uselessly releaasing hatchery salmon

[David Johnson]

Did you know that last spring in May when the Willamette went to the fin clip only fishery over 90% of the un clipped salmon released were hedded to the hatchery?

Who out there is in favor of going fishing for the "opportunity to fish" for salmon if they are probably going to have to throw it back, even if it is a hatchery fish?

This spring it is again going to be fin clip only rules on the Willamette. That's fine with me this year as almost all returning hatchery fish will be fin clipped. But what about the Clackamas? They want to make the Clackamas have the same rules too and waste a lot of fish that you should have the right to harvest.

[Hoosier Daddy]

I don't know enough of the details, so I'm not going to give an opinion. But lets assume there must be a good reason for it. If you have a problem with the policy, you should look at attending public meetings, ODFW does tons of them, check their web site, and express your concerns. You may also get to hear the reasons why things are planned the way they are.

Some possible explanations are Endangered Species Act stuff. In a lot of cases ODFW is told how to manage and what can and can't be harvested by federal agencies based on ESA concerns. They may have no other choice. I can guarantee you that there is a biological reason or it was mandated from somewhere else. ODFW wants us to catch fish. You know, but licenses and such.

[chuck 'n' duck]

Dave:

Are you arguing that a run of naturally spawning springers should not be allowed to exist in the Clackamas? I understand that this run may have been wiped out by the construction of River Mill Dam. However, shouldn't we try to right our wrongs?

I think that your frustration should be focused at the inefficiency of hatchery fin clipping programs, not at ODFW's attempts to protect wild spawners. We should just feel lucky to be able to fish that river seven days a week again.

Not trying to be difficult, just trying shed a different light on the problem.

Chuck 'n' Duck

[Bait O' Eggs]

Interesting topic David, I am by no means a fish biologist, but like everybody I got an opinion. (sometimes two http://www.ifish.net/forum/images/graemlins/grin.gif )

I dont completely understand your count of hatchery and wild fish and how the hatcheries perform clipping on the Clackamas. The clipped fish which you say will need released (with the hatchery ancestors), are they first generation decendants of hatchery fish? Or could it have been several generations of fish since their ancestors were hatchery fish? What my question boils down to is, does the hatchery clip every fish on do they only clip 40% of the fish they release.


Assuming the hatchery clip all there fish, and the only fish with a full fin count were gravel hatched in the river I feel the following should be done.

It is my opinion that nature fixes what we destroy. We kill off the entire gene pool with a dam, then we come along and reintroduce some hatchery fish, these fish with enough life cycles should get as close as possible to a wild fish. Nature should weed out the fish with the weak genes, leaving a fish which is as close as possible to the original run. If we keep taking every fish, just because its great great grandpa was a hatchery fish, we are resigning ourselves to never building a stong gene pool. I would rather let a fish that survived a "natural" life cycle with no hatchery influence go to spread the genes that made it all the way back up the river.

I heard one time, that what a fish loses in one year as a hatchery fish, will remedy itself in 1 year as a non hatchery influenced fish. I know that doesnt read well, but basically, what it loses in one year as a hatchery fish, will be fixed in the next generation on its own. I have no study to point to, or data to back it up. It makes sense to me though. If that egg can hatch in the gravel and survive several years at sea and return, it has everything a run of fish needs to survive. If we keep taking them all, and letting the hatchery only stock the river, we will eventually end up with a fish that could not survive on its own.

1 vote for the let the full fin count go, as long as the hatcheries are clipping there fish.

(but if you clip it and release it, then just dont tell anybody http://www.ifish.net/forum/images/graemlins/grin.gif http://www.ifish.net/forum/images/graemlins/grin.gif )

[Shannon]

Last year when they began tossing this idea around I knew it would create a questionable clause. The Clackamas Hatchery at Dog Creek receives 4500 Springers each year. That is sufficient. What wild stocks that return were mixed breeded with a hatchery clone at one time or another, naturally. It is too bad that this has occured. Soon McKenzie, Upper Willamette, Santiams will most likely follow. With todays ever so increasing growth of Salmon and Steelhead anglers in our fine state of Oregon, we will just have to accept that we can't just keep on taking. Give it another ten years of more anglers, Then what?

When in doubt set the hook.

[Clamman]

David,

This is just a small portion of the recently submitted Fisheries Management and Evaluation Plan for the Upper Willamette Spring Chinook. According to the NMFS The Clackamas River Spring Chinook fall under the Evolutionary Significant Unit for a wild population. I shall quote the rest;

" Recent wild spawning escapements in the Clackamas River exceed critical and viable thresholds for abundance and productivity. Most wild spring chinook spawn in the upper basin above the 3 dam complex located between river miles 23 and 30. Redd surveys conducted from 1996-1999 indicate spawning is widely distributed with about 75% in a 40 mile stretch of the mainstem upstream from the head of the North Fork Resevoir.

Wild population of spring chinook recolonized the upper Clackamas basin above the second dam (Faraday) after passage was reestablished in 1939 following a 22-year interruption. Counts of wild spring chinook averaged about 500 until 1981 when a large influx of hatchery fish from the newly built Clackamas Hatchery strayed past the hatchery and over the North Fork Dam. Dam counts declined from a hatchery-influenced peak of 4,659 in 1991 to vary between 900 and an expected 1,800 in 2000.

Hatchery and wild fish cannot be distinguished until 2002 when all returning hatchery fish will have marks. However, it is thought reasonable to assume that escapement of naturally produced spring chinook in the Clackamas has ranged from about 500 to 1,500 fush during 1994-1999. North Fork Dam counts have followed a generally increasing trend from 1996 to 2000 and have increased 3 of those 4 years. Relatively stable wild escapements from 1960 to 1980 and recent comparable wild escapements suggest that this population has maintained a replacement rate near 1.0 for an extended period of time."

It is apparent that from this Management Plan required by the NMFS under the new 4(d) rules, that wild fish populations on the Clackams River have existed prior to the dams. The spring chinook return as ages 3-6, as of 2001 only 3 and 4's will be fully hatchery marked. The 5's will be fully hatchery marked by 2002. Restrictions on the Clackamas most likely will include a fin-marked fishery only sometime in late April or May. But expect restrictions similar to last year in regards to days open.

As far as the Willamette, last year was a full fleet test fishery to determine the viablity of a selective fishery. This year 70%+ will be marked. Marking 100% of hatchery fish is no easy task. Spring chinook come in 4 different age classes so from the time you begin your mass marking project it will take a minimum of 6 years for all hatchery fish to be marked.

Anglers need to have patience with this fin-marking program, since it will ultimately keep you fishing. The bright side to this whole deal is that the Willamette is going to have the biggest estimated return since 1993. I believe that should be exciting enough.

For more info regarding the Fisheries Management and Evaluation Plan it should be accessible from the ODFW web site.

ISG

[David Johnson]

chnokie- I do go to most all the meetings( I attended one last monday), I have heard their reasons and I have and will continue to express my thoughtsm feelings and concerns with them.

For the most part there isn't a biological reason for the seasons that are set, it's a political one. Last Monday I was personally told that it is politics by Steve King, he is the head of fisheries management and a past boss of me when I worked for ODFW.

You are right in that many times there is no choice as they are a pupet of the feds.

BaitOEggs- I do have a fisheries biology degree so I have a little insite on these fish.

The fish I say that will have to be released are hatchery fish returning to the state hatchery. The reason they are not clipped is becasue ODFW didn't start clipping all the fish until three years ago, hence only the 3 yr olds are 100% clipped and only a few of the 4 and 5 yar olds are clipped. Next year all the 3 and 4 will be clipped and the next all the 3, 4 and 5 year olds will be clipped........the run is made up of +40% 4 year olds and +40% 5 year olds and the rest of the run made up of 3 and 6 year olds.

I agree that a grevel bred fish is better than a hatchery bred fish but this is all brought on by environmentalists wanting to preserve geneticly native fish, of which there are none here that exist.

chuck-n-duck-
my argument is not that I want to erradicate wild fish. I am in favor of protecting fish of a pure gene pool but these are a genaric fish is.

ODFW isn't un efficient at clipping, it's just that they have not been clipping them until three years ago.

personally I don't feel lucky to fish seven days a week if the fish I am going to work hard at to catch have to be leased and they are not even native fish, as I stated 60% will be hatchery fish and they will go on there way to the hatchery.

Thank all of you for your imput.

[David Johnson]

Thanks Chromer,

i would like to point out that from your report the wild run has done pretty well at replasing it's self.

Funny thing is it has done that even while a seven day a week, kill all fish season for the past 20 years.

To me it doesn't look like a sport fishery did too much damage.

------------------

[Hoosier Daddy]

David-
I certainly did not mean to imply that you can't or shouldn't have an opinion about this. I also did not mean to suggest "hey, dingbat go to the meetings" if you already were. A lot of that was for other readers' benefit. So they can know about them as well. Once again, I don't know all of the details of this situation.

[David Johnson]

No problem chnookie, and thanks for your imput.

David Johnson

[Ramstrong]

David,
I agree with your fundamental reasoning here. I do feel that hatchery fish are here for us to harvest, and harvest we should. however from what I gather ODFW's concerns here are about increased pressure on these fish (due to willamette closures/restrictions), and how to limit that pressure and still allow a fishery. I also understand your concerns, you pay the bills by being able to harvest these fish, so you have the most to lose. and telling you this is only temporary won't help you now. I fish for these fish recreationally. I only caught 2 springers last year. 1 in may on the willamette, then another in june on the clack. Both of these fish had adipose fins. Both were probably hatchery fish. 1 had to be released, the other tasted wonderful. However, if faced with not being able to fish at all vs having to release all non fin clipped fish. I'll release the darn fish. Just ask Rob Endsley in Washington (Robbo on Bob's board). Washington has closed some rivers to all steelheading this spring, that closure could devastate him. At least with a catch and release fishery you can generate some revenue, and I can log some water time. Like the old proverb says, a bad day of fishing is better than a good day at work.

------------------
-Ryan
www.xprt.net/~ryandsar (http://www.xprt.net/~ryandsar)
ramstrong@hotmail.com

[This message has been edited by Ramstrong (edited 12-14-2000).]

[Carver_OR]

Funny how we don't mind letting a steelhead swim free after landing it but those salmon we need to hit on the head. I think the general population of sport fishermen are thinking catch and release. If I (client) can go out and C&R a fish, it makes my day. I don't need to bring every fish home, it feels good to let them go.

------------------
<A HREF="http://www.holdzit.com
Catching" TARGET=_blank>http://www.holdzit.com
Catching</A> is only a small part of it.

[wiser]

For me, the opportunity to fish is the important thing. If I just wanted a fish for dinner, the fish market would be far less expensive than harvesting my own. If there is any chance that I can help ensure stronger runs of returning fish, I would gladly give up the harvest part of fishing. Don't get me wrong, I like to bring a fish home as much as anyone else. The experience of fishing and preservation of that experience for future generations is still far more important than being able to whack a fish over the head after the battle. I totally disagree with the statement "useless release of fish".

[Salmonator]

BOE, why do you keep on with the clip and release thing. I'm starting to think you really do it

[David Johnson]

I would like to know if any of you would still pay to fish salmon even if you are going to release it. Most all of the clients I talk to don't want to put in the time and effort and money just to throw back that salmon.

I simply can't make much money on this kind of fishery.

Last year insteaad of fishing the Willamette fin clip fishery I moved my opperation up to the Wind River in Washington.

This year I am going to have to do the same as well as put more presure on the Sandy.

Sure if a fisherman is going to spend a whole season just to catch one or two fish they are going to buy into the "opportunity to fish".

For those of us who average two or three fish a day and are expected to produce the "opportunity to fish" isn't very lusterous.

[Phish_on]

I can't afford guides no matter what.

I like to release fish. I like to eat fish.

I always follow the fishing regulations.

I think fin-clipping the hatchery fish and allowing for "selective" harvest is a GREAT IDEA, and I think it will work. It allowed me to eat silvers this fall, now didn't it?

- - that's my $.02

[Spooled]

I agree with Young Salt. If you fish for meat and not the enjoyment of fishing, you are going to be disappointed in any regulation dealing with conserving our fish. Sure I have kept fish, 3 this year, but I have released about 30. I simply enjoy fishing.
The sooner everyone that keeps a fish, whether they are a sportsfisherman, guide or commercial fisherman, realizes they contribute to the decline in the fish population the better. I always see sportfisherman blaming commercial fisherman an vice-versa. We all take fish, and are all responsible in one way or another.
I hear that commercial and Native American nets catch native as well as hatchery fish. I am sure this is true, but sportsfisherman also catch natives and sometimes treat the fish poorly because they can't keep it. I saw this first hand Friday and have seen it before. We all need to help build a good population of fish, which means we all must give something up. I especially would like to see Oregon and Washington work out a plan to limit salmon catches in the Columbia. It seems odd that I can keep twice as many fish from the Columbia if I buy a Washington tag in addition to my Oregon tag. Does one person need 40 salmon per year? Those who do, will be the first to complain when the fishery closes because someone else is taking "their fish". Every fish is important.

Just my $.02

[Salmonator]

Realistically, if somebody is concerned that every fish counts then people should not be catch and releasing 30, 50 or 100 fish a year. I have seen dead chromers laying in the bottom of holes that people had played "catch and release" in, even with great care in handling and watching them swim off. Obviously the survival success is greater than gill nets, but if we kill a small perctentage by recreational catch and release then go down and buy a gill-net killed fish (and we all know the REAL cost of that fish and i'm not talking dollars) then what do we gain?

[Hoosier Daddy]

Dave-
If I could afford to go on guided fishing trips, no I wouldn't care whether it was whack and stack or catch and release. For me it's about the fun, not the meat. Not that I condone catching and wearing out fish just to entertain yourself at the expense of wearing out a salmon/steelhead. However, I don't have any problem with going on a trip knowing that I may not be able to keep anything. Lots of folks fish the John Day, looking for stray hatchery fish, since the John Day fish are unmarked. Not to say that I dispute that you lose business over not being able to keep fish, I believe that. Most people probably do feel that way. But you asked, so I'm tellin. On another note, I have always believed firmly that all anadromous hatchery fish should be marked. It's necessary nowadays. However, the reality is it is VERY expensive, which is probably the primary reason these fish weren't clipped. Until forced to, agencies couldn't afford to clip every fish. ESA again. This doesn't help you at all I know.
One other thing. Most of the time it is, and probably always will be, more expensive to hire a guide or fish on your own than it is to go to the store and buy it. Nothing personal, just my opinion here

[Spooled]

Salmonator, I do agree with the fact that some fish released die, but their survival rate is way better than fish that are kept. I also agree with your statement on the cost of gill nets. I mentioned that everyone is responsible, myself and gill netters included. I just don't think many gill netters read this BB. I may be wrong. They have as much if not more responsibility as us sportsfishermen to help out. I was just trying to make the point that no one group is solely responsible for the current situation, and no one group is going to solve it. Everyone who fishes must help.
As far as fish that are sold in stores, I feel the same way about them as I do Christmas trees on lots. I can't help a fish that is in the store already, or a tree that is already cut. I can help the fish that is alive by releasing it, and buying and the fish that is already in the store. I can help a living tree by using one that is already cut. It just makes sense to me, but maybe not to everyone.

[Salmonator]

Spooled, wasn't trying to pick on you. Nothing wrong with catch and release on a healthy run. But buying a gillnet native ensures the death of future g/n natives. Especially when there are hatchery fish that are born to be on your barbeque.

Semi topic: Are the salmon that I see in stores that are w/out sea lice scars farm fish? It seems like all the sport caught ocean chromers have sea lice. I check out the fish section at Fred Meyer everytime through (fish are like a magnet no matter where I am http://www.ifish.net/forum/images/graemlins/grin.gif) and have never seen a sea lice scar.

Dave J: I have heard talk last summer up in Astoria about a license surcharge to buy out gill net licenses. Do you know anything about this. I would gladly lay out an extra 10 or 20 bucks for this cause. Joe

[Hookset]

Dave,

Just my opinion here, I really don't think your going to get an answer on this board that's typical of a person that regulary books a guided trip. I could be wrong, have been before. The majority of people on this board are serious fisherpeople, people who just like to fish and talk fishing. We should probably go one step further. People who live, eat and breath fishing. And most everyone here would rather (at least those that post)experience fishing on their own and learn for themselves. Just not your typical client. You've already answered your own question by moving your operations to Wind river last year. You'll probably have to do this for at least another 2 years from the sounds of the clipping program with hatchery fish.

Maybe you could do us a favor or clue us in. What are the demographics of a typical client who regularly books guided fishing trips? And what are their expectations on keeping fish? I already have my own ideas on these questions but would like to hear your observations.

thanks,

hook

[Spooled]

Salmonator, no offense taken. I enjoy hearing others veiws. I read a lot on this BB, and have learned a lot from others. I have seen a lot of your posts and usually could not have written them better myself.
I was also wondering about the fish in stores being farm raised. I don't know myself. http://www.ifish.net/forum/images/graemlins/smile.gif

[Ramstrong]

C&R vs Bonking that is the question this boils down to. I think that hatchery fish need to get eaten, that is what our tax dollars are paying for. Nates are a different story, the MSH and MSY models that regulate our fisheries are broken and need to be fixed. I'm not saying that I'm the guy to do it, but I'm sure there are people out there that know a whole lot more about the subject than I do that can fix it. We need to take a look at how we manage our native fisheries, they're going away faster than we know what to do with. I personally will no longer keep a native steelhead, It's still legal on the Rouge and Umpqua. Native Coho fishing is closed in all of Oregon, good. I have very little impact on the Chinook population, on heavy run years I think a fish or two is okay, that's it. Up north the Chum, Sockeye and Pink populations are at healty harvestable levels, but all should be left alone down here. Fin clipping is good, clip all hatchery fish. The verdict still appears to be out on native broodstock, but I like it, all hatchery fish should decend from in basin ancestors. Opinions are like butt holes, we all have them and most of them stink. that's mine.

[garyk]

David -- This has turned into an interesting topic. Regarding your concern that clients won't pay if they can't kill... This problem is caused by how guides, especially salmon guides market their trips -- pics of lots of dead fish. I mean that is the clientale that salmon guides try to attract.

Now compare this to the Deschutes trout guides -- they're getting the highest day fee in the whole state -- and they just about never kill a fish.

Now if you could regularly get your dudes 3 to 5 fish in the net and nice pictures of them, you think they wouldn't pay? You've got a unique trophy fishery there -- treat it as such.

Like any business, it's all in the marketing.
'Course you need a product to sell, in your case that means fish in the river. So, I think your businesss would be well served advocating for a healthy Clackamas, with lots of fish.

[David Johnson]

What is every ones feelings about having a run of spring chinook that is 9,000 fish, 8,500 of which are hatchery the other 500 are wild spawned but came from hatchery parents. And you had to release 60% of the fish you caught?

Sure releasing fish is cool and all but isn't it a waist to spend the day trying to catch a fish or two and then just having to release these hatchery fish?

This is what is probably going to happen on the Clackamas River.

This spring ODFW is proposing to open the Clackamas seven days a week to fin clip only salmon. The problem is only around 40% of the hatchery fish will be fin clipped. the other 60% will have to be let go. What does the state do with the serplus fish? Sell them, of course.

What about the wild fish you say that they are trying to preserve? Any wild fish in there have come from parrents that are of hatchery origin. River Mill dam stood blocking that river for 20+ years with no fish ladder. Not until they built the ladder and planted hatchery spring chinook from other systems such as the upper Willamette and even Wind River in Washington did they have fish going up there above the dam.

Please reply and tell me you oppinion.

David Johnson

------------------

[Bait O' Eggs]

David
I think your flustrations show in great magnitude in your one sentence:

"I simply can't make much money on this kind of fishery"

I thoroughly understand your pain where people are trying to make a living and government regulations make it tougher than it already is. Timberman (and most of my family) cannot make ends meet if they cannot harvest trees. For myself, I rely on school bond measures. If school bond measures dont pass, my work dwindles away. Everybody is tied into something. I think my one brother who works for the OSP may have the ticket, there is no shortage of outlaws.

Your further explanation of how the fish are and have been clipped was insightful. I still think the fish with a full fin count should be released. Even the ones returning in the next couple of years that were hatched in a plastic tray. I would rather the state error on the conserative side than let us take fish which may have a couple generations of natural spawning. The situation you are against will go away in a couple years if the hatcheries keep on clipping all the fins.

Garyk, great insight, it is all who you market to. Ever go to a restaurant with an endless buffet. Most of the people are overweight and going back for 2nds, 3rds and forths. It is because the restaurant is saying "all you can eat", all you overeaters get in here and eat away.

The C & R fisherman is a tougher market to find and fill the boat with. Comparing it to the restiction of clear cut logging, You now have to go individually cut select trees, no more logging a couple hundred acres at a time in a clear cut. This analogy pertains to both the fish you can keep and the people you need to find to fill the boat. You need to market to, and find the people who are willing to let the catch go.

And finally to answer your question, I would not care if I had to let my fish go if I was with a guide. Some of my best hunting and fishing trips ended in a lot less success than letting a fish go. I choose not to fish with guides, because of two reasons, 1) the money, 2) I tend to find satisfaction in doing it myself. It is about the pursuit not the kill.

[Hoosier Daddy]

I think Hookset hit it. We all (on this BB) just want fish, whether we kill and eat them is secondary (for most of us). Its better, from our perspective - not the perspective of one who has to make a living at it - to have fish to catch and release, than have fish to not catch, or not have fish to catch (did that make sense?). Everyone needs to do their parts in recovering fish stocks, but I think Joe Blow angler gets asked to give up a little more, mostly because we aren't as well organized for the most part as the Columbia River Gillnetters, Oregon Guides and Packers, etc. This impacts guys that depend on sport regulations (as opposed to commercial regs) a lot, and this includes guides. This is hard on some folks' way of life, just like the timber industry. Question is, is there a better way to go??
Does anyone have an answer to what should be done with this Clackamas issue INSTEAD of what's being done?

[wiser]

Garyk, I think you were right on. If you want to make a living on the resource it seems like it would make sense to preserve the resource at the same time.C&R should be promoted by guides. The expectation of better fishing in the future should bring people back if they are really interested in catching fish.
DJ, I hope you know there are native fish in the Sandy River too. If the guides want to kill all of them the demise of the fishery will serve them right.
Sorry, this thought of "I've got to kill fish, even natives if I can, to survive and be sucessfull really bothers me. It is one of the main reasons we are in the position we are in regarding the health of salmon and steelhead stocks. http://www.ifish.net/forum/images/graemlins/mad.gif

[Hookset]

garyk, nice post, couldn't agree more with what you said.

As with any business, it is about marketing and attracting potential customers to buy into your product. If your product is a dead fish, then they'll expect a dead fish. How many of us dream of catching a 90lb King? We've all seen the pictures of those huge salmon and I'm betting a salmon/steelhead trip up north for huge monster fish is our dream vacation. We buy into the idea.

The item I wonder about is this. Why don't more guides offer incentives for catch and release? I'm not advocating just strictly cacth and release but a discount for releasing fish and not retaining could help recover fish stocks on some fisheries.

Case in point, sturgeon on the Columbia. Over the last 10 years, sturgeon fishing has seen a dramatic increase in the number of people pursuing these fish. As a result, the harvestable number of sturgeon have declined which has forced tighter slot lenghts and this year could have closed the fishery during certain periods. And lets not forgot about the oversize fishery. With the marketing and commercialization of fishing for oversize, these fish have been pursued at a much higher rate. All of this added pressure fishing for sturgeon has the ODFW and WDFD concerned and rightfully so. If this summer sturgeon fishing is any indication of things to come, something has to change. Last summer was lousy, just ask any lower river sturgeon guide. I'd like to see those guides offer a discount for catch and release sturgeon fishing. Another point, I think a yearly catch limit of 10 fish is to much.

Ok, I'm probably way off base and didn't mean to change the subject. I just think that guides could and should do more to help promote catch and release fishing on particular fisheries. I didn't say which fisheries, that'll take more discussion. Just not hatchery fish, hatchery fish should be caught and kept, it's what you and I pay for, it's why hactheries exist in the first place.

Dave, Do you think a 10% discount for catch and release on some fisheries would hurt your business and bottom line? You could always increase your fee and then subtract the 10%.

Of course, I'm not taking a 10% pay cut. Don't ask me that question, it'll NEVER happen. http://www.ifish.net/forum/images/graemlins/cool.gif

tight lines,

hook

[David Johnson]

In reply to charging less for C&R, We have to release wild fish any way, most the people go when you can keep hatchery fish.

Someone had asked about what kind of people go out on a guided trip.

I appears to me that most people in this BB are avid fisherman and go quite regularly.

Most of you go fishing to relax and get away for the stess of work. It doesn't matter if you don't catch fish. For me my stressful owrk is fishing when we are not catching fish. Screw that saying about the worst day fishing is better than the best day working if you're in my shoes. http://www.ifish.net/forum/images/graemlins/smile.gif

About 15% go to learn more,

10-15% are from out of town,

about 65% are corporate trips that a company will pay for and the people going on the trip only fish a couple times a year, mostly with guides,

The rest are just every day joes that like to fish once in a while but don't have the time or money or skill to get away and do it themselves. If they're going to go just a few times a year they might as well go with a guide and up their chances at a fish. It's cheeper to go with a guide than pay a boat payment.

------------------

[Fishhead]

Ok, I've read all your guy's replies to the topic , but the fact remains that if a fish returns to where it came from it should be entitled to spawn there. The next time you go up to River Mill dam on the Estacada side (thats if you can get in there with all the construction going on )take a look at the fish ladder.WHAT A JOKE!!!!!!!! The last time I was up there I had to laugh or should I say cry. The opening to the fish ladder is about 24x24inches!!!Those fish are suppose to go all the way to the ocean and then come back to spawn only to find an opening to the first dam they come to, big enough that my dog could'nt get through!!!HA If you think that those fish make it up the Clackamas to spawn then your mistaken.The fish stack up there because they can't find the ladder!!Now thats fish management for ya!!You know fish ladders were designed to allow fish to go past the dam but unless you make a bigger opening IT AIN"T HAPPENING!!!!!-Fishhead Vic

[Grant Scheele]

Most guides do advocate catch and release of native fish. They may advertise with dead fish but that is only to get the phone to ring but once on the river a lot of education for the client goes on. Once a guide educates a client most will not have a problem with catch and release.

[Crusty]

Interesting thread. BUT, could we have a gentlemen's/women's agreement not to mention the rationale that, "It would be cheaper to buy fish than fish for them if the meat was what was important."?

I'm past that, thank God, since Dianne (now)loves to fish, but consider some of the members among us whose spouces (actually the plural of spouce is "spice") are still in training. Take Ryan (Ramstrong) for instance. His lovely wife Sarah still unreasonably wonders why he is using her 6 wt fly rod he got her for a Christmas present a couple of years ago. (And who has also said that before he could get a drift boat, he had to provide them with a driveway to keep it in.) She is in training, and having met her and been the subject of her offbeat humor (read "old men jokes") I think she will eventually make it, but you are not helping the cause of Ryan or others in the same situation.

Remember people, for those who are just starting to build their happy homes and introduce their significant others to the joys of the outdoors, the argument we all started with is that, fish, deer, elk, and other wild game is, FREE MEAT!!

Crusty

[Moleman]

What's so wrong with two fishies doing their thing in the gravel and making native er hatchery little fish. Would reducing the daily bag limit help? Why would you need or want to take home two 40# salmon. Does freezer burn mean anything?

------------------
"TMM"

[Navigator]

I feel we need to be patient during this transition phase. I love fishing and go as often as I can. I rarely catch salmon or steelhead though I fish for them often. I look at it as the luck of the draw. If it is not fin-clipped, I let it go and feel good. If it is fin-clipped, I keep it and feel good. If I get skunked, I feel good unless I have spent the day hanging up, undoing backlashes, pulling line from trees (we have all had those outings ...).

We need the hatchery, fin-clipped, fisheries in our popular rivers. The recreation fishing industry and guides need to make money because they are advocates for our fisheries. It is the same for forestry. If we want sustainable forestry, landowners need to make a living from their forests.

Look at what they are proposing for the Sandy? Allocating that river to a naturally spawning steelhead fishery makes no sense. A fin-clipped fishery for steelhead, coho and Spring chinook is necessary to keep the recreationists and guides out on the river and advocating for its protection (and to take pressure of other fisheries elsewhere - like Columbia sturgeon and wild coastal fisheries).

What we need is healthy fisheries - both for harvest and catch & release. I think we are heading in the right direction with the change that all hatchery fish are marked, that more hatcheries work with native or naturally spawning strains in the river they are augmenting, unmarked fish are released, marked fish are not allowed to stray in reaches devoted to naturally spawning fish and that surplus hatchery fish go back to the rivers as carcuses.

Given the infrequency that I hook or land salmon and steelhead, I do want the opportunity to catch and keep one - but knowing that that opportunity is part of a well managed fishery for well defined objectives and regulations that serve those objectives. I think we are on the right tract.

Good thread.

[Ramstrong]

Way to go Crusty, the one day my wife is over my shoulder reading posts. Voila - training, you know how many years this has set me back? At least now I'm one step closer to that drift boat since my wage has doubled. I now must turn the following to my wife for response to your post.

** Dear Crusty Bread,
I enjoyed being called spice {thank you !}b/c that is certainly what I am in my marriage as i am interested in things other than fish. As for your thoughts on training, i do not follow. I don't think husbands should think (or wives for that matter) that they can "train" their spouse to become a mirror of themselves. How boring! Don't you think it is kind of 'old fashioned'? I find it kind of insulting to my personhood. I already was raised by my parents and I am an aromatic spice!
It has been a pleasure to reaquaint myself with your pleasant self. Although that post about dirty songs I think you should take back. http://www.ifish.net/forum/images/graemlins/mad.gif
So there is some more of my 'off beat' humor just in time for the holidays.
Signed Ramstrong's spunky wife
http://www.ifish.net/forum/images/graemlins/smile.gif **

[David Johnson]

O.Mykiss,

Your right, there is a lot of education done on the water. We educate them about how important these fish are. But it's also frustraiting to release a fish that you know isn't one that needs protection. Last fall I asked a biologist I used to work with about the deal with the gill nets gettign a coho fishery and they get to keep all fish, fin or not, and the sports guy has to release it. He told me there were no wild fish in the river at that time.(September)

Navigator,
I agree with all you points. Well said.

Moleman,
reducing limits wouldn't make a difference. Even if it was four fish a day fishermen wouldn't make a overal impact because they just are not efficiant enough. A couple years back there was a proposal and meeting in Tillamook about makeing the limit for fall chinook one fish. The local bio showed their finding that it would only cut harvest by something like a tenth of a percent. There aren't very many people that catch their limit. 10% get 90% of the fish.

[happybrew]

I think we all fish for the enjoyment of it, and nobody is against catch and release. We all want to see healthy stocks. For someone in my situation, however, I target consumptive fisheries for a simple reason. With the amount of money I make, all of the bills I have to pay, and the large family I have to support, I can go fishing more often if I keep the fish I catch. Not having to spend that money in the grocery store means I can spend it on gas for my next trip. If I take the kids trout fishing, for five bucks in gas, I can come home with 16 trout for the freezer, which makes three meals for the family. That being said, though, my trips for salmon and steelhead have not paid for themselves in that fashion. The success rate isn't there. When I do catch fish, though, it makes sense for me to keep them to offset the cost of the trip. That way, I can fish more often. It does seem a waste to me to send hatchery fish on their way back to the hatchery after I've landed them. I generally target hatchery fisheries, and go for the catch and release fisheries only a couple of times a year. But the real reason I fish isn't to kill them and eat them, but to appreciate them. I can appreciate them on the barbeque, and I can appreciate them in the river. For the good of the sport, I can't really oppose catch and release for non-fin clipped fish, but it does come with a price, and for me, that means not being able to fish as often.

happybrew