Fishing with Rod Discussion Forum
Fishing in British Columbia => General Discussion => Topic started by: RalphH on January 12, 2023, 07:57:20 AM
-
Highway 8 that follows the Nicola River between Merrit and Spences Bridge, was washed out in 7 different locations during the record highwater events of Nov 2021. The Globe and mail published a photographic look at the damage along with commentary. the Nicola River, is the most important spawning location for Thompson Steelhead. The article includes some comments by Professor Eric Taylor of UBC on impacts on the these fish.
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/british-columbia/article-british-columbia-floods-highway-8-nicola-river/ (https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/british-columbia/article-british-columbia-floods-highway-8-nicola-river/)
-
The last driving through hwy 8 was in 2021 summer. The surrounding were likely to slide down anytime soon, though they looks majestic.
-
that article was put together extremely well. does a great job show casing the damage of that flood.
i hate to say it, but a good chance that flood put the last nail in the coffin for thompson steelhead. still think a hatchery should have been brought in. what a waste genetically. a hatchery steelhead is better than no steelhead.
-
that article was put together extremely well. does a great job show casing the damage of that flood.
i hate to say it, but a good chance that flood put the last nail in the coffin for thompson steelhead. still think a hatchery should have been brought in. what a waste genetically. a hatchery steelhead is better than no steelhead.
does anyone know of an example where a hatchery was made to try to recover the population? At what stage would the genetic factor of inbreeding play a role on significant negative effects on the fish? I read that the Thompson steelhead were a genetic stallion, so depressing considering their state currently and the likelihood it will be gone.
-
does anyone know of an example where a hatchery was made to try to recover the population? At what stage would the genetic factor of inbreeding play a role on significant negative effects on the fish? I read that the Thompson steelhead were a genetic stallion, so depressing considering their state currently and the likelihood it will be gone.
that's a good question and I have never heard or read a satisfactory answer. Hatcheries weren't established to save salmon runs that were approaching extinction but to enhance numbers back towards what they were 100+ years ago. Hatcheries on streams that have lost their capacity to produce little more than a tiny run can produce good numbers, but for how long? Of the 6 Pacific Salmon, steelhead are the most genetically diverse where diverse refers to the greatest variability in the individual life cycle of the fish over it's natural range. Pink salmon the least. Hatchery genetic effects are thought (by some) to be most severe with species that have high variability. I think BBF just means that if we had a hatchery there might be chance to maintain some of the genetic Thomson river strain until we have a better answer to why this dramatic decline ( and maybe fix it) or just give up.
-
The province of BC and DFO have to share the blame on the inevitable extinction of the Thompson Steelhead. There had been reports well in advance warning them this would happen. However, even the "Species at Risk" legislation could not even save this fishery. Take a bow on this one Turdo and the incompetent fisheries ministers you have appointed over the years. As far as a hatchery, why did the feds not chip in the necessary funds?? Probably because they did not care. Too preoccupied chasing the " Green Dream".
-
does anyone know of an example where a hatchery was made to try to recover the population?
Yes. Tenderfoot Creek on the Cheakamus system. Native Cheakamus steelhead were raised to smolts for 2 years to fill in the drop in population caused by the 2005 CN Rail Caustic Soda spill. Adult steelhead from those enhanced fish returned for a few years and successfully spawned and produced resulting fry and smolts. That 2 year component of the Cheakamus steelhead population is now as healthy ( or unhealthy) as the rest of the returning years.
-
does anyone know of an example where a hatchery was made to try to recover the population? At what stage would the genetic factor of inbreeding play a role on significant negative effects on the fish? I read that the Thompson steelhead were a genetic stallion, so depressing considering their state currently and the likelihood it will be gone.
there is lots of examples and many of them happened before an off us on here were alive
i read some archives from the 1950s where complete streams were wiped out by mud slides a silting out and they placed egg boxes in stream to return fish or took fish from new by streams,
its also likely some of them recovered via strays, new introductions or low levels of fish that were missed during stream counts.
-
does anyone know of an example where a hatchery was made to try to recover the population?
Yes. Tenderfoot Creek on the Cheakamus system. Native Cheakamus steelhead were raised to smolts for 2 years to fill in the drop in population caused by the 2005 CN Rail Caustic Soda spill. Adult steelhead from those enhanced fish returned for a few years and successfully spawned and produced resulting fry and smolts. That 2 year component of the Cheakamus steelhead population is now as healthy ( or unhealthy) as the rest of the returning years.
... as I recall that was intended not restore the run but to provide fishable numbers of steelhead during the 2010 Olympics. Critics claimed that since that race of steelhead has asymmetric steelhead returns,while the juveniles spend 2 years rearing in the river adults return after 1, 2 or even 3 years at sea the 2 year gap would be filled in within a few years time. So personally I don't find the example satisfactory since there was a native run remaining.
-
The province of BC and DFO have to share the blame on the inevitable extinction of the Thompson Steelhead. There had been reports well in advance warning them this would happen. However, even the "Species at Risk" legislation could not even save this fishery. Take a bow on this one Turdo and the incompetent fisheries ministers you have appointed over the years. As far as a hatchery, why did the feds not chip in the necessary funds?? Probably because they did not care. Too preoccupied chasing the " Green Dream".
The province of BC did not favor a hatchery alternative to saving the Thompson steelhead run though some modest releases of hatchery raised steelhead did occur close to 40 years ago. Since the decline started well before JET came into office and, as you say ,the Province and DFO share some responsibility ( the responsibility for steelhead is exclusively Provincial) why is only Trudeau to take a bow of shame so to speak? How about the Gordon Campbell and Christy Clark or even Glen Clark?
-
Consider the abundance of rainbow trout in T-river which shares the same gene of T-river steelhead, will the T-river steelhead gone completely?
-
i hate to say it, but a good chance that flood put the last nail in the coffin for thompson steelhead. still think a hatchery should have been brought in. what a waste genetically. a hatchery steelhead is better than no steelhead.
Agreed.
-
There has never been a hope in hell the Province will pay to put a hatchery on the Thompson to enhance steelhead.
-
Oncorhynchus Mykiss from my understanding exhibit varying life history strategies to protect the population from extirpation/extinction. Some offspring becoming anadromous ("steelhead") and some becoming resident ("rainbow") are life history strategies that help sustain the populations. If there was a natural disaster that destroyed the residual population, the anadromous population at sea would return and continue the lineage and vice versa. This is not any different than how Sockeye/Kokanee function to a degree. Thus the population is not technically at risk, it's just the more desirable, anadromous population ("steelhead") isn't as numerous as it once was for varying reasons.
-
Has there ever been a genetic study done for the Thompson that compared steelhead to the non anadromous rainbows? I don't think we can be sure they aren't genetically isolated for some reason without one.
I have certainly read the opinions of some biologists that the two are basically one and the same. They have even noted that as steelhead numbers declined rainbows have risen. The rainbows also seem to travel some distance as food sources dictate so they have a varied life history as well.
-
Has there ever been a genetic study done for the Thompson that compared steelhead to the non anadromous rainbows? I don't think we can be sure they aren't genetically isolated for some reason without one.
I have certainly read the opinions of some biologists that the two are basically one and the same. They have even noted that as steelhead numbers declined rainbows have risen. The rainbows also seem to travel some distance as food sources dictate so they have a varied life history as well.
Speyfitter 's comment can be supported by this video. After 100 years, once the dams of Elhwa removed. the anadromous fish come back.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9t_m1myVBBQ (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9t_m1myVBBQ)
-
I am aware of what happened with the Elwha particularly with the return of the lost summer steelhead run. However it is quite a different situation there than with IFS. There have been genetic studies in the US that do show resident trout interbreed with steelhead and there is a sharing of genetics. Still the situation on the Thompson may be reversed as it's suggested the non-anadromous fish are pushing out the anadromous stocks. That suggests the anadromous traits are being selected out of the population.
-
Thompson wont go extinct but to fishermen its gonna feel like they are