#978300 - 07/08/17 11:52 AM
Re: Steelhead plantings.
[Re: Rivrguy]
|
River Nutrients
Registered: 11/21/07
Posts: 7438
Loc: Olema,California,Planet Earth
|
Rivrguy, you are being so charitable. Size of a gain of sand? That'd be Huge. Trump-Class.
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#978301 - 07/08/17 02:45 PM
Re: Steelhead plantings.
[Re: Krijack]
|
River Nutrients
Registered: 11/21/07
Posts: 7438
Loc: Olema,California,Planet Earth
|
There have been many reviews of the advisability of contracting out the production of anadromous smolts. The general conclusion is that programs run by the state have constraints such as stock (each stream with a different stock) that would severely cut into a private's profits. Also, the state has to rear anadromous fish to survive in the wild whereas privates produce fish that are confined their whole life. Now, the privates can do put and take trout as that is little different from a commercial grow and kill operation.
While I know that the Department of Salmon has not treated game fish and gamefish bios very well I am aware of a very nice summer run steelhead program that WDF ran on the Sol Duc. It was under the table, done because it was fun, etc but it was apparently very successful. And then WDG made a fuss and shut it down. There have been some interesting projects carried on at hatcheries by some inventive and inquisitive staff.
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#978305 - 07/08/17 05:24 PM
Re: Steelhead plantings.
[Re: Krijack]
|
River Nutrients
Registered: 03/08/99
Posts: 13526
|
Smalma,
Thanks for the catch. That figure did seem high, but in my rush I didn't bother to check the math. My bad!
Krijack,
See above. I messed up the math by about a decimal point, ergo, an order of magnitude. Even so, the cost of smolts is high. Where the numbers came from? Harry Senn, former and long time head of WDF hatchery division. When he retired he consulted on hatchery costs, construction, and operation for BPA. The numbers were modified by other consultants to fit different projects as they came up. Basically the cost is the cost, and includes all costs including amortization of hatchery facilities - capital construction, renovation at 30 years, and replacement at 50 years. All utilities, labor, machinery, supplies, and fish feed are part of the cost.
You want to know the real reason some tribes can produce huge numbers of hatchery fish? OPM = other people's money. Tribes get federal dollars under rights protection funding via the BIA, and certain tribes that have enough political horsepower get directed line item appropriations. Admittedly, some tribes also use locally sourced funds, like from bingo halls and casinos to help fund hatchery programs. But the lions share is federal funding.
A potential cost saving is that many PS hatcheries have cut back the number of steelhead smolts raised and planted. So they likely have above average costs/smolt by being under utilized. Increasing production to design capacity would optimize production costs, but then there's that whole ESA limitation thing affecting hatcheries these days.
Rivrguy,
Chum salmon generally pencil out as having the highest cost:benefit ratio. Although coho and Chinook would have better cost:benefit ratios if we include the value of salmon caught in B.C., not to rub salt in a wound or anything.
CM,
Shush about any SD summer runs. Never happened, and if it did, long gone. DL and all.
Sg
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#978306 - 07/08/17 06:31 PM
Re: Steelhead plantings.
[Re: Krijack]
|
River Nutrients
Registered: 11/21/07
Posts: 7438
Loc: Olema,California,Planet Earth
|
Yeah, Salmo, long gone. But some folks were pretty happy for a while. And, truly, a unique way to successfully culture steelhead.
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#978309 - 07/09/17 08:26 AM
Re: Steelhead plantings.
[Re: Carcassman]
|
River Nutrients
Registered: 03/03/09
Posts: 4419
Loc: Somewhere on the planet,I hope
|
Interesting article I was reading started out below. Amazing how this has not changed.
Managing Salmon for Ecosystem Needs in the Pacific Northwest: Limiting Science Input in Ecosystem Management—Silos R Us J. Hal Michael, Jr., Science Outreach Director, Sustainable Fisheries Foundation, 511 Flora Vista Road NE, Olympia, WA
The mindset permeating salmonid management in Washington, and probably most other fisheries managed worldwide, can be encapsulated in the last draft of a steelhead Oncorhynchus mykiss management plan that was developed by the state of Washington and treaty Indian tribes 26 years ago (Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife [WDFW], unpublished data): A purpose of fisheries management is to ensure achievement of a desired level of catch. In order to maintain this level, it is necessary to prevent the capture of a certain portion of the run, so that these uncaught fish can spawn and produce fish for future use. An escapement allowance must be evaluated primarily according to whether it achieves the catch objective.
Note that fish serve two purposes: catch and production of catch. No other values or benefits are recognized.
_________________________
Dazed and confused.............the fog is closing in
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#978312 - 07/09/17 11:48 AM
Re: Steelhead plantings.
[Re: Smalma]
|
Spawner
Registered: 12/05/02
Posts: 527
|
FishDoctor - The thing that confuses me is if Puget Sound is toxic to steelhead why is that fish like sea-run cutthroat who smolt at the same size and time as the steelhead are doing relatively well through out Puget Sound?
Are the two living in the same water?
If folks are ever to understand what is happening with the steelhead somehow they will need to parse out how various factors are differently affecting other species that are doing better.
Curt Curt, Its a toxic mix of thousands of chemicals as you know. If indeed cutts are faring better then it would be of some hope that our wastes are not killing everything (yet). There are a lot of possible problems for steelhead in the sound and rivers also as this study outlines and discusses. PCB, Estrogen's and flame retardants are just the tip the iceburg IMO. Steelhead may be exposed to more"hot-spots" in the sound (and rivers) than cutts, or there may be many other reasons for a difference in survival. Bottom line: we need to keep our waters cleaner or face the fact that these fish are going away. The coastal waters are cleaner, and fish dont have the toxins like the sound does. There seems to be a good correlation of survival to adult with water quality IMO. >The closer to the city, the worse it is. Even the Nisqually fish are HOT with PCB's and other toxins. http://marinesurvivalproject.com/wp-cont...port-FINAL.pdf.source: Puget Sound Steelhead Marine Survival: 2013-2015 research findings summary Puget Sound Steelhead Marine Survival Workgroup December 31, 2015
_________________________
FishDoctor
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#978313 - 07/09/17 11:54 AM
Re: Steelhead plantings.
[Re: Krijack]
|
River Nutrients
Registered: 11/21/07
Posts: 7438
Loc: Olema,California,Planet Earth
|
We do know that coho are significantly more susceptible to stream pollution than are chum. Cutthroat are also seemingly more resilient to poor conditions than other salmonids, at least the coastal. They seem to survive in streams and the sound better.
Too often we seem to believe that a fish is a fish is a fish and if something is bad for one it is bad for all,
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#978314 - 07/09/17 01:19 PM
Re: Steelhead plantings.
[Re: Krijack]
|
Lord of the Chums
Registered: 03/29/14
Posts: 6829
|
the only thing that killed off the Chum on the upper Puyallup and Carbon systems, was asian demand for the eggs, and the greed of the tribes....
_________________________
BLM IS A TERRORIST ORGANIZATION ANTIFA IS A TERRORIST ORGANIZATION
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#978316 - 07/09/17 02:44 PM
Re: Steelhead plantings.
[Re: Carcassman]
|
Three Time Spawner
Registered: 09/07/05
Posts: 1882
Loc: Spokane WA
|
Too often we seem to believe that a fish is a fish is a fish and if something is bad for one it is bad for all,
I'm fairly confident nets are bad for all of them.
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#978321 - 07/10/17 07:22 AM
Re: Steelhead plantings.
[Re: ondarvr]
|
River Nutrients
Registered: 11/21/07
Posts: 7438
Loc: Olema,California,Planet Earth
|
As with all things biological, the answer is yes and no. Back in the 80s, Skagit coho were chronically under escaped. So much so that there was no bay/river fishing for them by netters. It got complicated by the (then) fairly robust chum runs as the incidental catch was pretty high. So, WDF and the Tribes put in something like a 6" or 6.5" minimum mesh requirement on gill nets during the chum fishery.
Coho by catch essentially disappeared. When salmon management ended (WDF conservation control) on 11/30 a 5" minimum was put in place for steelhead harvest. Suddenly, all sorts of coho showed up.
While gill nets are not perfect they can be used in a size-selective manner and significantly reduce by catch if the two species are of reasonably different sizes.
Still, it would need to be enforced and users would need 3 or 4 nets for a year rather tan just one.
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#978324 - 07/10/17 01:17 PM
Re: Steelhead plantings.
[Re: Krijack]
|
My Area code makes me cooler than you
Registered: 01/27/15
Posts: 4549
|
You guys base all your junk science on the numbers provided by who?
WDFW?
WDFW......... The same clowns that couldn't even count the number of fish in a net pen? The same lame ducks that couldn't figure out where or how the fish disappeared?
Give me a break.
Your numbers are a joke.
Plant fish morons!!!
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#978337 - 07/11/17 11:34 AM
Re: Steelhead plantings.
[Re: WDFW X 1 = 0]
|
My Area code makes me cooler than you
Registered: 01/27/15
Posts: 4549
|
For those that still cannot grasp the concept.............
PLANT FISH!!!!!!!!!!
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#978341 - 07/11/17 01:22 PM
Re: Steelhead plantings.
[Re: Carcassman]
|
River Nutrients
Registered: 04/25/00
Posts: 5078
Loc: East of Aberdeen, West of Mont...
|
While gill nets are not perfect they can be used in a size-selective manner and significantly reduce by catch if the two species are of reasonably different sizes.
Still, it would need to be enforced and users would need 3 or 4 nets for a year rather tan just one.
Enforcement would be much easier if only 1 group was netting. I go to NOF meetings and listen as the "cowboys" complain about having 2 or 3 sizes of nets and then whether it is gill net or tangle nets, there is another choice...stop netting completely.....
_________________________
"Worse day sport fishing, still better than the best day working"
"I thought growing older, would take longer"
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#978345 - 07/11/17 02:17 PM
Re: Steelhead plantings.
[Re: Krijack]
|
Shooting Instructor for hire
Registered: 10/26/10
Posts: 7260
Loc: Snohomish, WA
|
"OUR FISH ARE TURNING GAY!!!!" - Alexjonessupersteelheadvitalityinfowars.com
_________________________
“If the military were fighting for our freedom, they would be storming Capitol Hill”. – FleaFlickr02
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#978347 - 07/11/17 02:28 PM
Re: Steelhead plantings.
[Re: DrifterWA]
|
River Nutrients
Registered: 11/21/07
Posts: 7438
Loc: Olema,California,Planet Earth
|
I get tired of the excuse that it is too expensive for multiple nets, too expensive to enforce, too expensive to monitor, too expensive to manage in-season.
You either do the job, the whole job, or you don't. If the long term survival and productivity of our resources are important, then put the money into it. Do it right. If you don't have the money to do it right close it.
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#978354 - 07/11/17 05:22 PM
Re: Steelhead plantings.
[Re: Krijack]
|
Repeat Spawner
Registered: 12/06/07
Posts: 1388
|
Have a question? I have printed WDFW or State Game Dept. harvest reports back to 1983-84. The Steelhead plant numbers didn't start showing up on the reports until 1988-89. Anyone know where to find those plant numbers previous to 1988-89? The Green used to be hot for Summerun on the openers Memorial Day weekend and the change in June in the early 80's. I'm curious what kind of numbers it took to produce the catches then? Icy creek was on fire on the opener w/ a bunch stacked in there, w/ fish scattered all through the Gorge.
_________________________
"Life moves pretty fast. If you don't stop and look around once in a while, you could miss it.” – Ferris Bueller. Don't let the old man in!
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#978355 - 07/11/17 05:29 PM
Re: Steelhead plantings.
[Re: Krijack]
|
River Nutrients
Registered: 11/21/07
Posts: 7438
Loc: Olema,California,Planet Earth
|
The R4 office should have that. The Area Bio should have it. I thought the plant numbers were reported with the catch data earlier than the 80s. WDG used to have a rearing pond complex in the Upper Green. I forget the name. Icy and Crisp were WDF facilities for salmon. Icy had really nice water for growing fish.
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#978359 - 07/11/17 07:43 PM
Re: Steelhead plantings.
[Re: Krijack]
|
River Nutrients
Registered: 11/25/01
Posts: 2844
Loc: Marysville
|
RUNnGun-
WDFW produce a report a few years back "O. mykiss": Assessment of Washington State's steelhead populations and programs. That should be available by searching their site (might try Statewide steelhead plan and look for that report. Within the report there are a number of appendixes that provide historical data base for various regions of the State. While the smolt planting history is by no means complete but on some of the larger basin it can go back to about 1960.
For complete information contact the agency directly (either the fish program in Olympia or the regional office).
Curt
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#978376 - 07/11/17 11:20 PM
Re: Steelhead plantings.
[Re: Krijack]
|
River Nutrients
Registered: 03/15/99
Posts: 4214
Loc: Poulsbo, WA,USA
|
Same stuff is happening down in Oregon. Haven't purchased a fishing license in Washington and probably will not this year. Maybe they will wake up and figure out why their revenue is going down. Too bad for the bios on this forum. Just read in the Seattle PI that Salmon Bay is planning to double the commercial fishing fleet. Oh Joy! I look forward to fishing in Mexico!
Edited by Steelheadman (07/11/17 11:21 PM)
_________________________
I'd Rather Be Fishing for Summer Steelhead!
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
1 registered (Excitable Bob),
483
Guests and
2
Spiders online. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
11498 Members
16 Forums
63783 Topics
645418 Posts
Max Online: 3001 @ 01/28/20 02:48 PM
|
|
|