Originally Posted By: elparquito
Originally Posted By: stlhdr1
Prove me wrong then? Countless amounts of data if you look deep enough that supports my statement.

Keith


Happy to chat with you about it when we are shooting.

The data and studies I'm looking at seem to squarely point the finger at upriver and estuary habitat loss as the largest threats and reasons of a declining (stable at best) wild winter steelhead populations on the EFL.

I would wager a large sum of money that if the studies were done today a new, easily identified threat would be the top culprit, or at least a high contender to the loss/destruction of habitat. The Ocean.

The Ocean and ocean conditions are currently not favorable to a steelhead and a lot of the salmonid species.

Unless I'm missing something, the current data isn't showing any type of significant rebounding effect for the EFL.

It's not crashing in the tank either....but seems to be chugging long at a neutral state with periods of high and low escapement.

Maybe these documents are Fake News.

https://www.ezview.wa.gov/Portals/_1962/...DFW_Feb2019.pdf

https://nativefishsociety.org/watersheds/east-fork-lewis

Historical escapement data says anywhere from 1,000-11,000 seems to fit "the norm".

Escapement goal is 875 wild winter runs.

Look a the escapement graphs. No where close to 11,000 fish....and seems to hang right around the 800 mark and meets escapement.

That just tells me the river isn't outright dying. Not rebounding significantly.

I'm not an advocate for hatchery steelhead, but making blanket statements about how a few hatchery strays and or some magical spawning bed competition and/or hatchery/wild co-mingling in the spawning beds is by far *not* the largest threat to an EFL wild steelhead.

Can flat out guarantee that with absolutely no hatchery turds in the EFL now and in the future, you're never going to see 11,000 returning wild winter runs to that river...... You're never going to see 5,000...or 2,500......

You may see another 1,400 and you're probably going to see sub-800 numbers are well.


Good data there but it takes us further in this conversation when we discuss escapement imho.

When you consider a river's carrying capacity and the fact that most native steelhead smolt hold over up to two years before out-migration, there's minimal natural food in the systems compared to 150 years ago (probably when it could have had 11,000 returning natives), ie. the percentage of salmon returning compared to historical numbers falls right in line with the % of carrying capacity in the river basin if that makes sense. The carcasses of those huge numbers of salmon that used to return were one of major contributing factors to providing nutrients and food to the river system.

In other words, I understand escapement at one point could have been 11,000, 5000 or 2500 fish but to sustain those sort of numbers salmon populations would have to be at near historical levels as well, yet they're not. So we have this circle of life that can't happen in any sizable numbers. Then, when you add smolt to a under achieving system you take food from those that inhabit the area, the native smolts..

So, I guess we can dream of larger escapements but until the whole system is balanced it's what the carrying capacity is in the moment that dictates the future escapements, if that makes sense. Does habitat factor in, most certainly but I still think that's a cop out as well and I don't think it's the deciding factor to the numbers rebounding. Drive up the EFL and look at the habitat the river has to offer, its as good as any other basin out there especially in the mid to upper reaches of the river system.

When it comes to ocean conditions, we could go in circles in debating that as well. Yet, the native NFL Fall Chinook returns were again off the charts this year in the worst ocean conditions that have been preached about since I remember paying attention and lord have mercy on this rivers minimal habitat, just a fluke I suppose...

Sort of brings us full circle and back to what's been done so far as a state or coast wide discussion isn't working or really moving the needle except for these very few places where hatchery fish haven't existed and or have been fully removed to see evidence of or rebounds in native populations. I sort of feel like we've been kicking the can down the road for 20+ years, somethings got to change. In other words doing what we as sportsman would like to see (flood the rivers with hatchery fish) won't happen so might as well remove the number 1 factor holding these natives back from rebounding imho, the hatchery fish and that includes the hatchery salmon smolts too...

Keith
_________________________
It's time to put the red rubber nose away, clown seasons over.