PDA

View Full Version : Elk River Hatchery


GutshotApe
09-16-2002, 02:25 PM
This guest editorial is in today's Eugene Register-Guard, FYI.
GSApe graemlins/program.gif

Lawmakers Need to Save Elk River Hatchery

by Steve Taylor

Here we go again. The Elk River salmon hatchery near Port Orford - which everyone agrees is a model program - is once again faced with imminent closure.

It seems like only yesterday that we all went through this before. The last special session of the Legislature found the funds and the political will to save this hatchery and others from the budgeters' ax. Everyone thought it was settled. Then a new revenue forecast projected that tax income would be even less than expected, and we start all over again. Is this anyway to run a state?

The Elk River hatchery produces nearly half a million chinook salmon smolts annually at a cost of $300,000. That's a lot of bang for the buck. A little more than two-thirds of the fish go to the Elk River and the remainder goes to the Chetco River.

Additionally, 50,000 winter steelhead are raised for the Chetco. Looking at just the Elk River, more than half of the fish returning each year are hatchery fish, and many more are caught in ocean fisheries up and down the coast. Obviously, taking that many fish out of the system will have a profound impact on these rivers and their fisheries.

This is a big deal even beyond Oregon's south coast. Anyone who fishes for salmon in the ocean will be affected - including people in Coos Bay, Newport and as far north as Vancouver Island. A lot of people travel to the south coast to fish these rivers in the fall and winter.

It's impossible to know to what degree he was involved in this particular decision, but Gov. John Kitzhaber has to be held at least partly responsible. It's happening on his watch, and as Harry Truman said, "the buck stops here". Still, it's surprising that this governor, who has been a vocal salmon advocate and never misses an opportunity to be photographed standing in a stream with a fly rod in his hand, would agree to close the Elk River hatchery.

Kitzhaber surely knows, as we do, that all the lip service in the world in favor of restoring our salmon and steelhead runs adds up to nothing if we can't summon the will to support good, well-run hatchery programs to supplement natural production. He also knows that few sstreams will ever support any kind of consumptive fishery - sport or commercial - without help from hatcheries. Is eliminating the Elk River hatchery, a real fisheries success story, a legacy the governor wishes to leave, an accomplishment for which he wishes to be remembered?

But, there's more than enough blame to go around. The Legislature must share some of it for enacting new rules in the last session that severely handcuff the Oregon Dept. of Fish & Wildlife in it's ability to shift funds between programs. This was no doubt well-intentioned and responding to past abuses, but the rules now make it much more difficult to transfer money from far less beneficial activities to maintain hatcheries (such as Elk River) that get money from the general fund. These rules should be changed.

One bright spot in salmon restoration has been the work of watershed councils and other conservation groups that have worked to improve our fisheries. They've done a lot of good; miles of streambank have been re-vegetated, habitats restored and barriers removed.

Even with their good work, the number of actual fish produced doesn't compare with the number produced by the Elk River hatchery. How can we keep these dedicated volunteers motivated when our state government can't manage to fund the most basic, fundamental tools we have to maintain decent fisheries?

Then there is the potential loss of the staff at Elk River, a group with more than 50 years of combined experience here. Closure would cast this talent to the four winds and even a subsequent reopening could not rebuild a staff with similar knowledge of these fish.

Curry County - already on the ropes economically - will take another devastating blow, this time to tourism. Hundreds of fishermen who come here for the fine fall salmon fishery won't any more. Moreover, one of the reasons many of us chose to live here - the good fishing - will be dramatically diminished. Call me cynical, but the bureaucrats and the governor may figure that a sparsely populated area doesn't have enough votes to matter much.

The south coast's legislators - Rep. Wayne Kreiger and Sen. Ken Messerle - are fighting hard to turn this around. They need your support. Others that are interested might contact members of the governor's natural resources staff, the speaker of the House of Representatives, the president of the Senate and the director of ODFW. All Oregonians have a stake in this issue.

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

Steve Taylor of Port Orford is a member of the South Coast Watershed Coordinating Council. He prepared this column as an avid fisherman, not as a representatiive of the council.

fishisabonus
09-16-2002, 07:37 PM
Common you ifisher... make those calls.

Also wanted to bump this to the top!

Jerry Dove
09-16-2002, 07:47 PM
Hey Gut Shot, where have you been? We have been fighting for your hatchery and the other coastal hatcheries that are on the block for a long time. We need to work together and win this fight. I do belive we will not know anything untill after tomorrows election. I the two measures pass, it will help. If they fail then we are all in big trouble. If all have not voted be sure and get your ballets in to your court house before 8PM tomorrow. Jerry

GutshotApe
09-16-2002, 09:12 PM
Gee Jerry, I've been right here the whole time. :whazzup:

There are 4 hatcheries on the block, two on the north coast, one on the Sandy River (Cedar Cr) and one on Elk River. Just thought you might like to read a well written letter from the south coast that applies to all 4 hatcheries (and that was printed today in the 2nd largest newspaper in Oregon). :wink:

GSApe graemlins/program.gif

MasterCaster
09-16-2002, 09:28 PM
GutshotApe......I do believe the Cedar Creek hatchery thats on the block isnt from the Sandy but from the Nestucca/Three Rivers near Hebo. :grin:

Jon :smile: :grin: :smile:

GutshotApe
09-16-2002, 09:31 PM
Oops, you're right, I got my Cedar Creeks mixed up. :blush: Its the one near Hebo.
GSApe graemlins/program.gif

Point-of-Sale Clerk
09-16-2002, 10:29 PM
Gutshotape

I have been reviewing your background and would like to ask several questions regarding the Elk River Hatchery (ERH).

According to Ifish.net (http://www.ifish.net/NFClosure.html ) ERH raises 300,000 Chinook smolts not 500,000. Which is correct?

$300,000 is the operating costs for the ERH, what is the annual cost of tagging the minimum required 200,000 smolts with CWTs? What is the annual recovery cost and analysis of CWTs at ERH? What is the annual cost of stray monitoring related to the ERH?

Out of the total number of adult Fall Chinook produced at ERH, what percentage are harvested by Washington/ British Columbia/ Alaska commercial harvesters?

Along with rearing pond density issues, what disease prevents increased production at ERH?

Thank you :smile:

*** Clerk

http://www.hmsc.orst.edu/odfw/reports/ElkRCalib_Report2001.pdf

http://www.dfw.state.or.us/ODFWhtml/Research%26Reports/SportCatch.html

http://www.orst.edu/Dept/ODFW/inforeports/InfoRpt96-8.pdf

Dart / CWT (http://www.cbr.washington.edu/cgi-bin/dart/dart?format=standard&access_time=Monday%2C+16-Sep-2002+21%3A12%3A45+PDT&report=cwt_rec&hatch_key=24955&species=1&tag_code)

tailchaser
09-17-2002, 06:19 AM
Not sure what *** is trying to accomplish there :hoboy: , but I'm in full bore to fight this thing also. I live here on the S.Coast and couldn't imaging what would happen without this hatchery. That river would be overfished in a matter of years without it. I've done all that Ifish has asked when it comes to writing or calling and I hope that it makes a difference. Picking on the backbone of fishermen these days is not the way to solve problems, it only adds to them. Anything more we can do Jennie??? What's the latest updates?

tc

Thumper
09-17-2002, 07:46 AM
"Not sure what *** is trying to accomplish"

***, as usual, is trying to discredit hatcheries while the rest of us fight for them. He is, as President Bush would say, "irrelevant"..........

[ 09-17-2002, 07:47 AM: Message edited by: Thumper ]

GutshotApe
09-17-2002, 09:11 AM
*** Clerk - I only posted it, I didn't write it. Steve Taylor's letter made some good points and explained things I'd seen questioned in ifish board in the past few days so I transcribed it for your information.

I'll don't know if Taylor's numbers are accurate or not.

As for your questions, you seem to already have the answers - why don't you just tell us what they are and make your point directly? :whazzup:

GSApe graemlins/program.gif

Point-of-Sale Clerk
09-17-2002, 09:25 AM
Tailchaser

If we really wish to solve all the problems associated with the artificial production of salmonids we must honestly face up to them and not try to diminish the issues that we are faced with. It is one thing to fool others into supporting a position but it is terribly important that we not fool ourselves. :smile:

Thumper

I do not need to discredit hatcheries; history does a better job than I ever could. :wink:

Gutshotape

I was hoping for better, sorry if I offended. :depressed:

garyk
09-17-2002, 10:00 AM
The article said -- "The south coast's legislators - Rep. Wayne Kreiger and Sen. Ken Messerle - are fighting hard to turn this around"

The political wheels turn and turn....

ODFW is short of money, yet the Republican legislators demanded that millions of dollars be spent to move ODFW from Portland to Salem.

Message to republicans Krieger and Messerle -- stop wasting our money that could have been spent on fish instead of moving vans!!