RT, maybe you can answer this...

[Penn]

I'm stuck here at work and just watched a little of the meeting about the Sandy River on the news. Now correct me if I'm wrong but when everyone starts yelling about wild vs hatchery fish isn't one thing true, that when rivers run high say like the Trask, and the hatchery fish blow past the hatchery, don't those fish spawn naturally? I'm sure all the hatchery fish in the Wilson and the Necanicum are not caught every year and those must also spawn naturally. Would someone explain this to me.
Because the way I look at it. This has been going on for years, so how many people out there really think all these natives returning aren't actually hatchery mixed in that spawned naturally. ARG.. Headache. So we actually have wild with spawned hatchery? So does that now make the hatchery wild with the same original gene implant that has always been there but supressed? OK, way big headache. Any suggestions..?

[Ramstrong]

Penn,
My fisheries biology isn't the greatest, but I'll answer to the best of my abilities. True there are hatchery strays that attempt to spawn with wild fish. But as far as I have been able to ascertain, they are seldom successful. However some are. The ones that are, do pass their genetics on to the next generation. However the original in basin genetic code is still present in both dominant and recessive genes in the progeny. It is this mixed native genetics that are now attempting to be preserved, because most of the original genetic code is still intact. These fish should still be much better suited for survival than out of basin stock, and if left to do their thingy natural selection should take over. Now if ISG is around, I'm sure he'd have a much better take on the situation than I. But that is the way I see it.

[Deleted User]

Penn, this issue is part of what is at the heart of the hatchery controversies. Intermingling of the gene pools in different watersheds, rather than keeping the genetics as pure as possible to the indigenous river. [The other main factor is that hatchery smolts compete with native smolts for a limited food supply]. The consensus is that at least some hatchery fish spawn in the wild. There are people on both sides of this opinion though. Some believe there aren't many, if any, true pure native steelhead or salmon in the lower 48 anymore. It probably varies in different watersheds and the genetics of the plants. I am not an expert on these questions. However, I do agree that the eventual, and hopefully gradual, transition to the broodstock planting programs and the recovery of native stocks thru better habitat management are the answers for the future, rather than keep on putting too many hatchery smolts in other rivers. I think it may be too late for some of the more used rivers with 'put and take' fisheries, such as the Sandy and Cowlitz rivers, that have had so much planting for too many decades by now; thus the big controversies going on there. - Hopefully more knowledgable people will better answer your questions here. Or elsewhere. Thanks for a good topic. It has been touched upon before. - RT

Edit: Ramstrong, your post wasn't up yet when I made mine, thus similar coverage of the question. That happens periodically on here and it can appear that a poster was aware of the post just above theirs; but weren't. http://www.ifish.net/forum/images/graemlins/smile.gif

[This message has been edited by RT (edited 02-05-2001).]

[Penn]

Thanks guys, it makes more sense that way. I just hope we can all find a middle ground to all this. I know everyone wants the same ending to this story but sometimes the paths are way different.

[smilesforu]

I would have to disagree about not having pure strains of the wild steelhead remaining in the lower 48. Most of the hatchery plants in our region are geared towards a early run of steelhead and the later runs of fish tend to be wild. With the latest brood stocking type of programs some hatcheries are supplementing the wild fishery. It is so early in the brood stock hatchery process its hard to determine if its good for the fish at this point. Generally when we mess with nature we find out to late we shouln't have. Presently it looks like it is working..but we need to be very careful how we stir the pot.
Tight Lines

------------------
Marty M
Steelheader.net (http://www.steelheader.net/)

[Hoosier Daddy]

Boy what a can of worms you opened. Because of the huge hatchery influence in our region and the fact that even hatchery fish are "wild" animals (I mean they do what they want, not what we want them to, not "wild" as in wild fish), there is no way to guarantee that any river or creek that had a native population of any anadromous fish and has remained open to the sea still has its native, wild, natural, whatever you call it, genetics in that population. If you try to second guess nature, she will find a way to prove you wrong. So, those who say hatchery fish never interbreed with wilds, and those who say they always do, and those who say there are no real wild fish, and those who say there are, ARE ALL WRONG.
There just is no way to prove or disprove the impact our hatcheries and other management activities have impacted NW fish populations, except maybe by overall numbers.

OK, Disclaimer finished, big breath.
My opinion is this: we have a few rivers where hatchery fish (insert species here) were never stocked. However, in the case of anadromous fish, many of these systems are still open for immigration and straying. So, you can say there are streams that have very little, or POTENTIALLY no hatchery interbreeding, but you can't guarantee it. That said, it is still a wise idea to preserve whatever native genetics have survived. This is also true for streams with long hatchery histories. Even if this is the case, and hatchery fish have been in the system a long time, and interbred, etc., given that we know wild fish survive better from smolt-to-adult stage (generally), it stands to reason that some native genetics will remain in the population over time. So we should protect what's left. Please don't take this as a hatchery bashing either, because methods have improved dramatically in recent years. In the past, the strategy was to develop a strain of fish that grew well in hatcheries, and survived to release well. These strains were often shuttled all over the NW (or to the Great Lakes!). What later became known is that while those fish may have survived well in the hatchery, they didn't do as well in the wild as the natives. So there is evidence that those practices potentially weakened the populations. Native fish on the other hand, have better survival from the smolt to adult stages, but are more susceptible to mortality and predation as eggs and fry than hatchery fish. So, new hatchery practices are trending towards the native broodstock technique, where native (or as close to native as possible) fish from a river are collected, spawned in a hatchery, raised to smolt size, then released. Theoretically, this helps drastically reduce the egg and fry mortality experienced by fish in the wild, and improves the smolt-to-adult survival over what a pure hatchery strain would have had. This is all in addition to the benefits to preserving the genetics of the native population.
Thus ends my treatise on hatchery and wild fish. Sorry.

Whew, wha-huh, wha-happened?? I don't remember anything. It's like someone took over my body. I need a nap.

[SteelieSteve]

How many of you out there have caught spawners? I know I have and those have most always been hatchery stock. Not spawning in the hatchery but in the rivers they are running up and down. Who knows if they spawned with wild or hatchery fish with the exception of when and where you've caught them. I've caught downrunners in March when the wild ones are in the rivers. I've also caught hatchery fish that fought every bit as hard as some of the wild ones. All the santiam summmers are hatchery strain fish and I remember very well one buck that kicked my butt leaving me arm weary and shaken, just a 10 pound hatchery buck but dang did he fight! If the strain of fish that begat the hatchery strain is strong wild stock your going to have a good basis for fish. What matters is the strain of fish being raised. If the strong hatchery fish breed with wild fish it would seem that the general strain would not be hurt unless it does come down to food and habitat over population.
just my 2 cents.

Tight Lines

SS

[Hoosier Daddy]

Like I said, anybody who thinks any issue with fish is all this or all that is a freakin' idiot. There are too many variables. So yep, there are some great hatchery fish out there, and some weak-ass "wild"'s as well. That's why its so impossible to make generalizations about fish, especially salmon.