Fishing with Rod Discussion Forum
Fishing in British Columbia => General Discussion => Topic started by: CohoJake on September 02, 2016, 03:01:03 PM
-
I was reviewing the release database for the Chilliwack hatchery, and I noticed that this year, they only released about 100,000 coho smolt, as opposed to about 900,000 in a normal year. These are the fish that will constitute next year's hatchery coho run. Does anyone know what happened? Any chance this is a typo and it is supposed to say 1 million? ;D
-
That better be a typo. Given the history of importance of the coho as a main food fish targeted by myriads of fishermen both local and afar, cutting so much stalking will only encourage poaching of the wild stock. That will be a disaster indeed for both the wild fish and the fishing community. A lot of town folks will stay home or fish locally such as the Cap of the Stave or simply hang up for the fall Coho. The tackle shop people will be hurt definitely. It will certainly result in a lot less license sales as a lot of fishermen won't buy a license for chum and white spring. LOL.
-
Don't know about a typo but fish released this year will return in 2020 not next year.
-
Wouldn't the Coho Smolts that were released this year be the off spring of the 2014 spawn, making them return in 2018? It varies by river but Coho smolt in about in 18 months (in general).
Regardless, hope it is a typo!
-
I used to think the chilliwack coho were on a 4 year cycle, but I believe there have been multiple thread discussions on this forum where it was authoritatively proven they are a 3 year cycle. Regardless, it means some season soon will really suck!
-
That's correct. These offsprings will be returning as adult spawners in fall 2018.
-
I just noticed the Chehalis releases are also very low for 2016 - 400,000, which is half or less than half of normal amount for that river. No relief there either! I assume that all of the 2016 releases are done for the year, but might I be wrong? Might these be only partial numbers for the year?
-
This document from DFO explains that the Chilliwack coho follow a three year life cycle:
"Chilliwack coho, like most coho stocks, generally follow a 3 year life cycle, illustrated in Figure 1. While some Chilliwack coho return at age 2 (~6 out of every 100) and a few return at age 4 (less than 1 in 1000), the examples and illustrations in this handout use only the 3-year life cycle for simplicity."
www.fishingwithrod.com/fishy_news/file/051005.pdf (http://www.fishingwithrod.com/fishy_news/file/051005.pdf)
-
Typo error. Releases have been reduced to 800,000 from 1 million in order to be able to feed 2 million chum fry to 1 gram. In the mid eighties the hatchery was releasing 1.8 -2.2 million coho. The facility is only operating at half capacity. Reduce white chinook production and increase coho. Hatchery released a late experimental timing group and that may have been the 100k.
-
Typo error. Releases have been reduced to 800,000 from 1 million in order to be able to feed 2 million chum fry to 1 gram. In the mid eighties the hatchery was releasing 1.8 -2.2 million coho. The facility is only operating at half capacity. Reduce white chinook production and increase coho. Hatchery released a late experimental timing group and that may have been the 100k.
Obviously budget cuts have forced decisions to be made as to where the $$$ are to be spent. How does the hatchery make decisions on production quotas for the various salmon species? Do they give the most $$$ to the most endangered specie relative to historical records?
Why less coho/chinook for more chum? I have noticed, notwithstanding last year which I saw lots of chum, that there have been far fewer chum in the C/V in recent years compared to the past.
-
Obviously budget cuts have forced decisions to be made as to where the $$$ are to be spent. How does the hatchery make decisions on production quotas for the various salmon species? Do they give the most $$$ to the most endangered specie relative to historical records?
Why less coho/chinook for more chum? I have noticed, notwithstanding last year which I saw lots of chum, that there have been far fewer chum in the C/V in recent years compared to the past.
Chum and Pink are relatively cheap to produce because the are released as fry, at which time they immediately migrate out of the river. Chinook, coho and steelhead are more expensive because most of them are released at the smolt stage (they must be a certain size to clip their adipose fin). They require space for rearing, food, and sufficient water and/or power to maintain cool water in their pools. As between chinook and coho, I had heard that the white chinook stock was chosen because they out-migrate sooner, and there isn't sufficient nutrients in the river for a stock that would stick around in the river longer. I would guess one consideration with hatchery coho would be making sure the hatchery fish aren't out-competing the wild stock. In terms of $ per kg of fish that return, I'm guessing that chinook are cheaper to produce than coho.
In the ocean at least, I would guess that chinook (even white) have a higher value to the sport and commercial fisheries than coho. I believe someone on another thread mentioned that the Chilliwack chinook production by DFO was primarily to enhance ocean fisheries, and that may be the case with all DFO hatcheries. In Washington, some hatcheries are federally funded and were intended to help certain stocks overcome the dams on the Columbia system (and are funded from taxes on the power generated by the dams), and some are funded primarily to enhance tribal fishing opportunities (some hatcheries are run by the tribes themselves).
-
Thanks for the very enlightening reply. Nothing is ever as simple as it seams.
-
I wonder if one reason for the decrease in coho releases is the fact that they must all be clipped now? I believe it was the late 1990s when they started doing that. Maybe they are limited by the number of fish they can clip with their current staffing?
-
That's so brutal.
-
I never thought of that... Clipping a 1 000 000 smolts seems a herculean task. Makes me appreciate the hatchery workers a lot more.
https://youtu.be/qhjZjV42gMw
-
Release total for 2016 has been adjusted.
http://pacgis01.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/DocumentsForWebAccess/HatcheryReleaseReports/ReleaseReport.aspx?IDValue=107#Cohoreleased%20fromChilliwack%20R
-
Obviously budget cuts have forced decisions to be made as to where the $$$ are to be spent. How does the hatchery make decisions on production quotas for the various salmon species? Do they give the most $$$ to the most endangered specie relative to historical records?
Why less coho/chinook for more chum? I have noticed, notwithstanding last year which I saw lots of chum, that there have been far fewer chum in the C/V in recent years compared to the past.
I have it on reasonable authority that the decision to bring coho numbers down over the past few years at Chilliwack is not a direct tradeoff for maintaining chum production. All hatchery salmon production has specific goals they are trying to meet, whether they are to support terminal fisheries (Chilliwack coho), contribute to mixed marine fisheries (Chilliwack Chinook), or to rebuild or supplement depleted runs (Chilliwack chum). Obviously budgets are not getting any bigger for hatcheries, so decisions have to be made to try to achieve the best balance for the various user groups.
In the case of Chilliwack (and other South Coast) coho stocks, there were adjustments made in 2014 to production numbers at various hatcheries to try to better align production with the demands of the fisheries they service. IN recent years, the Chilliwack hatchery had had up to 40,000 coho swim back into the hatchery, with catches in the river only a percentage of that. The reduction intended to find a level of production that would bring enough adult coho back to the river to keep the sporties happy, while avoiding the expense of producing hundreds of thousands of surplus coho smolts (remember, they are reared at the hatchery for 1.5 years and are therefore very expensive to produce) that were contributing to the huge hatchery surpluses. These cost savings, while not specifically earmarked for chum production, would have been used to put towards maintaining other production priorities such as chum, Cultus sockeye, upper Fraser Chinook, etc.
Lower Fraser coho returns are driven almost exclusively by marine survival, the difference in return based on release numbers is usually lost in the noise. One hypothesised (but untestable) offshoot of reducing overall Southern coho production from hatcheries is a reduction in early marine competition between hatchery and wild fish, as well as simply between all the hatchery fish. Its possible that compensation could occur, seeing similar numbers of hatchery fish return from lower release numbers.
One other thing of note is that the hatchery is using some of the savings to initiate an experimental release of 100K coho salmon at a later and larger release size. If this strategy is successful in increasing survival rate, it may potentially be expanded.
It's easy to focus on release numbers with hatcheries, but the only really important number is the number of fish returning to be caught or to spawn.
nibs
-
Thanks for the insight, I could read posts like this all day long.
One other thing of note is that the hatchery is using some of the savings to initiate an experimental release of 100K coho salmon at a later and larger release size. If this strategy is successful in increasing survival rate, it may potentially be expanded.
I wonder what method they would use to identify return rates of later release coho vs regular release.
-
How are these older 100k smolts clipped?
-
Great post. Thank you!
The reduction intended to find a level of production that would bring enough adult coho back to the river to keep the sporties happy, while avoiding the expense of producing hundreds of thousands of surplus coho smolts
Now if they could also modify the gene of those hatchery cohos to make them a bit more 'bite-friendly'.... 8)
-
They are adipose clipped just like all other releases. They have been separately genotyped so they can be identified via DNA sample upon return.
There is some evidence/information that suggests that juvenile coho that enter the Strait (or Puget Sound) at a large enough size may be more likely to reside on the inside vs moving outside. This could also have benefits for the (now almost obsolete) Georgia Strait summer coho fishery if it were to show promise.
You never know until you try. The SoG summer fishery is already non-existent, so not much to lose by trying some new approaches.
-
Thanks dnibbles, always a wealth of information!
-
Wow, terrific insight. Thank you, dnibbles!
-
Thanks you Dnibbles
40 Thousand! That is crazy! Even if sporties took half that leaves 20,000 Coho making it to the hatchery! I have seen hundreds, but never thousands, that would be a site to see. With the only say 400 pairs (800 fish total) required (average fecundity of 2400 to reach 900,000 to be released with 60,000 lost along the way) that leaves a whole lot of excess coho.
-
What I find interesting on the list of release totals is that only 8000 steelhead were released in 2013. Does anyone know if this is accurate or a misprint ?