#971887 - 01/22/17 11:46 AM
Re: Snoqualmie
[Re: Yakutat Jack]
|
Fry
Registered: 09/12/16
Posts: 31
|
Really what would help is to not deplete the bait fish in the PS. The PS is our nursery, yet we give them little chance to survive... Salmon or Steel. Stop netting the bait fish in the nursery, and fish will return healthy and stronger. The bait is nothing like 20-30 years ago
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#971891 - 01/22/17 11:59 AM
Re: Snoqualmie
[Re: MetalheadMatt]
|
River Nutrients
Registered: 03/03/09
Posts: 4690
Loc: Somewhere on the planet,I hope
|
The failure to address or even admit to the simple fact that modern human conduct in just living is incompatible with salmonids is the problem. Period, no debate it is a fact. What is required to protect fish is then reduce harvest, stop further habitat destruction by preserving the best natural watersheds free of our influence, determine those that really pretty much done under and utilize them for hatchery production. Then the final shoe which is intercept fisheries which must be restrained for any hope to get salmon runs stabilized.
Strange as it sounds it will take all those actions to stabilize salmon in WA St. Years ago a friend who worked for the agency had the time to pour through historical data and came to the conclusion that the average Coho run in the upper Chehalis only was about 180k with the upper Chehalis being described as a Coho producing SOB. Habitat has been degraded to be sure but for the coast of WA our problem is not habitat ( it is a huge thing but has stabilized in the last 20 years ) but harvest. In fact PS misery is being driven by harvest depending which fish and stock as to degree.
Edited by Rivrguy (01/23/17 07:30 AM)
_________________________
Dazed and confused.............the fog is closing in
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#971897 - 01/22/17 01:58 PM
Re: Snoqualmie
[Re: Rivrguy]
|
My Waders are Moist
Registered: 11/20/08
Posts: 3419
Loc: PNW
|
The failure to address or even admit to the simple fact that modern human conduct in just living is incompatible with salmonids is the problem. Period, no debate it is a fact. What is required to protect fish is then reduce harvest, stop further habitat destruction by preserving the best natural watersheds free of our influence, determine those that really pretty much done under and utilize them for hatchery production. Then the final shoe which is intercept fisheries which must be restrained for any hope to get salmon runs stabilized.
Strange as it sounds it will take all those actions to stabilize salmon in WA St. Years ago a friend who worked for the agency had the time to pour through historical data and came to the conclusion that the average Coho run in the Chehalis was about 180k with the upper Chehalis being described as a Coho producing SOB. Habitat has been degraded to be sure but for the coast of WA our problem is not habitat ( it is a huge thing but has stabilized in the last 20 years ) but harvest. In fact PS misery is being driven by harvest depending which fish and stock as to degree. I agree with almost all of this. I'm not sure it is as complicated as some make it. I find it interesting as someone who does habitat restoration how often we are seen as the enemy by folks who never lift a finger for the good and want to build and live adjacent to critical areas. I understand how they value their rights and land but why are the habitat helpers and protectors the bad guys? Why do Americans always hate on those that are just trying to help? I understand that maybe we think our [Bleeeeep!] don't stink (environmentalists have this problem nearly universally) but we still are trying to do right by the habitat and that isn't a bad thing. Few want to hear the truth. Ive heard biologists called "lesbians" or "Indian lovers" as if that has anything to do with their work. Americans feel things that aren't there and could use a logic course. Brain wires are crossed everywhere hence a guy like Trump being seen as a solution to our problems.
_________________________
Maybe he's born with it.
Maybe it's amphetamines.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#971911 - 01/22/17 03:33 PM
Re: Snoqualmie
[Re: Yakutat Jack]
|
River Nutrients
Registered: 11/21/07
Posts: 7905
Loc: Olema,California,Planet Earth
|
begin with the understanding that when species were actually listed under ESA that cumulative human impact on that date was excessive and shown to detrimental to the species survival. So, in the 90s, or earlier with other species, the impact was excessive.
What have we done since then? Added hope many humans to WA, BC, AK, OR, the world? Paved over how much land? Continued harvest of the resources; not just the listed species but the species they eat.
Bob Lackey, and others, have been pointing this out regarding salmon since the turn of the century and it keeps being ignored.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 registered (ironhead, Carcassman, 1 invisible),
1315
Guests and
3
Spiders online. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
11505 Members
17 Forums
73083 Topics
827023 Posts
Max Online: 3937 @ 07/19/24 03:28 AM
|
|
|