Should You or Shouldn't You?

H20's recent threads got me to wondering? No flamage here H20 and others. Downstream migrant spawned out hatchery females....should they be bonked or released. Consider 1. they have already spawned; 2. if they return again then they have exhibited strengths characteristic of wild fish; 3. yes they may have some genetic differences from the wild fish but in any watershed there are always strays that show up from other watersheds to contribute there genes to the wild population. Typically the addition of some new genetic material to any population is found to be beneficial. I could probably come up with some more things to consider but this should be enough for now. So should we bonk them? Rather than just say "simply because" please give some reasoning beyond simple labels.

I say whack 'em. Nothing scientific (I think there is plenty of expertise in that area on this board, no reason for me to embarass myself), but I consider the native fish of any stream sort of sacred. I'm not a religious guy by any means, but I think they should remain as pure as possible.

I also like seeing an old growth tree alive once in a while, too. So sue me. :p

im with yah gooose...if the hatchery fish somehow spawned once....well good for it, but its a hatchery fish....we dont want those mixing with wild or native fish...bonk them whenever you get the chance

Seems to be alot of that sentiment Skywalker and Hedgie....no problems with your opinion
as its just as valid as anyone elses. Consider though that even before hatcheries there was straying between systems and addition of "foreign(?)" genetic material to native stocks. No judgements here...just some thoughts wanted. Thanks.

I don't know which way to go on this because you could question the ethics of either position. If someone could show me conclusive data that showed hatchery steelhead genes
do not comingle with native genes or that hatchery genes were actually beneficial I'd have no qualms whatsover about releasing them. I have been releasing them, with qualms, myself. Some of my fishing buddies release, some bonk....

Goose,

I'm not sure how to respond. I've released a lot of hatchery fish, mostly pre-spawners, over the years, mostly without knowing the downside. Even a couple this winter - shame on me?

The downside: a Chambers Creek winter run does not spawn very effectively (produce subsequent returning adults), and if it spawns with a native, it reduces the effectiveness of that spawner. As a kelt, most of the damage is done, as the return rate on hatchery kelts seems to be lower than with natives (is that a surprise?). And as fertilizer, it's probably just as good as a native fish.

The upside: if I release a bright hatchery rag today, maybe you'll catch it and bonk it tomorrow. Then we get twice the value from that one fish.

OK, maybe we should always bonk hatchery fish, no exceptions. But some days, that just isn't what I feel like doing. And with the regulation prohibiting waste, what would I do with a kelt? I'm picky about what fish I eat.

So even if bonking all hatchery fish is the proper ecological thing to do, I think a lot of 'em are gonna' get released, especially kelts.

Sincerely,

Salmo g.

Thanks for joining the discussion H20. Exactly the questions I'm asking. Looking for some science to be shed on the subject.

I figure that the hatchery fish are less likely to be genetically optimized for a natural spawning cycle, and if they should mix with a nate, they'll dilute the strain. Like I said, I figure. Data I DON'T have.

It's a good question, though. If a 12 lb. brat makes it through the gauntlet to spawn, the temptation might be to give it another shot. Especially if the other option is to eat it! :p

Hey Gooose!

May I suggest a session at the trestle hole on the Duck to discuss the Hardy Weinberg Theory of Genetic Equilibrium?

5000D

Hmmmmmm? 5000D don't know who you are as your profile speaks newbie....sounds like you know some of that river though...will consider it.
Thanks for the posts Salmo and Sky.

I say bonk em just cause they salmon are about to die anyway so get it over with. It would make a good pic if ist is a big one. I dont know just a thought

I say only klunk it if you plan to eat it. If you plan to eat it, then you have a stronger stomach than me. If its fate is to be chowed by a seal then so be it, maybe one less chromer in the seals diet.

And fishallday...kelts never make good pics.

fishallday steelhead can go back out to the salt and then come back to spawn again.

Tyler

No flaming please...not even mild flames...appreciate it?!
So far I haven't seen much discussion except from sky, h20 and salmo...just short statements of beliefs...all fine as they are valued opinions. What I am concerned about is that in the adoption of what I call religious orthodoxical beliefs we may be ignoring the value of discussion. I've seen this alot in various environmental subjects...the adoption of beliefs from basically what we are told with out actually personally fully exploring the issues. No problem with a persons chosen beliefs...they're as valid as anyone elses...I just want to delve deeper into the subject at hand. Again you want to flame please go somewhere else...please.

here is no need to bonk hatchery kelts. Also I am curios why people are so concerned with interbreeding let nature take care of it unfit fish will not be able to spawn. Also the genetic differences that are checked to determine different stocks does not code for anything it is simply extra. If I misunderstood my professors please correct me on that last statement. Also you need variations in genetics otherwise you will retard the stock and it will eventually die out look at Dalmatians also certain species of wolves are so inbred that they can no longer reproduce I am not sure how this would effect stocks of steelhead as compared to them as a whole but should be thought about. The straying of fish is natural besides an eight pound hatchery male is very rarely going to spawn with a larger female the larger natives will see to that. If you know for a fact that any of my statements are false please let me know so I can have the proper information.

Its pretty hard to have a discussion on a subject where the data available upon which to base an opinion is so hard to come by. Your left with a bunch of well intentioned people guessing at the right choice, mostly basing their decisions upon what is important to them. That's what I have done anyway...

I would let the fish go for several reasons:
1. Kelts usually are not that good to eat[ not to bad smoked?]
2. Already spawned [maybe not sucessfully] damage[if any] already done
3. I'm there to fish, not necessarily to catch and kill [that soul thing]
4. The mingling of genes is not inherently bad [the wandering theory]
5. If released, the kelt can[will] be caught again, they are hungry

Once again I am just pulling from emotion and speculation.I would have to take the size of the system into account.The Hoh river is a damn big system with alot of tributary spawning to boot so I would be less worried from hatchery intermingling.
5000D
Now if I caught one at the trestle hole I would not be surprised because it has been going on since they closed the hatchery program.

Gooose,
Was thinking of coming over your way and doing some hiking,looking for a red or two, ya gioing to be around?

Hi Cleo -

Knowing the Hoh as well as I do I strongly disagree with the statements 'there is alot of tributary spawning water' and 'the Hoh is a big system. Look on the map again and then compare its length vs, that of all Western Wa, rivers and you will find it to be small to average. I would describe the system overall as Healthy.

Comingling of hatchery genes with native genes, depending om which study you've read, has been portrayed as both nonexistent and highly damaging. This makes it difficult for someone who is looking for definitive information upon which to base a sound decision...

Gooose,
A buddy of mine runs the Tolt Creek hatchery, he seems to think that the hatchery fish spawn pretty good, its just the time of year they spawn. Lots of high water and flooding.

Fishhead5

I just throw the snakes back in. Here's my data for why: My arms get tired packing the damn things around all day (bank fishing) And, I always snicker about new guys packing chrome snakes, and don't want to be snickered at. Not scientific, but I don't like filling my punch card up w/garbage!

I guess you could call it an "economic" decision

Aaron

FH5,

I don't know your buddy at the Tokul hatchery, but next time you see him, ask him what "spawns pretty good" means. Many of us have observed hatchery steelhead successfully spawn by depositing their eggs in the gravel. However, for those places for which there is actually data, we know that those hatchery spawners are rarely successful in returning any subsequent adult steelhead, even though they produced natural fry from their redds that grew to be smolts, but they never survived to return.

In such cases, the hatchery spawners are a detriment to the river system because they produce fry that consume space and food resources that are then unavailable to wild native fry. Since the natural/hatchery smolts won't return as adults like the wild smolts, it is like the river actually produced fewer smolts than it is capable of, since whatever resources were devoted to growing the offspring of hatchery spawners isn't going to contribute to the next generation.

Sincerely,

Salmo g.

SG,
Didn't get into it very deep with him. My understanding was the hatchery fish deposited their eggs, they just never hatched. Why is it the fry can be turned loose from the hatchery and make it back, but as fry hatched in a river they don't make it back.

Fishhead5

Salmo the river is only producing less smolts than possible with the added hatchery fish if it is at or very near carrying capacity. Other wise those hatchery smolts just "take up" the extra space that is left. Since I doubt that very many of a steelhead rivers are at carrying capacity there doesn't appear to be a problem. Also I was wondering what the data on the survival of the offspring of a native and hatchery mix. If these fish survive than it doesn't really effet the fish exept in our eyes.

Here's my emotion-based opinion as well:

No, I personally wouldn't bonk a fish that I wasn't going to eat. In fact, I release many pre-spawn hatchery fish as well. My main reasoning follows Salmo g's example. If I let it go, someone who wants to bonk it will probably catch it later, thus getting twice the enjoyment out of catching one fish. I would like to believe that when left to her own devices, Mother Nature is still probably the best steelhead manager around.

Based on what I have read in these posts I will continue to release them, hopefully with fewer qualms.

I would have to agree with Jerry Garcia, with one additional comment: If it survives the trip back to the salt, and returns next year, should it not be a bit larger and full of fight since it will be fresh? Let her go!

FH5,

When hatchery steelhead spawn naturally, the eggs should hatch and fry emerge - unless they are way out of synch with a critical environmental parameter, like water temperature.

Steelhead fry are not turned loose from the hatchery with any expectation of making it back. They learned that technique doesn't work back in the 1940s. Steelhead fry must be raised to smolts, a little over a one year process, and then can be released from the hatchery with a reasonable expectation of making it back as adults.

Why hatchery fry hatched in the natural environment don't survive to make it back isn't well understood, I think. It does seem to be a testament to a lesser degree of fitness. To lend confusion to the issue (and underscore why conflicting information exists - it always depends on specifics), consider the not too common practice of steelhead fry plants. If a suitable broodstock is used, usually native wild, but in the case of the Cowlitz River restoration they are using native hatchery fish, fry can be stocked by scatter planting - meaning you can't just drive up to a bridge and dump all the fry in the same place - and then the little buggers will rear naturally like wild steelhead and produce a fry to smolt survival rate of 2 to 3%, not much less than from natural wild spawners when a river is near capacity. You probably couldn't do that with Chambers Creek stock, but it has been done several places using native brood stock, both from wild and hatchery sources.

elguapo,

Right, that assumes a river at capacity. If there is excess capacity in the river, then those natural offspring of hatchery spawners shouldn't be taking much away from the system, just failing to add anything to it.

Kalama and Deschutes data indicate that hatchery X wild crosses result in lower survival than W X W crosses and somewhat higher survival than H X H crosses. Keep in mind a critical difference here. In the Kalama case, the H fish are Chambers Creek that don't seem to be suited to any natural environment, maybe even Chambers Creek. I don't know. On the deschutes, the hatchery summer steelhead are the same or closely related stock as the natives. So the H X H cross is better than zero in that case.

I think that explains why some natural summer run populations have developed from prior hatchery stocking. The Skamania fish that were used are by coincidence probably better suited, and therefore more fit, to reproduce effectively in the natural environment. So it's important to avoid generalizations. Chambers Creek fish have been so selectively bred, and apparently their fitness so reduced in the natural environment, that they give all hatchery steelhead a bad reputation. I think it just depends on what stock of fish and which specific environment. Hence, generalizations can be confusing and misleading.

I hope I've added more clarity than confusion to this issue.

Sincerely,

Salmo g.

i am now thinking about it and agreein with some..i guess if they are a kelt they could be released..we'll just get them next year(hopefully)kinda pointless killin meat that tastes like cardboard ehh? ill pu t spin on the subject though... WHAT DO YOU GUYS THINK ABOUT THE BROODSTOCKING PROGRAMS??
i think most are out to do there best and in the best interest but im not sure as to whether i subscribe to the idea..i mean sure its a wild fish and those are good genes but in a hatchery 99% of those fish make it out(to the ocean), whereas in the wild 10 or 20% might make it to the ocean...this is the whole idea of survival of the fittest, something that has long since passed in the hatcheries, those fish that didnt survive died for a reason, they had a flaw of some sort. i dont know its late and most of this problably didnt make sense but I'd like some comments on this topic, especially yours salmo g and gooose

5000d...good point.moot, but good

Salmo G, from what I've been reading about studies on the Kalama is that the hatchery fish aren't breeding with the wild fish. (kinda getting away from the orig question)

I agree with you on some of the hatchery stocks don't breed at all. One of the rivers that I fish for summer run on, has been planted for years. I have never caught one that hasn't been clipped.

Do I conk spawners? Nope

Fishhead5

Biker, broodstocking probably should be a new topic as it's kinda off this thread however the first thing that comes to my mind is WHY are you broodstocking? Are you trying to suppliment a depressed stock? Or are your intentions to increase harvest? I think it makes a big difference.

Beezer

Ok...I figured out a way to reconcile my feelings about bonking kelts...

As I stated above I think hatchery are fish are a liablity for wild fish and should be removed from the gene pool at every opportunity...I figured out a way to bonk 'em without wasting them...feed them to Bubba, the 125 pound 1/2 Arctic Wolfdog.

He didn't seem to mind that the meat was pale...

Well I say throw back all the snakes becuase the are pretty much worthless as an eatin fish and even smoked the still taste horrible so let the little buggers go, plus you never know that fish might return in a few years weighing in at 19 or 20 lbs and you might just get him or her before it spawns.
Now as far as broodstocking goes the tribes screwed us on that because of them we have to clip all the fish and that just screws us from the start.
Dance Out

Seems to me, if you kill a downstreamer, then you're trying to reduce the next year's hatchery run. Right? The fish has already spawned, so unless you want to reduce the next years return of brats, what good does it do to kill the fish? Might as well shut down the hatcheries by that logic.

Also, are you gonna tag a downstreamer that you've killed? If not, is it ethical?

I believe one must first make the distinction between which fish are effected by inferior naturally spawning hatchery origin fish.

The "wild" designation that our Dept. of Fisheries has adopted for non-fin clipped Steelhead wrongfully lumps true rare stocks of native Steelhead with their inferior cousins. Clearly we are dealing with two different fish here and should be treated as such!

In the best interest of a true native Steelhead devoid of any hatchery genetic makeup it only make sense to club a prespawn hatchery fish.

Clubbing a post spawn hatchery fish on the other hand doesn't allow it to beat the odds of hopefully finding the hatchery on it's next visit. Killing the spawner doesn't solve the problem that hatcheries have created on our waters.

On waters that true native stocks have long since been extinct for one reason or another I see no reason not to allow the natural spawn of hatchery fish. However rivers that hold any true native stocks, I say shame on you WSDF for continuing to allowing inferior fish the opportunity to degrade the holy grail of gene pools.

Continuing to preserve "wild" fish in the correct context may be a chore that the those who be are incapable of doing. Labeling all non-clipped fish together as wild has provided one hell of a smoke screen to fool the public for the sole purpose of keeping tax paid upper management employees jobs and their political aspirations running smoothly on the gravy train.

Just my .02...if you don't agree that's your prerogative.

FJ...out.

I think fish as well as people should be required to obtain a liscence before breeding!

Thanks FJ for those comments...they got me trying to come up with a list of streams or portions of streams supposedly unaffected by hatchery fish. One showing current plants and one historical plants. My concern is that is it possible to hide the demise of a native stock by claiming hatchery derived fish as wild fish?

Hide the demise...interesting concept!

One more reason for the "wild" lable?

FJ...out.

I'll only keep a fish if I want to eat it. I wouldn't want to eat a downstream hatchery fish so I'd release it.