i have a few questions about what this news release says, no.1, when they say " in an attempt to improve survival and catch rates of salmon throughout the Columbia River and its tributaries", how can putting smolts in youngs bay improve catch rates throughout the columbia and its tributarys ??, no 2., if they can move the smolts to the safe area`s and increace there survival 10 fold why cant they do that in the hatcherys that they are taking them out of ??, other than holding the smolts longer how can they increase the rate 10 fold ??


http://www.cbbulletin.com/364172.aspx

The CR is regulated only for upriver springers impacts under the ESA listing.
Harvest Management is all for maximized catch rates IMHO. They are intentionally shifting the fish from the recreational public to the commercial sites to get worked up over the harvest numbers.
Legally taking opportunity from the sportfishers in the watershed to provide more harvest.

Oh, if the fish are held back at the upriver hatcheries to long; they loose the impulse to migrate throughout the ocean in historical age class returns.

Boater,

Depending what hatcheries the smolts come from affects the smolt outmigration mortality. That is, hatcheries farther from the ocean will have a higher smolt mortality rate than smolts leaving a hatchery or net pen that is located near the ocean. And particularly, hatcheries upstream of dams are going to have much higher smolt mortality losses than hatcheries downstream of the dams. So more smolts survive to reach the ocean, but of course those smolts do not contribute to the Columbia River fishery as returning adults except near the net pen release sites and the few nearby tributaries that the adult fish stray into.

Sg

Thanks Salmo, you saved me a response. Smolts are coming from McKenzie, and Leaburg hatcheries, via lib truck.

Right now there releasing about 6 million smolts and returning about 50 to 60k adults on a average year, less than 1%. So 250000 smolts would be equal to about 2000 to 2500 adults in the willamette, moving them to YB with a 2 or 3% percent survival rate should come out to somewhere between 4000 and 7500 fish returning. Impacts on the gillnet are still 100% but the mark rate in the terminal fisherys rises from 80/20 in the river to a couple of hundred to one. So it gives more fish to commercials and gives more impacts to sport plus whatever steelhead are saved. Works on paper atleast.

Also interesting enough the tribes don't count terminal fish in there agreement so any fish caught in YB don't come out of the 50/50 catch sharing. Which leaves more for sport something that seining the mainstem won't.

I disagree. There is nothing in this shift to keep the gillnets off the mainstem CR. Bycatch of steelhead and sturgeon will continue until they are listed too.

No it doesn't other than providing the same amount in a different place, so the more caught in the terminal area's reduces the commercial catch mainstem in the commsion's eyes. Its this 400 pound monkey wrench the tribes just threw down stream that changes the whole selective fishery plan.

Again this does not change the allocation on the mainstem. WDFW and ODFW are shifting fish to the commercial sites. Yet, allowing the most harmful, least sustainable methods of commercial harvest on more the wild segment in the mainstem.

Slab two problems now, it used to be just impacts and life was simple. Now the tribes don't care how hard anyone works to be more selective when we reach 50% of what they can catch with setnets, its over no matter what. Get the tribes to do some seining or tangle netting and its a whole new ballgame, maybe Barrack and Jane can go smoke peacepipe with them.

I'm in no hurry, and don't smoke.

The tribal below Bonnie is a red herring thrown out to stir the pot.
I've seen these folks and thanked some of them for standing up for conservation before harvest. If not for the tribes we would no longer have springers or steelhead to argue about.

We're walking through the clouds. Nothing moves to a reduction on the mainstem. Long distance run around.

but, according to cwt data the YB smolt SARs fall in the middle of Clack and McKenzie smolt release survivals (SARs for YB smolts at about 0.7% with the Clack at about 1% and the McKenzie at 0.5%), if there is a ten fold increase in survival that would mean the clack fish are going up to 10 percent ??, do you believe that ??

i agree, this wont even be mentioned at the meetings.

Boater,

Just cuz someone says the survival rate is increased 10X doesn't mean it is unless there are data supporting the allegation. I'm doubtful of 10X, but the 3 to 6X increase SBD posted seems plausible.

What gets me is the interests on the McKenzie that are being shorted; or are these YB smolts the result of a specific program of "extra" production.

Sg

Please remember that NOTHING precludes sporties from fishing the SAFE zones. NOTHING!

Sporties can even fish there during the off days of the week (and we will surely be limited to to fishing fixed days of the week this year) that the mainstem CR is closed to springers.

My understanding is that the deal is a TRANSFER of smolts... not a windfall of surplus production.

Biologists believe the stocking at Young's Bay may result in a 10-fold increase in survival and catch rates because the fish will be released closer to the ocean at a size and time of year that is more conducive to spring chinook out-migration.

i will email them and ask them for the data that will back up that statement.

there is data that supports this, i will try to get permission from the author to post it here.

It can be, but its a hatchery allocation fight, which cca wont do, so its up to others. Only allocation fight they care about is to reduce the commercial side of the impacts.

I heard from Goose on the other site that some hatchery fish are being moved to safe areas on the wa side, and Im not sure if he mentioned the cowlitz in particular. If they are pre-allocating out of the hatchery and dedicating it, to YB or other safe areas, its a shell game in the allocation game. Not only do sports get shorted, the tribes will eventually hollar about that allocation, as will the upriver sports.

SBD The colville tribe has already tested seine nets for two years and will be switching over, hopefully this year. The seine nets will level the playing field again between the tribe and non tribal. Considering the extra allocation they will get for the next three years, I doubt the safe areas, will continue to get a free ride, when selective harvest will acomplish the same reduction in impacts.

One other thing I wanted to throw out about the returns. Seems like everyone jumps for joy on the jack counts. I talked a guide friend, who spoke with the department about some Jacks that were up river. Im not sure, but these might have been jacks they caught and might have had tags in them. If that doesnt add up in anyones logic, I will call him and verify it. Anyway, they werent jacks, they were small mature fish. It makes me wonder if using the jack count is relied upon to predict the next years adult run. I know you guys know, but I havent followed that in detail. I dont fish it.

LB I was just showing an article that the Nez Pierce are jumping into the game. Four years ago it was 2 steehead now their catching hundreds of fish and looking at commercial markets. I believe they are a treaty tribe so the catch sharing applies to them, just one more mouth to feed.