Fishing with Rod Discussion Forum
Fishing in British Columbia => General Discussion => Topic started by: Steelhawk on January 02, 2016, 12:28:36 PM
-
This is the kind of steelheading in last so many years, people crowding on all the lower runs like coho fishing. Very hard for pocket water fishing in mid river these days as many fish (especially hatch) got thinned out in lower river. We need a period of high muddy water for fish to push past lower river runs. Hope for rainy days next week.
-
This is the kind of steelheading in last so many years, people crowding on all the lower runs like coho fishing. Very hard for pocket water fishing in mid river these days as many fish (especially hatch) got thinned out in lower river. We need a period of high muddy water for fish to push past lower river runs. Hope for rainy days next week.
I'd rather catch Wilds than hatches on most days. It is nice to retain a fish once in a while. I'm going to release around 97% of any steelhead IF I catch any this season (even hatches). Agreed on needing some rain, you can literally cross the river in most tailouts in mid - lower
-
We need a period of high muddy water for fish to push past lower river runs.
Or better Steelhead stocking in at least a few more rivers than we have now. That would spread out the pressure a bit more because most of the guys you see on the Vedder are just after hatchery fish.
Doubt it will ever happen though.
What is there like maybe a handful of rivers where you can go and have reasonable chance of catching hatchery steelhead in region 2. Compare that to well over 10 for hatchery coho.
-
I really don't care if its a hatch or wild... a steelhead is a steelhead ;D. Even though I am entered in the Wally Hall, I probably will release majority of the hatch I get into; steelhead are just such a beautiful fish. Quick question: I see a lot of guys talking about fishing non-pressured systems... does this include creeks and such or just rivers?
-
Clipped steelhead are put in the river for you as a licensed angler to harvest.
-
Clipped steelhead are put in the river for you as a licensed angler to harvest.
True, but these hatchery fish you can kill are produced from the app 75-80 wild fish (hatchery mortalities included in this number) harvested from the basically unknown wild population.
-
True, but these hatchery fish you can kill are produced from the app 75-80 wild fish (hatchery mortalities included in this number) harvested from the basically unknown wild population.
Why dont they use returning hatchery fish opposed to taking wild fish make hatchery fish? They are made with 2 wild fish so I dont understand why not?
-
Why dont they use returning hatchery fish opposed to taking wild fish make hatchery fish? They are made with 2 wild fish so I dont understand why not?
Attempting to protect the gene pool as much as possible.
-
Keep the fish as wild as possible
-
Why dont they use returning hatchery fish opposed to taking wild fish make hatchery fish? They are made with 2 wild fish so I dont understand why not?
There are people who frequent this site far more qualified than I to answer that question, and I hope they do.
In the meantime; my take on this issue is breeding hatchery fish begins to further weaken the unknown gene pool of C-V fish; the more generations of hatchery fish returning and the subsequent breeding programs results in poorer survivals of fish that do spawn, increased competition with wild fish, and over a few generations, like what has happened in Washington, Oregon and California, truly wild fish are basically extirpated. Try Googling this subject.
Many believe there are no real wild steelhead left in the C-V, and, from a purely scientific genetic standpoint that is probably correct. However, (and this why I and a few others continue to monitor these fish) those we observe every spring in the upper river are as wild as anyone in 2016 could expect from a fish … wary and spooky as hell, males fighting for females and the territory that entails, erect dorsal and adipose fins, and basically just magnificent.
I believe the present steelhead hatchery program on the C-V needs major changes and have been advocating for that for years, but, imo, changing protocols to breed and release hatchery fish would be the beginning of the end for this system. Considering how these steelhead and this river has stood up to the pressures of urban encroachment and the huge increase in angling pressure shows just how well wild steelhead can do when they have a degree of protection, in this case a closed to angling upper river, which results in an unknown wild spawning population.
-
This argument goes on and on, but at the end of the day when does a fish become wild or stop being wild? As was said, in all likely hood there is probably very few steelhead in the C/V that do not have a hatchery fish somewhere in there ancestry. Yes, it has been proven that hatchery fish do not behave the same as wild fish, it has also been proven that within 2 generations the fish are for all intents and purposes is a completely wild fish. For all the arguments up here, one should do some reading about Washington/Oregon. They have had major lawsuits and have been forced to hatcheries have been forced to euthanize hundreds of thousands of juvenile fish because they aren't "wild" enough. To me, simply, if you want to fish for steelhead support the hatcheries. Most studies show that they are highly susceptible to delayed mortality.
But back to the original purpose of this thread. With the rains expected to come on monday I went steelheading on the C/V for the first time in years. It was great to see that river again, even if nothing worked. The water was low though, really low but looked perfect. The kind of day on dreams of steelheading. Best of luck to every one.
-
This argument goes on and on, but at the end of the day when does a fish become wild or stop being wild? As was said, in all likely hood there is probably very few steelhead in the C/V that do not have a hatchery fish somewhere in there ancestry. Yes, it has been proven that hatchery fish do not behave the same as wild fish, it has also been proven that within 2 generations the fish are for all intents and purposes is a completely wild fish. For all the arguments up here, one should do some reading about Washington/Oregon. They have had major lawsuits and have been forced to hatcheries have been forced to euthanize hundreds of thousands of juvenile fish because they aren't "wild" enough. To me, simply, if you want to fish for steelhead support the hatcheries. Most studies show that they are highly susceptible to delayed mortality.
Perhaps I don't understand your position ... are you saying you support a hatchery program that might have possible negative impacts to wild stocks?
-
Perhaps I don't understand your position ... are you saying you support a hatchery program that might have possible negative impacts to wild stocks?
I am saying that it is complicated, but that hatcheries don't have a long-term negative affect in stocks. There can be no doubt that fish raised in a hatchery are different, but those differences are quickly bred out if the salmon are allowed to spawn naturally. However, if you remove hatchery fish from systems as heavily fished as the C/V the shear amount of deaths from Catch and Release, no matter how well practiced, would result in the collapse of the stock eventually.
-
If you guys keep hatcheries, check their stomachs. I found plastic pieces in belly of a fish last year and so did others. Interesting to see if we see more of that...
Also lets see what happens to wild stocks on an urban river like Chilliwack without hatcheries given oceans are warming at alarming rate, spawning beds are getting mined out, droughts, forests up river are getting clear cut, clay silting over spawning beds, people dumping garbage not to mention asbestos, urban sprawl, fish farms, invasives like bass in sumas, loss of riparian, more and more people using and abusing the resource etc... all those factors and more are getting worse year by year. Something to keep in mind..
-
I am saying that it is complicated, but that hatcheries don't have a long-term negative affect in stocks. There can be no doubt that fish raised in a hatchery are different, but those differences are quickly bred out if the salmon are allowed to spawn naturally. However, if you remove hatchery fish from systems as heavily fished as the C/V the shear amount of deaths from Catch and Release, no matter how well practiced, would result in the collapse of the stock eventually.
Bold statement your making, ignoring all the other potential impacts on stock survival (ocean conditions, smolt mortality, bycatch mortality, etc... and saying the only way for the cheddar to have a run ino he future is hatchery supplementation.
-
Also lets see what happens to wild stocks on an urban river like Chilliwack without hatcheries given oceans are warming at alarming rate, spawning beds are getting mined out, droughts, forests up river are getting clear cut, clay silting over spawning beds, people dumping garbage not to mention asbestos, urban sprawl, fish farms, invasives like bass in sumas, loss of riparian, more and more people using and abusing the resource etc... all those factors and more are getting worse year by year. Something to keep in mind..
If you want to see what it will look like, just look at the Squamish system. Awful! Mamquam / Ashlu = a hand full of fish. Upper Squamish is less than 200 fish . Cheakamus is the best of the bunch but it only has maybe 400 fish on a good year. So if you just leave it to Mother Nature there is no garantee to it will recover. No steelhead fish culture ( fed fry releases, no smolts ) on the Squamish system since 1992 ( with the exception of the 2 years impacted by the CN Rail chemical spill ) and things are much worse than back in the 80's and 90's. With the types of floods we see up here and all of the associated gravel and habitat movements, I don't see it recovering with out fish culture help. There has been significant habitat works as well but they are non viable in large rivers that move around a lot. Now we can add another 1+ million people to the lower mainland in the next 20 years and you can guess what the likely long term impacks are going to be.
-
If you want to see what it will look like, just look at the Squamish system. Awful! Mamquam / Ashlu = a hand full of fish. Upper Squamish is less than 200 fish . Cheakamus is the best of the bunch but it only has maybe 400 fish on a good year. So if you just leave it to Mother Nature there is no garantee to it will recover. No steelhead fish culture ( fed fry releases, no smolts ) on the Squamish system since 1992 ( with the exception of the 2 years impacted by the CN Rail chemical spill ) and things are much worse than back in the 80's and 90's. With the types of floods we see up here and all of the associated gravel and habitat movements, I don't see it recovering with out fish culture help. There has been significant habitat works as well but they are non viable in large rivers that move around a lot. Now we can add another 1+ million people to the lower mainland in the next 20 years and you can guess what the likely long term impacks are going to be.
Lol you make me laugh.
Correlation does not necessarily mean causation. There has been a severe decrease in global pirate numbers from the 1700s, and a marked increase in atmospheric CO2. Did pirate numbers decrease just because of climate change?
-
Lol you make me laugh.
Correlation does not necessarily mean causation. There has been a severe decrease in global pirate numbers from the 1700s, and a marked increase in atmospheric CO2. Did pirate numbers decrease just because of climate change?
Young grasshopper lol... You should find out who bkk is first....
-
Young grasshopper lol... You should find out who bkk is first....
And he should look outside the lower mainland to a legendary system called the Thompson. I don't see him talking about how that steelhead run has declined. But then again it does not fit his model.
-
And he should look outside the lower mainland to a legendary system called the Thompson. I don't see him talking about how that steelhead run has declined. But then again it does not fit his model.
And what model is that? All I said is that the Squamish steelhead will most likely not recover as things are currently. I have been listening to people go on about what to do on the Thompson for over 30 years and the only thing that has happened there is the fish stocks have gotten worse every year. No one can agree on what to do. What are we down to now - 400 fish? Lots of problems and not all of them related to habitat. When you don't have enough fish to seed the habitat that is there now, building more habitat won't solve the issue. The Province has no real interest to doing anything as it will cost money. Just look at how few resources they put toward steelhead in Region 2 - one dedicated staff member based in Surrey. So why would I have a plan, the Provincial govt. do not.
-
So Clarkii what's your big plan for the Vedder? In a perfect world we would not have to have hatcheries and all the fish caught would be from wild progeny.
Looking at other systems on the west coast that do not have hatchery augmentation, these systems are all hanging on by a thread. As bkk said just look at
the Thompson as an example. No plan, no money no fish. A few more cycles and they can kiss the Thompson good bye.
Having caught a few hatchery and wild steelhead I can say that I can not tell the difference in the fighting ability of hatchery fish to their wild counterpart.
Yes I have heard guys say as soon as they hook a fish they can tell the difference! Not from my experience.
In future, if we want our grand kids to have the ability to catch salmon and steelhead, artificial propagation is a necessity!
Bkk: Check out Dr. Ernest L. Brannon's paper on Hatchery Genetic Risks and Benefits. A good read and gives a new perspective on genetic concerns.
-
Buck and I were fortunate to have Ernie Brannon as our supervisor way back when ...
here is the link buck suggested ..
http://www.piscatorialpursuits.com/forum/ubbthreads.php/topics/293935/Re_Salmon_Steelhead_Hatchery_F.html
-
So Clarkii what's your big plan for the Vedder? In a perfect world we would not have to have hatcheries and all the fish caught would be from wild progeny.
Looking at other systems on the west coast that do not have hatchery augmentation, these systems are all hanging on by a thread. As bkk said just look at
the Thompson as an example. No plan, no money no fish. A few more cycles and they can kiss the Thompson good bye.
Having caught a few hatchery and wild steelhead I can say that I can not tell the difference in the fighting ability of hatchery fish to their wild counterpart.
Yes I have heard guys say as soon as they hook a fish they can tell the difference! Not from my experience.
In future, if we want our grand kids to have the ability to catch salmon and steelhead, artificial propagation is a necessity!
Bkk: Check out Dr. Ernest L. Brannon's paper on Hatchery Genetic Risks and Benefits. A good read and gives a new perspective on genetic concerns.
How about we look to how successful the Americans have been with their hatchery programs....oh wait...hhmmm...they're actually discontinuing a whole bunch of them because their seen as detrimental to wild stocks and a waste of money because the returns on these fish are so poor.
Doesn't make sense to spend a ton of money on what ends up being mostly seal and cormorant food.
Okay back to the main point of this thread....anyone got some river conditions?
-
So Clarkii what's your big plan for the Vedder? In a perfect world we would not have to have hatcheries and all the fish caught would be from wild progeny.
Looking at other systems on the west coast that do not have hatchery augmentation, these systems are all hanging on by a thread.
I would not go as far as saying ALL of these systems are hanging on by a thread, as this is a completely false statement. I would approach it as MOST systems are struggling. There are many completely WILD streams that are doing quite well under the circumstances we face today on planet earth. Not like numbers we had seen in the 80's, but there are a lot more than you may think, some in some very urbanized areas, and remote areas of BC. Although like many have stated, the only thing one has to do is do a bit of reading. Placing hatchery steelhead in streams has proven fatal to most wild fish in most systems. That being said, one strange phenomenon (not great by any means) is the Chilliwack-Vedder system that does see ok numbers of Wild fish with Hatchery augmentation. We should take a look at what is happening down south in areas such as Washington, Oregon, and Cali. A good majority of things are not looking so hot for wild fish, and they have seemingly decimated a majority of their Wild Stocks. I have seen people towing with the notion about the Thompson needing a hatchery? That is just ridiculous. Let's take a step back people, and realize some of the REAL issues Wild Steelhead face. Commercial interception, ocean survival, ocean temperatures, loss of habitat, etc. etc. More things need to be solved before people just start throwing out the notion that hatchery fish are the answer, because it is not. Once you take the hatchery fish away, you are left with nothing but a Wild Run needing to rebuild itself.
-
they're actually discontinuing a whole bunch of them because their seen as detrimental to wild stocks and a waste of money because the returns on these fish are so poor.
The American situation is VERY different.
They have been using chambers creek steelhead to stock every system forever. These fish are inbred hatchery populations, that all come from one system. They are not the same as taking wild broodstock from each individual river. Broodstock is practically putting wild fish into the system with a clipped fin - not detrimental to genetics or anything else other than the short hatchery rearing time. The chambers stock is problematic, as you are mixing genetics from different rivers, and they've been so inbred for so long that you'll obviously have some problems.
I personally don't think hatchery supplementation is the way to make stocks recover, but I wouldn't say that hatchery fish are the problem here. As other have mentioned - commercial bycatch, gravel disturbances, logging, chemical/rail/oil spills, ocean conditions, etc are the things to blame. Getting rid of hatcheries will not cause a huge increase in numbers, and anyone that thinks it will have no idea what they are talking about. A bunch of island systems have been hatchery free for a long, long time now, and very few have recovered much, if at all.
-
So Clarkii what's your big plan for the Vedder? In a perfect world we would not have to have hatcheries and all the fish caught would be from wild progeny.
Looking at other systems on the west coast that do not have hatchery augmentation, these systems are all hanging on by a thread. As bkk said just look at
the Thompson as an example. No plan, no money no fish. A few more cycles and they can kiss the Thompson good bye.
Having caught a few hatchery and wild steelhead I can say that I can not tell the difference in the fighting ability of hatchery fish to their wild counterpart.
Yes I have heard guys say as soon as they hook a fish they can tell the difference! Not from my experience.
In future, if we want our grand kids to have the ability to catch salmon and steelhead, artificial propagation is a necessity!
You won't like the answer (as will most here ) but I'd like to see the kill fishery (and hatchery program) on that river gone. However before that I'd like to see an analysis on the relative pressure pretty fish caused by the hatchery program along with the derby (I understand the social aspect of it) over that with just a wild fish population (would need modelling which of course would not be totally accurate).
-
You won't like the answer (as will most here ) but I'd like to see the kill fishery (and hatchery program) on that river gone. However before that I'd like to see an analysis on the relative pressure pretty fish caused by the hatchery program along with the derby (I understand the social aspect of it)
The Cowichan has closed their hatchery Steelhead program. It has not lessened the angling pressure. It is just as crowded as ever. Most anglers fish Steelhead for the pure pleasure it brings to the soul. It is not a meat fishery and never will be.
-
What will happen to the wild fish population if the C/V system has no more hatchery program for steelhead? Will it increase the wild fish population or decrease? I am leaning on the later. Reason? Human weakness! There are all walks of life out there among the steelheading population. Some won't keep or eat steelhead, some won't mind a fresh fish once in a while, and most can't catch anything to begin with and will be tempted to poach any fish caught.
With hatchery fish being present in the river, most steelheaders of any conscience and ethics will release a wild steelhead without hesitation, hoping on catching a hatch eventually before the end of the day. Holding that hope, they can be releasing multiple wild fish (especially in the upper) without a blink. But without any prospect of a hatchery fish, even if a small % of steelheaders are tempted to poach a wild fish for dinner (because they won't hold on the hope of catching a hatch after releasing a wild fish), then the overall effect of wild-fish only fishery on a heavily fished urban river like the C/V system will be negative to the wild fish population. We will need a lot more C/Os on the river any day to keep poaching out of the system. But the reality may be that C/Os don't spend as much time on the wild systems because there are fewer 'meat' fishermen to catch there, and most wild-only fishermen are dedicated conservationists. So with less enforcement, won't a wild only system attract the poachers, especially on the popular & urban C/V system? Is that a possible reason that most of the wild-only systems are seeing less and less fish yearly? Just guessing, lol.
-
Poaching on summer-runs on a smaller trib east of Hope has had exactly that effect.
-
imo the outcome of no hatchery supplementation especially on system like Chilliwack is rather predictable, especially in today's day and age. There are too many negative factors for these fish to deal with from global warming to habitat destruction to poaching so on and so on...negative factors are continually getting worse, numbers will continue to dwindle. Long term stock survival and viability may very well depend on responsible hatchery augmentation even whether we fish for them or not.
There are responsible ways and irresponsible ways to go about it. I can't help but look at many prime hatchery specimens that return to the river and think to myself this thing has lived it's life from fry or smolt in river to ocean and back avoiding everything thrown in it's way has overcome all odds, to me, it's proven it's worth as a worthy fish to pass on it's genes. I will not automatically subscribe to the idea that because it was given a slight head start being hatched in hatchery that it is automatically going to harm or detriment the gene pool. Imo these fish need and will more so need the head start as time and conditions from river to ocean make it harder for the species to thrive.
Folks will point to other jurisdictions and say, look, this is why hatcheries don't work but I think most will agree not every hatchery programs were done thoughtfully or responsibly and those irresponsible hatchery programs shouldn't decide the fate of successful or potential successful programs everywhere else. Everything said I am not a professional or a scientist just an avid, concerned outdoorsman who's thoughts and perspectives based on my own observations.
I think it would be a shame if we would just shut a hatchery program down due to concern it would have on detrimental impact on wild stock while other more potential serious factors continue and worsen as time goes on ultimately sealing the species fate, hatcheries or not...
-
One paper by Dr Brannon does not a scientific consensus make. Overall it's solidly con on hatcheries. It's true the hatchery system was far different in the states; hatchery and wild fish were viewed as cut from the cloth & interchangeable. Hatchery augmentation was done in huge numbers with no protection for wild fish. Wild fish were killed off as angling pressure increased. Abundance of hatchery fish caused complacency when it came to protecting habitat. The result was native fish all but disappeared from many systems from pressure alone. When ocean conditions became unfavourable so did the hatchery fish no matter how many smolts they dumped out the hatchery pipeline. In many cases it was much the same with wild salmon.
While not the last word the Native Fish Society has lots of information and links on issues around hatcheries and anadromous salmonids:
http://nativefishsociety.org/index.php/science-research/
-
imo the outcome of no hatchery supplementation especially on system like Chilliwack is rather predictable, especially in today's day and age. There are too many negative factors for these fish to deal with from global warming to habitat destruction to poaching so on and so on...negative factors are continually getting worse, numbers will continue to dwindle. Long term stock survival and viability may very well depend on responsible hatchery augmentation even whether we fish for them or not.
There are responsible ways and irresponsible ways to go about it. I can't help but look at many prime hatchery specimens that return to the river and think to myself this thing has lived it's life from fry or smolt in river to ocean and back avoiding everything thrown in it's way has overcome all odds, to me, it's proven it's worth as a worthy fish to pass on it's genes. I will not automatically subscribe to the idea that because it was given a slight head start being hatched in hatchery that it is automatically going to harm or detriment the gene pool. Imo these fish need and will more so need the head start as time and conditions from river to ocean make it harder for the species to thrive.
Folks will point to other jurisdictions and say, look, this is why hatcheries don't work but I think most will agree not every hatchery programs were done thoughtfully or responsibly and those irresponsible hatchery programs shouldn't decide the fate of successful or potential successful programs everywhere else. Everything said I am not a professional or a scientist just an avid, concerned outdoorsman who's thoughts and perspectives based on my own observations.
I think it would be a shame if we would just shut a hatchery program down due to concern it would have on detrimental impact on wild stock while other more potential serious factors continue and worsen as time goes on ultimately sealing the species fate, hatcheries or not...
Good points wizard. One positive thing about curtailing the hatchery program on the C-V would mean up to 80 wild (or at least those with an adipose fin) would have the opportunity to spawn, and quite probably, fewer anglers would participate in the fishery resulting in perhaps a better angling experience for some, and less stress on wild fish caught and released.
I personally would prefer no hatchery augmentation on this system, but I’m not naïve, and realize hatchery fish are here to stay on the C-V. I do however care about the wellbeing of these fish so I suggest perhaps the hatchery program be modified to cut brood stock numbers in half, that is 20 pairs annually. These 40 fish should be matrix spawned to maximize genetic diversity http://www.sehab.org/pdf/GenManGuide.pdf,
reared on optimum water temperatures and fed appropriately to achieve whatever is considered nowadays the optimum size for optimum survival. And, perhaps most importantly, these “best science available” fish be released sea worthy tolerant, meaning pre smolt and just past parr. In other words when released they bugger off and do not residualize. It currently costs DFO app 120K annually to rear the progeny of about 80 fish (interesting, as steelhead are managed by the Province but they pay nothing towards rearing these fish) so whatever savings are realized from caring for less I suggest be put into maintenance of off channel habitat areas, or the science to achieve proper juvenile release times.
-
If a system can't support a population of wild fish in the long term, hatchery augmentation is unaffordable and pointless. It's just a symptom of how out of whack our societies values are.
-
Good points wizard. One positive thing about curtailing the hatchery program on the C-V would mean up to 80 wild (or at least those with an adipose fin) would have the opportunity to spawn, and quite probably, fewer anglers would participate in the fishery resulting in perhaps a better angling experience for some, and less stress on wild fish caught and released.
Fewer anglers? Not a chance. Take a look at the Cowichan River. It's as crowded as it ever was since the hatchery steelhead program was discontinued. Anglers love to fish for Steelhead. The Thompson also comes to mind. Look how crowded that river is when open. The only decrease in anglers over there r the ones who stopped angling for this endangered run out of compassion for these legendary iconic species.
-
Fewer anglers? Not a chance. Take a look at the Cowichan River. It's as crowded as it ever was since the hatchery steelhead program was discontinued. Anglers love to fish for Steelhead. The Thompson also comes to mind. Look how crowded that river is when open. The only decrease in anglers over there r the ones who stopped angling for this endangered run out of compassion for these legendary iconic species.
Ah of course the mighty Thompson. In no way comparable to the cheddar considering there is no hatchery, it is bigger water, and the T is also a legendary river. It has a name to it that draws people from around the globe.
As for the Cowie your happening to talk about a system with big brown trout in it, one of the few in BC. That in itself is a major draw. It also has a fly fishing only section on it. Are you assuming everyone fishing it was after steelhead? All the guys I know who fish it target the Browns.
-
There's a big 'hole' in this discussion which seems to focus exclusively on the freshwater environment steelhead use and even on specific rivers.
The big hole that's left out is the ocean and much of what has happened with steelhead and salmon numbers on the south coast over the last few decades has as much to do with the ocean as it does with anything else.
For whatever reason, long term, the Pacific can't support the same numbers of salmonids in the same areas it used to. There are more fish farther north and even into the Bering sea and the Arctic and fewer farther south.
Some rivers have fared better than others since this started happening. One is the V/C. The hatchery may have something to do with this but habitat improvements also may. Likewise fish in some rivers may migrate to different areas of the open Pacific and perhaps V/C fish genetically are programmed to go farther north where conditions are better.
However consider this; where conditions in the ocean open are not as favourable to salmonids as we'd like, every hatchery fish released is a fish that competes for food and space with wild fish.
If the ocean can no longer support steelhead and other salmonids in number to support a fishery, it won't matter how many hatchery smolts are released from a hatchery. If they can't live in the ocean then they won't return as adults. At some point the economics of poor returns will overwhelm the hatchery system. It won't be worth running and stocking will stop.
-
Don't you have a kill fishery on the smolts released from the hatchery?
-
Don't you have a kill fishery on the smolts released from the hatchery?
That's part of the problem ... not all of the juveniles released from the hatchery are ready for smolting and residualize in the river until they are ready to migrate. Unfortunately the river opens July 1 so these fish are caught before they leave the system.
-
I always heard most of those fish won't migrate to the ocean. Steelhead and resident rainbows are the same sort of fish except some % migrate out to sea. As steelhead numbers in rivers like the Thompson have gone down resident trout number have gone up. Nature currently favours the stay at homes.
-
Well Ralph, there's no denying every steelhead juvenile killed won't have the opportunity to migrate and return as an adult.
Comparing the productivity of the T and the C-V doesn't work for me.
-
I wasn't comparing but simply using the T as an example of how the fish respond to environmental changes man imposes.
Best I recall the Province promoted the marked trout fishery in the V/C to clear residual smolts out of the system as they compete with wild fish for space and food, which is not a good thing. The hatchery model is that released smolts quickly move downstream to tide water and thus don't use in stream resources better utilized by wild steelhead smolts - which the hatchery programs depends on.
I think up to the present we've been fortunate the V/C has maintained a healthy population of wild fish while the hatchery has been successful in producing respectable numbers of hatchery fish and a good % of those are harvested helping to mitigate possible genetic contamination of wild steelhead stocks. Let's hope that continues well into the future.
-
The Thompson has been seeing less and less fish for various reasons, but with numbers as low as they currently are, there is no way they are going to rebound while the commercials are still gillnetting chum in the lower Fraser (Area E)...period.
-
The Thompson has been seeing less and less fish for various reasons, but with numbers as low as they currently are, there is no way they are going to rebound while the commercials are still gillnetting chum in the lower Fraser (Area E)...period.
And allowing anglers to continue to fish for an endangered run does not help either. :'(