Fishing with Rod Discussion Forum
Fishing in British Columbia => General Discussion => Topic started by: Steelhawk on December 16, 2017, 03:18:43 PM
-
Never involved in politics myself but a friend of mine who is active in liberal leadership race calls my attention to Michael Lee, a current MLA representing Langara who is in the race for liberal party leader. I look at his site and there is one of his platforms supporting fishing and hunting in an open letter to the hunting/fishing/sport shooting community.
https://joinmichael.ca/Policy?name=open-letter-to-the-hunting-fishing-and-sport-shooting-community
So if he gets elected as leader of the Liberal party, does that mean there is a possible chance we will get a guy (who may become premier one day) who cares about what we do, like increasing funding for stocking of more steelhead and trout. I remember years ago Premier Harcourt and his minister Moe Shiota tried to cut or stop steelhead funding and it was met with much uproar from the fishing community. So this guy will get my vote if he is fishing friendly. If you want better steelhead fishing, helping him win the leadership race is a good start. LOL. I am registering .... Haha. (Must register before December 29 2017 to be qualified to vote for leadership in February 2018 )
-
Good luck. We've had this discussion before each federal and provincial election as to which party is fish friendly. None of the mainstream parties ie. Liberals, Conservatives and NDP have delivered on their promises.
-
That may be so. Politicians are just politicians. But I did a brief glance of some of the major players in the race like Lee, Watts, De Jong, and Lee seems to be the only one with an open letter to pledge his support for the fishing/hunting/shooting sport communities. I am not even sure if he is a fisherman like us, but it is a bit unusual for him to reach out to us even before he is electing to be a premier. That may just be showing his sincerity that he cares about us who is really a politically insignificant group (due to our lack of unity and pro-active actions as a group). Lol.
-
I also see that in the policy page of Michael Lee, he puts his open letter to the fishing, hunting and sport shooting community as the #1 item on that policy list. That is a bit unusual given other more crowd pleasing issues such as job, immigration and tourism. So in my book, he is friendly to our community. I think Steel Head Society of British Columbia should consider him a friend as steelhead is a provincial jurisdiction. If he ever gets to be a premier, he will have to be accountable to our community if his policy is different from what he is saying.
https://joinmichael.ca/Policies?page=1
-
"Hunting and fishing friendly" should be recognized as political code for a particular set of values that may not be absolutely friendly to wilderness, eco-systems, wildlife or fish.
-
I don't know enough about the detail of all his policies but it seems he cares about climate change and eco system from a brief glance of his policies. Honestly all I care is no more steelhead funding cut and best to stock some more. Perhspa he can stop the carnage of those nets from decimating the Thompson steelhead. Who knows. But at least he openly reach out to us in an open letter. That is a bit unusual unless he is ready to live up to it.
-
I read the statement as specifically fishing for endorsement from the BCWF and support from it's members simply because almost all hunting and fishing clubs and their members are under the BCWF umbrella. While the BCWF is a basically a good organization with good objectives it has in the past advocated for kill fisheries for wild steelhead. It's also supported wolf culls under the mistaken idea that wolves are responsible for the horrible state of caribou populations in the Province (it's really human access & climate change). Essentially the BCWF often comes down on the side of policy decisions that increase game numbers and sport fish numbers at the expense of other fish, wildlife and environmental values and issues.
I am also unaware of the BCWF's policies regarding hatcheries. Do they support wild fish strategies? I am also not aware if they have made any statements re: global warming/climate change; simple fact is hunters and anglers have bigger per capita carbon footprints than average. Much of the problems we are having with sport fish populations can be linked to climate change and hunters and anglers have been unwilling to recognize this let alone change their habits to reduce their contribution of green house gases.
Likewise hunters and anglers are often more concerned with maintaining and expanding 'access' and by access they often mean via gas powered vehicles without little regard for the negative impacts of road and ATV track vehicles in wilderness areas.
While I think increased funding for steelhead management is essential, it's become fairly clear hatchery enhancement is not good for steelhead populations. For every success story (like the Chilliwack) there are several outright failures. The entire hatchery enhancement program on the Island is an abject failure and has been proven to be incapable of reversing the decline of steelhead stocks in the long run or even maintain adequate fisheries for local anglers. It's improbable that throwing more money at hatchery programs will produce any significant positive result.
Overall Lee's reach for support of organized fishing and hunting groups isn't enough to show he has much grasp of what the problems are with our fishing and wildlife resources and smacks more of pandering to a specific interest group. I'd rather he make a statement that shows he understands what the real problems are in the woods, by the rivers, in the ocean and on the lakes which simply being 'our friend' does not do.
-
I love to read your posts, Ralph. Not only do they contain a wealth of information along with somewhat sassy (one could say almost pessimistic) albeit clearly very informed viewpoints - but the shear quality of your writing, sentence structure, grammar, and command of the English language is always a joy to read. :) Cheers!
-
Overall Lee's reach for support of organized fishing and hunting groups isn't enough to show he has much grasp of what the problems are with our fishing and wildlife resources and smacks more of pandering to a specific interest group. I'd rather he make a statement that shows he understands what the real problems are in the woods, by the rivers, in the ocean and on the lakes which simply being 'our friend' does not do.
That may be true but to expect a busy politician trying to run for party leadership to dwell on detail on a policy page is not realistic. It will be nice if Brian Chan is running for this office (plan A) but since it is not going to happen (at least for now lol) then perhaps having plan B is not a bad idea. What we need is a premier who is willing to listen and won't enact laws or have policies unfriendly to our community. The details of what the problems are by river or lake will be the job of lower level staffers in those ministries having jurisdiction over these matters. They will report to the guys in charge of funding or making policy changes helpful to solving the respective problems. For the voters at this stage of the game it is already good enough to know who will likely lend a listening ears to our concerns. If a candidate is not even interested to reach out to us at this stage, nor interested to engage in a dialogue, then you can expect a deaf ear from him/her later after the election. My 2 cents on this.
As for the hatchery program being harmful to wild steelhead or harmful to steelhead population on the island, that is a subject beyond me. To me it may have a lot to do with ocean survival due to the invasion of warm water species and the island steelhead smolts are a lot more vulnerable to these predators due to the proximity to the open ocean there. This may tie in with the 'blob' of warm water in the north Pacific too. Who knows for sure and so I will reserve my judgement on the cause and effect of hatchery program on steelhead population. If this is the case, how do we explain the hatchery program in the state for steelhead? Do they suffer the same problem? I have talked to friends who fish SH in the States and the general impression is that they have a lot more fish and much more productive trip there than here and often it is due to hatchery enhancement. Once I sold my new Patagonia boots (not fitting me from online shopping) to a steelheader from White Rock who was a retired teacher. He said he only exclusively fished the rivers in the State for steelhead due to the productive trips there compared to here and he said some rivers like the Sol Duc can be very productive.
-
I suspect Lee's statement may be related to the Province's recent decision to support the South Okanagan National Park proposal, which has considerable (but not majority) local opposition. Government's of both parties and in particular the Horgan government has spurned input from the BCWF and it's President Harvey Andrusak. I love the constant use of the phrase "science based approach" we see these days. In the case of the park opposition is more about access, particularly for hunters and opposition to preferential hunting by First Nations. Certainly important community issues but hardly science based.
Steelhawk, East Coast Vanilse steelhead stocks declined dramatically 20 or more years ago . There wasn't even a sufficient return to support an living gene bank program and hatchery enhancement has been pretty much given up. "The Blob" had nothing to do with it. Many anglers don't even bother anymore and returns in the Stamp have tanked in recent years as well.
Like other rivers that run directly into the Pacific, many Olympic Peninsula rivers have fared better but overall Washington and Oregon has seen pretty dramatic declines, the same as in Southern BC
*************
Thanks JK47
-
I agree the steelhead fishing on the Island is a shade of its former self. I still remember a trip to the Gold with 25 wild steelies in one day some 20+ years ago. Gone are those glory days. I just don't know if hatchery enhancement is the culprit as there is no hatchery enhancement on the Gold and it still follows the general decline. It leads me to think that something is happening in the ocean causing such a decline. It could be due to excessive predation by the warm water species or the lack of food source which the blob is a major reason too. Warm water with little mineral nutrients just won't support enough plankton which means less krill and less squid & herring (and the herring roe fishery make it worse), and then less salmon and steelhead. This is happening to this year's poor pink run. My 2 cents.
-
I didn't say it was caused by hatchery production but overall there is good scientific evidence that in the longer term there are a lot of downsides for wild stocks.
-
Anyway back to the subject of Michael Lee with his open letter to our community, the best is to show up on some of his campaign stops and ask him questions on fishery issues. My source told me that he will be meeting up with some supporters and potential voters tomorrow Tuesday at Coquitlam. I am going over there and ask him personally what he means by his open letter. Lol. If you have the time and want to ask him more about his policies, show up at:
6:00 tomorrow at 2918 Glen Drive, Coquitlam (at Hu's Kitchen)
I was told it will be held in a Chinese restaurant called Hu's Kitchen. I will attend it and ask him to clarify his open letter. That is called taking a pro-active stance rather than debating about it here guessing where he stands on our fishing issues. Lol. If I find something interesting from Lee, will report back.
-
I love to read your posts, Ralph. Not only do they contain a wealth of information along with somewhat sassy (one could say almost pessimistic) albeit clearly very informed viewpoints - but the shear quality of your writing, sentence structure, grammar, and command of the English language is always a joy to read. :) Cheers!
X2
I may not always agree with Ralph but I'd like to think that he makes me a better person.
Merry Christmas.
-
i question the timing of this plea to the fishing and hunting community by mr lee. especially after the ban of the grizzly hunt by the greens and ndp. the ndp green alliance lost alot of rural bc support by this decision and the liberals are going to try to take advantage.
alot of hunters are not happy right now. i am not for or against the bear hunt as long as its backed by good science.
-
Are we sure that Fishhawk isnt a Russian troll,trying to influence our election? I understand that is a thing now and this would be a great “minor league” for trolls to learn their craft before moving up to the big leagues.
-
I am not a hunter so perhaps the hunters on this forum can address that. As my poster name suggests, my main interest is the well being of the wild steelhead as well as adequate stocking of Hatchery steelhead, hopefully restoring to levels in the past for key hatchery rivers. I also like Lee to take a strong stand against any DFO fishery opening that can decimate Thompson steelhead. Just can't let a federal institution like DFO ruin a precious legendary breed of steelhead. Perhaps you folks in fishing community like Chilliwack or Port Albernie should ask his campaign to hold meetings with him and drill him on your concern. But I was told the only way I can vote for him is to register as liberal voter before December 29, 2017. If he wins then his pledge will mean something to us. Just sitting at home or complain on internet forums will not help bring any change. My 2 cents.
Ya I am a Russian troll who joined this forum 15+ years ago and has made 1000+ posts before Lee is even a politician so he can win a election in the future. SMH. Rodney should be jumping up and down to know that his forum is so popular that even the Russians are using it for political gain. Haha. One thing for sure Lee is more popular here than Trump. LOL. I am not sure if I am allowed to ask him questions in tonight's meeting at Coquitlam. If I am, then I will tell him that he is being accused of using Russian trolls on FWR to help in win the party leadership and he is now being scrutinized on this forum. Hey, who knows, he may just come in here to answer your questions. Lol.
-
steelhawk, if he is sincere he has my vote. i like you do not hunt. would love to see steelhead stocks rebound to former glory.
-
adequate stocking of Hatchery steelhead, hopefully restoring to levels in the past for key hatchery rivers.
Steelhawk, are you aware that hatchery steelhead smolt survival (ie released fish that return as adults) is about 1/5th or less what is was a couple of decades ago? Are you aware that around 2 in 100 released smolts return as adults?
-
Ralph, I respect your opinion as you are obviously quite informed and intelligent about issues. I am not as informed as you are on the exact number of survival rate of hatchery steelhead smolt, and for that matter survival rate of all salmon smolts in recent years. I don't know if hatchery is the culprit. I am an IT guy, not a fishery or ocean scientist. Lol.
As a layman, I can only speculate that the ocean has to do with the smolt survival rate, wild of hatchery, and not the fish origin itself. The ocean has changed in recent years due to the 'blob'. Perhaps with increased predation and decreasing food source, there are less matured fish returning. The Americans are pouring in a lot more hatchery smolts than us and our smolts have to compete with dwindling food source under warmer ocean condition. So they produce more smolts to compensate for less survival rate. If we don't increase our smolt production or even reduce it more, then sure our return will be lower and lower.
I don't know if smolt survival rate is an exact science. But like the babyboomer generation born right after World War II, their parents have seen wars and deaths from wars, and deaths from deceases in war-torn places lacking health care. So they produced a lot more babies after the war ready for the survival game in the next war. Sure enough a lot more of us made it to old age then before because the 'ocean' of our life has been favourable since the war. It may be a stupid strategy but you and I or our parents exist today because our parents or grandparents didn't stop after 2 or 3 kids. They went 4 or more. Like I said, it is not an exact science out there. If it were, then we wouldn't have the best sockeye run in 100 years the year after the disastrous return prompting a federal judiciary inquiry on the crash. Nothing changed much on land and what humans were doing within a year or two. But the ocean has done something mysterious for that year of bounty of sockeye run. I am no expert on fishery things as you do, Ralph. But can one be so assertive about the cause and effect of everything affecting salmon & steelhead survival, especially laymen like us?
-
It is not an opinion, it is a fact.
If you think you are not as informed as me that should tell you something.
Get informed before forming an opinion.
-
LOL. I am not contending that those numbers are an opinion. Perhaps you can quote the source. But even if you know about that as fact, which I am not challenging, where is the proof that such decrease in survival rate is because these steelhead are from hatchery origin. The argument is, does that decreased number come as a result of hatcheries? I have presented my reasoning that there is no such proof. Perhaps you can quote some scientific papers or research that prove without doubt that hatcheries are the culprit of steelhead decline. If that is the case, I like to know why the Gold and other wild rivers are suffering the same general decline.
Anyhow this thread is not about steelhead knowledge superiority. It is about a liberal candidate who seems friendly to our community who may listen to our community if elected as leader of the opposition and perhaps as a premier in the future. Let's just don't waste people's time in justifying personal merits. Thanks.
-
....... are you aware that hatchery steelhead smolt survival (ie released fish that return as adults) is about 1/5th or less what is was a couple of decades ago? Are you aware that around 2 in 100 released smolts return as adults?
You have to be specific Ralph, our hatcheries are not run the same way as the Americans, south Washington streams in particular.
btw, what is the survival rate of wild SUMMER steelhead smolts returning as adults?
-
Like other rivers that run directly into the Pacific, many Olympic Peninsula rivers have fared better but overall Washington and Oregon has seen pretty dramatic declines, the same as in Southern BC
Most who fish down south are after springers/summers. Dramatic declines? Yes. What do we have within a couple of hours drive from the LML?
-
As I said before I was about to attend a campaign stop of Michael Lee and tried to ask him to clarify his open letter and his desire to fight for endanger steelhead like the Thompson.
It was too bad the weather was harsh with rain and snow. But Michael Lee showed up as promised to a small gathering of people who braved the elements to hear him and his policies. While he shook my hand, I told him about FWR and this thread about him and his open letter. Apparently he was aware of such thread as some of his people have told him. He spoke extensively on his policies and he addressed his open letter with a sincere desire to work with the fishing, hunting and shooting-sport communities. I can sense his sincerity as he recognizes the important of our natural resources and yet the need for better management to benefit also the various user groups.
In the question and answer period, I drilled him on fishery issues and the need for proper funding and to protect the Thompson steelhead from the nets on the Fraser. He listened and answered me with assurances that lead me trustimg in his sincerity. You can bad mouth him or work with him at this grass root level. I choose the latter. It is better to get the attention of an aspiring future leader of the province at the grass root level. You will more likely get his attention at this stage and hopefully he will remember his campaign promise.
Lee, showing his sincerity to include our community, specifically instructs his assistance to take down my email and they also give me the email of their team member who will be responsible for formulating policies on things he mentions in the open letter. I asked him if he is willing to meet with people in fishing communities like Chilliwack and the answer is YES!!!
So if those of you in Chilliwack or another fishing town such as Port Albernie wish to meet up with him to express your concern on fishery and steelhead, you can contact me at steelhawk1@gmail.com and I will try to connect you folks to his campaign team.
If none of you interested, then perhaps I will try Fred of Fred's tackle. I have heard Lee is leading in some poll and is a serious contender. So hopefully the fishing community can jump on the band wagon at this golden time. I have done my best as an outsider as I am a busy IT guy, not in politics nor in fishing industry. I did my best and hopefully Rodney, Chris, Fred or some others can organize something out there in the Wack.
Remember if you want to support Michael Lee but not currently a liberal party member, you need to register first to be a member before Dec 29, 2017 before you can vote for the leader in February, 2018. If you wish to do so, try to go to his web site to study his policies, then register if you so incline.
-
Steelhawk, you're (both) putting words in my mouth and using a 'stawman' argument. Both of you don't disagree with the numbers & then ask for 'proof'. As I stated above, if you look at the East Coast of the Island, there no longer is a hatchery program so the hatchery smolt survival question is moot. Overall hatchery programs are no longer cost effective. They are a waste of money and harm wild fish production to boot. If you aren't informed about the numbers how can you form a useful opinion about what needs to be done?
************************
BTW in average to good years the hatchery return to V/C is in the range of 2,000 fish. Here's a link to smolt releases over the last 10 years
http://www.gofishbc.com/Stocked-Fish/Summary-Report.aspx?region=LOWER%20MAINLAND&waterbody=VEDDER%20-%20CHILLIWACK%20R&species_static=Steelhead&start=12/20/2007&end=12/20/2017
the average is around 120,000. Do the math.
-
RalphH,
I did the math for Kanaka creek bassed on what Ross Davies told me about returns and how many smolts are released.
Kanaka's has like a 5-6% return rate and provides Coqutlam and Burnaby with coho eggs. Also Kanaka for chum have a larger then AVG size then most of the Fraser river tribbs. Ross thinks its because of the irregular water flow, Chum can be forced to wait for weeks for the water to rise.
Some interesting facts about the system are in 1950's pinks were extirpated from the system. in 1980's they started to return and in 2015 it saw its largest return with over a 100 returning.
Ocean survival tho has been proven to be at a 2% or less rate. Yet some systems continue to defile this. I am not a huge hatchery advocate, I understand why people are now taking the approach with salmon to just leave them alone. However i think there is a place for hatcheries. Have a look at all the education they provide. Have a look at the year end presentation 2 mins in by Ross. http://media.mapleridge.ca/Mediasite/Play/89767f9b7c9644948ecdc0e4e02db46b1d
-
For myself, I don't think hunting and fishing are important enough overall to be the platform I'd base my vote on. Furthermore, low level politicians can be as sincere as they like, and even really mean it at the time when they make their promises, but still must bow down to the overall strategy of the party. And if I were to look back on the liberal history, I wouldn't put much faith in their approach to resource management.
-
Annual steelhead return number seems to be a lot higher than the 2,000 according to some reports. I have heard through out the years people saying 4,000 to 6,000. But in this article in 2011 by Dave Vedder, a well known steelheader who author steelhead books, he quoted a much higher number of annual angling catches (not return only) of 14,000, and later in describing the January/February steelhead fishing, he quoted a range of 10,000 to 20,000 fish return.
http://www.sportfishingbc.com/post.php?The-VedderRiver---B.C.-s-Crown-Jewel-36
And in this 1985 creel survey and 1984/85 questionaire, on table 8 of page 12, it quoted a much larger number of catches by anglers, and these were catch number so the total return number should be even higher (because we simply can't catch every returning steelie, lol).
http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/wld/documents/fisheriesrpts/FTC73.pdf
I am sure most of those steelheaders actively fishing in the last 20+ years agree that the fishing is getting harder by the year compared to prior glory years. If the ocean survival is getting harder, then we will see less fish coming back. Stocking more smolts is one way to solve that. We have seen how more stocking in the EXPO years have created phenomenal fishing.
If the hatchery enhancement is removed, there will be less fishers interested going out. Yes, the purist will love that. They don't have crowd around them. But less eyes on the rivers can also mean more poaching for wild fish, and less people fishing will mean less concern for the welfare of steelhead stocks and you won't find enough support when there is critical need to help save the Thompson steelhead.
So I like Michael Lee's approach, to find a balance between natural resources and user groups, not just the purists, but the needs of average fishing folks. He as the future opposition leader or premier will be willing to listen to our concern. Politicians are not saints. You support him at the grass root level, he/she will be more likely to listen to you later when elected. Fishing groups should look at his fishing friendly policies and decide if he is someone you can support at the grass root level.
-
LOL. Somewhere above I referred to the V-C hatchery program as a success though most are failures.
Snorkel surveys don't happen that often but here is a paper on one:
http://a100.gov.bc.ca/appsdata/acat/documents/r2210/chilliwack_adult_2001_1106349746675_e5c96f8eb41e4f4b8c1eb5150a80e5f7.pdf
They counted 1200
Most estimates made by the Branch I have seen put the total return at around 4,000 fish on average though the last few years are likely lower as we haven't seen good returns. That would include both wild and hatchery which they put at a 50/50 split hence the estimate of 2,000 hatchery fish. Most hatchery fish return earlier than wild fish and are harvested by anglers.
Compare to this 1980s estimate that put the river rearing capacity at about 11,000 wild fish. While the river may not be as productive as then clearly it is not the river environment that limits steelhead numbers.
http://a100.gov.bc.ca/pub/eirs/finishDownloadDocument.do;jsessionid=yM5sh7BpPKSDx6NSpp1td9GLNHB9L1PGlxJz1V5kPM0t3yvwTsQR!-1181731771?subdocumentId=6981
He also estimates that hatchery returns of 5,000 should be expected from 120,000 smolts based on the much higher smolt survival rates of that time. If look at some past posts you'll find some hatchery staff put survival at 2.5% several years ago.
Catch statistics include multiple captures and some tagged fish studies indicated all wild fish were caught at least once and some 4 or more times. Catch statistics don't indicate population and are actually reduced considerably from what anglers report since angler reports are usually exaggerated as are angler estimates of fish populations.
Back in the 90s Branch staff looked at snorkel survey results and basically concluded that steelhead number in many streams were were a fraction (perhaps as low as 10 to 20%) of previous estimates.
In the last 40 years or so I have heard of at least 2 years where Kanaka had no steelhead return for at least one year in a cycle. I doubt there would be many in there (maybe a handful most years) if not for the hatchery program. Certainly true for the Stave as well. The Georgia Basin Alliance published a survey of dozen of stream many years ago that for sometime was available on the web and it was surprising how many streams were estimated to have a wild population of 50 or less. Few had more than one to 200 hundred. The V-C is a rare apple.
-
There is no steelhead left in kanaka and I don’t believe it’s been stocked in a long time. It’s packed full of cutthroat tho. Hatchery programs for steelhead do seem to be horrible ineffective but maybe it’s just a warning for all salmon. Yet for chum they seem to have been sucessful.
They certainly can’t control what happening in the ocean. Anyways Ralph is right it’s all about acess and our need to catch every last fish.
Times and government are changing along with our climate. I can certainly see why it would be nice to have an advocate for the sport in government.
I am Certainly not going to bother argue with Ralph on this his philosophy line up with a lot of ENGO”s out their and they have turned the tide.
Next up is the southern killer whale issue on their list.
-
I've found the Georgia Basin Steelhead survey which dates back to 2000 or so. The Chilliwack is summarized on page 87. Wild steelhead return is estimated at under 2500. Carrying capacity is estimated at 4000.
Interesting to note the Chilliwack is the only South Coast mainland river though to have a steelhead population of over 1,000 and most other well known rivers are estimated at 500 or less.
http://a100.gov.bc.ca/appsdata/acat/documents/r5856/2002LillRegion2tables092702_1499366584133_936271980.pdf
-
"Yet for chum they seem to have been sucessful"
It is probably due to the huge number of chum fry that don't need to depend on the river ecology for long before they head out to the ocean. In fact this site says the fry begin downstream migration immediately after emerging from the gravel bed.
http://wdfw.wa.gov/fishing/salmon/chum/life_history/
These tiny fry may suffer even a higher mortality rate in the ocean or even while migrating down the Fraser as I think the notorious pike minnow find the fry the right size for sashimi. LOL. But with sheer number alone, even with a lower survival rate, they still come back in large number. However the 'blob' problem may still impact their survival as we don't see a huge return this year as in prior years. The Squamish return is such a shade of its former days. The Stave? Oh what a 'kingdom of the dog' there. I suspect the whole wide and slow flowing river bottom there is suitable spawning ground, and the gong show at the West bank can only touch a small fraction of the huge spawning ground and so a lot of spawners are spare.
-
Feeding chums in a hatchery for very short periods (weeks) has shown to, in some cases, double returns of unfed hatchery fish. Cheap to raise, prolific, and such corner pieces of coastal ecosystems ... why aren't we producing more of these?
-
Feeding chums in a hatchery for very short periods (weeks) has shown to, in some cases, double returns of unfed hatchery fish. Cheap to raise, prolific, and such corner pieces of coastal ecosystems ... why aren't we producing more of these?
Agreed
-
"immediately" is a bit of an exaggeration from my observation. Chum fry start gathering in shallow areas and backwaters in early spring and will usually remain there until water temperatures get to about 10 degrees then they school up and move downstream. I have never seen evidence that they feed.
I've always thought chum enhancement simply disguises the dramatic loss of coho and chinook numbers. Those declines took place in spite of dramatic chum enhancement that sometimes left streams all but chocked with chum salmon. People seem them and think salmon are doing wonderfully when in fact they are not. I wonder if other salmon species productivity is at all correlated to chum. Apparently pink productivity has a negative correlation with steelhead numbers.
-
I wonder if other salmon species productivity is at all correlated to chum.
Interesting thought Ralph. On coastal rivers I can see a possible correlation there for coho, steelhead and stream type chinook, and of course whitefish, resident trout and char populations.
-
I've always thought chum enhancement simply disguises the dramatic loss of coho and chinook numbers. Those declines took place in spite of dramatic chum enhancement that sometimes left streams all but chocked with chum salmon. People seem them and think salmon are doing wonderfully when in fact they are not. I wonder if other salmon species productivity is at all correlated to chum. Apparently pink productivity has a negative correlation with steelhead numbers.
Pinks were extirpated from Kanaka in the 1950's for these reason. spawning grounds were operating at near capacity and im sure they were wanting to make room for more commercial valuable Coho.
That is a fair assessment I have seen chum being bullies on spawning grounds while fishing for coho. For example there are falls on Kanaka that the chum cant make it past, above the falls is where the majority of the coho spawn. I honestly can't say if there would still be coho in the system if they shared the grounds with chum.
I honestly haven't seen any reports on salmon competition in spawning grounds and what it means. Just what ive seen from chum chasing off coho.