Funny how the WDFW takes a proactive stance with the Skagit Chums not allowing retention as the run is estimated at only making escapement by 1,000 fish.

I find it very interesting that they will not take a proactive stance with the Hoh wild steelhead where it missed escpaement by 800 fish last year and was managed for under escapement this year.

Harvest is still being aloud where if it was not escapement would most likely be mett.

I find it very strange where no retention is implaced when a run is estimated at only meeting escapement by .75% or so, (Skagit Chum), but wild steelhead in the Hoh was 25% under escapement last year and is estimated to be 35% under escapement this year.

I gues we are compareing aples to oranges here Skagit Chum 119,000. fish compared to Hoh Wild steelhead 2400. fish minimum escapement.

I gues we are just seeing good management and good science at work

In case anyone wasn't paying attention, the WDFW is IN LOVE with CHUMS!!!!

My god, what a waste of hatchery resources to produce millions of those BAD tasting boots. Brats and Nooks are a better table fare, but they cost 10x as much to raise and release.

So in order to brag about the great job of stewardship they are doing, they release those dogs instead by the millions. It's a numbers game everywhere you look, most bang for the buck comes from chums. So guess which fish is more valuable to the WDFW???

Rich,

You are probably right about one thing.
It's apples and oranges.

The Skagit chums are projected to barely meet escapement.

You might want to check with the WDFW or the WSC about this but I'm pretty sure the "total wild return" on the Hoh last year was about 3600 fish or 50% above the escapement goal.

I think the projected run for the current year was about the same.

I do agree that the 2000 fish harvest on the Hoh may have been too many considerng that the harvestable excess was only about 1200 but the mistake is partially the result of the predicted run being larger than the 3600 fish return.


EDIT:
Seacat - There are no hatchery chum in the Skagit.

One thing to be said is that the WDFW and the tribes have done a horrible job with the management of our fish and game in this state.

We as Washington Residents and anglers have no one to blame but them.

Wait thats not entirely true.

There are tons of Turkeys in Eastern Washington.

Plunker,

I didn't know that there weren't any hatchery chum in the Skagit, just assumed they were, my mistake. But that makes Rich's point all the more. Why are different run/species being mis-managed differently from river to river?

The whole escapement and harvest thing is kind of wacky and basically debatable whether or not it's working. I believe that favorable ocean conditions recently have let the managers slide and take credit for policies that really aren't working very well.

Guess I better stick to the saltchuck where I know apples from oranges. :rolleyes:

Seacat, you miss the point with hatchery chums and pinks, or sockeye. You get lots of hatchery fish with very little production cost and virtually no feeding or upkeep...

You don't have to raise or feed them for 1+ years like chinook, coho, or steelhead. Just spawn, hatch the eggs, then release the fry.

If the river rearing habitats continue to decline around here the only salmon left will be chums and pinks.

Rich, there's a lot of turkeys in the Puget Sound region too...

Zen -

Some even hve feathers!

Tight lines
S malma

Geoduck,

I knew that chums were cheap to rear in comparison to nooks and brats, that's what I said in my first post. Didn't know that the pinks and sockeye were similarly cheap though.

But what point did I miss? Habitat decline or cost or what?

Sorry Seacat,

I must have misread your first post.

Yep, I think maximizing $ is spent is what hatcheries are starting to focus on. You get a lot more bang for the buck if you just hatch the fry and turn them loose.

Also with the chinook and coho, the candians and alaskans take a bunch (up to 50%) of them off the feeding grounds. Thats not nearly as much of an issue with pinks sockeye or chum.