Print

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

[greyghost]

Funny you mention the Chehalis. The three times I snorkeled it from the Statlu down I noticed more wild fish ( Cutthroat ) in the Statlu than the Chehalis. I've seen pools full of wild fish in the Statlu and then none at the Chehlis confluence  I can remeber being at the base of the mini waterfall just 100 meters down from the Statlu in the Chehalis and seeing ( what seemed like ) 100's of smolts and 5 big Summer Steel in the tailout. The smolts were always at the front and the adults were always in the back. Every pool.

Probably due to the fertilization project that was done in the Statlu and a couple other creeks in the drainage as well.

On a few occasions over the years, I’ve had summer-runs absolutely destroy smolts that I have hooked by accident while fishing for summer-runs and have observed them in the stomach contents of summers that I have harvested. If I was a smolt, I wouldn’t be hanging around the adults as well!

[RalphH]

the Skeena, Dean, Bella Coola all have no hatchery production. They seem to be fairly well to reasonably well. While it would be hard to find a stream that hasn't been seriously affected by the blob phenomena, habitat degradation and net fishery interception, the information in John McMillan's presentation presents a powerful case that hatcheries reduce diversity among steelhead,  that have been able to exist for millions of years alongside much larger populations of salmon because of their diverse life histories.

The more disturbing facts are the number of rivers with once healthy populations of wild steelhead, that after 5 or more generations of large scale hatchery production, saw massive collapses of both wild and artifically produced stock and these have not recovered despite hatchery augmentation. Quite the opposite, hatchery production has in a good many cases been shut down since there are not enough wild fish to support them.

[Hike_and_fish]

I do notice with the Chehalis that when I have a 4 + summer run day, they all are wild fish. Last year and the year prior I would average 1 hatch to 3 wilds but this year I've probably caught 16 fish ? More if you add in my friends that I go with and they've all had the adipose intact. Is this because they simply not clipped ? I dont know. The max is intact as well. Normally they clip both. We had a 6 Steely day 2 months ago and all of them were wilds ( or not marked hatchery fish ). If these are wilds, then they have really taken quite well to this system.

[Dave]

I think you maybe should review that part of the presentation. Well fed smolts may be more inclined to remain in stream and interbreed with wild steelhead

My take on this was he meant juveniles might not smolt if enough food was available to make going to the sea unnecessary; ie the Thompson or other productive rivers.

 Chilliwack juveniles are released on a set day, as their space and water are needed for the next batch of steelhead in the pipeline. They are released downstream of the Vedder bridge to avoid interaction as much as possible with wild steelhead … downstream of the Vedder bridge is, for various reasons, not good habitat for wild steelhead juveniles, so any interactions are minimal.  The fish are released nearly 2 months before the river opens to angling but on opening day, many are caught by fishermen and of course they have been heron and merganser food all the while.

Imo, these fish juveniles aren’t sticking around because the food is good (you’d be hard pressed to find any invertebrates in the lower river nowadays), they’re still here because they haven’t smolted and decided to migrate.  I’m not sure how this problem could be solved, with the hatchery rearing protocols in place now.

The point I'm making is if we are to continue with this hatchery program, and I would bet a pension cheque it will continue, wild steelhead diversity be damned, lets do it to the best of our ability.

[Roderick]

I suppose I should digress on this a bit.

Think about the evolution of salmonids.  They all originated as fresh water species, basically trout.  Because they were successful, almost too successful, the populations grew to a size where they started running out of food. Competition within the species would result in some individuals hogging all the food. Those fish would dominate the fresh water environment.  The less successful individuals would be forced to move in to brackish, estuarial waters in order to access the (much larger) food supply in the ocean.  Those that adapted to the salt conditions grew fat but, because of their fresh water origins, couldn't spawn in the ocean and had to return to the rivers and lakes to spawn. They were much bigger then the 'residuals' and dominated the spawning grounds. 

Sometimes they would get lost and spawn in the cold, low-productivity rivers that wouldn't normally be able to support a year-round trout population. Because there was no competition for spawning grounds or fry rearing territory, they all grew into fry.  They might stay for the summer, but winter would force them to the ocean to find food and survive. This is why some steelhead rivers have no residual rainbows, or in the case of sockeye, no kokanee.

Bottom line is this: more productive environments, like a hatchery, encourage residualization. It's not a problem because they are accessing different food supplies and the larger anadromous versions dominate the spawning grounds. 

[Roderick]

"They are released downstream of the Vedder bridge "

They started doing this what, 3,4,5 years ago? Presumably more smolts survive to get to the ocean.  And how has that worked out?

"once healthy populations of wild steelhead, that after 5 or more generations of large scale hatchery production, saw massive collapse"

Just what happened on the Cap... but not because of the hatchery.  Happened in California too... when they pulled all the water from the rivers for agriculture. 

[RalphH]

Dave, et al. I can't see where I said the hatcheries should be closed or done away with. However some of you regard the hatchery programs as they exist as some sort of sacred cow, carved in stone (if I can mix my metaphors) that can't be altered no matter what is learned about their short comings.

Personally I think if the program as it exists continues long enough along with the growing development above the crossing, the decline in steelhead will take care of it all on it's own. It is being repeated all up and down the coast.

In California much of the loss of wild steelhead populations can be related to dam construction and development, including agriculture. Climate change hasn't helped either. For the most part hatcheries haven't prevented this collapse though some rivers have recovered with little or no hatchery assistance. The Smith is one example. Declines in Oregon (ie the Willamette) and Washington (The Stilligumish) have not been stopped let alone reversed.

On the Island much of the once fine steelheading in many rivers is becoming an increasingly distant memory. Hatchery programs got rolling their in the late 70s and 80s but by the late 90s came alarming declines in numbers. Most of those programs are no more or limited. Even the Stamp the most artificially enhanced winter run in the Province is a shadow of what its once was.

Anyone who has read some of the available literature from the 1st half of the last century knows that steelhead runs were not just more numerous but more diverse than today. Homesteaders reported fall steelhead runs in some mainland streams. I have a letter from the Haney Fish and Game club that reported the Alouettes had a considerable run in late November through December. The Campbell (on the Island) had a run of Spring to (late April through June) of 'half pounders'  (1 to 4lbs) that was still around in 70s. Haig Brown documented these fish. They are gone now, totally disappeared. Should we surprised the late November December component of the Chilliwack is disappearing as well?

[Dave]

Ralph, I think our dogs are chasing the same coon.

[Roderick]

What really drives me nuts is us humans trying to apply human values to fish spawning. 

The strategy that fish use, successful over millions of years, is to produce as many fertilized eggs as possible and leave them to survive on their own without any nurturing by the adults. A very low percentage survives.  Humans have a small number of children and take care of them till they are adult enough to survive on their own. A high percentage survives.  Very different strategies. 

Hatcheries try to apply the human strategy to fish.  We take care of them, protect them from predators, feed them, place them in the river where we think they will survive the best, etc., etc. But we only hatch a small number and hope that a higher percentage survives.

The emphasis should be on producing as many eyed eggs as possible and placing them in the river, perhaps as alevin or un-fed fry, where they would naturally be.  The percentage survival would be lower but the number of returning adults should be higher. And they wouldn't have the epigenetic changes associated with tank raised fish.

[wildmanyeah]

He said that hatcheries increase abundance in the video

I’m not sure how much brood is taken for the c/v but I do know that more hatch fish are caught in  Seasonal derby then the parental brood taken.

That means with the help of the hatchery even with really poor ocean survival more adults return then there parents.

This is no so in a wild population with really poor ocean survival they can and do fail to replace themselves.

That is why I support the idea of using hatchery brood and running it like the coho fishery on the C/V. You get the benefit of the increased abundance from the hatchery and you are not taking wild fish for brood.

[avid angler]

I don’t see that working, the quality of the hatchery fish would decline badly over time. The more times you spawn hatchery fish from hatcheries the worse off the offspring are. Not to mention good luck collecting that brood stock on the vedder lol. But if the people commenting actually fished vedder steelhead they would actually know it’s not a viable option.

 I know it’s not as good as true wild spawners but I think a decent number of hatchery fish survive the gauntlet and spawn naturally. Being only once removed from wild stock I think they produce their own “wild” off spring. Which compensates for the wild brood fish taken. I think better protection of upper river spawning grounds as well as more habitat work is a better solution. The hatchery program produces a ton of extra fish to catch for sport anglers in literally the only steelhead fishery in the lower mainland with enough fish and holding water to produce good results all season long in all water conditions.

 The guys who aren’t catching as many now as they were 10 years ago (John Werring) are just not adapting to the new higher pressured, more challenging vedder River steelhead fishery.

[CohoJake]

I likes the idea from the video (on the Yakima river) of capturing and re-conditioning female kelts so they are likely to make a second spawning run - that is a real way to increase eggs in the system, which is one of the big limiting factors on numbers of steelhead.  Anything you do is going to have an impact on genetics, but that seems like a smaller impact than hatchery programs.

[Dave]

Here is a link to Bob Hooton's latest blog regarding Vedder steelhead

http://steelheadvoices.com/?p=1846&fbclid=IwAR2G8eYrcGq6oqS36oIkUKODtaios_RVnAaETu0xlxOd6v03M5GlyAdqaVA

[RalphH]

I likes the idea from the video (on the Yakima river) of capturing and re-conditioning female kelts so they are likely to make a second spawning run - that is a real way to increase eggs in the system, which is one of the big limiting factors on numbers of steelhead.  Anything you do is going to have an impact on genetics, but that seems like a smaller impact than hatchery programs.

... that is a truly innovative idea that can be done in existing hatcheries!

As far as hatcheries increasing abundance - they certainly do but in many cases that's limited to a half dozen to a dozen generations at most. Hatcheries reduce survival % and in a period of low ocean survival generally the advantage diminishes or even disappears. At the same time hatcheries reduce diversity.

As long as the Chilliwack hatchery program continues to work why close it? At the same time it is likely far more important to protect and enhancement habitat in the upper valley than to increase hatchery production. It's a matter of what is the smartest place to place extra money.

[skaha]

--each system needs a prescription with objectives clearly stated and a monitoring plan to measure if the plan is working or needs adjustment. There is no easy fix, especially when we cannot even agree on the desired outcomes.