Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[bkk]

Also lets see what happens to wild stocks on an urban river like Chilliwack without hatcheries given oceans are warming at alarming rate, spawning beds are getting mined out, droughts, forests up river are getting clear cut, clay silting over spawning beds, people dumping garbage not to mention asbestos, urban sprawl, fish farms, invasives like bass in sumas, loss of riparian, more and more people using and abusing the resource etc... all those factors and more are getting worse year by year.  Something to keep in mind..

If you want to see what it will look like, just look at the Squamish system. Awful! Mamquam / Ashlu = a hand full of fish. Upper Squamish is less than 200 fish . Cheakamus is the best of the bunch but it only has maybe 400 fish on a good year. So if you just leave it to Mother Nature there is no garantee to it will recover. No steelhead fish culture ( fed fry releases, no smolts ) on the Squamish system since 1992 ( with the exception of the 2 years impacted by the CN Rail chemical spill ) and things are much worse than back in the 80's and 90's. With the types of floods we see up here and all of the associated gravel and habitat movements, I don't see it recovering with out fish culture help. There has been significant habitat works as well but they are non viable in large rivers that move around a lot. Now we can add another 1+ million people to the lower mainland in the next 20 years and you can guess what the likely long term impacks are going to be.

[clarkii]

If you want to see what it will look like, just look at the Squamish system. Awful! Mamquam / Ashlu = a hand full of fish. Upper Squamish is less than 200 fish . Cheakamus is the best of the bunch but it only has maybe 400 fish on a good year. So if you just leave it to Mother Nature there is no garantee to it will recover. No steelhead fish culture ( fed fry releases, no smolts ) on the Squamish system since 1992 ( with the exception of the 2 years impacted by the CN Rail chemical spill ) and things are much worse than back in the 80's and 90's. With the types of floods we see up here and all of the associated gravel and habitat movements, I don't see it recovering with out fish culture help. There has been significant habitat works as well but they are non viable in large rivers that move around a lot. Now we can add another 1+ million people to the lower mainland in the next 20 years and you can guess what the likely long term impacks are going to be.

Lol you make me laugh.

Correlation does not necessarily mean causation.  There has been a severe decrease in global pirate numbers from the 1700s, and a marked increase in atmospheric CO2. Did pirate numbers decrease just because of climate change?

[big_fish]

Lol you make me laugh.

Correlation does not necessarily mean causation.  There has been a severe decrease in global pirate numbers from the 1700s, and a marked increase in atmospheric CO2. Did pirate numbers decrease just because of climate change?

Young grasshopper lol... You should find out who bkk is first....

[clarkii]

Young grasshopper lol... You should find out who bkk is first....

And he should look outside the lower mainland to a legendary system called the Thompson.  I don't see him talking about how that steelhead run has declined.  But then again it does not fit his model.

[bkk]

And he should look outside the lower mainland to a legendary system called the Thompson.  I don't see him talking about how that steelhead run has declined.  But then again it does not fit his model.

And what model is that? All I said is that the Squamish steelhead will most likely not recover as things are currently. I have been listening to people go on about what to do on the Thompson for over 30 years and the only thing that has happened there is the fish stocks have gotten worse every year. No one can agree on what to do. What are we down to now - 400 fish? Lots of problems and not all of them related to habitat. When you don't have enough fish to seed the habitat that is there now, building more habitat won't solve the issue. The Province has no real interest to doing anything as it will cost money. Just look at how few resources they put toward steelhead in Region 2 - one dedicated staff member based in Surrey. So why would I have a plan, the Provincial govt. do not.

[buck]

So Clarkii what's your big plan for the Vedder? In a perfect world we would not have to have hatcheries and all the fish caught would be from wild progeny.
Looking at other systems on the west coast that do not have hatchery augmentation, these systems are  all hanging on by a thread. As bkk said just look at
the Thompson as an example. No plan, no money no fish. A few more cycles and they can kiss the Thompson good bye.
Having caught a few hatchery and wild steelhead I can say that I can not tell the difference in the fighting ability of hatchery fish to their wild counterpart.
Yes I have heard guys say as soon as they hook a fish they can tell the difference!  Not from my experience.
In future, if we want our grand kids to have the ability to catch salmon and steelhead, artificial propagation is a necessity!

 
Bkk:  Check out Dr. Ernest L. Brannon's paper on Hatchery Genetic Risks and Benefits. A good read and gives a new perspective on genetic concerns.

[Dave]

Buck and I were fortunate to have Ernie Brannon as our supervisor way back when ...
here is the link buck suggested ..

http://www.piscatorialpursuits.com/forum/ubbthreads.php/topics/293935/Re_Salmon_Steelhead_Hatchery_F.html

[swimmingwiththefishes]

So Clarkii what's your big plan for the Vedder? In a perfect world we would not have to have hatcheries and all the fish caught would be from wild progeny.
Looking at other systems on the west coast that do not have hatchery augmentation, these systems are  all hanging on by a thread. As bkk said just look at
the Thompson as an example. No plan, no money no fish. A few more cycles and they can kiss the Thompson good bye.
Having caught a few hatchery and wild steelhead I can say that I can not tell the difference in the fighting ability of hatchery fish to their wild counterpart.
Yes I have heard guys say as soon as they hook a fish they can tell the difference!  Not from my experience.
In future, if we want our grand kids to have the ability to catch salmon and steelhead, artificial propagation is a necessity!
Bkk:  Check out Dr. Ernest L. Brannon's paper on Hatchery Genetic Risks and Benefits. A good read and gives a new perspective on genetic concerns.

How about we look to how successful the Americans have been with their hatchery programs....oh wait...hhmmm...they're actually discontinuing a whole bunch of them because their seen as detrimental to wild stocks and a waste of money because the returns on these fish are so poor.

Doesn't make sense to spend a ton of money on what ends up being mostly seal and cormorant food.

Okay back to the main point of this thread....anyone got some river conditions?

[cas]

So Clarkii what's your big plan for the Vedder? In a perfect world we would not have to have hatcheries and all the fish caught would be from wild progeny.
Looking at other systems on the west coast that do not have hatchery augmentation, these systems are  all hanging on by a thread.

I would not go as far as saying ALL of these systems are hanging on by a thread, as this is a completely false statement. I would approach it as MOST systems are struggling. There are many completely WILD streams that are doing quite well under the circumstances we face today on planet earth. Not like numbers we had seen in the 80's, but there are a lot more than you may think, some in some very urbanized areas, and remote areas of BC. Although like many have stated, the only thing one has to do is do a bit of reading. Placing hatchery steelhead in streams has proven fatal to most wild fish in most systems. That being said, one strange phenomenon (not great by any means) is the Chilliwack-Vedder system that does see ok numbers of Wild fish with Hatchery augmentation. We should take a look at what is happening down south in areas such as Washington, Oregon, and Cali. A good majority of things are not looking so hot for wild fish, and they have seemingly decimated a majority of their Wild Stocks. I have seen people towing with the notion about the Thompson needing a hatchery? That is just ridiculous. Let's take a step back people, and realize some of the REAL issues Wild Steelhead face. Commercial interception, ocean survival, ocean temperatures, loss of habitat, etc. etc. More things need to be solved before people just start throwing out the notion that hatchery fish are the answer, because it is not. Once you take the hatchery fish away, you are left with nothing but a Wild Run needing to rebuild itself.

[Every Day]

they're actually discontinuing a whole bunch of them because their seen as detrimental to wild stocks and a waste of money because the returns on these fish are so poor.

The American situation is VERY different.

They have been using chambers creek steelhead to stock every system forever. These fish are inbred hatchery populations, that all come from one system. They are not the same as taking wild broodstock from each individual river. Broodstock is practically putting wild fish into  the system with a clipped fin - not detrimental to genetics or anything else other than the short hatchery rearing time. The chambers stock is problematic, as you are mixing genetics from different rivers, and they've been so inbred for so long that you'll obviously have some problems. 

I personally don't think hatchery supplementation is the way to make stocks recover, but I wouldn't say that hatchery fish are the problem here. As other have mentioned - commercial bycatch, gravel disturbances, logging, chemical/rail/oil spills, ocean conditions, etc are the things to blame. Getting rid of hatcheries will not cause a huge increase in numbers, and anyone that thinks it will have no idea what they are talking about. A bunch of island systems have been hatchery free for a long, long time now, and very few have recovered much, if at all.

[clarkii]

So Clarkii what's your big plan for the Vedder? In a perfect world we would not have to have hatcheries and all the fish caught would be from wild progeny.
Looking at other systems on the west coast that do not have hatchery augmentation, these systems are  all hanging on by a thread. As bkk said just look at
the Thompson as an example. No plan, no money no fish. A few more cycles and they can kiss the Thompson good bye.
Having caught a few hatchery and wild steelhead I can say that I can not tell the difference in the fighting ability of hatchery fish to their wild counterpart.
Yes I have heard guys say as soon as they hook a fish they can tell the difference!  Not from my experience.
In future, if we want our grand kids to have the ability to catch salmon and steelhead, artificial propagation is a necessity!

You won't like the answer (as will most here ) but I'd like to see the kill fishery (and hatchery program) on that river gone.  However before that I'd like to see an analysis on the relative pressure pretty fish caused by the hatchery program along with the derby (I understand the social aspect of it) over that with just a wild fish population (would need modelling which of course would not be totally accurate). 

[Wiseguy]

You won't like the answer (as will most here ) but I'd like to see the kill fishery (and hatchery program) on that river gone.  However before that I'd like to see an analysis on the relative pressure pretty fish caused by the hatchery program along with the derby (I understand the social aspect of it)

The Cowichan has closed their hatchery Steelhead program. It has not lessened the angling pressure. It is just as crowded as ever. Most anglers fish Steelhead for the pure pleasure it brings to the soul. It is not a meat fishery and never will be.

[Steelhawk]

What will happen to the wild fish population if the C/V system has no more hatchery program for steelhead? Will it increase the wild fish population or decrease? I am leaning on the later. Reason? Human weakness! There are all walks of life out there among the steelheading population. Some won't keep or eat steelhead, some won't mind a fresh fish once in a while, and most can't catch anything to begin with and will be tempted to poach any fish caught.

With hatchery fish being present in the river, most steelheaders of any conscience and ethics will release a wild steelhead without hesitation, hoping on catching a hatch eventually before the end of the day. Holding that hope, they can be releasing multiple wild fish (especially in the upper) without a blink. But without any prospect of a hatchery fish, even if a small % of steelheaders are tempted to poach a wild fish for dinner (because they won't hold on the hope of catching a hatch after releasing a wild fish), then the overall effect of wild-fish only fishery on a heavily fished urban river like the C/V system will be negative to the wild fish population. We will need a lot more C/Os on the river any day to keep poaching out of the system. But the reality may be that C/Os don't spend as much time on the wild systems because there are fewer 'meat' fishermen to catch there, and most wild-only fishermen are dedicated conservationists. So with less enforcement, won't a wild only system attract the poachers, especially on the popular & urban C/V system? Is that a possible reason that most of the wild-only systems are seeing less and less fish yearly? Just guessing, lol.

[typhoon]

Poaching on summer-runs on a smaller trib east of Hope has had exactly that effect.

[wizard]

imo the outcome of no hatchery supplementation especially on system like Chilliwack is rather predictable, especially in today's day and age.  There are too many negative factors for these fish to deal with from global warming to habitat destruction to poaching so on and so on...negative factors are continually getting worse, numbers will continue to dwindle.  Long term stock survival and viability may very well depend on responsible hatchery augmentation even whether we fish for them or not. 

There are responsible ways and irresponsible ways to go about it.  I can't help but look at many prime hatchery specimens that return to the river and think to myself this thing has lived it's life from fry or smolt in river to ocean and back avoiding everything thrown in it's way has overcome all odds, to me, it's proven it's worth as a worthy fish to pass on it's genes.  I will not automatically subscribe to the idea that because it was given a slight head start being hatched in hatchery that it is automatically going to harm or detriment the gene pool.  Imo these fish need and will more so need the head start as time and conditions from river to ocean make it harder for the species to thrive.

Folks will point to other jurisdictions and say, look, this is why hatcheries don't work but I think most will agree not every hatchery programs were done thoughtfully or responsibly and those irresponsible hatchery programs shouldn't decide the fate of successful or potential successful programs everywhere else. Everything said I am not a professional or a scientist just an avid, concerned outdoorsman who's thoughts and perspectives based on my own observations. 

I think it would be a shame if we would just shut a hatchery program down due to concern it would have on detrimental impact on wild stock while other more potential serious factors continue and worsen as time goes on ultimately sealing the species fate, hatcheries or not...