nearly all of my points are met in this review of the hatchery,
http://wdfw.wa.gov/publications/01187/wdfw01187.pdf
Points such as:
Hatchery fishing bringing negative genetic and domestication traits into the wild strain.
Hatchery fishing negatively effecting spawning of wild fish.
Removal of wild broodstock fish reducing fish spawned in the wild, etc.
I'm glad you can use google.
Snider creek is unlike all other hatcheries because they use Native fish for broodstock, not returning hatchery fish. The resulting smolt are reared until smolt and then released. Those fish won't dillute the gene pool if they spawn with true wild fish.
Post by: teal101 on February 09, 2012, 12:17:51 PM
This is a bad idea! :bash: :bash: :bash: Now you can only keep 1 steele on the duc per year and the overall numbers will drop by a lot. Sounds like a push from our left wing folks in tree huging Olympia.
Or it sounds like a push from Bios to restore the natural Steelhead runs to the river. Why dont you stop and use that brain of yours for a minute and do some research as to why they are doing this, and stop thinking with your greed. Hatchery fish are terrible for the population as a whole. They are weak inbred fish that are "watering" down the wild population slowly but surely. Eventually all the wild Steelhead will contain the weak hatchery gene and the population will slowly disappear to nothing. Hatchery fish have a much lower survival rate in the wild. Hatchery fish are destroying genetically unique Steelhead populations. Hatchery fish are competing with wild fish for redd locations. In order to sustain Steelhead fisheries in the future, we need to evaluate what waters contain large runs of wild fish and save them from the hatchery plague. You both sound like the stereotypical gear throwers all the fly fishers like to bash because of your selfish me first, fish later attitude.
Yes the numbers will drop, and yes you will only be able to catch one. As the wild population rebounds due to better management practices there will be more fish, and eventually a better fishery for yours and mine kids. Steelhead research has made huge strides in the past decade and old management practices are being revised or eliminated in order to properly manage the fish. The hatcheries are one of these old management practices that does more harm than good in the long run. Stop thinking about the short term, and think about the long term. If you do not, there wont be ANY Steelhead for you, nor your children to catch in the future.
And agreed on the point about the dammed rivers. I have a feeling they will not implement this management practice on rivers with dams, at least without further research. The dams are one of the some of the most important pieces of infrastructure in the PNW, yet at the same time they are the number one killer of Salmon and Steelhead. Can you imagine catching wild Chinook and Steelhead on the Sanpoil? You were able to until Grand Coulee was built. For 4 years after the construction anadromous fish continued to return to the dam site to try and migrate up river, until that 4th year when none were recorded. That dam wiped out countless individual populations of anadromous fish. In order to understand the significance of this you have to have an understanding of how anadromous fish populations work. Each creek has its own population with its own genes. Transplanting fish from one creek to another generally has a very low success rate. In the wild, anadromous fish use their homing senses (still debating as to what senses are used, but it is generally accepted smell is one) to find their home creek. Every year fish will stray from their home creek to another. This promotes finding new habitat to breed in as well as preventing genetic inbreeding among populations. These are FRAGILE ecosystems with creek specific populations, many of which we have forced into extinction.
Kudos to the state for finally making a sound Steelhead management move. :tup:
Do you understand what the snider creek program was all about?
Uhh supplementation of the Steelhead population via artificial rearing of native and non native strains of Steelhead. It's what nearly every hatchery program is about, tailored to the water the hatchery is on.
Just for reading, nearly all of my points are met in this review of the hatchery,
http://wdfw.wa.gov/publications/01187/wdfw01187.pdf
Points such as:
Hatchery fishing bringing negative genetic and domestication traits into the wild strain.
Hatchery fishing negatively effecting spawning of wild fish.
Removal of wild broodstock fish reducing fish spawned in the wild, etc.
I'm glad you can use google.
Snider creek is unlike all other hatcheries because they use Native fish for broodstock, not returning hatchery fish. The resulting smolt are reared until smolt and then released. Those fish won't dillute the gene pool if they spawn with true wild fish.
I'm glad you can generalize and assume, disregarding source material.
Snider creek is not alone, other hatcheries have done this (Hood River), and do do this. These fish still dilute the gene pool as they pick up domesticating traits while being reared. It is proven. Also, wild fish spawning with hatchery fish produce fewer adult off spring than wild on wild, roughly 85% of wild on wild.
Not only that, but the hatchery fish are not growing to appropriate size before release, resulting in a later spawning return, two years as opposed to one. They are changing the ecosystem.
Post by: teal101 on February 09, 2012, 12:19:37 PM
I honestly believe gillnetting is a small part of why these fish aren't coming back. (Flame away) not saying I agree with the practice but I don't think its the majority of the problem, but it sure is easy to point the finger.
Look at some of the rivers that have massive hatchery plants and relatively low netting. A lot of these systems are having trouble getting wild fish and hatchery fish back. Here's why imo. 1: If you continue to inbreed fish they will become less and less genetically diverse which will lead to poor survival rates. When genetically inferior fish spawn with wild fish it makes the survival rate of the now "wild fish" lower. 2: urban expansion continues to take away habitat put silt and chemical runoff into the river destroying the chances of the vulnerable smolts survival and valuable spawning areas. Dams are another issue which we all know about.
Now let's look at some of the coastal rivers that get the shi+ netted out of them. Comparatively the habitat is left pretty much unchanged. These rivers still get great runs of wild fish, which leads me to believe that netting is not the single greatest cause of the wild steelheads demise. Rather habitat destruction is.
Removing hatcherys from rivers is not the end all be all cure but it is a great strp in the right direction for the recovery of these northwest icons.
We have the gentics to rival the fisheries of b.c. And with the right managment plans I believe the oly pen could once again be the motherland to steelheaders. But there are several pieces to this puzzle. Decreasing Netting, removing hatcherys, and restoring habitat are just a few places to start in restoring these fish we all cherish.
I hope my future children will be able to enjoy these great fish as I have.
Wa needs to take a look at B.C.'s managment plan and start there. :twocents:
The Wenatchee River is a prime example. :tup: :yeah:
Post by: asl20bball on February 09, 2012, 12:24:50 PM
Post by: teal101 on February 09, 2012, 12:33:06 PM
teal101: guess it comes down to this: You prefer a strong native population. I, and many others, prefer a strong Steelhead population.
Agreed. I'd prefer to see the fish brought back to a natural state with little to no artificial influence. Like I said before, this is near impossible on rivers with dams, but on natural flow rivers I see no reason for artificial supplementation. Management practices need to be reviewed to help those rivers. I think this is too often misinterpreted as anti fishing by the lefties, when in fact it is not anti anything. It is PRO wild native fish, and unfortunately that means possibly losing access to a fishery. I'd rather have the fish for future generations to look at then decimate and extinct them due to selfish reasons. :tup:
Post by: PolarBear on February 09, 2012, 12:35:15 PM
Post by: Button Nubbs on February 09, 2012, 12:47:26 PM
Post by: Dhoey07 on February 09, 2012, 01:03:29 PM
Native steelhead spend 1-4 years in freshwater, a small portion of snider fish stay 1 year in freshwater after getting released. So yes a small portion of snider smolts compete for food in freshwater with wild smolts.
Snider fish are caught, tethered, and transported to the Sol Duc hatchery, so there are spawning "biters"
Snider creek fish spawn 1-2 months earlier than wild fish so the chances of crossing a first gen hatchery and a wild fish are small.
The snider creek program releases 100k smolts while only needing 45 adults. That's a lot of return considering.
Post by: Button Nubbs on February 09, 2012, 01:37:12 PM
Incubation and rearing facilities can and will spread disease.
I'm assuming they feed the fish the same things as they do other hatcheries in the state...
Hmmm... Sounds like a hatchery fish to me. :twocents:
Oh and 100K is a lot of smolt. Assuming 10 % stay in freshwater like you say that's still 10,000 fish.
Post by: JimmyHoffa on February 09, 2012, 01:54:20 PM
Post by: GEARHEAD on February 09, 2012, 02:00:54 PM
Post by: teal101 on February 09, 2012, 02:04:19 PM
A couple points
Native steelhead spend 1-4 years in freshwater, a small portion of snider fish stay 1 year in freshwater after getting released. So yes a small portion of snider smolts compete for food in freshwater with wild smolts.
A small portion stay 2 years. They want them to only spend one year as to have as little impact as possible on the native smolts.
Snider fish are caught, tethered, and transported to the Sol Duc hatchery, so there are spawning "biters"
Cant argue that!
Snider creek fish spawn 1-2 months earlier than wild fish so the chances of crossing a first gen hatchery and a wild fish are small.
Somewhat true. Within 5 weeks of the statistical beginning of the run, 85% of the hatchery and 25% of the native fish have entered the system.
The snider creek program releases 100k smolts while only needing 45 adults. That's a lot of return considering.
It is intended to provide a maximum of 100,000 smolts. The targeted release in turn was lowered to 50,000 before 1998.
:yeah:
Post by: teal101 on February 09, 2012, 02:09:18 PM
All i know is this. they killed off many of the high lakes, because the fish in them are not native. they believe having no fish in a system, be it a river or a lake, is better than having anything classified as non native. this is just a growing trend.
Many of those lakes were over populated with stunted fish. There was a knee jerk reaction by the state on that issue due to a few studies on non native fish effects on native amphibians. When the bulk of the high lakes were being planted, the state did not understand the effect of planting so many fish in such small waters. There are plans to kill off more lakes and re-introduce fish in smaller densities to allow all specie to interact. Some systems they are shooting for all native (Sol Duc), some an equilibrium between the two(Columbia River and Tribs as well as most lakes in the state), and others all artificial(Stan Coffin Lake managed as 100% non native warmwater). :tup:
Post by: Dhoey07 on February 09, 2012, 02:13:25 PM
So what kind of fish is it considered if eggs are incubated at the salmon hatchery? How about if they're held in rearing ponds?
Incubation and rearing facilities can and will spread disease.
I'm assuming they feed the fish the same things as they do other hatcheries in the state...
Hmmm... Sounds like a hatchery fish to me. :twocents:
Oh and 100K is a lot of smolt. Assuming 10 % stay in freshwater like you say that's still 10,000 fish.
If these snider creek smolts have such an effect on wild smolts, why have wild escapement numbers gone up since it's inception?
Post by: teal101 on February 09, 2012, 02:43:20 PM
So what kind of fish is it considered if eggs are incubated at the salmon hatchery? How about if they're held in rearing ponds?
Incubation and rearing facilities can and will spread disease.
I'm assuming they feed the fish the same things as they do other hatcheries in the state...
Hmmm... Sounds like a hatchery fish to me. :twocents:
Oh and 100K is a lot of smolt. Assuming 10 % stay in freshwater like you say that's still 10,000 fish.
If these snider creek smolts have such an effect on wild smolts, why have wild escapement numbers gone up since it's inception?
They havent. It's fluctuated quite a bit, but returns between 1991-2010 have shown no significant stable increase in wild fish escapement. I'm interested as to where you got this figure.
Post by: Dhoey07 on February 09, 2012, 02:44:57 PM
So what kind of fish is it considered if eggs are incubated at the salmon hatchery? How about if they're held in rearing ponds?
Incubation and rearing facilities can and will spread disease.
I'm assuming they feed the fish the same things as they do other hatcheries in the state...
Hmmm... Sounds like a hatchery fish to me. :twocents:
Oh and 100K is a lot of smolt. Assuming 10 % stay in freshwater like you say that's still 10,000 fish.
If these snider creek smolts have such an effect on wild smolts, why have wild escapement numbers gone up since it's inception?
They havent. It's fluctuated quite a bit, but returns between 1991-2010 have shown no significant stable increase in wild fish escapement. I'm interested as to where you got this figure.
http://wdfw.wa.gov/publications/00150/oly_pen_esu.pdf
Post by: teal101 on February 09, 2012, 03:14:39 PM
So what kind of fish is it considered if eggs are incubated at the salmon hatchery? How about if they're held in rearing ponds?
Incubation and rearing facilities can and will spread disease.
I'm assuming they feed the fish the same things as they do other hatcheries in the state...
Hmmm... Sounds like a hatchery fish to me. :twocents:
Oh and 100K is a lot of smolt. Assuming 10 % stay in freshwater like you say that's still 10,000 fish.
If these snider creek smolts have such an effect on wild smolts, why have wild escapement numbers gone up since it's inception?
They havent. It's fluctuated quite a bit, but returns between 1991-2010 have shown no significant stable increase in wild fish escapement. I'm interested as to where you got this figure.
http://wdfw.wa.gov/publications/00150/oly_pen_esu.pdf
Interesting.
Pre hatchery wild escapement was avg. 9300 while post hatchery it was 10900. The interesting trend is the mass return of wild fish within 5 years of the hatchery implementation, then the steady decline to mean average returns. It would have been interesting to see if the wild runs would ever hit those peak numbers again right after hatchery implementation. It's contradictory of the hatchery review paper.
Post by: Phantom Gobbler on February 09, 2012, 11:15:35 PM
Only time and proper field evaluation/documentation will show us if the elimination of this specialized type of hatchery was ultimately in the best interest of the native steelhead population and of all the associated user groups.
Short term impacts will likely be the elimination of the one native fish retention limit per year. This then would be followed by a reduction in the allowable season interval for the catch and release of native steelhead in the Sol Duc. The far reaching social, economic, and cultural impacts of the new Wild Steelhead Management Plan will prove to be significant.
Post by: TheHunt on February 10, 2012, 07:13:22 AM
1. I want to fish for Salmon and Steelhead.
2. I want to bonk Salmon and Steelhead to eat them and use their eggs as bait.
3. I don't give a $hit about anyone's opinion or the WDFW scientific data. If the bottom line that I do not get to catch and bonk Salmon and Steelhead I will go find something else to do. And there goes my money too.
4. If the WDFW screws up the fishing in this state rivers and the Indians sell licenses to fish their reservation I will not be buying a State Fishing license. As I said, I want to catch fish and bonk em. If this state does not provide that and an Indian Tribe does...
5. I don’t mind working for the fish, or studying how they think and how to catch them. But I am just old school that if I am going to put in the work effort there better be some fish to catch and take home. I really don't care if I can take home a native or a hatchery as it makes no difference to me. As long as it is legal of course. So I am the SOB that bonked that natived last year on the OP.
Post by: Button Nubbs on February 10, 2012, 09:29:18 AM
Post by: TheHunt on February 10, 2012, 09:48:15 AM
I do not care if they close the Sol Duc as long as there are other rivers to fish. Heck the OP is getting hammered by large numbers of people fishing. I wonder what the size of the fishing population was in the following years:
1060's
1970's
1980's
1990's
2000's
2010's
I would assume it grows every year. I would think that eventually it will be like hunting and you will be required to draw a permit to fish specific weekends.
Post by: JimmyHoffa on February 10, 2012, 10:51:50 AM
Post by: Button Nubbs on February 10, 2012, 11:34:16 AM
Post by: JimmyHoffa on February 10, 2012, 11:46:23 AM
If everyone who fished the rivers where wild retention is allowed and killed their 1 nate year after year what do you think is going to happen?My guess is we'll see it happen rather quickly. The Sol Duc has been really busy the last few days, I'd be surprised if there is even room at the hatchery boat launch this weekend.
I won't even fish the river in the timeframe between hatchery steelies and springers. So many fingers get pointed at the bonkers, but the C&R guys contribute plenty to the mortality. I'll look and see if I can find the paper about it, but it had fish survival rates and successful spawning rates for things like proper handling, time to land, time removed from water (including the ambient air temps), number of times caught, etc.
Post by: Button Nubbs on February 10, 2012, 12:10:54 PM
Post by: jackmaster on February 10, 2012, 12:37:24 PM
Post by: teal101 on February 10, 2012, 01:14:14 PM
Its hard for me to wrap my head around how someone could be so selfish as to not care what numbers, science, or anything else says because they just want to kill. I have never personally felt the need to kill a wild steelhead but that stems from personal beliefs. How can you not care or understand that wild fish are on the brink right now? If everyone who fished the rivers where wild retention is allowed and killed their 1 nate year after year what do you think is going to happen? Do you really want permit only? Ill keep releasing wild fish and I guess you can keep bonking them. There will come a time when you will figure it out and for the fish's sake I hope that's sooner than later.
Me as well. I'm only 22 and started fishing for Salmon and Steelhead this August. I've fished all my life, just not for these species. To see these opinions is asinine to me.
Post by: teal101 on February 10, 2012, 01:16:15 PM
If everyone who fished the rivers where wild retention is allowed and killed their 1 nate year after year what do you think is going to happen?My guess is we'll see it happen rather quickly. The Sol Duc has been really busy the last few days, I'd be surprised if there is even room at the hatchery boat launch this weekend.
I won't even fish the river in the timeframe between hatchery steelies and springers. So many fingers get pointed at the bonkers, but the C&R guys contribute plenty to the mortality. I'll look and see if I can find the paper about it, but it had fish survival rates and successful spawning rates for things like proper handling, time to land, time removed from water (including the ambient air temps), number of times caught, etc.
www.wildsteelheadcoalition.org/Repository/WSR%20rpt%20full.pdf
There are many papers on it. One that is often brought up was a study done on trout in 57* water which hardly applies to most Steelheaders here in the PNW. The general consensus is 2-3% mortality by experienced fishers, 5% as an average for all, and 10% mortality as a buffer number.
90-98% survival is better than 0% :tup:
Post by: huntnnw on February 10, 2012, 03:37:44 PM
Post by: TheHunt on February 10, 2012, 06:25:08 PM
I am just glad those two groups have hatchery's for me to catch those fish.
As for my opinion on scientific studies, any data can be twisted and turned to whoever wants the values to come out they want it to. Look at the entire wolf model as an example. I do not have time to figure out who are the zealots in the issue of native fish verses hatchery fish.
Post by: TheHunt on February 10, 2012, 06:45:52 PM
Ha! I was joking the other day about when the time will come that we have to draw a permit for fishing "Quality River Native Steelhead permit".
I think it is a matter of time. I have been to the OP fishing and there were tons of people. A few Saturdays ago I fished the wynoochee and there had to be 50 drift boats on that river. I do think it is a matter of time or once the WDFW find out that they can charge per river of use over the license today that can be a huge money maker.
Pay for license ...
Pay 25 dollars per river that has a hatchery.
- $25 for minter creek
- $25 for cowlitz blue creek
- $25 for Kalama
- $25 for Green River
Now you just turned the fishing into a rich man's sport. WDFW gets a ton of money...
Post by: tmike on February 10, 2012, 08:01:54 PM
Post by: TheHunt on February 10, 2012, 09:04:22 PM
There's a lot of factors involved in the wild steelhead decline. Harvest by all user groups is part of it I believe. For those of you that have to bonk your 1 wild fish, ask yourself this. How many wild fish have you kept in rivers that are now closed completely or closed to keeping them now. Look at the trend. Just something to think about.
I would agree that we all have a part in it. I think the proof will be in the Sol Duc closing for native steelhead. If closing it (which I do not have a problem with) does not bring up the wild numbers than the sportsmen do NOT have or provide LITTLE to NO impact. Which means that the nets are the problem. This is from a pure logical perspective.
Post by: Button Nubbs on February 10, 2012, 09:29:45 PM
Post by: tmike on February 10, 2012, 10:29:15 PM
Post by: teal101 on February 11, 2012, 10:38:50 AM
My personal opinion, if the native steelhead is in such poor shape the WDFW would stop the bonking. YET, they still allow it. The Natives gillnet the heck out of the rivers and they do not see an issue or they would stop or use different type of nets. Don’t forget neither one of those groups care about the sea lions eating the fish. So until the two of these groups feel it needs attention I personally think it is not as big deal as many portray.
I am just glad those two groups have hatchery's for me to catch those fish.
As for my opinion on scientific studies, any data can be twisted and turned to whoever wants the values to come out they want it to. Look at the entire wolf model as an example. I do not have time to figure out who are the zealots in the issue of native fish verses hatchery fish.
They still allow native harvest because of people like you who just have to bonk fish or you will take your money elsewhere. If more people were management minded and would rather fish for sport other than sustenance with Steelhead this wouldnt be an issue. They cant change the natives gillnetting, there is a treaty and millions of miles of political *censored* to change before that happens. The Sea Lions is an interesting subject. They have always been here and always will be. Populations have risen dramatically over the past few decades and there is a growing concern about their take in the sportfish market. Take for example the amount of White Sturgeon they eat at Bonneville Dam. It would be nice for them to step up and have a few controlled hunts to thin numbers, although the public outcry would be substantial.
Comparing these studies to the wolf model is like comparing apples to a car. They are completely different in every aspect. You can see the public having issues with the wolf population before they are at management goals. You do not see the public saying there are plenty of Steelhead before management goals. I dont see how the WDFW could twist this data in their favor if they tried, while still implementing management practices. Why would they twist the data to show there are more fish than there are while implementing population increasing management practices while the public still sees no increase? This makes zero sense any way you spin it because of WDFW's actions.
There are no zealots. WDFW implemented hatcheries as a way to replenish fish lost due to the construction of the dams and over fishing. Over time they have realized due to numerous studies and field research that hatchery fish are worse for the system as a whole due to degradation of native fish populations. They are now attempting to fix these issues by either removing hatcheries or implementing new hatchery practices like those at the Sol Duc. You have to remember, the WDFW's plan for the Steelhead is native fish recovery, not sport fishing.
Post by: Houndhunter on February 11, 2012, 11:49:21 AM
. The Sea Lions is an interesting subject. They have always been here and always will be. Populations have risen dramatically over the past few decades and there is a growing concern about their take in the sportfish market. Take for example the amount of White Sturgeon they eat at Bonneville Dam. It would be nice for them to step up and have a few controlled hunts to thin numbers, although the public outcry would be substantial.
from my understanding sealions were not in the Columbia river until the damns, so they haven't always been here. i don't know the significance of what they do to the salmon and steelhead but i know they are destroying the sturgeon
Post by: TheHunt on February 11, 2012, 07:37:49 PM
Your comment regarding the WDFW plan for the Steelhead is native fish recovery, not sport fishing. I am a NEW sport fishermen as I want to catch fish like all new fishermen like to do. Now answer the question: If the WDFW does not support sport fishing why would this make sense to me? To me, the WDFW would NEED to have many rivers with hatcheries for the sport fishing in mind. Look at the Methow for the fishing, people can go over and fish and carefully let the fish go. The Sol Duc can be the same. One on the East side and one on the West side. I am all for it...
My personal opinion, if the native steelhead is in such poor shape the WDFW would stop the bonking. YET, they still allow it. The Natives gillnet the heck out of the rivers and they do not see an issue or they would stop or use different type of nets. Don’t forget neither one of those groups care about the sea lions eating the fish. So until the two of these groups feel it needs attention I personally think it is not as big deal as many portray.
I am just glad those two groups have hatchery's for me to catch those fish.
As for my opinion on scientific studies, any data can be twisted and turned to whoever wants the values to come out they want it to. Look at the entire wolf model as an example. I do not have time to figure out who are the zealots in the issue of native fish verses hatchery fish.
They still allow native harvest because of people like you who just have to bonk fish or you will take your money elsewhere. If more people were management minded and would rather fish for sport other than sustenance with Steelhead this wouldnt be an issue. They cant change the natives gillnetting, there is a treaty and millions of miles of political bull*censored* to change before that happens. The Sea Lions is an interesting subject. They have always been here and always will be. Populations have risen dramatically over the past few decades and there is a growing concern about their take in the sportfish market. Take for example the amount of White Sturgeon they eat at Bonneville Dam. It would be nice for them to step up and have a few controlled hunts to thin numbers, although the public outcry would be substantial.
Comparing these studies to the wolf model is like comparing apples to a car. They are completely different in every aspect. You can see the public having issues with the wolf population before they are at management goals. You do not see the public saying there are plenty of Steelhead before management goals. I dont see how the WDFW could twist this data in their favor if they tried, while still implementing management practices. Why would they twist the data to show there are more fish than there are while implementing population increasing management practices while the public still sees no increase? This makes zero sense any way you spin it because of WDFW's actions.
There are no zealots. WDFW implemented hatcheries as a way to replenish fish lost due to the construction of the dams and over fishing. Over time they have realized due to numerous studies and field research that hatchery fish are worse for the system as a whole due to degradation of native fish populations. They are now attempting to fix these issues by either removing hatcheries or implementing new hatchery practices like those at the Sol Duc. You have to remember, the WDFW's plan for the Steelhead is native fish recovery, not sport fishing.
Post by: teal101 on February 13, 2012, 08:05:22 AM
. The Sea Lions is an interesting subject. They have always been here and always will be. Populations have risen dramatically over the past few decades and there is a growing concern about their take in the sportfish market. Take for example the amount of White Sturgeon they eat at Bonneville Dam. It would be nice for them to step up and have a few controlled hunts to thin numbers, although the public outcry would be substantial.
from my understanding sealions were not in the Columbia river until the damns, so they haven't always been here. i don't know the significance of what they do to the salmon and steelhead but i know they are destroying the sturgeon
Thats what I understand as well. I think that is the main concern from the public is them sitting at the dams picking off the sturgeon and fish going up the ladders. I do think that needs to be managed by removal of animals, lethal if necessary. It makes no sense to inhibit the sport fishers, but not solve the wild issue caused by the construction of the dams.
Post by: teal101 on February 13, 2012, 08:13:58 AM
I never said, nor has the WDFW, that the WDFW does not support sport fishing. What I said is that the WDFW's main goal is native fish recovery. Everything else will take a back seat to the native fish recovery goals. The WDFW obviously supports sport fishing by allowing you a season :rolleyes: Their main goal, fish, bird, or big game, is management of the resource so we all have an opportunity at harvest or sightseeing dependent upon our venue. The Methow and the Sol Duc are VERY different rivers. Again I implore you to take up some reading on this subject. You will begin to understand why the Methow is a poor choice for a wild Steelhead recovery river and why the Sol Duc is a great choice. Furthermore, you can still fish the Sol Duc, catch as many as you want, and carefully release them, I fail to see where your argument is here. First you want to bonk as many fish as you can, now you want to catch and release carefully wild fish. Make up your mind, your argument lacks cohesion.
Totally disagree with all your comments. There are many books out there that show how history was recorded and what actually recorded. I make NO impact to the fishing of WDFW if I take my money some where else. I just started fishing last October so how would my comment shake the foundation of funding of WDFW? I personally do not see it. Ahhh the wolf study.. That is apples to apples if you would consider that there are Zealots in the Wolf introductions. I have read thread after thread on the wolf topic. The wolf Zealots do not care about the data and they willfully ignore data. So I contest there are Zealots in this fish debate. They could be the Tribes, fly fishermen, elitest fishermen, or tree huggers.
Your comment regarding the WDFW plan for the Steelhead is native fish recovery, not sport fishing. I am a NEW sport fishermen as I want to catch fish like all new fishermen like to do. Now answer the question: If the WDFW does not support sport fishing why would this make sense to me? To me, the WDFW would NEED to have many rivers with hatcheries for the sport fishing in mind. Look at the Methow for the fishing, people can go over and fish and carefully let the fish go. The Sol Duc can be the same. One on the East side and one on the West side. I am all for it...My personal opinion, if the native steelhead is in such poor shape the WDFW would stop the bonking. YET, they still allow it. The Natives gillnet the heck out of the rivers and they do not see an issue or they would stop or use different type of nets. Don’t forget neither one of those groups care about the sea lions eating the fish. So until the two of these groups feel it needs attention I personally think it is not as big deal as many portray.
I am just glad those two groups have hatchery's for me to catch those fish.
As for my opinion on scientific studies, any data can be twisted and turned to whoever wants the values to come out they want it to. Look at the entire wolf model as an example. I do not have time to figure out who are the zealots in the issue of native fish verses hatchery fish.
They still allow native harvest because of people like you who just have to bonk fish or you will take your money elsewhere. If more people were management minded and would rather fish for sport other than sustenance with Steelhead this wouldnt be an issue. They cant change the natives gillnetting, there is a treaty and millions of miles of political bull*censored* to change before that happens. The Sea Lions is an interesting subject. They have always been here and always will be. Populations have risen dramatically over the past few decades and there is a growing concern about their take in the sportfish market. Take for example the amount of White Sturgeon they eat at Bonneville Dam. It would be nice for them to step up and have a few controlled hunts to thin numbers, although the public outcry would be substantial.
Comparing these studies to the wolf model is like comparing apples to a car. They are completely different in every aspect. You can see the public having issues with the wolf population before they are at management goals. You do not see the public saying there are plenty of Steelhead before management goals. I dont see how the WDFW could twist this data in their favor if they tried, while still implementing management practices. Why would they twist the data to show there are more fish than there are while implementing population increasing management practices while the public still sees no increase? This makes zero sense any way you spin it because of WDFW's actions.
There are no zealots. WDFW implemented hatcheries as a way to replenish fish lost due to the construction of the dams and over fishing. Over time they have realized due to numerous studies and field research that hatchery fish are worse for the system as a whole due to degradation of native fish populations. They are now attempting to fix these issues by either removing hatcheries or implementing new hatchery practices like those at the Sol Duc. You have to remember, the WDFW's plan for the Steelhead is native fish recovery, not sport fishing.
Post by: TheHunt on February 13, 2012, 09:48:29 AM
Ignorant yes, Zealot NO! <Humor> HA HA HA you will have to sell that to someone else as I am not buying any of that... Heck you might be one of them Zealots for all that I know. You might be one of them folks who says fish have feeling too and they cry when you hook them in the mouth. </Humor> I will stay ignorant for a while. I do not have time to read up all the fishing crap to determine who is who in the zoo. Will I get to it? YES, but my first objective is to learn to catch the darn things legally. If I cannot catch them than I should give up and find something else to do during the hunting off season.
Lately I have been spending all my time:
1. trying to figure out the access points, deciphering the regs, finding the locations which fish hold up on the Wynoochee river.
2. how to successfully catch fish when I go fishing. This is the most complicated part of fishing for me. I have read many books and I am starting to feel confident in figuring out were the fish are at in the river.
3. putting in for out of state elk hunts.
Once I start catching them and feel confident in my ability I can than spend some time reading about the fishery and how messed up or hopless, or what ever it is.
Post by: teal101 on February 13, 2012, 09:54:01 AM
Nothing has changed my argument still stands... I have only been fishing since last October. I am good to go as long as I have a place to fish, I can bonk them and take them home.
Ignorant yes, Zealot NO! <Humor> HA HA HA you will have to sell that to someone else as I am not buying any of that... Heck you might be one of them Zealots for all that I know. You might be one of them folks who says fish have feeling too and they cry when you hook them in the mouth. </Humor> I will stay ignorant for a while. I do not have time to read up all the fishing crap to determine who is who in the zoo. Will I get to it? YES, but my first objective is to learn to catch the darn things legally. If I cannot catch them than I should give up and find something else to do during the hunting off season.
Lately I have been spending all my time:
1. trying to figure out the access points, deciphering the regs, finding the locations which fish hold up on the Wynoochee river.
2. how to successfully catch fish when I go fishing. This is the most complicated part of fishing for me. I have read many books and I am starting to feel confident in figuring out were the fish are at in the river.
3. putting in for out of state elk hunts.
Once I start catching them and feel confident in my ability I can than spend some time reading about the fishery and how messed up or hopless, or what ever it is.
Your attitude says it all. Would you keep killing branch antler bulls in a unit that has poor bull elk recruitment because you can? Would you fight to help recover the population or continue to destroy it? Same exact thing, then only issue is we know an extraordinary amount more about elk than we do pacific salmon. Tight lines.
Post by: TheHunt on February 13, 2012, 10:04:21 AM
I am starting to think in your world if it is not perfect you will not participate. I am not that way.
Post by: WSU on February 13, 2012, 10:11:07 AM
Nothing has changed my argument still stands... I have only been fishing since last October. I am good to go as long as I have a place to fish, I can bonk them and take them home.
Ignorant yes, Zealot NO! <Humor> HA HA HA you will have to sell that to someone else as I am not buying any of that... Heck you might be one of them Zealots for all that I know. You might be one of them folks who says fish have feeling too and they cry when you hook them in the mouth. </Humor> I will stay ignorant for a while. I do not have time to read up all the fishing crap to determine who is who in the zoo. Will I get to it? YES, but my first objective is to learn to catch the darn things legally. If I cannot catch them than I should give up and find something else to do during the hunting off season.
Lately I have been spending all my time:
1. trying to figure out the access points, deciphering the regs, finding the locations which fish hold up on the Wynoochee river.
2. how to successfully catch fish when I go fishing. This is the most complicated part of fishing for me. I have read many books and I am starting to feel confident in figuring out were the fish are at in the river.
3. putting in for out of state elk hunts.
Once I start catching them and feel confident in my ability I can than spend some time reading about the fishery and how messed up or hopless, or what ever it is.
If you feel the need to bonk every fish then go fish in a river that is full of hatchery fish. Plain and simple, there are tons of rivers that have harvestable hatchery fish. It doesn't matter if you've fished for 40 years or 4 months. If you only want to bonk fish, go to rivers with fish in them that were made to be bonked. To shorten your learning curve, go fish the cowlitz. It has hatchery fish there for the bonking 12 months a year. You could fill freezers full if that is all you want.
I've helped you and gave you very specific advice in order to help you catch fish. You probably know that I'm not a "zealot" (whatever that is supposed to mean in this context). I like to eat fish, and dozens every year. There is no reason to be selfish and screw up one of the few remaining relatively healthy runs left just so you can bonk fish. If you feel you must "take your ball and go home" if not allowed to bonk fish on the 'duc, feel free.
Post by: Dhoey07 on February 13, 2012, 10:23:28 AM
[/quote]
I never said, nor has the WDFW, that the WDFW does not support sport fishing. What I said is that the WDFW's main goal is native fish recovery. Everything else will take a back seat to the native fish recovery goals. The WDFW obviously supports sport fishing by allowing you a season :rolleyes: Their main goal, fish, bird, or big game, is management of the resource so we all have an opportunity at harvest or sightseeing dependent upon our venue. The Methow and the Sol Duc are VERY different rivers. Again I implore you to take up some reading on this subject. You will begin to understand why the Methow is a poor choice for a wild Steelhead recovery river and why the Sol Duc is a great choice. Furthermore, you can still fish the Sol Duc, catch as many as you want, and carefully release them, I fail to see where your argument is here. First you want to bonk as many fish as you can, now you want to catch and release carefully wild fish. Make up your mind, your argument lacks cohesion.
WDFW's main goal is NOT native fish recovery. It is politics and money. If native fish recovery was the main goal, you would close every river not exceeding wild escapement goals to the sportman, tribes and commercial fishermen. That will never happen.
Post by: TheHunt on February 13, 2012, 10:44:08 AM
Nothing has changed my argument still stands... I have only been fishing since last October. I am good to go as long as I have a place to fish, I can bonk them and take them home.
Ignorant yes, Zealot NO! <Humor> HA HA HA you will have to sell that to someone else as I am not buying any of that... Heck you might be one of them Zealots for all that I know. You might be one of them folks who says fish have feeling too and they cry when you hook them in the mouth. </Humor> I will stay ignorant for a while. I do not have time to read up all the fishing crap to determine who is who in the zoo. Will I get to it? YES, but my first objective is to learn to catch the darn things legally. If I cannot catch them than I should give up and find something else to do during the hunting off season.
Lately I have been spending all my time:
1. trying to figure out the access points, deciphering the regs, finding the locations which fish hold up on the Wynoochee river.
2. how to successfully catch fish when I go fishing. This is the most complicated part of fishing for me. I have read many books and I am starting to feel confident in figuring out were the fish are at in the river.
3. putting in for out of state elk hunts.
Once I start catching them and feel confident in my ability I can than spend some time reading about the fishery and how messed up or hopless, or what ever it is.
If you feel the need to bonk every fish then go fish in a river that is full of hatchery fish. Plain and simple, there are tons of rivers that have harvestable hatchery fish. It doesn't matter if you've fished for 40 years or 4 months. If you only want to bonk fish, go to rivers with fish in them that were made to be bonked. To shorten your learning curve, go fish the cowlitz. It has hatchery fish there for the bonking 12 months a year. You could fill freezers full if that is all you want.
I've helped you and gave you very specific advice in order to help you catch fish. You probably know that I'm not a "zealot" (whatever that is supposed to mean in this context). I like to eat fish, and dozens every year. There is no reason to be selfish and screw up one of the few remaining relatively healthy runs left just so you can bonk fish. If you feel you must "take your ball and go home" if not allowed to bonk fish on the 'duc, feel free.
Post by: teal101 on February 13, 2012, 10:45:42 AM
My attitude is right on. All the poor branch antler areas are draw only and based on WDFW biologist estimates. The bull to cow ratios are well documented. The targeted areas have been diminished based on helping mule deer or other species.
I am starting to think in your world if it is not perfect you will not participate. I am not that way.
Your attitude is way off, as well as your argument. You just proved my point. There are plenty of rivers with poor wild returns that are open to hatchery fish. There are a few waters with good wild returns that allow fishing for wild fish as well as hatchery. You can still take a wild fish home from the Sol Duc if you so please.
Your last comment proves your ignorance. Really? I'll fish to the day I die for whatever I damn well please, so long as I can ethically do so. I fish for Steelhead, but not natives.
Post by: teal101 on February 13, 2012, 10:47:59 AM
I never said, nor has the WDFW, that the WDFW does not support sport fishing. What I said is that the WDFW's main goal is native fish recovery. Everything else will take a back seat to the native fish recovery goals. The WDFW obviously supports sport fishing by allowing you a season :rolleyes: Their main goal, fish, bird, or big game, is management of the resource so we all have an opportunity at harvest or sightseeing dependent upon our venue. The Methow and the Sol Duc are VERY different rivers. Again I implore you to take up some reading on this subject. You will begin to understand why the Methow is a poor choice for a wild Steelhead recovery river and why the Sol Duc is a great choice. Furthermore, you can still fish the Sol Duc, catch as many as you want, and carefully release them, I fail to see where your argument is here. First you want to bonk as many fish as you can, now you want to catch and release carefully wild fish. Make up your mind, your argument lacks cohesion.
WDFW's main goal is NOT native fish recovery. It is politics and money. If native fish recovery was the main goal, you would close every river not exceeding wild escapement goals to the sportman, tribes and commercial fishermen. That will never happen.
[/quote]
You go ahead and break Federal Law and close the tribes down. You go ahead and withstand the public revolt when you close the fishing season to all users. It's not that simple. It's called balance. So you're right it will never happen.
Post by: teal101 on February 13, 2012, 10:48:50 AM
Exactly, What rivers am I targetting? Hatchery river fish. WSU, you are right on target. Wynoochee river is a huge hatchery run. That is why I am targeting that river. BTW, Thanks for your help. I am not sure why Teal is getting his shorts in a knot.Nothing has changed my argument still stands... I have only been fishing since last October. I am good to go as long as I have a place to fish, I can bonk them and take them home.
Ignorant yes, Zealot NO! <Humor> HA HA HA you will have to sell that to someone else as I am not buying any of that... Heck you might be one of them Zealots for all that I know. You might be one of them folks who says fish have feeling too and they cry when you hook them in the mouth. </Humor> I will stay ignorant for a while. I do not have time to read up all the fishing crap to determine who is who in the zoo. Will I get to it? YES, but my first objective is to learn to catch the darn things legally. If I cannot catch them than I should give up and find something else to do during the hunting off season.
Lately I have been spending all my time:
1. trying to figure out the access points, deciphering the regs, finding the locations which fish hold up on the Wynoochee river.
2. how to successfully catch fish when I go fishing. This is the most complicated part of fishing for me. I have read many books and I am starting to feel confident in figuring out were the fish are at in the river.
3. putting in for out of state elk hunts.
Once I start catching them and feel confident in my ability I can than spend some time reading about the fishery and how messed up or hopless, or what ever it is.
If you feel the need to bonk every fish then go fish in a river that is full of hatchery fish. Plain and simple, there are tons of rivers that have harvestable hatchery fish. It doesn't matter if you've fished for 40 years or 4 months. If you only want to bonk fish, go to rivers with fish in them that were made to be bonked. To shorten your learning curve, go fish the cowlitz. It has hatchery fish there for the bonking 12 months a year. You could fill freezers full if that is all you want.
I've helped you and gave you very specific advice in order to help you catch fish. You probably know that I'm not a "zealot" (whatever that is supposed to mean in this context). I like to eat fish, and dozens every year. There is no reason to be selfish and screw up one of the few remaining relatively healthy runs left just so you can bonk fish. If you feel you must "take your ball and go home" if not allowed to bonk fish on the 'duc, feel free.
Post by: Dhoey07 on February 13, 2012, 10:51:30 AM
I never said, nor has the WDFW, that the WDFW does not support sport fishing. What I said is that the WDFW's main goal is native fish recovery. Everything else will take a back seat to the native fish recovery goals. The WDFW obviously supports sport fishing by allowing you a season :rolleyes: Their main goal, fish, bird, or big game, is management of the resource so we all have an opportunity at harvest or sightseeing dependent upon our venue. The Methow and the Sol Duc are VERY different rivers. Again I implore you to take up some reading on this subject. You will begin to understand why the Methow is a poor choice for a wild Steelhead recovery river and why the Sol Duc is a great choice. Furthermore, you can still fish the Sol Duc, catch as many as you want, and carefully release them, I fail to see where your argument is here. First you want to bonk as many fish as you can, now you want to catch and release carefully wild fish. Make up your mind, your argument lacks cohesion.
WDFW's main goal is NOT native fish recovery. It is politics and money. If native fish recovery was the main goal, you would close every river not exceeding wild escapement goals to the sportman, tribes and commercial fishermen. That will never happen.
You go ahead and break Federal Law and close the tribes down. You go ahead and withstand the public revolt when you close the fishing season to all users. It's not that simple. It's called balance. So you're right it will never happen.
[/quote]
Never said it was that simple. But don't sit there and act like wdfw has your back and gives a *censored* about you. You are asking us to trust wdfw to manage our fish and wildlife after we have seen them fail so many times in the past.
Post by: TheHunt on February 13, 2012, 11:04:39 AM
Please tell me why I should NOT be bonking hatchery steelhead on the Wynoochee.
I dont see why you feel the need to blast this decision based solely on your own selfish greed to bonk fish. :rolleyes:Exactly, What rivers am I targetting? Hatchery river fish. WSU, you are right on target. Wynoochee river is a huge hatchery run. That is why I am targeting that river. BTW, Thanks for your help. I am not sure why Teal is getting his shorts in a knot.Nothing has changed my argument still stands... I have only been fishing since last October. I am good to go as long as I have a place to fish, I can bonk them and take them home.
Ignorant yes, Zealot NO! <Humor> HA HA HA you will have to sell that to someone else as I am not buying any of that... Heck you might be one of them Zealots for all that I know. You might be one of them folks who says fish have feeling too and they cry when you hook them in the mouth. </Humor> I will stay ignorant for a while. I do not have time to read up all the fishing crap to determine who is who in the zoo. Will I get to it? YES, but my first objective is to learn to catch the darn things legally. If I cannot catch them than I should give up and find something else to do during the hunting off season.
Lately I have been spending all my time:
1. trying to figure out the access points, deciphering the regs, finding the locations which fish hold up on the Wynoochee river.
2. how to successfully catch fish when I go fishing. This is the most complicated part of fishing for me. I have read many books and I am starting to feel confident in figuring out were the fish are at in the river.
3. putting in for out of state elk hunts.
Once I start catching them and feel confident in my ability I can than spend some time reading about the fishery and how messed up or hopless, or what ever it is.
If you feel the need to bonk every fish then go fish in a river that is full of hatchery fish. Plain and simple, there are tons of rivers that have harvestable hatchery fish. It doesn't matter if you've fished for 40 years or 4 months. If you only want to bonk fish, go to rivers with fish in them that were made to be bonked. To shorten your learning curve, go fish the cowlitz. It has hatchery fish there for the bonking 12 months a year. You could fill freezers full if that is all you want.
I've helped you and gave you very specific advice in order to help you catch fish. You probably know that I'm not a "zealot" (whatever that is supposed to mean in this context). I like to eat fish, and dozens every year. There is no reason to be selfish and screw up one of the few remaining relatively healthy runs left just so you can bonk fish. If you feel you must "take your ball and go home" if not allowed to bonk fish on the 'duc, feel free.
Post by: teal101 on February 13, 2012, 11:24:55 AM
I have stated that I am targeting Wynoochee River hatchery fish. It is illegal to bonk native steelhead on the Wynoochee. Teal, I am thinking you are NUTS/INSANE!!! I will be bonking hatchery steelhead on the Wynoochee. You are still NOT happy with that.
Please tell me why I should NOT be bonking hatchery steelhead on the Wynoochee.I dont see why you feel the need to blast this decision based solely on your own selfish greed to bonk fish. :rolleyes:Exactly, What rivers am I targetting? Hatchery river fish. WSU, you are right on target. Wynoochee river is a huge hatchery run. That is why I am targeting that river. BTW, Thanks for your help. I am not sure why Teal is getting his shorts in a knot.Nothing has changed my argument still stands... I have only been fishing since last October. I am good to go as long as I have a place to fish, I can bonk them and take them home.
Ignorant yes, Zealot NO! <Humor> HA HA HA you will have to sell that to someone else as I am not buying any of that... Heck you might be one of them Zealots for all that I know. You might be one of them folks who says fish have feeling too and they cry when you hook them in the mouth. </Humor> I will stay ignorant for a while. I do not have time to read up all the fishing crap to determine who is who in the zoo. Will I get to it? YES, but my first objective is to learn to catch the darn things legally. If I cannot catch them than I should give up and find something else to do during the hunting off season.
Lately I have been spending all my time:
1. trying to figure out the access points, deciphering the regs, finding the locations which fish hold up on the Wynoochee river.
2. how to successfully catch fish when I go fishing. This is the most complicated part of fishing for me. I have read many books and I am starting to feel confident in figuring out were the fish are at in the river.
3. putting in for out of state elk hunts.
Once I start catching them and feel confident in my ability I can than spend some time reading about the fishery and how messed up or hopless, or what ever it is.
If you feel the need to bonk every fish then go fish in a river that is full of hatchery fish. Plain and simple, there are tons of rivers that have harvestable hatchery fish. It doesn't matter if you've fished for 40 years or 4 months. If you only want to bonk fish, go to rivers with fish in them that were made to be bonked. To shorten your learning curve, go fish the cowlitz. It has hatchery fish there for the bonking 12 months a year. You could fill freezers full if that is all you want.
I've helped you and gave you very specific advice in order to help you catch fish. You probably know that I'm not a "zealot" (whatever that is supposed to mean in this context). I like to eat fish, and dozens every year. There is no reason to be selfish and screw up one of the few remaining relatively healthy runs left just so you can bonk fish. If you feel you must "take your ball and go home" if not allowed to bonk fish on the 'duc, feel free.
Post by: teal101 on February 13, 2012, 11:30:37 AM
I never said, nor has the WDFW, that the WDFW does not support sport fishing. What I said is that the WDFW's main goal is native fish recovery. Everything else will take a back seat to the native fish recovery goals. The WDFW obviously supports sport fishing by allowing you a season :rolleyes: Their main goal, fish, bird, or big game, is management of the resource so we all have an opportunity at harvest or sightseeing dependent upon our venue. The Methow and the Sol Duc are VERY different rivers. Again I implore you to take up some reading on this subject. You will begin to understand why the Methow is a poor choice for a wild Steelhead recovery river and why the Sol Duc is a great choice. Furthermore, you can still fish the Sol Duc, catch as many as you want, and carefully release them, I fail to see where your argument is here. First you want to bonk as many fish as you can, now you want to catch and release carefully wild fish. Make up your mind, your argument lacks cohesion.
WDFW's main goal is NOT native fish recovery. It is politics and money. If native fish recovery was the main goal, you would close every river not exceeding wild escapement goals to the sportman, tribes and commercial fishermen. That will never happen.
You go ahead and break Federal Law and close the tribes down. You go ahead and withstand the public revolt when you close the fishing season to all users. It's not that simple. It's called balance. So you're right it will never happen.
Never said it was that simple. But don't sit there and act like wdfw has your back and gives a *censored* about you. You are asking us to trust wdfw to manage our fish and wildlife after we have seen them fail so many times in the past.
[/quote]
Yet in other areas they have succeeded. They are always going to be fighting a losing battle with anadromous fish so long as there are dams on the rivers. They are always going to be fighting the people who oppose tactics such as select harvest, which I would like to see them implement on the sea lions. Theyre going to have to fight the people who get up in arms over the closure of a hatchery because there are less fish to take home now.
The Wild Steelhead Coalition actually got the WDFW to make the OP a catch and release fishery for ALL wild Steelhead. They Mayor opposed the ruling stating that families would STARVE if they could not keep wild Steelhead. Let's disregard the fact you're allowed retention of ONE wild a year. It is garbage like that they have to contend with.
In all honesty I think they are doing an OK job at managing the fisheries, not so much the land wildlife.
Post by: TheHunt on February 13, 2012, 11:32:25 AM
I think you have painted youself in a corner. I stated in at least three post I do not care if the Sol Duc is closed and only for native steelhead. So how can that be selfish? I think you need to learn to read as well. Did you go to the same high school I went to? :dunno:
I'm thinking you need to learn how to read :rolleyes: Did I say you shouldnt be bonking hatchery fish on the Wynoochee? No I didnt. In fact I think you should bonk every damn hatchery fish you see to rid their poor genetics from the wild population. What is irritating is the fact you are so damn selfish you feel as if the state should not close down the Sol Duc hatchery so you can kill more fish instead of restoring native runs. It's pathetic, just like your attitude. Theres no point in continuing on with this seeing as that you cant even understand my points. Keep on opposing changes like this and when our future generations ask about Steelhead fishing, all we will have is fond memories of a time long ago destroyed by greed.I have stated that I am targeting Wynoochee River hatchery fish. It is illegal to bonk native steelhead on the Wynoochee. Teal, I am thinking you are NUTS/INSANE!!! I will be bonking hatchery steelhead on the Wynoochee. You are still NOT happy with that.
Please tell me why I should NOT be bonking hatchery steelhead on the Wynoochee.I dont see why you feel the need to blast this decision based solely on your own selfish greed to bonk fish. :rolleyes:Exactly, What rivers am I targetting? Hatchery river fish. WSU, you are right on target. Wynoochee river is a huge hatchery run. That is why I am targeting that river. BTW, Thanks for your help. I am not sure why Teal is getting his shorts in a knot.Nothing has changed my argument still stands... I have only been fishing since last October. I am good to go as long as I have a place to fish, I can bonk them and take them home.
Ignorant yes, Zealot NO! <Humor> HA HA HA you will have to sell that to someone else as I am not buying any of that... Heck you might be one of them Zealots for all that I know. You might be one of them folks who says fish have feeling too and they cry when you hook them in the mouth. </Humor> I will stay ignorant for a while. I do not have time to read up all the fishing crap to determine who is who in the zoo. Will I get to it? YES, but my first objective is to learn to catch the darn things legally. If I cannot catch them than I should give up and find something else to do during the hunting off season.
Lately I have been spending all my time:
1. trying to figure out the access points, deciphering the regs, finding the locations which fish hold up on the Wynoochee river.
2. how to successfully catch fish when I go fishing. This is the most complicated part of fishing for me. I have read many books and I am starting to feel confident in figuring out were the fish are at in the river.
3. putting in for out of state elk hunts.
Once I start catching them and feel confident in my ability I can than spend some time reading about the fishery and how messed up or hopless, or what ever it is.
If you feel the need to bonk every fish then go fish in a river that is full of hatchery fish. Plain and simple, there are tons of rivers that have harvestable hatchery fish. It doesn't matter if you've fished for 40 years or 4 months. If you only want to bonk fish, go to rivers with fish in them that were made to be bonked. To shorten your learning curve, go fish the cowlitz. It has hatchery fish there for the bonking 12 months a year. You could fill freezers full if that is all you want.
I've helped you and gave you very specific advice in order to help you catch fish. You probably know that I'm not a "zealot" (whatever that is supposed to mean in this context). I like to eat fish, and dozens every year. There is no reason to be selfish and screw up one of the few remaining relatively healthy runs left just so you can bonk fish. If you feel you must "take your ball and go home" if not allowed to bonk fish on the 'duc, feel free.
Post by: Dhoey07 on February 13, 2012, 12:18:06 PM
I understand your point of wanting to preserve native steelhead. There aren't very many left in WA and the sol duc is a great river to preserve them in. But the cutting a very successful hatchery, that produced fish that minimally effected wild fish is not the answer. Like a previous link i had posted, wild fish escapement has gone up in the sol duc since the implementation of the project. If they would have made their pet project on the Dickey, lyre or elwah i would be less upset.
Post by: jackmaster on February 13, 2012, 12:26:50 PM
Post by: JimmyHoffa on February 13, 2012, 12:32:21 PM
If they would have made their pet project on the Dickey, lyre or elwah i would be less upset.The elwha is getting its own pet projects, and now instead of the 325 million for the dam removal and the 16 million hatchery the feds built for the tribe they'll now be able to tack on the millions that the new lawsuits are likely to incur.
Post by: teal101 on February 13, 2012, 12:50:05 PM
Teal-
I understand your point of wanting to preserve native steelhead. There aren't very many left in WA and the sol duc is a great river to preserve them in. But the cutting a very successful hatchery, that produced fish that minimally effected wild fish is not the answer. Like a previous link i had posted, wild fish escapement has gone up in the sol duc since the implementation of the project. If they would have made their pet project on the Dickey, lyre or elwah i would be less upset.
Heres my theory on the closure. The Sol Duc has one of the highest native runs in the state. They've seen an increase in runs over the years. The increase in native fish has outweighed any negatives the hatchery fish had. They have decided to preserve this large wild run and eliminate the hatchery fish. The sole reason for the closure is how successful the wild fish are there. Now they can implement the practices used on the Sol Duc on other rivers to attempt increasing native runs. I have a feeling this isnt the last we've seen of hatcheries run this way, nor is it the last of the hatchery removal. It is preservation of the gene bank as I've heard it called. Keep this fish as isolated as possible so when they need pure wild fish for a hatchery they can get them from the Duc.
Post by: WSU on February 13, 2012, 03:26:23 PM
here is a serious question from a novice fisherman, what makes a native steelhead a native steelhead,? it cant just be the adipose fin right, cause i know a on a monday after a hard nights drinkn some hungover *censored* dont want anything to do with clipn nasty ole fish first thing in the mornin when they are lookn for the cat that crapped in their mouth :chuckle: :chuckle:
The short answer is genetics. Those fish are genetically different (which has been verified through sampling).
Post by: WSU on February 13, 2012, 03:29:10 PM
Teal-
I understand your point of wanting to preserve native steelhead. There aren't very many left in WA and the sol duc is a great river to preserve them in. But the cutting a very successful hatchery, that produced fish that minimally effected wild fish is not the answer. Like a previous link i had posted, wild fish escapement has gone up in the sol duc since the implementation of the project. If they would have made their pet project on the Dickey, lyre or elwah i would be less upset.
Wild fish do seem to be doing well on the duc. The problem is the Snider program hasn't been monitored well enough to tell if that is because of the program, in spite of the program, or independent of the program. All that is known is that it appears to be doing OK but nobody really knows, and that nearly every other broodstock program that has had sufficient study shows that broodstock programs don't work (Hoodriver being the most recent and well known study). Broodstock programs are nothing new and exist all over. There hasn't been one yet that has done what it is supposed to.