I agree with almost everything I have heard except maybe the weak lousy fight you get from a legal hooked chum.

I don't know the impacts, already stated, will try to find out timing and what if any impacts it would have on other species. The "ideal" situation would be plant the chum and there be ZERO targeting of them for anything and they come back to be sold to support the hatchery production of desired fish species.

IMHO, Selective fisheries and netting should already be mandatory for all fishers to protect wild stocks.

And before anyone says that is NEVER gonna happen, everyone said the tribe would NEVER pony up money for the Humptulips hatchery too.

Keep up the good fight, fish_4_all.

Interesting BF and correct as to the value of natural Chum to a watershed. Every now then a gem does show up in this BB! Imagine that.

If the idea is to raise money to enhance fisheries....go with what costs least and produces the most. (Ecomonics 101?)

There may be zero targeting them on paper, but how does that work when the tribe gets 50% ? Maybe you should try to get the QIN to go in 50% to fund the operation of the hatchery.

What's this? No love for the lowly chum? Oh, the horror!

BTW, the best environmental approach would be no artificial chum propagation in GH until natural stock production recovers to a healthy and sustainable level -- UNLESS it becomes necessary to put the chum stock on life support, aka ESA listed as endangered, not just threatened.

Sg

Getting a healthy chum salmon run in GH streams isn't as hard as getting healthy steelhead or coho or Chinook...just don't net them, and there'll be plenty of them.

Letting them spawn will make plenty more of them...no need to use hatchery space or money to do so.

Fish on...

Todd

Actually Todd, GH and Tillamook represent the southern extent of the natural range of chum salmon. There may be environmental factors at work in this and not just over harvest. Of course the way the co-managers choose to handle GH this past season serves the purpose of having harvest be the proximate cause of decline. Maybe that's what you had in mind.

Sg

Doubtless true...but when we're talking about the margins of their range, harvest of chums is the only thing we can control, since their use of river habitat is very limited compared to the rest (save perhaps the pinks, of which there aren't any there)...and since climate change is not real, but is only a political football, we won't do anything about that.

Fish on...

Todd

There is the issue that Chum are almost impossible to mark for selective harvest. Released at 500 or more per pound it isn't feasible to mark them.

Chum are also a cyclical fish or so I have been informed. Their returns vary greatly based on river conditions and more on ocean conditions. I don't understand all of this yet and getting a biologist to really take the time out of their busy schedules to explain thoroughly has not been easy.

The idea would be zero target of them, not zero harvest but zero target. No change in netting schedules so that Coho, Chinook and Steelhead aren't impacted anymore than they are already. Maybe they will become a resource that can be used to replace revenue that might have been gotten by the tribes for other species. Hard issues to work out but always a possibility.

Numbers of chum are on the rise in Grays Harbor. Have been for a while. Is this because there has been no netting schedule until recently, possibly, more likely than not.

The idea is not to support wild stocks or even protect them per say. Terrible way to put it but they would be a money fish to raise money through carcass sales, not much else.

I would also hope that the tribes would kick back a percentage of revenue from increases in harvest. With as inexpensive as they are to raise, in some cases I hear that they only take man hours and literally pennies in feed if anything the return to the hatcheries is almost 100%.

I know, lots of reasons not to do it but if impacts on wild stocks are negligible it helps solve the ever growing revenue issues we deal with every year.

I don't understand...timing for chums is parallel to the timing for the mid-late October glut of Coho and Chinook...so if the Q's net for their kings & ho's...they impact chum runs too....maybe I am missing something here...just trying to understand this all. BTW thank you for posting this fish4all...it's been informative!

If there are chums available for harvest, they will be netted.

If there are coho or kings around, they will be in the same nets.

The unfortunate truth is that there is no ifs, ands, or buts about that.

Fish on...

Todd

Yah and the tribe will never kick in money to support hatcheries either. Working with the tribes without going through the state and who knows what can happen. $25K proves that the tribes are willing to do something, what will they do next if they are talked to and not given mandates?

There is plenty of chum in Kennedy Creek for every one to go screw around with, no need to spend $ raising them in a hatchery!

Its also fun to watch all the guys out there fencing with 7' ugly sticks and the mud wrestling !

Chum in a creek don't make hatcheries money, chum in the hatchery make hatcheries money.

If I have to, I will get a non profit business ID or find one that will help and raise the money to raise them. 4 years later they should support themselves and hopefully another 500K to 2M more sought after species.

Estimated feed costs to raise 500K Chum: $1,000 $0.002 cents a fish; possibly even less, and they can be released without feeding them with decent returns, so they could cost ZERO in feed and minimal added operating costs.
Feed Cost to raise 500K Chinook $7K, 2010 actual costs $0.014 a fish 7x more
Feed Cost to Raise 970K Coho $62K 2010 actual costs $0.064 a fish 32x more
Feed Cost to Raise 155K steelhead $27K 2010 actual costs $0.174 a fish 87x more

BTW, Humptulips hatchery production capacity: over 6M
Current usage: about 20% or 1.2M

And let this be clear, I do not want any reductions in anything else because of raising Chum, Getting Coho back to 970K, keeping Chinook at current levels and increasing Steelhead are all things I would like to see. Maybe even increasing the numbers of all IF it is determined that impacts will be negligible on native stocks.

Operating costs stay pretty much the same except for clipping costs and slight increases in water needs. Chum are NOT clipped so they do not add to clipping costs. A negative aspect but not much that can be done about it since they are released so small.

Cost is IRRELEVANT in this plan. I will find a way to raise the money so it doesn't cut into other fish production. The return is what is important here. High value carcasses to raise money to raise more highly valued table fair fish.

This is what I have heard that really matters IMHO:
Wild impacts
Increased netting
Commercials netting bay
Not marked
Won't be a draw for people to fish Grays Harbor
If I missed something or there is something that hasn't be said I want to hear it.

As for them being a nuisance or that I simply don't eat them: Release them if you don't eat them. If you can't catch Coho and/or Chinook without hooking chum all the time don't fish while they are in. Or ask those of us that know how.

If the WDFW want to spend money put more Coho or steelhead in that river. Chum don't make me sick with that stupid idea.

The only time chum are worth money is when they are netted...they are of zero table value by the time they make it back to a hatchery.

Fish on...

Todd

Oh come on, I'm sure most of the people targeting them would claim they smoke up just fine.

Hey Todd your right about table value to be sure. The Hood Canal Chum or Chum on the Hump are in far better condition as much less fresh water time and are utilized differently. The real value is the eggs and they fetch a rather good price. In fact even Coho eggs are being utilized in the overseas market and fetch a reasonable price. The projection is that these prices for eggs dependant on quality, will do nothing but increase over the next few years as it is a growing market.

That would be some human’s point of view but to the eco system/environment, chums are priceless.