A few have come to the conclusion that this is NOT an allocation issue between user groups and they are correct. This is a law issue. Closing down 18 hatcheries would not distribute opportunity to C&R anglers because you can not have a directed fishery of any type on listed stocks without a NMFS exception.

Also, they are targeting closure of chinook producing hatcheries, not just chinook production so with closure of the hatcheries goes any other salmon production at that facilities. Most of you know that wild Puget Sound Coho stocks are not ESA listed, but generally are not healthy enough to provide much opportunity.

Part of the problem is the ESA itself. The legislation was never written to apply to fish. It was written to apply to birds and whales and species that you can get a specific tally on the number of animals that live. With fish we don't know how many there are. There are thousands of wild chinook that return to puget sound rivers every year but its not like we can send someone down to count them. In California there is a proposed ESA listing on Boccacio rockfish, but the estimated population is close to a million fish. But they really don't have a clue how many are down there either. We have a law that is not written to apply to fish and it requires judges to make decisions that they really should not be required to make.

WT is an anti-hatchery organization. They say so themselves:
"Hatcheries were used early on to replace wild fish runs destroyed by various land uses and overharvest. Not merely expensive, short-term fixes, hatcheries often help prevent wild fish recovery, and are fraught with problems that will eventually cause their undoing. By destroying or blocking habitat, polluting waters, creating massive competition with wild fish and toying with complicated genetics, hatcheries create more problems than solutions"
Unfortunately, despite Todd's post, the information I am receiving so far is that WT is going for the closures and not trying to just leverage negotiation. I tend to believe the information I am getting from my source at this point because of additional information I received in a meeting a couple weeks ago.

The meeting was not specifically about Tokul creek, in fact it was about blackmouth, but the two top officials in the WDFW made a point to bring it up (can not remember specifically if it was Peck or Koenings). Tokul creek trout hatchery is not involved in this lawsuit but a separate lawsuit WT has against the department. The official pointed out that the department does have a specific plan for fixing the Tokul creek facility and even though WT has knowledge of this plan they are going to court anyway. I have heard just about every opinion imaginable about the leadership in our department, but I will add that it is extremly unlikely that they would be untruthful about having this plan with both Senator Oke and Representative Doumit at the table.

I am not taking blame off WT for this one because of a inadequately written law. They are choosing to go after hatcheries knowing that there was no possible way to bring all these hatcheries into ESA compliance quickly. The funding has not been there, the design has not been there. It was not that long ago that we found out what the standard for ESA compliance was. All of this is going on while NMFS is still trying to make up its mind if we have endangered salmon at all.

Hmmmmmmmm maybe my eyes decieved me but someone posted a picture holding some nice chrome hatchery fish with a sh@t eating grin on their face. wonder who that was. still don't get do ya. you're fighting the wrong battle boys. This is what they want, for us to fight amongst ourselves instead of targeting the problem. Maybe we should get rid of a few other things like nets. "my ancestors netted fish so i should be able to rape a river that's in decline too" well my ancestors did the cowboy and indian gig so should i be able to put some lead in them? pisses me off!

Regardless of one's opinion, I find the thread insightful. However, I now question whether my practice of C&R on hatchery fish is helping or hurting the fishery. I'll still C&R hatchery fish just because I'm an old softie, but there seem to be some who keep fish for whatever reason. Keep or C&R hatchery fish - what motivates you to do either?

glowball

What the heck are you talking about? What pictures?

uhhh Glow Ball your point being...??? Oh and its relevance to this discussion?

i'm coming off the first page where complaints were made about harvest harvest harvest. sorry to throw you a curveball i had not read the second page and was not up to pace with your latest angle on the subject. I still believe you guys are pissed off at the wrong people. Remember my words ten years from now when being able to fish any stretch of river you want is not an option. Just being able to fish period is taking for granted and it is sad that everyone is so caught up in themselves to notice. I was just making one point about the net thing. But obviously it went over a few heads.

on page 4 of this forum woodys wayne has a pix with six HATCHERY steelhead KEPT. and a i'm guessing a client or friend of richg has one on another post on same page. those are the pics i'm refering to.
I'm not against having solid runs of wild fish, but with the way the world works today it will be tough. A lot of things would have to change that won't until they ban fishing period. Another thougt how many fish that you catch that aren't clipped do really think are wild?

Hey boater.....

Who died and left you in charge of what can and can't be posted on this BB? We've heard enough crap out of you that you're the LAST person who should go around telling people to shut their mouths.

We can all take Sparkey's posts at face value without you acting like you're the babysitter here.

Thanks Glow Ball ! My point exactly! These people keep it up and we will only experience fish at our local zoo! DanS we all need to lighten up a little Huh? Peace!

As far as the "holier than thou" cnr idiots that think they'll be allowed to continue to fish. You guys have alot to learn!!!
Never kill any fish??? Give me a break!! I don't have the mortality numbers but there has to be some that die. Odds are if that fish is bleeding it's a goner. There's to many parasites and bacteria in the water that home right in on that.
Not to mention what the stress does to the fish.

As far as hatchery vs. wild and if the hatcheries are doing damage to the wild fish is a debate that will always be there.
I do know one thing. If you shut the hatcheries down you can kiss your fishing goodbye. Just from a law enforcement stand point. Let's say you're a game warden drivin by a closed river and see someone fishing, you know they're doin something wrong. If you drive by a river thats open and see people fishing who knows what they're doing. Yeah you can stop and talk, but you don't see those 3 wild nookies in the trunk of their car.

Look at how many people are on the rivers fishing when the salmon are in. How long will it take to get a wild run with the same kind of numbers? 20yrs? 50yrs? 100yrs? All depends on the river system. Regardless it's alot longer than any tax payer, fisherman, tackle shop owner is willing to wait cause a bunch of idiots wanted the hatcheries shut down.

If this area wasn't so populated the whole idea might work but look around you. I'm amazed at the cars on the road between here and Auburn every morning. If only 1% of those people fished, without hatcheries we'd really be in a world of hurt.

One last thing:
Watch what you ask for!!!!!!!!

I dont have a problem with the harvest of hatchery fish. If they are there I say take them all bonk every last one of them. The thing that bothers me is that many people would rather have the oportunity to harvest hatchery fish rather than have healthy numbers of wild fish they cannot harvest but only CNR.

When it really comes down to it most of the people on this board go nuts when there is a chance we might loose some hatchery fish that wernt even native to a system anyways or loose being able to use bait. They go crazy because they feel they are loosing oportunity to fish and harvest but they dont even think of the good it may do for the wild fish. They make excuse that the majority want to bonk anyways, or is there really any true wild fish left?, or only the wild stocks in a healthy status couldnt sustain even a CnR fishery, or we would not be able to fish for puget sound salmon, so on and so on.

Most people dont care about what is best for are dying out native fish but only what is best for themselves.

dans, you seem to be very smart when it comes to these issues so i have a question for you.

where are the studys that have been done on each of these 18 hatcheries that wt wants closed that prove that these 18 hatcheries are in fact killing wild fish ?, please dont refer me to read studys that have been done on other rivers because the last time i checked all rivers were diffrent (watersheds, flow, strains of fish etc.) and i guess while your at it you can answer the grand question, why are there any wild fish in any river with a hatchery on it ?, and also, while i`m at it , these studys show that a hatchery fish and a wild fish when spawned together in the wild put out an offspring with next to zero survival, can you say that even if the wild fish of the 2 did spawn with another wildfish that those offspring would have survived ?, and how do they know that with the wild fish strays that it wasnt time for that impaticular wild fish to be kicked out of the gene pool since it could have itself been a stray from years ago ? where are the studys that were done before hatcheries were on rivers that show that this wasnt always happening ?, i just feel you cant possibly use this study as a model for all rivers with hatcheries because there are some rivers with hatcheries that do infact have healthy wild fish runs, i am for finding out why that is and reforming the hatcheries on the rivers with poor wild fish runs and working with the state to do that rather than always being against what they are doing and it is not going to happen over night.

Thank you, boater, for asking a legit question and asking for an exchange which is what we SHOULDbe doing here rather than splintering into a dozen factions, each only 1/12th as strong as we could be politically.

Man, this is such a complex issue that I'm not sure I have the time to write out my thoughts completely, but I guess I could let you know where I'm coming from.

I bonk a dozen or so fish a year. I bonk some unclipped kings (if they were marked, so I could be relatively sure where they came from, I wouldn't), a few hatchery silvers, and a few hatchery steelhead. I don't want to bonk native steelhead for one reason. I'm VERY critical of commercial harvesters of native steelhead because I think they are scarce enough to be looked at as something other than a food item. Since I AM critcal of commercial harvesters of wild fish, I believe it would be hypocritical of me to kill them myself. That's just my opinion, and while I'd LIKE others to see it my way, I realize that's going to take ME just explaining myself and my position, rather than screaming and calling people idiots and all those things that folks do when they can't just make a reasonable argument.

As far as WT goes, I think they are making a grave mistake, if only because they just managed to splinter sports anglers once again. I also think that closing hatcheries in an effort to restore runs is a Band-Aid on arterial bleeding. They don't need to close hatcheries......they need to operate them in a manner that isn't detrimental to the wild component of the run. Can this be done? I think it can, but then again, I'm not a fish biologist. I only know what I've read and observed myself.........and as much as that is, it still is a pretty small pool of knowledge.

I'm just getting tired of the "C&K morons this......" and "C&R idiots that......" crap. It's getting us NOWHERE fast. In case nobody's noticed, this state is in a financial bind like we haven't seen in quite a while. Fish won't be high on ANYBODY'S list to keep funding for, because WE CAN'T ORGANIZE to save a sport we ALL love. We're so friggin' sad at organizing that we just may have to rely on the COMMERCIAL NETTERS to save hatchery fish. The bad thing is, if the commercials bankroll the fight, it will be done on their terms, and we'll get the same crappy hatcheries doing the same crappy job of producing fish........and all the while the native fish will be in worse shape than when we started.

This stuff just burns me out sometimes. I remember the days when I just went and fished and didn't have to worry about this stuff.........or so I thought. With a little foresight, we might have avoided this in the first place, but only hindsight is 20/20. I'll just end my piece with a little list of things I think could improve the fisheries in this state.


I'd like to see EVERY hatchery fish marked, bother salmon and steelhead. I'd like to see the commercial fleet OFF Hood Canal when the last remnants of wild silvers are trying to run the gauntlet of nets. I'd like to see the tribal nets out BEFORE they close down the Skok to chum retention because the numbers are low. I'd like to see a law forbidding the stripping of hens for roe that DOESN'T have loophole you could drive a truck through in it. I'd like to see Gamies out IN FORCE during the snagfests that take place on the Carbon, Satsop, Kalama, Cowlitz......they could pay their own salary with ticket revenue, so don't say you can't afford more officers WDFW. I'd like to see Tribal police do SOME enforcement of their own. I'd like to see people be less uptight when they're fishing than when they're at work. I'd like people to look at a wild fish as MORE than just a meal, but as something they can pass on to their kids. I'd like to see people who release wild fish to act like it IS more than just a fish. I'd like the C&R folks to understand the value of a hatchery fish, both as a food item and as a quarry we can persue and take home.

And most of all, I'd like to see my float sink any time I want it to. Well, since that's probably not going to happen, maybe I'll just go about working on the other stuff I listed.........that stuff COULD happen.

Dan S., I like what you have to say.
My sentiments exactly.
Who knows, maybe your Bobber will go down at will soon.

dans, i agree, we should be working together on this, i feel the rfa is the way to go.

"The thing that bothers me is that many people would rather have the oportunity to harvest hatchery fish rather than have healthy numbers of wild fish they cannot harvest but only CNR."

Yep. S'true. Grow 'em. Catch 'em. Kill 'em. Eat 'em. Life is simple.

The thing that bothers me is that some people are not at all concerned with the probability that the currently depressed natural runs will never in our lifetime be healthy enough to allow any kind of targeted fishery...and this most definitely includes CNR. Meaning that guess what...You ain't even gonna get to CNR! Prime example is what has happened here on Hood Canal. We have a listed stock...Hood Canal Summer Chum....that was being slyly targeted by a bunch of "rivers runs through it" types for CNR fishing under the claim of "hey officer I'm fishing for steelhead( or trout)." Guess what? Those lower sections of the Dosewallips and Duckabush are now closed to ALL FISHING INCLUDING CNR during the time those poor salmon are in the rivers! And I'm dam proud to claim a role in lobbying to bring that about...thank you.
Sad thing is I will likely never again get to fish those portions of my home rivers that hosts very large numbers of 24 inch plus searun Cutts during the closure period. Yep...guess what ...not even CNR is allowed...but I was more than willing to give up that opportunity to protect those fish....and other than my friend lTlcleo I don't see too many others willing to do the same? I will go elsewhere and fish where there is opportunity to catch fish where my impact even doing the CNR thing will have the least impact on naturally produced fish. Peace!

My point exactly Gooose.

Sinker

Hey Goose,

Believe me, not all the dudes fishing "trout" or steelhead on those specific rivers were "Rivers Run Through It" types. I've seen some famous steelheading names cruising around those parts, and in the sign-in book. I'll admit that I wasn't too happy about the closures you mentioned for one reason. They haven't taken ANY OTHER action that I can see to protect these fish other than to close this C&R season that wasn't really a C&R season. That's my only beef. In hindsight, and especially after seeing how some people handled the fish they caught "while in pursuit of steelhead", it's probably best that it IS closed altogether.

Something stinks on Hood Canal, goose. My only question to you is this. Why so upset with the C&R of chums on the Dosey and Hamma Hamma, when you don't seem too upset that large numbers of threatened summer chums are being harassed every time the silvers show up on the Quilcene? I don't know how many times I've seen clowns get frustrated that they can't hook the silvers there and so they start fishing chums.

I can tell you why the state has the double-standard. The have a huge number of hatchery silvers coming back to the Quilcene hatchery, and they can't just let them go to waste, so they allow you to fish amongst the threatened chums. That may not be a concern to you because I know you have found ways to specifically target silvers and leave the chums unmolested. But how about the rest of those Yahoos up there that are snagging anything in sight?

I'm sure the summer chums on the Dosie and Hamma Hamma are thanking you.......not everyone would take the effort to see that the right thing gets done, especially when it costs them a fishing opportunity. Let's just hope some more "right things" get done, or I'm afraid those chums are going to need more than your help to save them.