Steeliedrew,

A wild broodstock program would result in an increased harvest rate on the remaining wild steelhead population. Smalma is absolutely right in that the existing (or was existing until a few weeks ago) Chambers Ck hatchery stock program had far lower adverse impact on the wild population than a wild broodstock hatchery program would have. The risk, IMO, is that policy managers might "declare" that wild broodstock hatchery fish and wild steelhead are genetically the same, and that therefore the mixing of hatchery and wild steelhead on the spawning grounds is OK. That is the policy position some tribes have adopted, but from a biological perspective, it just ain't so. Biology and ecology don't care about and don't accept policy declarations. IMO if WDFW and NMFS adopt that position, then functional extinction does become the most likely outcome.

As far why not turn the Cowlitz back into the hatchery blood hole it was for 3 decades, it's because so far there is no legal avenue for exempting it from ESA constraints and turning it, or any other river, into a sacrificial hatchery circus. Like it or not, feasible or not, the agencies are locked into trying to recover wild chinook, chum, and steelhead on the Cowlitz River.

Sg

Recovering wild runs on the Cowlitz is a pipe dream Salmo. I think we all know that. I wish certain agencies could accept that and let it be what it should be. I see your point about the brood stock programs causing a higher wild fish mortality rate but why is it that they are going to be researching such a program on the skagit in the coming years?

Side note...Does anyone know if the WFC will attack the skamania steelhead stock and hatchery coho and chinook? In my slightly uneducated opinion I'd say it's not a matter of if, but "when".

If they get theyre way up north then I think its a safe bet that the skamania genes will follow.

Salmo G,
Is there such a thing as a wild summer run left or have the skamania integrated themselves so deep that there are no true wild summer run left?

Drew
Kings are the money fish....most likely the commercial interests will put up much more of a fight than they did with the Steelhead.

Maybe when there is physical violence threatened like has happened in this thread it shuts down discussion. Or maybe it is that all that happens is people get shouted down. That would be like me saying that everyone that wants to keep hatcheries could care less about wild fish. Though it does seem the more I read conservation thread the more people are saying screw the wild fish and pump hatchery fish in every where.

JJ

JJ, Drew wasn't serious.

I don't know he seems to want to kick me. Which is fine if you want to stop conversations. Blanket statements like that end conversation and don't really lend themselves to debate. I have a thick skin and can disagree with people but I have personally talked with people from this board that don't post in support of limiting, changing, closing, etc. hatcheries because of things like this. I haven't been one of them but I have no desire to say hey wouldn't it make financial sense to make sure that the ESA study was done before the money was spent on the hatchery to make sure that it passed the test and would be usable not after when it could be wasted. I don't know that doesn't seem unreasonable to me. Seems to make financial sense and but don't let sense get in the way of kicking someone or stringing them up.

JJ

Steeliedrew,

Thread drifting somewhat, but recovering wild salmon and steelhead on the Cowlitz isn't a pipe dream. Fundamentally it's a matter of having an effective downstream fishway, and that is currently on the drawing board. Even with the ineffective system present now, wild coho in significant numbers (1,000s) from upstream of the dams have become a regular occurrence on the Cowlitz. A few hundred wild steelhead and now even some wild fall chinook from Tilton/Mayfield are taking hold. With good juvenile fish passage, recovering viable wild runs on the upper Cowlitz will be a reality in the foreseeable future. Of course, just like in PS, there won't be many harvestable wild steelhead, because that just isn't in the cards for that species.

Furthermore, the barrier dam on the Cowlitz greatly facilitates the separation of wild and hatchery fish, so the numbers of hatchery fish allowed to spawn naturally in the upper basin can be strictly controlled.

Why are WDFW and WFC going to be researching a Skagit wild steelhead broodstock program in the coming years? Excellent question. I'd say it's because it was a negotiated term of settlement. The Skagit tribes are wondering why WDFW made WFC a third "co-manager." I think they are more than slightly pissed about that. Anyway, agreeing to research a topic can be a long ways off from coming up with a viable program. Maybe it was a throw away measure used to get agreement, maybe both parties are serious. I don't know.

I also don't know what WFC's plans are regarding going after Skamania steelhead. Doing so actually makes more biological sense than going after the Chambers Ck stock on the grounds they alleged. Skamania hatchery spawning time overlaps with wild winter steelhead far more than does Chambers Ck, so there is a substantially higher likelihood of H x W crosses and genetic introgression there, but I'm not so sure that biological integrity is the primary parameter for lawsuit selection. Since WFC (as WT) went after PS hatchery chinook before, I think it's highly likely that they will again. And that's a big deal. It would affect folks known as the movers and shakers and influential members of society and government.

Backtrollin,

I think there is a mix of endemic native wild summer runs that are free of significant or measurable Skamania introgression and some that are mixed. We don't have much summer run genetic data, so I'm speculating based on what the existing information has shown and the spatial spread of native populations and Skamania stocking.

Sg

FYI - If you're interested in organizations supporting sportfishing rights I'd suggest the Steelhead Trout Club of Washington (STCW). It's been around since 1928, and in it's heyday had a significant voice in Olympia (but they still got some teeth!). I joined a few years ago and overall, I'm really impressed with the members and what the club stands for.

The last meeting before summer break is coming up on Tuesday, June 10, at 6 PM at the Orient Express Restaurant on 4th Ave S, Seattle. PM me if you want to know more.

Salmo,

Thank you for your knowledgeable response.

JJ,

I am not going to kick anybody in the d!ck or string anyone up. I was heated the other night when I opened this thread and most likely shouldn't have said that. Am I happy about the state of our steelhead fisheries? Nope. It's extremely saddening.

Sorry for coming off so harsh. I'm actually pretty nice.

Steeliedrew , there are some other Puget sound wild brood stock programs out there , the one on the white, and green but they are both small programs , but the foundation is there.

People need to see the film "Wild Reverence". Listen to what they are saying and what the data show...then think carefully about what you think is realistic in the future for Puget Sound (and other) rivers. Perhaps we save the wild runs that can be saved and operate hatcheries in the rivers that have designated harvestable runs, like the Cowlitz. The opportunities for harvest are not going to be the same and it's going to be a hard pill to swallow. It's surely not going to happen overnight either...it's going to take some time. I foresee some difficult negotiations with the Tribes too. This may get worse before it gets better.

P.S. the film is not sponsored by the WFC

But the show has been shown by WSC which is partners with WFC.

It sounds like there is a guarantee that goes with the experiment of wild fish galore if no hatchery fish produced.

What is the plan after decades stacked on decades shows little to no results?

Redd_D,

Your words paint a picture.

That is a sad picture indeed for the majority of 700,000+ fish license holders in WA state.