Oregon What?

Isn't this thread locked?

Who is messing with me? I don't get it, come to my 500 post party thread and shuffle with me.

Simple answer is that the State will do what the tribes want. If they don't want it, it won't stay.

Keep it open. If there is real concern about the wild stock then close down the hatcheries AND close the rivers to all sport fishing when the natives enter the system. At least the sport caught mortality would be solved. The netting will still continue....

Kill it.

The Quils aren't all that excited about it, either...those who think it's a good idea should ask them (after doing some rudiementiary research on how broodstock programs work...or don't work, as the case may be...ok, as the case is).

Fish on...

Todd

Well, finally got a chance to ready the summary paper the state put out on the subject.

Honestly, there is little there than is really damning for the project. Smolt residualization issues are likely not a factor: percentage is higher than typical hatchery fish, but not not huge and they believe that is in part due to the genetics of the fish saying stay a second year since the many of the wild fish do on their own. Parker and I disagree on this one ... since most of these go out quick, at a time when there is more food in that river than they all know what to do with, not an issue. And for holdovers, there appears to be no negligible effect on the wild stock since some of the biggest wild returns on record were in years where heavy Snider plants also returned, so had there been too much competition, one would expect lower wild returns and that has NOT been the case.

And if all interested parties are worried about 50K steelhead smolts, then what about the 3/4 million salmon smolts dumped in there. Rather see some of those cut back than these fish

The HSRG metric goals are far exceeded, so all is in order there.

Size not great, but honestly, I'm not sold that's a big issue either way since returns don't seem to reflect outgoing size. But if the state wants us to fatten them up some more, there are ways to do that, warm the Pond up a few degrees and feed em more and then you can meet that magical guideline for whatever it's worth.

The Gene bank ideas laid out in the summary are great and I'd love to see the situation where this took place without 5 days a week of netting and a current slaughter-fest of outgoing kelts like is occurring now.

The biggest problem if they want to go that route is the state is fooling themselves on this one because the number of Chambers fish that are in the system as it is. And even less of these will be harvested if Snider is nuked and effort goes down in the timeframe where at least some of these Chambers fish are in the system. One of those things that looks great on paper ... but who else is going to get those fish out of the river at that time???

And there is reference in the summary of the Araki data ... the first one that so many of the naysayers of the program point at as the program's biggest flaw is the decreased productivity of firs-gen broodstocked fish. But more importantly to me to the later data that the naysayers don't seem to know about ... that shows that once these broodstocked fish spawn with wild fish again, that the amount of productivity lost diminishes.

And that is perhaps why this program seems to be working where so many haven't, because we're working with a smaller percentage of the population and the fish are interacting down the road with a big enough percentage of wild fish to keep this issue at bay.

We won't know what it has really done for the fish, until the program is shut down for 5-10 yr's, and no harvest or supplimentation encounters the fish while this cycle occurs. It would be bad science to presume that the program is having a healthy long term effect on the fish, while there is no evidence that the program has helped the fish return to their natural state. Any hatchery fish, snider or not, in the ecosystem, is not a natural state.

But no harvest is completely unrealistic. The gene bank idea sounds great. Everything goes to shitt with gillnets in the pic.

i like the gene bank idea, but i wonder why it has to be one river (sol duc) or another (clearwater) instead of both.

i know the fish are genetically very similar, but it seems two gene banks are better than one, especially since neither would require closing rivers to fishing.

of course, politics is playing a huge role in this decision. the city of forks is pushing hard to save this program and they usually get their way when it comes to overturning more conservative regulations to protect wild steelhead.

I think it should be up to oregon guides.

+1

JD

Thanks for the info Bob, I know it is a heated topic. I am amazed at how many people post pics of Snider fish and the hype of that run to people that fish the Sol Duc, yet on the webz we get a healthy mix of for & against (yet I would imagine the internet-anti-sniders still enjoy fishing for them)

So, I just read that the program is coming to an end in 2014. Can anyone confirm this?

yes, they had a meeting a month or 2 ago, and decided to shut the program down... personally, i think its a stupid idea, and the wild fish will be impacted more than others think it will be...

I think it's a great idea, and the wild fish will be far less impacted by not being stuck in tubes and turned into hatchery fish.



Fish on...

Todd

I guess I just missed the actual final decision and thought it was still an on-going conversation.

i understand what you are saying Todd, but, there isnt "that many" wild fish per year that are stuck in the tubes.. what i think is going to happen, with the absence of the Snyder fish, is that more people will be killing wild fish, because they took the trip and time and money to go all the way there, and didnt get to bring anything home, because there werent any hatchery fish... takin it away, wont decrease fishing pressure, its been going up and up and up for years... so that will increase pressure on wild fish, because not everyone is like the few that fish just to fish, they want to kill everything they catch... plus, without them around, how many more wild fish will be poached by the locals out there? that is a problem as well imo... only time will tell if it was a good idea or not... but during that time, the Indians will still continue netting the hell out of the Yute, and raping whats left, then, blame it on sportsfisherman, just like always..

Losing this progam is a big loss, The few they take for the program will not yield more then a handful of Natives, if bred in the Wild. But the loss of these fish will transfer even a greater impact to the retention of the wild fish in the system. And as long as thiers netting you are going to do nothing habitat wise to restore these runs, Look at the Queets, Great habitat, No sport Native retention. Bt we do have reckless netting........... And dewindling numbers of these great fishes

They run a brood stock program on the white/stuck. Its had the most upward trend for that system as far as redd counts go. Where's the love for the test tube babies?

Already been tried on the Sauk/Skagit...failed.

During the time that Snider fish return the rivers are all closed to wild fish retention, so the "well, there aren't any Snider fish here so I'll bonk a wild one" on January 12th isn't really an argument at all...

Fish on...

Todd

P.S. I know this program is popular, just like they are popular with the guides and many fishermen wherever they go...and while everyone acknowledges that all...100%...of the science says that they do more harm than good, everyone thinks "their" pet program is the "one" that is bucking the odds.

It's not.