Originally posted by Smalma:
In taking about realistic expectations of maximum carrying capacity you mentioned the Skagit river as an examole. Very interesting and insightful case. Over the last 20 years the Skagit has had escapements of wild steelhead of 10,000 or more fish for 4 times. In every case the resulting returns fo the adults produced by those larger escapements was less than the parent run and if fact each return was less than 8,000 fish. That would seem to argue that the average capacity of the Skagit is less than 10,000 fish, probably between 8 and 9,000.
Were these declines incosistent with other declines in out Puget Sound river systems?? To say that these declines were due to an escapement that excedes carrying capacity is ludicrous...unless other rivers in Puget Sound did not experience the same declines. And also were there any other cicumstances that could have effected escapement other then "too many fish spawning"????
Secondly, what if it was 3 out of 4 or 4 out of 5??...its been too long since statistics to do the math in my head but wouldn't that not be a significant enough of a differance to make a far reaaching biological decision on??
I can undestand 10 out 10 or 19 out of 20 as I believe there would be a significant differance...but 4 out of 4????
When you say that we must manage for a return between MSH numbers and carry capacity...how about we manage for a return that is over MSH and let Mother Nature take care of a population that is exceding carry capacity, which She has done for millions of years.
If that means closing down even C&R when the hooking mortality of fishery would push the escapement below MSH, then so be it.
We must put the fish first, the sport that we love is a privelage and is not a right. We gave up that right when we tore down the forests, damed the rivers, polluted the waters, overfished them, created this animal that is global warming that is screwing with ocean survival (PDO aside) etc. etc. etc.
Thanks!!
Previous Topic
Index
