Northwest Fishing Reports

I am a geek for reading... So I was digging through the WDFW documents about salmon and steelhead "recovery" on their website and am reminded of what a depserate and sad state of affairs we find our local rivers in. Here's a great link if you want to get into a bad mood - http://wdfw.wa.gov/publications/00150/puget_snd_esu.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; . It highlights the fact that our steelhead have been harvested at a rate of 60 - 80% of run totals for years until what was left of them was "managed" into the ground.
In 1895 in the first year records were kept on fish catch, it was thought that about 40,000 steelhead were caught and canned in the stilly and perhaps as many as 60,000 in the Snohomish. To see that 10,000+ were being caught still up through the 70's and 80's in the bigger systems with only a few thousand escaping is appalling. This pattern is true of other species as well. (i.e. chinook) Fish science in Washington amounts to lets hope we don't kill so many that less come back than last year.
Now that the state and co-managing tribes have allowed this debocile to happen, they simply blame habitat as the underlying cause. While habitat destruction is undeniably a factor in fish decline, it is simply breath taking to think that we could ever expect robust fish returns or recovery to come from such meager escapements that have been the norm since record keeping began. On good years when flooding isn't bad and ocean conditions are right, it is possible to have great returns come from a realatively small brood year, however it is nieve to think that would always be the case.
Managers use such great terms as "upper management threshold" to justify agressive fisheries. What this basically means is that the scientist believe that after a certain amount of fish are allowed to spawn, any more than that number don't contribute to more fish returning because of lack of habitat, competition, etc... However, dead fish and fish eggs in our creeks and rivers are vital to the health of our watersheds and the animals that live there, as well as to the future generations of salmonoids that will hatch in these creeks. On exceptional flood years when only 3% of eggs survive, having too many eggs in the river means ensuring fish returning on the next brood cycle.
Steelhead populations have crashed in the last ten years. This is not because habitat has disapeared at an alarming rate in the last ten years... it has been continually marginalized for years. This is because the state and tribes have managed our fish on a a paper thin margin for years and conditions have not been favorable for fish in recent years. Even in areas with realatively sound habitat (Olympic Puninsula for example) fish populations are down... and yet we can still harvest them.
Another great of example of great management is our local chum salmon. Ten years ago chum runs were at some of the highest levels in recent decades. They have been managing these "healthy" fish populations with a 65% exploitation rate in recent years, and wow, suprise, the population crashed. Who is going chum fishing now? Nobody! Way to go fish management scientists! You guys really know what you are doing! I know... its the flooding, the logging, the development... Can't be that we killed too much of the population and there weren't enough to reproduce! And now we all lose because we all don't get to fish for chums for years.
We ought to be storming the WDFW offices with torches and pitchforks for the dismal management they have given us over the years. If you do your homework, you will find that our salmon and steelhead throughout the state have been harvested at 50 - 80%+ for as long as people have been able to do it, all while we have watched fish come back in smaller and smaller numbers. Very sad. How can fish recover when we kill so many they can't replace themselves? I blame no particular group. The anglers, the tribes and the commercial fishers have all had their part in this process. Now many wild fish populations are at such low levels it will take years to recover, if they are ever allowed to.
Interesting side study... The US government was alarmed in the 1870's at the rapid crash of salmon populations in the Columbia after only 20 years of commercial harvest. (pre dams, habitat loss, etc...) Studies were done... hatcheries were opened to boost populations shortly thereafter. The rest is history. Check it out if you like to read. Fair warning - it will depress you.

Fewer nets and more hatchery fish>>>Bada Bing!
The true wild fish are gone... boost hatchery production, introduce some of the current hybrid "wild" fish genes into the mix if you want but the future of sport caught salmon and steelhead lies in hatchery fish production.

I've noticed lately at another fishing website there has been postings from WFC supporters. They had their backsides handed to them at a state hearing over that last destructive lawsuit WFC filed, destroyed Puget Sound's hatchery winter run steelhead. WFC is gunning to close all hatcheries! That would leave us with no fish. Fight WFC and their minions, it's way worse than Boldt.

Support WDFW in their quest for a strong hatchery program.

Gee thanks for bumming me out buddy! But seriously the exploitation of our salmon runs is appalling! Wa lakes should have a rally in Olympia or something. Im not a leader or anything, but I would show up. I dont know if they would listen, the republicans are on the side of the non native gillnetters and the democrats are all bought and paid for by the tribes. We need to stop treating our fish as just a commodity like cattle or corn. There's alot of money involved though, I fear nothing will be done and we will all be sitting around someday telling our grandchildren about what it was like to fis for something besides 8 inch planter trout.

Thank you for your rant/ or thoughts. These are worthwhile things to think about.
Just wanted you to know your long post was read.
I rate fishing at my number one past time. Not sure what the answer is.
It all feels kind of bunged up. Good for people to be aware of the situation.

I don't think people are truly aware of the history and true nature of the problems our fisheries face. Try to find an old growth tree in the western washington lowlands... by about 80 years ago literally EVERY tree was cut down that was of value... the same has on a large scale been done to our steelhead and salmon. Canneries cleaned out the rivers until they couldn't stay in business due to lack of fish. By the '50s and '60s the fisheries were already a shadow of what they were... and now we look at those decades as golden years. There will be something along the lines of 400,000 chinook caught in Washington this year... as we wring our hands and lament the endangered salmon in Puget Sound that number in some rivers in the low hundreds... all while "scientists" insist that those particular fish are not impacted by fisheries. How could they not be? Alaska catches our fish, Canada catches our fish, WA anglers, natives... the list goes on... not to mention scum snagger poachers.
Hatcheries should be exploited to the max with native fish where they can be. If native brood stock was used in rivers I don't know how the agument could be made that it would be a negative impact on wild fish. Look no further than the cowlitz system to see a successful hatchery program. (no nets in that river... btw). There is no reason that couldn't be done in any number of other systems using native stock. If tribal fishers would commit to selective fisheries and managers of our fish would set sustainable exploitation rates on our fish alongside the efforts to increase habitat on our rivers, our fish would have a bright future, as would fisheries for all people who want to fish in Washington.

MarkFromSea wrote:Fewer nets and more hatchery fish>>>Bada Bing!
The true wild fish are gone... boost hatchery production, introduce some of the current hybrid "wild" fish genes into the mix if you want but the future of sport caught salmon and steelhead lies in hatchery fish production.

I've noticed lately at another fishing website there has been postings from WFC supporters. They had their backsides handed to them at a state hearing over that last destructive lawsuit WFC filed, destroyed Puget Sound's hatchery winter run steelhead. WFC is gunning to close all hatcheries! That would leave us with no fish. Fight WFC and their minions, it's way worse than Boldt.

Seems to me there is much incorrect here. The wfc didn't have their asses handed to them, more like the other way around as our greedy co managers fought to keep the status quo. Wild fish aren't gone, but soon will be if ignorance like this persists. I am not a wfc supporter, however it's deplorable we even need hatcheries. But I realize there are those out there that would just assume floss brats at a pipe somewhere with eighty two other "anglers". As far as spring the wdfw in a strong hatchery program. I wouldn't support the wdfw to manage my fish tank or now my lawn. There is zero accountability and zero enforcement and zero common sense. Your logic is flawed. More hatchery fish are not the answer, they are like dependence on foreign energy.

Hatchery fish are admitedly a short term solution to a long term problem, skagit 510. They shouldn't be neccessary if fisheries were managed well. Obviously this has not happened and I agree, WDFW should not manage a fish tank. They claim they use the best science available, but the evidence speaks for its self. As far as wild fish go, there are many runs of reasonably healthy salmon and steelhead around the state... humpies in most rivers, some silver populations, to mention a few. However in places where steelhead number in the few hundred and are in danger of being wiped out, it makes sense to step in and propegate this fish in meaningful numbers through a hatchery program that is aimed at bolstering native populations. And to that end, would we all rather catch a bunch of cookie cutter early season brats that come up in a six week period, or would you rather see stock used that will offer fishing from Dec through April? This could be done if the hatchery program chose to use the right fish. Native steelhead are present in most rivers nearly all 12 months of the year.

Great thread stilly. I'm not opposed to hatchery production. I would just like to see discretion and use it as a tool not a policy. If that means telling commercials to take the season off and sports in kind so be it. I'm for the fish. Hatchery fish attract harvest, wild fish are caught in the process. Not a big deal for selective sporty fishing but death when done by commercial. Each river should be managed around it's strength. Fish should be managed for maximum escapement not maximum kill. Those responsive should be promoted those responsible for the now should be run out of town.

I challenge the science to prove that a second generation hatchery fish, a naturally river or stream spawned fish from two hatchery raised fish, will not act like any other native fish. The reason hatchery fish behave the way they do has almost nothing to do with genetics, it is a byproduct of their rearing and ultimate release from their hatchery. This is not new science either, this knowledge has been around for many decades and has been used to create specialty fisheries and keep native fish from co-mingling with hatchery fish. Remove the hatchery and you'll find the hatchery fish will go "native" in short order, with natural spawning and rearing sorting out the "genetically inferior" fish.

What I don't grasp, is why commercial and native fisherman are still allowed to rape the ocean for salmon. Is there any reason they can't run hatcheries close to the mouth of rivers and collect fish that return for sale? It would be very much like free range cattle farming.

That's done in Alaska in several locations very successfully. The fish gang up right in front of where they're released and they get seined right up. Slam dunk.

On another note. The hatchery fish have been spawning with the native steelheads and both have been spawning with the rainbows in the system. I would put forth, there is no such thing as a native or hatchery fish anymore. They've been interbreeding since the inception of the hatchery program. That's a good 50 years!

WFC is full of themselves!

Get some more hatchery fish going to build up the runs!

Once again I'm astounded at the lack of science. Bodo, pumping a system full of hatchery drones doesn't build anything except money spent, commercial fishing, and a floss/snag fishery at a hatchery pipe neat near you. Which the later is probably what most here are concerned about. Yes I will agree wfc is full of it, but at least they offer an alternative to what is already not working.

skagit510 wrote:Once again I'm astounded at the lack of science. Bodo, pumping a system full of hatchery drones doesn't build anything except money spent, commercial fishing, and a floss/snag fishery at a hatchery pipe neat near you. Which the later is probably what most here are concerned about. Yes I will agree wfc is full of it, but at least they offer an alternative to what is already not working.

The major problem is not up the river. It's out in the salt. Our State has allowed foreign and domestic fishers alike to clean out the large amounts of Puget Sounds food fish populations, Herring, Candlefish, Anchovies, Hake.... The list goes on and on. It doesn't really matter how many fish you put in a system, if there's not enough food to feed them to maturity, they can't come back to spawn.
Then there's pollution, one factor is copper poisoning. The major source is metallic brake pads. It only takes a few molecules of copper flowing down the river to upset the olfactory senses of any of our anadromous species, which by the way use their sense of smell to find their way home and find food. First we starve them then we hide their rivers. Do you have full ceramic brake pads on all your cars?
How would we know if it's not working? First the State publicly proclaims it wants to get out of the hatchery business. Next they give WFC a huge grant to study the problem. Then they start drastically cutting back and shutting down hatcheries along with letting the only gill netters left fish till they have their documented 50% of the catch. I don't know about you but I see some huge flaws in the way this whole sham was set up. How can we know if it works if they break it first, then test it and study it. It's worked for over 50 years, why would it all of a sudden crash in the last few? I'm going to have to say not hatcheries, more like p!$$ poor management and personal agenda.

How would we know if it's not working? First the State publicly proclaims it wants to get out of the hatchery business. Next they give WFC a huge grant to study the problem. Then they start drastically cutting back and shutting down hatcheries along with letting the only gill netters left fish till they have their documented 50% of the catch. I don't know about you but I see some huge flaws in the way this whole sham was set up. How can we know if it works if they break it first, then test it and study it. It's worked for over 50 years, why would it all of a sudden crash in the last few? I'm going to have to say not hatcheries, more like p!$$ poor management and personal agenda.[/quote]
Preach on bodo, seams like wdfw got exactly what they wanted out of this whole deal.

Agree fully with the above two posts. O would just like to see management improved and wild stocks rebound. I do believe there are wild fish in our systems. Genetic testing proves this. Hatchery fish should be like a band aid. Applied to a wound towound until healed.

skagit510 wrote:Agree fully with the above two posts. O would just like to see management improved and wild stocks rebound. I do believe there are wild fish in our systems. Genetic testing proves this. Hatchery fish should be like a band aid. Applied to a wound towound until healed.

RBT and Steelhead are genetically indistinguishable. 50 years of interbreeding, Hatcheries and Nates, I'm going to say it's a little late to close the gate. It would be nice to fuel the hatcheries with native stock like they do on the Lewis. Then it couldn't matter one tiny bit to anyone what the label on the fish is.

Wrong, races of steelhead can be fleshed out from genetic data. They can be fleshed out with the naked eye. However, I am with you in the fact that all planted fish should be of in river stock. This lessens the impact of hatchery integration.

skagit510 wrote:Wrong, races of steelhead can be fleshed out from genetic data. They can be fleshed out with the naked eye. However, I am with you in the fact that all planted fish should be of in river stock. This lessens the impact of hatchery integration.

Lets see some supporting data. I've never seen any.

skagit510 wrote:Wrong, races of steelhead can be fleshed out from genetic data. They can be fleshed out with the naked eye. However, I am with you in the fact that all planted fish should be of in river stock. This lessens the impact of hatchery integration.

Makes sense to me. Seems this would satisfy all parties. Maybe start on one system and shut it down for a couple years. Then do another. I for one would be ok with a moratorium, if they could get the gillnetters to go along.

Keep in mind that interbreeding among fish from separate rivers/systems occurs naturally. Yes, the vast majority of fish return to their home stream to spawn, but some don't. How do you think we ended up with Pinks in so many systems? Why are fin clipped chinook and silvers counted every year at Landsburg? In fact interbreeding is somewhat desireable as it can help depressed stocks from having to draw upon a limited gene pool.

The fact that hatchery fish make it back to thier place of origin is actually quite amazing. Picture if you will a young animal or human for that matter who is sheltered from all harm and does not have to compete for food suddenly thrown into a world where they have to fend for themselves. Not only do they now have to quickly learn how to find food, they also have to figure out how to keep from being eaten. I figure the fish that do survive this are some tough sobs and are more than qualified to propagate their species.