Print

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

[GENERAL-SHERMAN]

So, you're assuming that people are lying to creel surveyors then?

"Analysis of 2018-19 creel survey revealed that approximately 58% of hatchery steelhead landed were released, 50% of which were released specifically because the angler wanted to continue angling that day. In addition, 25% of respondents who claim to routinely release hatchery"

I know a number of people that release hatchery fish near the start of a day to keep angling, but would gladly retain that same fish after a few hours out/ near the end of the day. The 2/ day has existed on the island for a long time without issue.

Once again, for the last time, biologists often will make decisions based on creel. The question should be, "would you rather allow this regulation change, or potentially lose the program (that isn't being "utilized") outright?"

Honestly I don't care what the creel surveys say. Like others have stated if that is all we have to go on then we are in trouble. How many times does or can a fish bite in a day? How many people catch the same fish over and over sometimes within minutes or hours or days in the same run or stretch of river. Its happened to me more times than I can count. Maybe some people like to stroke their own ego say they hooked 2 hatchery steelhead that day releasing 1 hatchery when its the same fish.Or somebody comes along in the afternoon and kills that fish. bottom line fishermen like to tell a story .
 
Many of these catch and release anglers you speak of including members of this forum will likely account for a very small percentage of the total number of anglers. As well as only a small percent of those anglers will account for a large catch rate per person .
 
Too many variables to put total faith in creel survey. the 2 fish a day thing honestly wont bother nor affect me. I would just like to see more people especially beginners with opportunity to catch fish. I don't think changing the rules will affect the outcome. There is enough pressure on the C/V that somebody else would likely catch that second fish regardless of a 1 or 2 bag limit. the yearly limit would be better to increase as many anglers can easily catch that many hatchery fish monthly from January or at least February on.

 I agree with 100 percent of what you speak including the egg planting or re organizing hatchery programs to put more time into such things. these hatchery fish are there too be killed period. But regardless of bag limits many hatchery fish will still be shooting through the system unhooked or unlanded. Total loss of a program would be shitty for sure as unlikely as that seems. I don't know if this has been said as I have not read through this whole thread but the seals at the mouth of the river are as big of a problem as the hatcheries not being bonked. When the number of pairs being seen spawning in the upper sections year after year has been declining as it has, every seal culled at or near vedder mouth would have a very positive affect for wild populations.   

[wizard]

How long has the steelhead hatchery program been implemented on the chilliwack? Just how "wild" are these fish now, to begin with? Still many fine specimens of both "wild" and hatchery fish defying all odds to come back into the system. To me, a returning fish in today's river and ocean conditions has proven itself worthy of carrying on their genes.
Also, what kind of impact is the ongoing clear cutting in the upper reaches effecting spawning habitat I wonder.
2 a day means significantly more wilds being caught, inevitably leading to more mortality. Closing above tamihi means those "problematic" hatchery fish have zero chance to be taken out of gene pool who continue above the bridge..either way I don't see how either proposed changes significantly impacts the goal of..what is the objective of the proposals again?
I think 1 per day, 20 per year should be considered.

[Morty]

shifting the topic away from hatchery fish for a moment. 
If the objective is to protect and increase the population of wild fish, then I think there should be new thinking on what "bait" is allowed.  Especially considering that steelhead continue to live on after spawning.  Keep in mind what is being done re. lead shot and bird hunting.

 * There is evidence of steelhead being caught that have multiple baits in their gut
 * Borax and some other bait cures have been proven to be poisonous to fish (especially in the concentrations that exist in 'cured': egg, deli-shrimp, and Ghost Shrimp)
 * although steel hooks have been known to dissolve in a fishes system, many synthetic: worms, eggs, shrimp, and other artificial baits will not

I see an opportunity for either: an additional regulation, or peer agreement by those fishing the river, to not use baits that will harm fish that swallow that bait and either: shake the hook, or get released.
Also and opportunity for someone, or some company, to develop and promote successful baits that do not harm steelhead.  (maybe even benefit their health )

[RalphH]

if there is one this I have gotten out of this discussion is the difficulty there is in making good decisions on such a limited knowledge base. Most everything that's been said makes sense but do we know enough to make policy and regulations that benefit wild steelhead? We don't know to what extent wild and hatchery steelhead interactions may have affected the wild steelhead in the river. We don't even have genetic base data to determine if the wild fish of 2021 have been significantly alternated since 1970 (to pick a date). We don't even have much of a grasp to what extent hatchery fish spawning naturally in the river are contributing to returns of wild fish.

There has been little or no serious study of steelhead for 20 years or more and most of what took place before that was pretty basic and quite possibly now out of date.

[Dave]

if there is one this I have gotten out of this discussion is the difficulty there is in making good decisions on such a limited knowledge base. Most everything that's been said makes sense but do we know enough to make policy and regulations that benefit wild steelhead? We don't know to what extent wild and hatchery steelhead interactions may have affected the wild steelhead in the river. We don't even have genetic base data to determine if the wild fish of 2021 have been significantly alternated since 1970 (to pick a date). We don't even have much of a grasp to what extent hatchery fish spawning naturally in the river are contributing to returns of wild fish.

There has been little or no serious study of steelhead for 20 years or more and most of what took place before that was pretty basic and quite possibly now out of date.

Another good post Ralph.
I agree we have limited data to make decisions - buck and I have been saying it for years. I said in an earlier post it's time to do another telemetry study, with a few add ons.  I know the provincial people would be all over this idea, as they know the bottlenecks.  The trick is going to be finding funds for a multi year study, so as in most things governmental, some group has to take the lead and champion the idea.

[Rodney]

I personally think finding the funds and volunteers are the easiest tasks to execute these needed projects. It comes down to having the right person to lead the initiatives. You build it, people will come.

Sounds like a great retirement project for you Dave.

[Dave]

I appreciate your confidence in me, and 5 years ago I would have jumped at this ... but I don't have the energy now to be the lead 
You're right Rod, the money would come if enough people pushed for it and I would be happy to assist someone, anyone, to take this on.

[Hike_and_fish]

shifting the topic away from hatchery fish for a moment. 
If the objective is to protect and increase the population of wild fish, then I think there should be new thinking on what "bait" is allowed.  Especially considering that steelhead continue to live on after spawning.  Keep in mind what is being done re. lead shot and bird hunting.

 * There is evidence of steelhead being caught that have multiple baits in their gut
 * Borax and some other bait cures have been proven to be poisonous to fish (especially in the concentrations that exist in 'cured': egg, deli-shrimp, and Ghost Shrimp)
 * although steel hooks have been known to dissolve in a fishes system, many synthetic: worms, eggs, shrimp, and other artificial baits will not

I see an opportunity for either: an additional regulation, or peer agreement by those fishing the river, to not use baits that will harm fish that swallow that bait and either: shake the hook, or get released.
Also and opportunity for someone, or some company, to develop and promote successful baits that do not harm steelhead.  (maybe even benefit their health )

I agree. I remeber seeing a study not that long ago ( came out of Washington ) that talked about thr negative effects of cured baits on resident trout. I'm all for a bait ban myself. I think it'll really help native trout and Char populations that's for sure. Everyday fishermen lose their chemical roe to the river OR just simply chuck it in only to uave it go down stream and inhaled by other species. I know that the bait ban argument for the Chilliwack river doesn't recive a welcoming discussion but I'd definitely like to see some detailed science behind a bait ban and any positive effects it may have.

[wildmanyeah]

I agree. I remeber seeing a study not that long ago ( came out of Washington ) that talked about thr negative effects of cured baits on resident trout. I'm all for a bait ban myself. I think it'll really help native trout and Char populations that's for sure. Everyday fishermen lose their chemical roe to the river OR just simply chuck it in only to uave it go down stream and inhaled by other species. I know that the bait ban argument for the Chilliwack river doesn't recive a welcoming discussion but I'd definitely like to see some detailed science behind a bait ban and any positive effects it may have.

Short floating roe has been highly promoted as an alternative method to snagging.  The use of snagging techniques would probably increase with a bait ban.

[Hike_and_fish]

Short floating roe has been highly promoted as an alternative method to snagging.  The use of snagging techniques would probably increase with a bait ban.

I think that's a knuckle dragging argument. Ban roe and everyone will snag. Totaly not the case. Its a sort of threat. Many areas of the province have implemented bait bans with great success.

[redside1]

 * Borax and some other bait cures have been proven to be poisonous to fish [i
 

the state of Oregon already did this study and forced bait cure companies like Pro Cure and Pautzke's to reformulate their products to cause less harm and be deemed safe (or safer) for fish in general. it happened maybe 5 years ago or so.

[RalphH]

It's sodium sulphite cures that have that issue. I don't know how that was addressed but in Oregon the recommendation was to remove sulphites from eggs cures altogether. They did find that the maximum safe concentration of sulphites per kg of eggs is 12 grams which still would have about a10% mortality among salmon smolts if ingested. I haven't bought commercial cures in years but recall they never mentioned on the label what was in the cure and in what concentrations.

More info here: https://www.dfw.state.or.us/agency/commission/minutes/11/09_sept/Exhibit%20D_Attachment%202_Memo%20to%20Egg%20Cure%20Industry%20from%20B%20McIntosh_072911.pdf

[wildmanyeah]

I think that's a knuckle dragging argument. Ban roe and everyone will snag. Totaly not the case. Its a sort of threat. Many areas of the province have implemented bait bans with great success.

Fair enough but I don’t no if any examples in bc where a bait ban has made a lick of difference in the stocks status. Typically a bit ban is followed by a complete  closure years down the line.

[RalphH]

Fair enough but I don’t no if any examples in bc where a bait ban has made a lick of difference in the stocks status. Typically a bit ban is followed by a complete  closure years down the line.

The 'lick of difference' may be correct but not the bait ban being typically followed by a complete closure down the line. All summer run steelhead rivers  on the Island have a bait ban and have for many years. Almost all have remained open to fishing. Ditto with many streams in the Skeena Region and the Squamish. The Thompson bait ban had zip to do with saving the saving the steelhead . It was about the only river in BC with an important summer run steelhead run that didn't have a bait ban.

[ribolovac02]

https://youtu.be/H0lwCihC_uc
I know it’s not stealhead , I know it’s not in Canada , but I’m sure it’s enough proof that salmonids hatchery and wild spawn together , others might think otherwise , but I believe same happens in our waters with stealhead , look closely lots of hatchery in there