I recieved an e-mail tonight from a BB member that I respect, guide Grant Scheele, asking me my opinion of the history of northwest salmon and steelhead hatcheries. He just read the book "Salmon Without Rivers". I have heard it is a great book with powerful messages about how we've managed (mismanged? I haven't read it yet) our salmon and steelhead runs. He strongly recomended this book as a must read. You can get the book here at Ifish - access
http://www.ifish.net/books.html . I will print a copy of my reply e-mail here, and encourage your opinions and solution ideas posted under this thread. ----- Reply: I have felt a need for and advocated different hatchery policies, than the states have used, many years back when it would have made a much bigger difference. And when not many guys seemed too concerned about it all. Some of my opinion came from the knowledge base of Bill Bakke, president of Trout Unlimited and former head of N.W. Steelheaders many years ago. He is a fanatic for wild fish and habitat restoration. And for obviously good reasons. Some of my opinion came from within (simple sense and logic). Salmon & steelhead hatcheries were ill concieved from the beginning. Primarily from the standpoint of diluting the gene pool of watershed specific strains of wild fish. They should have kept the genetics pure for any indigenous river planted! Period. The costs to do that correctly would likely have been prohibitive. The problems were the all-time culprits of money and lack of foresight; probably in that order. - When such things as habitat degredation, dams, and increasing fishing pressure caused run declines pressure was put on the ODFW & WDFW to produce fish in the most cost effective ways possible. And in the case of loss of fish due to dams it actually became law for the power companies to replace the fish with hatchery fish. Do you think that kind of money interests would put the interest of the fish first. NO WAY! As a result the Power Co.s and the ODFW & WDFW went headlong into hatchery programs without proper scientific study on the long term effects on wild fish genetics and the eco-systems. It has created an incredible mess with loss of important specific watershed genetic strength, lost by inter-breeding of nates and hat's from different rivers; sometimes far away rivers. Also, as wild fish continued to decline they kept increasing hatchery smolt production and releases that were in direct competition with native fingerlings and smolts, resulting in less efficient natural production of these valuable and ultimately irreplacable fish!!! Most of the damage has already been done. However, these nates are very resilient if given the right chance to come back. It is an immense multi-faceted task! And unfortunately, even where the problems mentioned above can be corrected, I think that only the strongest, healthiest, and PUREST native runs can make it back to former health. How many river nate runs fit into this catagory? I don't really know, but I figure not very many. I think an extensive biologic study of all watersheds needs to take place to access the rivers with the best chance at recovery of native runs with essentially intact proper genetics. Then stop planting those rivers and close them to all fishing until they have recovered enough to allow a C&R fishery only. These will be very special rivers and runs. It's not too late for that, but can we win enough money from society to accomplish this? Maybe. I hope so. Soon! - At the same time, where it is found that the genetics of the small percent of remaining nates in heavily fished rivers are too diluted to have any real chance at bringing back a true nate run I think that we are pretty much committed to a put and take hatchery fishery, while maintaining C&R reg.s for the remaining nates to at least give them a chance. And I believe that using essentially native fish for hatchery broodstock will help a lot to regain some of the lost purity of genetics if we use only fish progeny indigenous to a river for planting that river. Quit using stocks from other rivers. I don't know the answer though. That's just how I see it. - Also, 20+ years ago I wrote to ODFW, STS mag., and the Oregonian fishing columnists advocating the finclipping of hatchery fish so we could start C&R fishing only on the dwindling nates. Of course it fell on deaf ears, as undoubtably many other's letters did. Now all these years later, and too late in many cases, they are finally doing it. Better late than never? Yes, but not by much in this unforunatte scenario created in the Northwest. - Steve -
HEY
Not mad! I just wanted to get your attention that I edited in above where you can get this good book for sale here at Ifish.
[This message has been edited by RT (edited 08-05-2000).]
[This message has been edited by Jennie@ifish (edited 08-05-2000).]
Opinions: Hatchery Policies - Past and Present
Linear Mode
