IFish Fishing Forum banner
  • Are you passionate about fishing? Would you like to write about topics that interest you and get paid for it? Read all about it here!
1 - 20 of 21 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
156 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Well Congress ordered an independent study and the results are in – hatcheries are bad news for wild salmon and steelhead runs (see Metro front page in today’s Oregonian). Of course we’ve known this all along. Now let’s see if our government leaders have the stomach to do the right things or will they keep ordering new studies until they hear what they want.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,425 Posts
Mooseturd,

Would "the right thing" be a massive, crash program to restore native habitat so that in 5 years we will have enough sustainable native spawning areas to replace all the hatcheries?

I'm for that.

Brion

[ 10-16-2003, 10:25 AM: Message edited by: BrionLutz ]
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
7,726 Posts
Haven't read the article so don't know if it is basin specific.

If it is not, I can only hope, no gurantee, it is not the final word on hatcheries.

Do away with all hatchery production only when you are ready to do away with all fishing for anadromous fish.

If anyone thinks the extremist will let us fish on wild fish in some basins, they are saddly mistaken in my opinion.

[ 10-16-2003, 09:06 AM: Message edited by: Straydog ]
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
554 Posts
I don't get it. Are hatchery salmon/steelhead genetically different from each other? How did hatchery salmon/steelhead come about? Did they magically appear on this earth missing an adipose fin or did we take a few wild salmon/steelhead and cutoff their adipose fin and call them hatchery??? :shrug:
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,904 Posts
Saw the caption of this thread while here in Lonngview and told my brother working here at BS Fishtales that; oh boy, going to have fun with this one"!

I've been trying to get this message accross to Jerry Dove, HustlerJim, and Brion Lutz and many other "pro hatchery" ifisher's for months now even dating back to the Febuary Tillamook Forest Tour threads.

Surprise, surprise? Not!

And before you get too carried away Brion on habitat, I've been telling you all along that we have some pretty good habitat and that the demise for our coastal wild coho that are rebounding great presently was over fishing namely by the commercials and compounded by dumping millions of hatchery coho on top of them.
As I have mentioned many times we have pretty much taken care of the coastal hatchery coho problem by all but eliminating them.

So go after the loggers again if you choose but there are folks like me that realize that over fishing and hatchery fish are a beeg problem!
Hate to be a "I told you so" kind of guy but I wasted many hours with you trying to get this point accross to you.

As for you Dakotan, I don't know if you are serious with that question or not. But if you are serious, I'll point out the problems with the highly domesticated, problematic hatchery fish a little later after I go out on the Cowlitz and try and catch some.

You might even go to Bill Bakkes' Native Fish Society site in the mean time and you will find all the info you want on how hatchery fish are a beeg problem and how that there is science showing how even broodstock fish are changed in the first year hatchery environment.

It's statements like this:
Do away with all hatchery production only when you are ready to do away with all fishing for anadromous fish.
<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">that are the problem and hinder progress in turning things back around.
I suggest reading the responces to Jerry Doves almost identical statement a couple weeks ago.

It would be my hope that some of you start listening up to the facts and not promote the demise of wild fish with hatchery fish that are not even needed and counter productive in many areas like Tillamook area including the Nestucca River.

Dakotan, I'd love to send you article after article about the detrimental effects of the inferior hatchery fish on wild fish and in fact brought up 3 CD's I burned durring my move with some articles including the new Clackamas Steelhead DNA report I posted a month ago or so showing that these hatchery and wild steelhead were identified through DNA along with their out migrating smolts and how the decline of the Clackamas wild winter steelhead is blamed on the stocking program of Clackamas hatchery summer steelhead started in the '70's.

I'm going to go out and catch a lame hatchery fish on the Cowlitz and check back later.

Dan

[ 10-16-2003, 08:16 PM: Message edited by: crabbait ]
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,505 Posts
Guess I'll put off buying a boat and take up golf since if they get their way there won't be anymore fish to catch and keep.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
7,726 Posts
Dan,

It is taking quotes out of context that hinders constructive dialogue on these issues as much as anything.

"Basin specific" and "all hatcheries" are pretty key elements to my entire message. I did mispeak when I said "all fishing......."

My point is, there are some basins in which there will not be fishing for anadromous fish without hatcheries. That is neither rediculous or false, in my opinion.

[ 10-16-2003, 08:16 PM: Message edited by: crabbait ]
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,425 Posts
DepoeBayDan,

And before you get too carried away Brion on habitat, I've been telling you all along that we have some pretty good habitat and that the demise for our coastal wild coho that are rebounding great presently was over fishing namely by the commercials and compounded by dumping millions of hatchery coho on top of them.
<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">Unfortunately you keep missing the point, including the one made by the report you say you are citing but apparently you did not read.

Recently improved salmon runs remain far below historic levels.
<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">We have a long, long way to go. Most of the "historically low record runs" have been due to the hatcheries and ocean conditions, not to sustainable habitat improvement.

You probably missed the other part of the report that noted what it was about and why your reference to coastal coho is a bit off the mark.

The researchers considered 227 hatchery programs throughout the U.S. portion of the Columbia Basin, gathering a previously unavailable overview of programs run by state fish and wildlife agencies, federal agencies and Native American tribes with treaty rights to salmon.
<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">This is mostly Chinook. When you read the report, it will explain why this is the case.

I'm not pro or anti-hatchery. I'm pro-restoration of sustainable salmon populations in the range of 50% of historic run.

Hope that clears up your confusion.

Brion
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
602 Posts
I know I will get slammed for this but I am going to say this anyways. Hatchery fish and wild fish all have the same genetics and dna. Where did the fish come from when they started the hatchery easy answer from the wild. So that makes hatchery fish dna and genetics same as the wild fish . Only thing that fish loses when raised in the hatchery is maybe some instincts like the wild. So why keep on wasting tax
dollars on studies on wild versus hatchery dna and genetics. :whazzup:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
101 Posts
I agree with what jetsledder pointed out.There is no difference between wild or hatch. This is just the goverment trying to shut hatcheries down. just my two cents worth. :dance:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,494 Posts
Jet sledder.. I am afraid you are incorrect. Hatchery and wild fish even of the same stock and even first generation wild hatchery fish ( wild broodstock) are genetically different!

The hatchery enviroment is genetically selective just like a natural river is.. The hatchery selects the best fish that are the most fir for survival in the hatchery setting. Fish that are better suited for survival in the wild tend to die in the hatchery process. Over generations this has a cumulative effect on the population of fish. soon you have fish that don't survive well in the wild at all because they have lost the genetic traits to do so..

I'd be happy to e-mail you dozens of studies illustrating this very fact. but it is true hatchery and wild fish are genetically different! it's not just a matter of instincts it's genetics..
Here is an analogy.. saying hatchery fish and wild fish are the same is like saying a timber wolf has the same genetics as a golden retriever..
One may have origionally come from the other but they are by no means the same..
The process is called domestication.. you can do a search on yahoo and read all about it..
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
118 Posts
Well, there are good points from everyone here, but there is something that we all need to realize. It is not just one factor that is contributing to the demise of our wild fisheries. Yes, over-harvest is definitely a contributor to declines in salmonid populations. Yes, spawning habitat is another limiting factor. This, however, is more basin or watershed specific. In watersheds where spawning habitat is good, hatchery fish may have more of a negative impact than in watersheds that have been hammered because wild populations are very low to begin with. There are a lot of areas where there is a lot of available spawning habitat, but it is cutoff by a dam without a fishladder, which is criminial in my mind (at least build a fish ladder). As for eliminating hatcheries, it is still debatable. I think (my opinion) that in watersheds where the habitat is there to support all life stages, hatcheries would not be necessary. However, in watersheds that lack the habitat, especially for spawning, hatcheries would be needed to provide that artificial bypass if our goal is fish for fisherman. Lastly, there is a genetic difference between wild and hatchery fish. Populations throughout the NW have evolved over many years acquiring traits specific to their unique life histories for their success from watersheds in lower rivers to those watersheds inland (i.e. Tules, Upriver Brights). A good example of this is the Skamania/Carson stock for Chinook that have been transplanted throughout the Columbia Basin. Many early efforts to move hatchery fish to basins where salmonid populations had been extirpated were not successful (low escapement), until we found the Carson stock. This strain was very successful, therefore was widely used in many hatcheries. Unfortunately, it was also used in areas that had decent Wild runs, therefore, competing with wild fish. Wild broodstock programs are definitely better than this approach. I think this discussion is great, because this is an issue that isn’t totally figured out yet. The fish have it figured out, we just need to figure out how to manage or not manage them. Cheers.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
440 Posts
yep fish are way different.
We don’t have anymore "June Hogs" in the Columbia anymore. They were adapted for their environment for their river. In this case they needed massive muscles and fat to carry them up the Columbia. Now you would be saying those fish that averaged 50 lbs are exactly the same as the 20 lbs Chinook in the sandy...nope
Nowadays when a hatchery needs eggs (when returning fish don’t come back in) they will get them from other hatcheries that have excess. So now we have fish that are adapted for.. lets say the trask now living in the Clackamas. Quite a different river with different needs. Like an extra 80 river miles that that fish never would have to swim if he lived on the trask. Yes they will adapt, but that takes time. We as humans like to "fix" things fast.."need some fish in that river? Here have these fish. There all fixed"

Then there is a whole other side to this.
All these returning fish didn’t get caught, meaning they either weren’t as aggressive or they learned not to bite a hook. In either case we now are breading these fish with other fish that didn’t get caught, over and over again. Of course this would also apply to wild fish, but I think it would affect the hatchery fish more

So in closing i would like to say fish are smelly and different...and tasty
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
156 Posts
Discussion Starter · #15 ·
This is just the goverment trying to shut hatcheries down.
<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">Can't imagine why the government would want to shut down hatcheries. Hatcheries are what allow industries to keep plundering our wild salmon with impunity in the name of corporate profits - a concept near and dear to this current administration.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
101 Posts
Well my opinion will always remain that wild fish and hatchery all have the same genetics. But one thing I do agree is the genetics differ from river to river. Lets say you take a wild fish from the clackamas put it in a hatchery. 5 years down the road its young that return will have the same gentics as a wild fish that spawns in the river.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,997 Posts
Jooky:: You are wrong. You will not see Trask fish used in the Clack. They use only fish from the same water shed. You are living in the past. Times and practice have changed, for the better.I had to laugh at the article in todays Oregonian. Quote, Columbia River hatcheries raise fish for the commercial fisherman only. I wonder what the thousands of sport fishermen were doing on the columbia this year. that is besides spending millions of dollars on their hobby. Must have been drinking beer and watching the commercial boys at work.Ha.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
37,111 Posts
I think they were referring to the Tules that are hatchery raised and commercially harvested at sea. They compete with the wild smolt in the estuary but are worth far less when returning to the river.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,286 Posts
Originally posted by rob allen:

Here is an analogy.. saying hatchery fish and wild fish are the same is like saying a timber wolf has the same genetics as a golden retriever..
<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">That doesn't sound like a very good analogy. Wouldn't it be more accurate to compare the two canines to a Chinook and a Coho rather than hatchery vs wild? Don't we to this day use artificial selection to breed the purest dogs/cats, ect..? How do genetics apply to the human race? Are we all required to be genetically the same for survival? Why after billions of years of hatchery production do we occasionally have great runs of native fish? Are we sure that naturally spawned hatchery brood (especially from native broodstock) are inferior to naturally spawned native brood after one or two years of natural selection? Can we trust the info from all the studies regarding this? Are we putting our fish under too powerful of a microscope for their own good? Geez, I realize all I have is questions and the only thing I know is that right now there are some great runs of hatchery and native fish around. Oh yeah, and what Jooky said... "So in closing i would like to say fish are smelly and different...and tasty". That is a classic :grin:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17,225 Posts
Hey Longview (formerly depoe bay) Dan, check your Private Messages!
 
1 - 20 of 21 Posts
Top