DepoeBayDan,
We'll start a new thread on the decline of the salmon in the Pacific Nw.
Your original message:
Qriginally posted by DepoeBayDan:
Well I was going to wait untill I started a wild and hatchery coho thread before I posted this chart and others I have but will post it here also.
![]()
As you can see Jim the only pattern with the OCN’s is that they have been on a steady incline in the 90’s and into the millennium after being afforded protection. No three year cycle as you have stated. No 50% decline as Lutz has stated. :hoboy:
’97 & ’98 they took a nose dive and that was because the February ’96 flood trashed the ’94 smolts and ’95 eggs that were in the river when the devastating flood hit.
Now when you add the three year old offspring to the ’94 and ’95 equation you come up with ’97 and ’98. Simple as that. Then they recovered and started rebounding once again.
There will be large numbers of wild coho returning again this fall/winter as long as the sport boats don’t manage to kill too many. There are a lot of them out there again this year and last count 54,000 coho have been released in the Cape Falcon to Humbug Mountain hatchery coho fishery.
The figure is probably over 60,000 by now. The majority of those were wild coho and a large chunk of those were killed especially by the irresponsible sport anglers.
It is quite obvious that we can produce a lot more coho in the wild on the coast than we can produce hatchery coho.
Now if you look at the returns of hatchery coho to the Oregon coast over the last 30 years you will see returns as low as 5,000 coho and as high as 39,000 coho with the average being probably around 20,000 coho.
Doesn’t hardly compare with the estimated numbers of wild coho at 169,500 in 2001 and 264,300 in 2002! This year 2003 could be real interesting and I’m sure it won’t be a disappointment.
Yes Jim I’m confident that the biologist did the right thing by cutting back the amount of hatchery coho smolt being planted in our coastal rivers and the rivers that don’t have hatchery coho plants are doing the best.
You and I both know the reason behind the reduction in hatchery coho smolts on the Oregon coast and that was to rebuild the wild coho runs. You can’t argue the fact that our OCN’s are rebounding in unprecedented numbers. You can argue the reasons why they are rebounding but I think Bob Lohn of NOAA set some of you straight on that.
You mean that “they can separate the hatchery fish from the wild fish” but they don’t bother to count them? That’s kind of hard for me to swallow Jim. One phone call could get down to the bottom of this and I would be willing to bet that is an inaccurate statement also.
Cafes aren’t a healthy environment to produce fish science. :wink:
Dan
[ 07-27-2003, 03:41 PM: Message edited by: BrionLutz ]
We'll start a new thread on the decline of the salmon in the Pacific Nw.
Your original message:
Qriginally posted by DepoeBayDan:
Well I was going to wait untill I started a wild and hatchery coho thread before I posted this chart and others I have but will post it here also.
As you can see Jim the only pattern with the OCN’s is that they have been on a steady incline in the 90’s and into the millennium after being afforded protection. No three year cycle as you have stated. No 50% decline as Lutz has stated. :hoboy:
’97 & ’98 they took a nose dive and that was because the February ’96 flood trashed the ’94 smolts and ’95 eggs that were in the river when the devastating flood hit.
Now when you add the three year old offspring to the ’94 and ’95 equation you come up with ’97 and ’98. Simple as that. Then they recovered and started rebounding once again.
There will be large numbers of wild coho returning again this fall/winter as long as the sport boats don’t manage to kill too many. There are a lot of them out there again this year and last count 54,000 coho have been released in the Cape Falcon to Humbug Mountain hatchery coho fishery.
The figure is probably over 60,000 by now. The majority of those were wild coho and a large chunk of those were killed especially by the irresponsible sport anglers.
It is quite obvious that we can produce a lot more coho in the wild on the coast than we can produce hatchery coho.
Now if you look at the returns of hatchery coho to the Oregon coast over the last 30 years you will see returns as low as 5,000 coho and as high as 39,000 coho with the average being probably around 20,000 coho.
Doesn’t hardly compare with the estimated numbers of wild coho at 169,500 in 2001 and 264,300 in 2002! This year 2003 could be real interesting and I’m sure it won’t be a disappointment.
Yes Jim I’m confident that the biologist did the right thing by cutting back the amount of hatchery coho smolt being planted in our coastal rivers and the rivers that don’t have hatchery coho plants are doing the best.
You and I both know the reason behind the reduction in hatchery coho smolts on the Oregon coast and that was to rebuild the wild coho runs. You can’t argue the fact that our OCN’s are rebounding in unprecedented numbers. You can argue the reasons why they are rebounding but I think Bob Lohn of NOAA set some of you straight on that.
<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">This in my opinion is one of the few accurate statements you have made on this thread. :grin:
<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">Now Jim, you asked; “I would like to know how you can come up with a number of coho in the nehalem River when there is no counting station there”
You mean that “they can separate the hatchery fish from the wild fish” but they don’t bother to count them? That’s kind of hard for me to swallow Jim. One phone call could get down to the bottom of this and I would be willing to bet that is an inaccurate statement also.
Cafes aren’t a healthy environment to produce fish science. :wink:
Dan
[ 07-27-2003, 03:41 PM: Message edited by: BrionLutz ]
