Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Randog]

The Ministry of Water, Land and Air Protection (WALP) is contemplating introducing a policy which will designate more than 600 streams in B.C. as either Hatchery augmented or "Wild" . As I recently attended two meetings on this policy, one in Nanaimo and one in Burnaby, I have mixed feelings on this policy. To me it seems like WALP is throwing the baby out with the bathwater. Plese read this proposed policy and post your comments. I'll elaborate on my thoughts latter in the thread.

http://wlapwww.gov.bc.ca/fw/documents/steelhead_stream_class.pdf

[Randog]

Wow, 74 reads, and nobody has any comments? If your and avid steelhead angler, please read this policy. It may affect your angling oppertunities for steelhead. I don't want to voice my views on this policy yet, but would love to hear what others think. Please take a minute to read it.

[Rodney]

Read it (can't believe I am reading it on a Saturday night! ). How does it differ to the current management strategy?

[reach]

Well, here's my take.  It sounds to me like a cost cutting measure.  If they class a whole bunch of streams as "wild", they don't have to spend any money or effort to stock them with hatchery fish.  They can simply leave them alone, or close them to fishing if they get lazy and/or the steelhead numbers decline.  But due to the wild designation, enhancing those streams would not involve hatchery fish.

It looks like even small local volunteer-run hatcheries would be out of the question unless the stock gets close to extinction.

I expect it would lead to many smaller streams being closed to fishing, but perhaps better fishing on the hatchery-augmented streams as they would be able to focus their resources.  This is the same as the permanent "red tide" closure on the north coast, which has nothing to do with actual PSP presence but is strictly a result of lack of money for coastwide monitoring.  The same thing would happen with steelhead fishing.

Better to NOT cut the $4 million from the salmonid enhancement budget.  Then they might not have to consider policies like this.

[Randog]

Well, here's my take.  It sounds to me like a cost cutting measure.  If they class a whole bunch of streams as "wild", they don't have to spend any money or effort to stock them with hatchery fish.  They can simply leave them alone, or close them to fishing if they get lazy and/or the steelhead numbers decline.  But due to the wild designation, enhancing those streams would not involve hatchery fish.

Cost cutting measures? Maybe,but I don't think thats the reason for this policy. Could it possibly be that GBSRP has a hold of WALPS ear and has convinced them that steelhead returns should only be from "Wild" origins? Now that the Fresh water fisheries society gets 1/2 of every dollar from angling lisc. sold to joe public in B.C. , should'nt they be thinking of ways to introduce new anglers to the already crowded streams and lakes in B.C. to increase cash flow? Let's smell the coffee here, what happens if this policy dosen't work? What if WALP dosen't see their projected end result? Will they let the remaing "wild" reurn of steelhead vanish, and never replace them?

  Let me ask this, why are we experiencing such low steelhead returns from central B.C. south to the 49th? Poor ocean survival? Overharvesting? Ocean temps?

 We here on the West Coast of B.C. have the highest concentration of fish biologists in Canada and NONE of them can seem to figure it out!

[Smiley]

i am not a english major or a philly lawyer, but i get the same type of message as reach does. no matter what they do it will cost a load of money and guess who is going to pay.soon only the rich will be fishing this province.
 what the h_ll is the difference between conservation fish culture program and the traditional production hatchery program????ones clipped and the other not or is it more. can someone explain that.

[Rodney]

You meant highest concentration of unemployed fish biologists.

Because of my lack of background on steelhead management, I will only comment on a few things about the policy. After one glance, from a biologist's point of view, I find it quite sounding with maybe the odd questionable approaches. From an angler's point of view, I can see our opportunities being downsized. Oh well, the fish comes first anyway right?

Possible reasons of low steelhead returns

Again, I'll offer a few suggestions that may have impacted the return as I am not as updated on the current situation as others.

One thing to keep in mind is that ocean productivity is irregularly cyclic. One prime example that indicates this trend is the pacific and atlantic herring fisheries (I do not have the graphs of historical harvest and returns, will post if I find them). Historically, fishermen in Japan or East coast of NA have had seasons when hardly any herrings returned during spawning seasons, while other years their allowable harvests well exceeded the average. Why do such occurances take place, no one really knows. One possible hypothesis is climatic fluctuation. Ocean temperature is a major precursor of productivity of planktons, which acts as the base of the food web. This may possibly impact the salmonid populations after their ocean phase as they spend more than 50% of their lifespan in the ocean and sit on a higher trophic level. Ocean temperature and other climatic components can impact the spawner return size, the question is how much? I shall cease discussing this idea at this point before embarrassing myself in front of my colleagues as I simply do not have information to continue further.

If ocean survival is to blame, then is it simply out of our hands since we can not control natural trend? The answer is not entirely yes. Most salmonids fail to survive in the ocean soon after smoltification. Smoltification is a juvenile phase between the river and the ocean. Survival rate of smolts depends on several factors. These include the presence of predators and ability to feed. If a smolt is too small, it can not feed as fast as others, its chance of being eaten is much larger (especially during warm years when higher populations of mackerel and other pelagic species are further north).

One factor that cannot be neglected is smolt size. If the smolt is bigger, survival rate is higher. How does a juvenile salmonid achieve the optimal weight before smoltification? By rearing in a healthy stream where food is abundant. Abundance of food means higher population of insects. Healthy stream means shady pools created by overhanging trees, well oxygenated water and sufficient amount of gravel.

Anyways, I'm trying to say.... Better spawning and rearing habitat brings back more fish.

Saturday night....

[chris gadsden]

Thanks for posting this Randy. Am sort of burnt out from yesterday's meeting so will read and comment later. Will want to discuss with my MLA if things look hay wire on this report

A side thought if they are so bent on this wild policy thing as the FED'S are also seeming to be leading too maybe we should be banning fish farms. They are hatchery raised fish, atlantic and some chinook, numbers of them escaping into the wild, polluting the ocean floor, sea lice problems ect.

One of the first Nation presenters yesterday said it made him cry to see all the chum and pink fry covered with sea lice in the Broughton Archipelago the last while.

Sorry if I hijacked this thread but will bring it back tomorrow when I read the complete report.

[reach]

... what happens if this policy dosen't work? What if WALP dosen't see their projected end result? Will they let the remaing "wild" reurn of steelhead vanish, and never replace them?

Yes, I expect that's what they would do.  They would point to this policy and say "our hands are tied - we can't add hatchery fish to a wild stream."  Unless the stock is singled out by SARA or the Accord for Protection of Species at Risk, whatever that is, as needing a Recovery Program, the policy as written says they will do nothing except control fishing effort and work on habitat.  And we all know how much enhancing habitat costs, so being a bit of a cynic, I doubt any real habitat work would happen.

But that brings up the question - what SHOULD they do in that case?  Is the status quo an option?  The only other option I see would be allow small hatchery programs on streams that are in trouble, along the same lines as the current programs (must use wild brood stock, must not "high grade" when selecting brood stock, hatchery fry must not be more than 30% of total released, etc.)  Any other ideas?  Maybe your steelhead license should require some number of hours of "volunteer" work in habitat improvement/enhancement?  (That's probably not practical, but hey, I'm brainstorming.)

[Randog]

Reach/Smiley,  I'm not sure how you arrived at the conclusion that introduction of this policy well require buckets if cash? The policy says nothing about closing hatcheries, it just wont allow hatcheries on streams that have been classifies as wild, or won't reopen any hatcheries that are not currently functioning. Even though the hatchery was introducing "Hatchery augmented" fish into a stream and some of the progeny of those "Hatchery" fish will have hatchery genes and no doubt spawm with the so called "wild" fish. Will the hatchery/wild fish be of pure 'Wild" strain?

  What happens if a run of "Wild" steelhead is decimated by a human error, i.e. chemical spill, land slide etc. How will WALP rebuild that return? Hatchery, I bet. This policy is quite convoluted and it is very easy to misconstrue its meaning. I have probably read the policy at least 20 times and still find holes in it and can't see how it will cost or save any revenue.

[reach]

Randog, I didn't say it would require cash.  I said it would save cash, as it restricts the amount of hatchery work they can do.  It would limit the options when it comes to hatcheries and give the green light to focus all the budget they have on the few streams designated hatchery-augmented.  If a wild run gets into trouble, the only management options for wild streams would be improve habitat (sorry, no budget for that...) or shut them down.

[bkk]

News flash for you. It won't save any money as the Federal govt is picking up the tab for most of the steelhead enhancement. All the hatchery steelhead in the Vedder, Chehalis and Stamp are all paid for by the federal govt. As DFO is forced by the Ottawa bureacrates to cut costs, you can be sure that the steelhead programs are going to disapear. These are Provincial programs  and the BC govt has not paid for any of them. They put $1 million into SEP when it was formed in the late 70's and no money since. Their money is long gone. Classifing streams wild / hatchery is just another classic move by the Province to rearange the deck chairs on the Titanic and then tell us that everything is under control. Look around at the Provinces track record in southern BC when it comes to steelhead. Pretty poor. We need a whole new group of senior people in WLAP with some new ideas  or steelhead are going to disapear in a lot of the south coast areas. Think I'm wrong. Look at the Squamish. When was the last time anyone raved about this steelhead fishery. It used to be the 2nd best fishery in Region 2. It's in horrible shape now. After 20+ years of doing nothing and hopeing for the best we now have at best, under 400 fish. Good job guys. Their plan is soon comming to a river near you. God help us all. They are always underfunded, yet BC has a large surplus and the senior people can't even get $4 Million dollars for Georgia Straight Steelhead Recovery programs. Time for some heads to roll.

[Randog]

Well said BKK, at the rate WALP is proceeding, I think I might blow the dust off the ol' golf clubs. You say that the Feds. are sponsering the steelhead programs? Where did you get this info? Specifics please.

[bkk]

Common knoweldge. Talk to Bob Stanton at Chwk hatchery or Robin Dickson at Capilano and they will tell you what it costs. No provincial money. It's all comming out the DFO budget to run these facilities.

[chris gadsden]

On the Vedder the majority of the brood stock ( Wild ) Steelhead are captured by volunteer anglers. They are then transported to the Chilliwack River Hatchery by their staff where they are keep in condominums until they are ready to be spawned in the Spring.

After the eggs are hatched they are raised at the hatchery to smolt stage and are picked up by the Abbotsford Trout Hatchery staff in their tanker trucks and put into the lower part of the Vedder River in May the following year.

ABH coordinate the volunteer anglers, number of brood to be taken etc.

Am not sure what the cost sharing between FOC and Province is if there is one but could find out but someone else on the board most likely knows.