Check

 

Defiance Boats!

LURECHARGE!

THE PP OUTDOOR FORUMS

Kast Gear!

Power Pro Shimano Reels G Loomis Rods

  Willie boats! Puffballs!

 

Three Rivers Marine

 

 
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 >
Topic Options
Rate This Topic
#1021390 - 02/03/20 10:25 AM "A Review of Hatchery Reform Science in WA State"
OncyT Offline
Returning Adult

Registered: 02/06/08
Posts: 463
The WDFW Fish Science staff has published one of the documents they have been preparing as part of the ongoing review of the Fish and Wildlife Commission's Hatchery and Fishery Reform Policy. Here are a few take away conclusions from the report:

Overarching themes:

Hatchery reform is but one of several factors requiring careful planning and aggressive implementation needed to achieve meaningful recovery of salmon populations.

Hatchery reform is largely aimed at reducing risk in a relative but not absolute sense.

In WDFW’s hatchery system, a focus on efficiency and maximizing abundance prevents widespread implementation of risk reduction measures.

Conclusions Specific to HSRG Recommendations

The principles of reducing pHOS and increasing pNOB to achieve fitness gains in wild populations are well-founded, and should be fundamental goals in any hatchery reform management action.

Program size requires more careful scrutiny and scientific justification because it affects virtually every aspect of hatchery risks.

The HSRG’s phased approach to recovery has strong conceptual merit, but its implementation has resulted in an absence of stricter, conservation oriented PNI goals for many populations.

We recommend crafting a stand-alone monitoring and adaptive management plan for each hatchery program that quantifies both benefits and risks, and explicitly links hatchery performance metrics to potential operational changes.


WDFW Fish Science review

Top
#1021391 - 02/03/20 10:47 AM Re: "A Review of Hatchery Reform Science in WA State" [Re: OncyT]
Carcassman Offline
River Nutrients

Registered: 11/21/07
Posts: 5732
Loc: Olema,California,Planet Earth
Interesting. "a focus on efficiency and maximizing abundance prevents widespread implementation of risk reduction measures". When I was in Hatcheries, the main difference between State facilities and for profit was the recognition that we weren't trying to be "efficient", we were trying to produce the fish and stocks that were best suited to ecosystem.

If WDFW is now saying that efficiency is the goal, then let private business run the show as they will likely do it cheaper. And money must be the only important thing.

Top
#1021397 - 02/03/20 11:55 AM Re: "A Review of Hatchery Reform Science in WA State" [Re: Carcassman]
OncyT Offline
Returning Adult

Registered: 02/06/08
Posts: 463
Originally Posted By: Carcassman
Interesting. "a focus on efficiency and maximizing abundance prevents widespread implementation of risk reduction measures". When I was in Hatcheries, the main difference between State facilities and for profit was the recognition that we weren't trying to be "efficient", we were trying to produce the fish and stocks that were best suited to ecosystem.

If WDFW is now saying that efficiency is the goal, then let private business run the show as they will likely do it cheaper. And money must be the only important thing.

I haven't read the full report yet, so I'm just spit-balling this, but I suspect the issue of efficiency has to do with how inefficient it is to try to implement some of the broodstock management protocols, e.g. collecting natural broodstock or operating a weir to control the spawning of hathery origin returns. Those types of things are certainly less efficient in terms of time, money and personnel than simply operating hatcheries as we have in the past, and in many cases, still do. That would seem to fit in with the other thought that the desire to maximize abundance (I'm guessng in terms of the size of the hatchery program and therefore abundance of hatchery fish returning) prevents being able to implement risk reduction measures like more conservation minded broodstock protocols. Again, just a guess before I read the report.



Edited by OncyT (02/03/20 12:00 PM)

Top
#1021426 - 02/03/20 05:59 PM Re: "A Review of Hatchery Reform Science in WA State" [Re: OncyT]
blenny Offline
Fry

Registered: 12/19/18
Posts: 26
There is some really good data in this document:

Quote:
In 2006, non-treaty commercial salmon fisheries in Washington generated a gross
revenue of $7 M, which represents harvest and seafood revenue minus fishing and processing
costs (TCW Economics 2008). The 2006 economic impacts of non-treaty commercial salmon
fisheries was estimated at $21 M and 507 jobs, which includes the direct personal income and
secondary, indirect benefits to local economies of the persons employed in the fishing industry
spending their earnings (TCW Economics 2008). Wegge (2008) estimated the direct plus
indirect economic impacts of Washington’s 120 salmon and steelhead hatchery programs;
across the Puget Sound, Washington Coast, and Lower Columbia regions, the total contribution
of non-treaty commercial fisheries to personal income was approximately $14 M.
The 2006 total economic impact (again, direct and indirect personal income) of all
Washington State recreational fisheries, not just salmon and steelhead, was estimated at $393
M (TCW Economics 2008). Salmon and steelhead fisheries totaled 39% across all recreational
fisheries of a different metric, net economic value (described below under Social and cultural
section), so we suggest a coarse economic impact of $153 M for Washington’s recreational
salmon and steelhead fisheries. Furthermore, Wegge (2009) estimated the economic impact of Washington’s hatcheries to salmon and steelhead recreational fisheries in Puget Sound,
Washington Coast and Lower Columbia at $54 M.]

Top
#1021437 - 02/03/20 11:31 PM Re: "A Review of Hatchery Reform Science in WA State" [Re: OncyT]
darth baiter Offline
Smolt

Registered: 04/04/10
Posts: 85
Loc: United States
The surprising thing in OncyT's summary is the self criticism of WDFW operations from a WDFW report. It is difficult to put out a report from within an agency that says something other than glowing comments. CM: I dont think that ecosystem concerns were ever a main driver in WDFW hatcheries; at best perhaps acknowledgement of "ecosystems" but not enough to dramatically alter programs. "More is better" has been the primary motivator for hatcheries up until recently.

Top
#1021442 - 02/04/20 07:06 AM Re: "A Review of Hatchery Reform Science in WA State" [Re: OncyT]
Carcassman Offline
River Nutrients

Registered: 11/21/07
Posts: 5732
Loc: Olema,California,Planet Earth
There was a big difference back then. WDF utilized "local" stocks. They did transfer stuff around but then used the returns to maintain the program. WDG used the mothership model which was much more economical.

For trout and various lakes (high and low) they maintained a variety of stocks rather than a single one-size fits all which is (again) cheaper.

My point was that, in the past at least, WDFW used local stocks which are less economical than a mothership operation which is why the agency, back then anyway, was certain that their operations were, overall, better for the State economically than just going cheap and buying the fish from private growers.

Top
#1021457 - 02/04/20 10:36 AM Re: "A Review of Hatchery Reform Science in WA State" [Re: Carcassman]
WDFW X 1 = 0 Offline
Official Darkside Fucktard Whisperer

Registered: 01/27/15
Posts: 2911
Originally Posted By: Carcassman
Interesting. "a focus on efficiency and maximizing abundance prevents widespread implementation of risk reduction measures". When I was in Hatcheries, the main difference between State facilities and for profit was the recognition that we weren't trying to be "efficient", we were trying to produce the fish and stocks that were best suited to ecosystem.

If WDFW is now saying that efficiency is the goal, then let private business run the show as they will likely do it cheaper. And money must be the only important thing.




LOL.
Don't wanna cut into the pension donation pot.
Gotta keep real.
And fail.
Efficiency!!!! Still laughing.

Top
#1021458 - 02/04/20 10:38 AM Re: "A Review of Hatchery Reform Science in WA State" [Re: Carcassman]
OncyT Offline
Returning Adult

Registered: 02/06/08
Posts: 463
Originally Posted By: Carcassman
There was a big difference back then. WDF utilized "local" stocks. They did transfer stuff around but then used the returns to maintain the program. WDG used the mothership model which was much more economical.

For trout and various lakes (high and low) they maintained a variety of stocks rather than a single one-size fits all which is (again) cheaper.

My point was that, in the past at least, WDFW used local stocks which are less economical than a mothership operation which is why the agency, back then anyway, was certain that their operations were, overall, better for the State economically than just going cheap and buying the fish from private growers.

WDF may have preferred using local stocks, but had no problem backfilling eggs from other sources when there weren't enough of the local stocks available to make program. When starting new programs, it was also common to simply transfer in eggs or fish from an existing hatchery program, even if it were in a different watershed, rather than collecting local broodstock.

Top
#1021463 - 02/04/20 11:47 AM Re: "A Review of Hatchery Reform Science in WA State" [Re: WDFW X 1 = 0]
Rivrguy Offline
River Nutrients

Registered: 03/03/09
Posts: 3367
Loc: Somewhere on the planet,I hope
Quote:
And money must be the only important thing.


Well yes in a manner of speaking. To WDFW the most important thing is BUDGET, period. The agency will do everything possible to maintain the current staffing and how they do business even if it short changes the tax payer, license buyers, and the resource. It is what it is.
_________________________
Dazed and confused.............the fog is closing in

Top
#1021566 - 02/05/20 10:50 AM Re: "A Review of Hatchery Reform Science in WA State" [Re: OncyT]
blenny Offline
Fry

Registered: 12/19/18
Posts: 26
Has anyone in hear actually read or skimmed the document? It took me about an hour to go through it. This is a really important document for policy making- it is extremely balanced and even handed when assessing the pros and cons of hatcheries. It actually outlines programs that work, programs that aren't working and knowledge gaps.The fact that the agency published this document is a huge step in the right direction and there are forum members in here more dedicated to circle jerking anti-WDFW posts. This document acknowledges the failures of the current hatchery programs and suggests modern approaches and largely supports 100% broodstocking programs for conservation and harvest minded hatcheries. It also acknowledges that over production of chum and pink salmon by Alaska, Japan and Russia may be impacting our hatchery production in Washington. Another thing not often considered by the pro-hatchery crowd is highlighted in the document as well: out competition of natives by hatchery releases in habitat limited environments. Releasing large chinook smolts can result in native fish being eaten or simply out-muscled by the larger fish.

Top
#1021569 - 02/05/20 11:07 AM Re: "A Review of Hatchery Reform Science in WA State" [Re: OncyT]
WDFW X 1 = 0 Offline
Official Darkside Fucktard Whisperer

Registered: 01/27/15
Posts: 2911
That's great.
I approve.
Now turn the printed word into fish instead of the continued circle jerking..

Top
#1021573 - 02/05/20 11:40 AM Re: "A Review of Hatchery Reform Science in WA State" [Re: blenny]
Rivrguy Offline
River Nutrients

Registered: 03/03/09
Posts: 3367
Loc: Somewhere on the planet,I hope
Ah, BL all of this was known ( minus the AK bit ) in the 90's. It is not that this was not known but rather the agency chose not to change. I seriously doubt that the agency will feel the need to upend the cart now. The Science Division does not rule the roost but rather Fish Program does and they are all about harvest.


Edited by Rivrguy (02/05/20 11:43 AM)
_________________________
Dazed and confused.............the fog is closing in

Top
#1021656 - 02/05/20 07:56 PM Re: "A Review of Hatchery Reform Science in WA State" [Re: OncyT]
OncyT Offline
Returning Adult

Registered: 02/06/08
Posts: 463
In case anyone wants to comment on this report or the review of the hatchery policy it is on the Fish and Wildlife Commission's agenda at their meeting tomorrow:

THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 2020

8:00 AM Hatchery Policy Review Emerging Science Report Workshop – Briefing, Public Comment

Location: Room 172
Staff will brief the Commission on the key findings of the recently completed science report titled, “A review of hatchery reform science in Washington State.”
Staff Report: Joe Anderson, Research Scientist and Ken Warheit, Supervisor of Genetic and Fish Health Laboratories

Public Comment – This Item Only

Top
#1021685 - 02/06/20 05:59 AM Re: "A Review of Hatchery Reform Science in WA State" [Re: OncyT]
Smalma Offline
River Nutrients

Registered: 11/25/01
Posts: 2779
Loc: Marysville
What shapes much of the conversation around hatchery, recovery and many of our fisheries issues has been the dramatic decline in marine smolt to adult survivals; especially for Puget Sound stocks.

In the last 40 years the information I can dig up show that for steelhead, coho, and Chinook the fish returning to Puget Sound have seen an 80 to 90% decline in that smolt to adult survival. That survival decline appears to be occurring at significantly accelerated rates than that of the ocean as a whole.

Those declines not only limits the returns from given hatchery releases but also the success of wild escapements. In addition those poor returns negate or limits the benefits from freshwater restoration work.

As interesting aside to the whole decline of Puget Sound smolt to adult survivals has been that with at least the coho and steelhead that decline occurred first or happened faster in the South Sound but now is a PS wide program.

Curt

Top
#1021688 - 02/06/20 07:23 AM Re: "A Review of Hatchery Reform Science in WA State" [Re: OncyT]
Carcassman Offline
River Nutrients

Registered: 11/21/07
Posts: 5732
Loc: Olema,California,Planet Earth
I remember when we first noticed the deep SS problem. It was with yearling smolts, primarily. What really struck me was when we saw Yearling Chinook from Minter doing worse that the same stock, but fingerlings, released in White River. Made it look like the problem was at or north of the Narrows.

At that time, I found it hard to say the problem was in-Sound (Itself) as the season cutts and native char were both doing well and increasing and they lived their whole life in that selfsame Sound.

I don't know if the cutts and char are still increasing but I do know that the cutts are supporting targeted/guided fisheries.

Top
#1021699 - 02/06/20 09:44 AM Re: "A Review of Hatchery Reform Science in WA State" [Re: OncyT]
_WW_ Offline
Juvenile at Sea

Registered: 01/30/13
Posts: 219
Loc: Skagit
something wrong with the link this morning. Takes me to Homeimprovement.com
_________________________
Catch & Release Is Not A Crime

Top
#1021758 - 02/07/20 03:37 PM Re: "A Review of Hatchery Reform Science in WA State" [Re: OncyT]
slabhunter Offline
River Nutrients

Registered: 01/17/04
Posts: 3649
Loc: Sheltona Beach
HRS was meant to be a part of the solution. Hydro and Habitat have changed for the better. Harvest continues to be a problem.

The gill net folks say how they handle less b-run steel head with larger mesh. The thing missed is the ones captured and handled are the ones that could have been major contributors. Them of greater fecundity.
_________________________
When we are forgotten, we cease to exist .
Share your outdoor skills.

Top
#1021763 - 02/07/20 04:57 PM Re: "A Review of Hatchery Reform Science in WA State" [Re: slabhunter]
RUNnGUN Offline
Spawner

Registered: 12/06/07
Posts: 979
Originally Posted By: slabhunter
HRS was meant to be a part of the solution. Hydro and Habitat have changed for the better. Harvest continues to be a problem.

The gill net folks say how they handle less b-run steel head with larger mesh. The thing missed is the ones captured and handled are the ones that could have been major contributors. Them of greater fecundity.


In reality, what is the gill net impact on Columbia river Steelhead? Is it factually known? We can make all the assumptions we want, and I agree think they F up lots while handling. But does anyone really know other than those on board? Why not have observers on every boat? Make that a requirement for every licensed commercial fisher. I would volunteer to be an observer even if it meant the threat of walking the plank.
_________________________
"After fishing for Steelhead for over 40 years, Steelheading as I know it is gone in Puget Sound!"
ME

Top
#1021766 - 02/07/20 05:52 PM Re: "A Review of Hatchery Reform Science in WA State" [Re: OncyT]
Carcassman Offline
River Nutrients

Registered: 11/21/07
Posts: 5732
Loc: Olema,California,Planet Earth
Way back with separate agencies, WDG rules mandated that all steelhead caught in nets be released.Period, Live, dead. And, there was no accounting. I know of one CR fishery where one guy retained, because they were dead, 400 pounds of steelhead (20 fish). They were donated. He also released any that were live. We (the State) made a conscious decision to not know what was going on.

Top
#1021776 - 02/08/20 08:03 AM Re: "A Review of Hatchery Reform Science in WA State" [Re: slabhunter]
Numbqua Offline
Alevin

Registered: 10/29/15
Posts: 13
Originally Posted By: slabhunter
HRS was meant to be a part of the solution. Hydro and Habitat have changed for the better. Harvest continues to be a problem.

The gill net folks say how they handle less b-run steel head with larger mesh. The thing missed is the ones captured and handled are the ones that could have been major contributors. Them of greater fecundity.




You really make yourself look extremely unintelligent and pretty much clueless when you say things like “Hydro and Habitat have changed for the better”. You clearly have no idea what’s going on.

Top
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 >

Search

Site Links
Home
Our Washington Fishing
Our Alaska Fishing
Reports
Rates
Contact Us
About Us
Recipes
Photos / Videos
Visit us on Facebook
Today's Birthdays
Fish-N-Chicks, New2TroutFishN, SuperMagManiac, wolverine
Recent Gallery Pix
Hatchery Releases into the Pacific and Harvest
Gibbs Delta Time Capsule
Who's Online
7 registered (Streamer, paguy, Illahee, Hanker, FishDoctor, NickD90, 1 invisible), 435 Guests and 2 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Newest Members
Marc Krueger, ptarmigan, Sandbaggin, WildBobber, Nikkidog
11448 Registered Users
Top Posters
Todd 25343
Sol Duc 15794
Dan S. 15655
elparquito 13703
Salmo g. 12731
eyeFISH 12507
STRIKE ZONE 12107
Dogfish 10979
ParaLeaks 10513
Jerry Garcia 9159
Forum Stats
11448 Members
18 Forums
75638 Topics
836335 Posts

Max Online: 3001 @ 01/28/20 02:48 PM

Join the PP forums.

It's quick, easy, and always free!

Working for the fish and our future fishing opportunities:

The Wild Steelhead Coalition

The Photo & Video Gallery. Nearly 1200 images from our fishing trips! Tips, techniques, live weight calculator & more in the Fishing Resource Center. The time is now to get prime dates for 2018 Olympic Peninsula Winter Steelhead , don't miss out!.

| HOME | ALASKA FISHING | WASHINGTON FISHING | RIVER REPORTS | FORUMS | FISHING RESOURCE CENTER | CHARTER RATES | CONTACT US | WHAT ABOUT BOB? | PHOTO & VIDEO GALLERY | LEARN ABOUT THE FISH | RECIPES | SITE HELP & FAQ |