Partial fin clips - An update from ODFW

[Hogmaster]

After the thread posted a couple days ago on this subject: Please click here if you aren't up to speed on the issue... (http://www.ifish.net/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=019541#000010)

I decided to do some investigation on the issue and called the ODFW. I have traded some voice mail with Mr. Steve King, who is the director of the salmon hatchery programs in addition to other duties. Here are notes I took from his latest message. These are paraphrased and not quotes:

1) They recognize and agree that partially clipped fins are a problem.

2) The partials range from a % to more than a few % depending on the hatchery and return.

3) They have noted it in spring chinook and coho. He did not mention steelhead, though I did in a subsequent voice mail back to him.

4) They are aware that WA regulations are less stringent than the "completely removed" language in the OR regs. Not only that but that the OR regs were realistically too stringent.

5) He agreed with my premise that they have never recorded a wild fish that has 1/2 or less of an adipose fin.

6) This summer there are plans, as they write the regs for 2004, to rewrite the language for the 2004 season.

7) He said that there was simply no easy way to get this changed for 2003 since it would constitute an "Emergency Action" and would likely require public comment through hearings and whatnot. I left him a message back that I understood, but who would likely object to this?

Anyway, this is NOT an endorsement to retain a partially clipped fish. As has been stated before, different law enforcement areas and officials interpet the rules differently. Until it is fixed, it is probably risky to retain, but at least they are (eventually) doing something about it.

:cheers:

[ 01-17-2003, 05:56 PM: Message edited by: Hogmaster ]

[Hogmaster]

Oh, I forgot to add that he also said that they were very interested in hearing about reports of partials. I directed him to this site in voice mail (Power of ifish!!). You might want to add to this thread if you have had a partial. If so please tell species, when and what river so they are aware of how much or little this is happening...

Thanks!

[STGRule]

Psst Hogmaster: (He already knew about this site) :wink:
A bunch of ODFW people know about this site.

[ 01-17-2003, 05:30 PM: Message edited by: STGRule ]

[Lured In]

Although I have seen others, I personally have only caught one. It was a spring Chinook caught in 2001 on the Columbia near Rainier, OR. Adipose fin was about 90% gone with only a small section extending beyond the point of attachment. It was maybe 1/8 of an inch tall and 1/2 inch long.

[SHLEPROCK]

I also caught a 2001 springer with a partial fin in the Multnomah Channel.

[Hogmaster]

STG - I would have figured he did, but wanted to make sure!

But thanks for the input, guys. reeldick got a partial on the Clack on a summer steelhead a few weeks ago, but I should have mentioned that if you are sure if it was a summer or winter fish in the case of a steelie, I am sure they would like to know.

My friends and I caught a total of three coho in the ocean in August 2002 with partials.

I caught 1 coho on the Willamette in September 2002 that had a partial.

Last spring I caught a springer in the OC area with a partial.

Who else?

[ 01-17-2003, 06:26 PM: Message edited by: Hogmaster ]

[SureSet]

The sportsman are not the only ones who are pushing for the removal of the "entirety" language, and it's been talked about for awhile. You can see that the ODFW report on 2003 gear modifications for CR spring Chinook commercial season notes the potential recommendation to the CR compact concerning dropping the stringent language based on recommendation from enforcement presonnel and fishers. That was April 16, 2002............


SureSet

[MasterCaster]

This is great news that they are working on this situation.

I have landed and released.....1 partially clipped steelhead last summer on Three rivers in June.

1 partially clipped steelhead on the Nestucca a couple years ago.

2 partially clipped summer steelhead on the North Santiam at Mehama last summer and 1 the summer before.

1 partially clipped Coho last Fall on Big Creek.

You could tell that they were hatchery fish no doubt but didnt want to risk it. Should have been keeper fish but due to the partials they all went back.

Jon :smile: :grin: :smile:

[Joe]

1 ocean Coho in July.

1 Nestucca Summer Steelhead in June.

Both were more clipped than not but still I suppose technically you could be cited for keeping them.

It is my belief that most OSP officers go by the intent of the law more than the letter of the law.

[Point-of-Sale Clerk]

Last summer in the ocean I landed what some would call a “Healed” adipose on a Coho. You could definitely see where it had been mostly cut away but had been left partially attached and had healed.

I agree that we should have regulations that more reflect the intent of why we differentiate wild from hatchery in the first place. I do recognize that putting it in writing may be difficult. This summer ODFW will be looking at all of their regulations and this issue should be addressed. If you are interested in being involved the person to contact is Mr. Messmer / ODFW at rhine.t.messmer@state.or.us

STGRule

Mr. King knows about this site? Well I’ll just have to add him to my list :grin:
Tell me, do you know if Mr. Bowles knows about Ifish :grin:

[Bill Monroe]

It would be interesting to hear from anyone here who's a lawyer about the defensibility of keeping a partial...for example, when the dusky Canada goose tickets began hitting some courts years ago, local judges did a lot of dismissing...I'll try to chase Steve and the cops down to see whether there's any uniformity to interpretations. All I've ever heard from anglers is that they're allowed to keep partials, so there is that general feeling.

(If Steve knows about ifish...and I know personally that he does...my guess is that Ed does, too)

[Fish Finder]

2002: 1 springer on the Clackamas, 1 summer steelhead on the Columbia, 1 winter steelhead on the Trask. All fish are release. :shrug:

[swampy]

I have always gone with "clipped and healed" vs "completely gone" and that has always been ok with the fish checkers. my .02.

[Teamfish]

I caught 2 summer steelhead at the mouth of the Deschutes that had partial fin clips. :depressed:

[ampersat]

as odfw is reviewing this thread looking for info on partial clips, keep in mind that it has come up in past years as well. they should cull through the archives for a "historical perspective" of this issue.

i've never caught one myself, but i don't catch that many fish. as i get better and start to catch more, i hope that i'm not forced to make a decision that would put me on the "other" side of the law. i hope that they make this change to the regulations this year. they change regulations all the time. why would this one be any different than, say, a retention limit for a particular river?

make the change!!

[Gus Orviston]

Several, ~5, ocean cohos out of astoria for us that weren't fully clipped. All caught in August/September and released. It seemed to be 1 per 15 total fish (both nates and hatcheries).

gus

[will_e_fish]

I knew It! I knew those fish I released with the deformed adipose or as you say "Partial Clip" were not natives.Then if it looks altered in any way it is probably hatchery ,Bonk and keep it. I always had the attitude be safe not sorry,save the native chinook! Great news thanks Hogmaster

[Lo-Pro16]

How I would love to see this issue cleared up before the 2003 Springer season.

Last year out of our fishing group of about 6 to 13 guys, fishing from the bank below Bonneville Dam, on the Washington side of the river, we hooked- landed- and released 8 partially clipped spring salmon that I know of.

This year I will be taking my digital camera along on every trip, and will take pictures of every bad finned clipped fish we catch. I also will be going back to the Regional Office of the WDFW to see if I can get them to give me a clear cut ruling on the retention of partially clipped salmon before the season gets under way.

[SteelieSteve]

Over the years I've seen many clipped fish and a good many weren't cleanly cut. Some cropped close to the back some not so close. All healed over. Normally it's clear whether It's a native or a brat. I hope ODFW rewrites the language to fix this issue. It's a hard job to hold and clip those slippery little fish and it would be easy to not get a good cut.

[Gun Rod Bow]

3 springers in the Columbia in 2002 with partials

2 ocean chinook this summer with partials

[wetaline]

We seem to attract partial clipped fish... We had 6 partials on the columbia in 2002 for Chinook, and 2 summer steelhead. 1 summer steelhead on the clack in 2002. Multiple Coho at B10 and ocean.....

We caught our first partial steelhead of the year (2003) today on the Siletz.

I look forward to rewording the regulations!

[ 01-18-2003, 08:47 PM: Message edited by: wetaline ]

[norms gone fishing too]

just to aks washington reg state "Wild steelhead, chinook, coho, or
cutthroat have intact adipose and ventral
fins.
Wild steelhead, chinook, coho, or cutthroat
may not be kept; only hatchery fish of the
designated species may be kept. Hatchery
fish are identified by missing adipose or
ventral fins and a healed scar in the
location of the missing fin."

does this mean in the big cr i can keep a fish with ventral fin missing so long as i put it on my washington card? just asking :shrug:

[Fast Water]

Lo Pro 16,

You shouldn't have too much trouble with the WDFW. For-the-most-part**, if it is a hatchery fish then you are good to go. I have talked to the Region 5 people in Vancouver off of 4th Plain and Grand. They understand the situation.

IMO, in Washinton you have to be concerned about (it) being a hatchery fish or not. In Oregon you have to be concerened about being busted with a hatchery fish with a partial clip. It's just not right.

** Excludes the "checkers" who get out of the wrong side of the bed that day. Happens. :depressed:

[Hogmaster]

Norm,

You hit the nail right on the head as to why it is such a peeve of mine. While OR and WA are supposed to share reprocity on the Columbia, your example is one where you are running a risk to mark your WA tag but get checked in Oregon.

Ordinarily it is OK to mark (only one) limit on either tag when launching from either state. But would a "letter of the law" game officer checking you at the Hammond cleaning station write you up in spite of you using your WA tag?

At least by next year hopefully the laws will be in synch...

[Miss B Haven]

Hog/norm - Actually the law is that you must follow the regs of the states waters that you are fishing in on the CR (regardless of which state you are licsensed and regardless of launch/land).
So........ doesn't actually matter which tag you use, the law says you go by the State law of the water your in. How's that for a mess! :shocked:
PS- have you taken your lawyer fishing today? :wink:

[ 01-18-2003, 10:16 PM: Message edited by: Miss B Haven ]

[norms gone fishing too]

no but he is going with me on all trips from now on
Hog i agree with you totaly if there is a question back it goes i don't catch that many but i would rather be safe than sorry

[King13fisher]

1 Hen on the Nestucca in Dec 02. With partial.
I have kept fish on the Deschutes with partials and when checked at Heritage landing there I had no problems......the fish checkers and Staters both that theres "usually" no question.
But...if I had any questions about the fin I'd release it.

[Fishrite]

I released 4 partials in the last two seasons on the Willamette. These were ALL Springers! I have been dubbed the "Wild Guy" because I've caught sooooo many "wild fish" in the last few years. We have also caught some "huge wild fish." Last year, I personally released the 3 largest springers that I have ever caught. Two fish were over 35 lbs. and one fish (the largerst that I've ever caught) was 49 lbs!! This fish was 51"x27"....by formula it was almost 50 lbs.
I think that it is wonderful that they have this regulation, but I do think that they need to change the wording, because I've talked to a couple of people on the Willamette that claim they have been ticketed for keeping a "partial"
Thanks for your post........fishrite

[will_e_fish]

Fishrite- I was refered to as "Wild Bill" for regularly hooking natives on my favorite plunking beach. I stopped counting and the partial clips aka Natives were everywhere lower CR, Big Creek, Bonneville both sides, Warrendale,Willamete.
I asked a reel repair shop employee in a conversation about the abundance of Natives, he assured me it clipping was all done by machine and little chance for error. I heard volunteers or inmates did the clipping he said no machine.
So which is it human clipped or machine clipped on thesemasters of random movement?

[Lilcorky]

Caught 2 fish on Siusila on 1/21 that had been obviously fin clipped but released them because I would say they had about 1/3 regeneration of their fin towards the back. You could actually flip the fin a little bit. The dorsals had the worn look Hatchery Fish have. Caught a third fish that had his completely removed save it was rounded a little but no regrowth. I have seen a few Hatchery Fish missing a maxalary also but none of these fish were missing that so out of three Hatchery fish caught one was retained and two were released to fight again and then raise that old question about whether to retain or not when they are caught again. Also caught a wild fish and there was no question when you saw it's adipose. Back it went with no discussion from anyone in the boat. Again I think the moral here is that wild fish have a abvious and very prominante Adipose. A healed half a adipose or less has been clipped and we should be able to retain. The Biologist himself said in a earlier post in this thread that he had never seen a wild fish missing any of his adipose.

[LilSteelie]

I haven't personally caught any, but while doing creel on the South Santiam near Sweet Home last summer I checked a few summer steelhead (that were caught when I was standing there) that were partially clipped. The fishermen asked me about partial clips and I advised them to release them (which they did). Also, there were several summer steelhead with an adipose totally intact that were released. This was in Aug./Sept. when winter steelhead are not in the river yet and summers have a pink stripe. One guy told me he caught and released 10 summers that weren't clipped between the months of July and Aug.

[Big Willie]

Thank you very much Hog for the leg work here!
Um...that hen from my original post was on the Necanicum 3 weeks ago. The summers on the Nestucca were all very well clipped. I released a couple from the Nestucca last winter as well.
Gary

[BUGLEMAN]

In 5 trips to the Cr Bouy we caught 2 partial clipped coho for 3 rods. You bet we kept those brats.

[FastAction]

What about a full adipose and deformed dorsal and tail? Like Native Clackamas Summers. I saw Biolo's recycling some this summer... they said they clip some, and slip some...

[Mad Mikey]

For the record, since Dec. I have had three "questionable" fish on my boat in from the Clack. All were small one salt Winters and all were not netted, and were released.

[AnglersRental]

Just to add to the confusion.... Notice the actual wording in the Oregon 2003 fishing regulations for the Columbia Zone:

(*** clerk taught me how to do this)

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

• Only adipose fin-clipped steelhead may be kept.
• Closed for chum salmon.
• See Special Regulations in Columbia River Zone to determine where harvest of any chinook, coho or sockeye salmon is allowed. Harvest of nonadipose fin-clipped steelhead is not allowed in the Columbia River Zone.
• There is no annual limit for adipose or otherwise fin-clipped salmon or adipose fin-clipped steelhead as long as the appropriate number of Hatchery Harvest Tags have been purchased to record the catch.
• NOTE: Changes to salmon regulations for the Columbia River system are printed in May and are available at ODFW offices or from license agents. Check for new regulations before you fish.

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

The part about steelhead is clear, they must be adipose fin clipped.

The part about salmon clearly says "adipose or otherwise fin-clipped", which is really confusing, would a salmon with intact adipose but with a ventral clip be legal? Or how about a partial adipose clip, is that otherwise clipped? Is there a reason they wrote it this way I wonder?

Im confused?????

[ 01-23-2003, 06:44 PM: Message edited by: Uglygreen ]

[Joe]

UG,

On the Nestucca Springers just have to be fin clipped. This is due to the fact that for several years the majority (75%) were ventral clipped only.

I know of several cases were people released legal fish because they didn't read the regs. close enough. :depressed: That would ruin my day.

The reason for this was that until a few years ago Chinook had to be coded wire tagged to have an adipose clip. That is no longer the case.

I am sure there are other rivers that were in the same boat.

[Point-of-Sale Clerk]

UG

You learned well graemlins/applause.gif :cheers:

[AnglersRental]

Thanks *** Clerk... that stealing stuff outa PDF files is kinda cool, but back on topic...

I was told I by OSP today that I was "real lucky" I wasn't written a ticket, and that keeping the fish with the adipose fin pictured below was "pushing the limit". If there was anymore of a fin on this fish they would have written me up. The officer explained that he was being a "nice guy", and other officers would have written a ticket.

http://www.ifish.net/uploads/09121723.jpg

Was timely for this thread, huh? I guess anymore than this amount of fin and I will be puttin them back in the water. I personally think this is nuts, the fish is obviously hatchery in origin. Duh.

UG

[Hogmaster]

UG -

Since when did they start fin clipping Brown Trout? :grin:

I spoke with Steve King live yesterday and explained that I had started this thread. He agreed to look at it, so please, those of you that might have caught a partial, add the particulars here.

Thanks!

:cheers:

[Miss B Haven]

Brown Trout? In that close up those look like Carp Scales to me. Do Carp have to be fully missing the fin or are partials OK UG? :wink: :grin: