Fishing in British Columbia > Fishing-related Issues & News
Billions spent on Columbia River fail to help salmon and steelhead
wildmanyeah:
the reality is they could probably compare it to many salmon stocks we have in BC, that are not enhanced and do not have a dam as part of their migration and find similar declines in wild fish populations.
there is also a lot of cheese in the study, like they say hatchery's have not improved wild fish populations, sure that's correct.
But they fail to acknowledge that in the absence of hatchery's, there would of been no way the wild population would of been able to sustain the level of harvest that has occured over the past 50 years thanks to the hatchery production.
IMO they are comparing apples to oranges in many ways in this study.
saying spending 9 billion have not improved wild populations sure correct, but it has provided a fishery that the wild population would of never sustained.
RalphH:
--- Quote from: wildmanyeah on October 17, 2023, 12:20:08 PM ---
saying spending 9 billion have not improved wild populations sure correct, but it has provided a fishery that the wild population would of never sustained.
--- End quote ---
This is what is typically known as a massive government subsidy. Wild fish are free. Much of the hatchery infrastructure in Washington, particularly in the Upper Columbia is basically at the end of it's useful life and needs to be rebuilt or replaced. I think the study will be used for value for money considerations. Sports anglers are completely in favor of such expenditures as long as they don't have to foot the bulk of the bill.
wildmanyeah:
--- Quote from: RalphH on October 17, 2023, 06:59:29 PM ---This is what is typically known as a massive government subsidy. Wild fish are free. Much of the hatchery infrastructure in Washington, particularly in the Upper Columbia is basically at the end of it's useful life and needs to be rebuilt or replaced. I think the study will be used for value for money considerations. Sports anglers are completely in favor of such expenditures as long as they don't have to foot the bulk of the bill.
--- End quote ---
It’s basically a carbon tax, pay money for destroying the environment. In this case the electricity company’s paying for displacing wild fish.
Also pay for a access hatchery would be the dream for many people. Like fishing in a trout pond.
Hatcherys I don’t think are going anywhere goverment needs them so First Nations can practice there traditional things
I don’t disagree tho hatchery for harvest are 100% a government subsidy.
I doubt Fred would even have a business without the chilwack hatchery
RalphH:
the $9 billion was public expenditure not from private enterprise which the electrical utilities are. Quoted comments from other stake holders made it clear other expenditures were excluded from the figure. Hatchery operations at best offer a band-aide treatment of the major loss of the fisheries resource and can never come close to replacing what's been lost.
A pay for access hatchery? Where do you come up with this stuff? Never mentioned. The sport fishing industry ... and it is an industry, is heavily subsidized and wouldn't exist as it does today without major injections of government funds. It's a welfare state operation and we are all Hatchery Welfare Bums.
wildmanyeah:
https://fortune.com/2023/09/26/white-house-biden-200-million-salmon-ancestral-fishing-grounds-washington/
I thought there was a pay for access hatchery ran by first nations down south?
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version