IFish.net banner

1 - 20 of 49 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,494 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Please Don\'t Catch and Release!

OK.. I know everyone has a feeezer full of coho and chinook right but winter steelheading is just around the corner. With that in mind i really want to encourage people to get out and fish for them and when you encounter a hatchery fish please for the sake of wild fish add it to your daily limit, especially if you are on a stream that doesn't recieve hatchery plants..

Here is why: ( pay very close attention to the last sentence or two)
GENETIC DIFFERENCES IN GROWTH AND SURVIVAL OF JUVENILE HATCHERY AND WILD STEELHEAD TROUT



Reisenbichler, R.R. and J.D. McIntyre. 1977. J. Fish. Res. Board Can. 34:123-128.



Relative growth and survival of offspring from matings of hatchery and wild Deschutes River (Oregon) summer steelhead trout were measured to determine if hatchery fish
differ genetically from wild fish in traits that can affect the stock-recruitment relationship of wild populations. The fish used in this study were indigenous to the Deschutes
River and the hatchery fish were two generations removed from the wild parental stock. Sections of four natural streams and a hatchery pond were each stocked with
genetically marked (lactate dehydrogenase genotypes) eyed eggs or unfed swim-up fry from each of three matings: hatchery x hatchery (HH), hatchery x wild (HW), and
wild x wild (WW), In streams. WW fish had the highest survival and HW fish the highest growth rates. In the hatchery pond, HH fish had the highest survival and growth
rates. The hatchery fish were genetically different from wild fish and when they interbreed with wild fish may reduce the number of smolts produced. The observed
differences in survival suggested that the short-term effect of hatchery adults spawning in the wild is the production of fewer smolts and ultimately, fewer returning adults
than are produced from the same number of wild steelhead spawners.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,841 Posts
Re: Please Don\'t Catch and Release!

Just out of curiosity, do you have percentages or numbers to support your post? I believe that hatchery fish are genetically lacking, but seriously, a steelhead that's planted in a stream, survives to get down to the ocean, survives in the ocean, and survives to make it back up to the stream it was planted in is a pretty darn healthy fish, wouldn't you say? I know that survivablilty rates are lower in hatchery produced progeny, like what's covered in your post, but besides that, I have a hard time believing they are vastly genetically inferior from wild fish. But, Rob, I do agree with your post, and I'm not trying to argue what you're saying in any way. Very interesting post, thanks.
 
S

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
Re: Please Don\'t Catch and Release!

Rob I absolutely agree that hatchery fish are there to harvest! So bonk 'em
What I'm not convinced of is that they intermingle with native fish as much as some would believe.
I fish the Wilson river a lot in the winter and I personally would like to see the end of the Alsea-egg mutants.
They may be good for the drift boats who row down from Mills, or in some instances motor up from Donaldson's :shocked: , for the two week slayfest in December at Duyck's but they are not a very good fish.
Hopefully the ongoing broodstock program will continue to provide the harvestable, quality steelhead that tag holders want.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,841 Posts
Re: Please Don\'t Catch and Release!

Originally posted by Stew:

I fish the Wilson river a lot in the winter and I personally would like to see the end of the Alsea-egg mutants.
<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">I'm confused here...care to inform the uniformed?
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,904 Posts
Re: Please Don\'t Catch and Release!

I believe that hatchery fish are genetically lacking, but seriously, a steelhead that's planted in a stream, survives to get down to the ocean, survives in the ocean, and survives to make it back up to the stream it was planted in is a pretty darn healthy fish, wouldn't you say?
<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">NO!
Healthy for a hatchery fish? Probably.
Healthy for a wild fish? NO!
Detrimental to the wild fish? YES!

Wild fish are genetically altered first generation removed from the wild (brood stock programs). That is a genetically proven fact.
Domesticated hatchery fish are considerably genetically different and bad news if they spawn with wild fish.
The domestic stocks are so altered that they return and spawn ahead of the wild fish and the interactions are less likely than a broodstock fish that has the same return/spawn timing as the wild fish.

I know that survivablilty rates are lower in hatchery produced progeny, like what's covered in your post, but besides that, I have a hard time believing they are vastly genetically inferior from wild fish.
<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">They are vastly genetically inferior in many aspects.
They don't attract mates as well as the wild fish.
They usually aren't very successfull at spawning and when they do the progeny does not survive the wild very well and has a very poor return ratio.
They are less immune to disease and parasites.
When they are successfull at spawning they are robbing the superior wild fish of spawning gravel and rearing areas and competing with the superior wild fish for the available food.
When conditions get tough or change, the wild fish will often adapt or weather it out as where the hatchery fish are more prone to succumb.
Last year was a good example of that when the coastal wild coho excelled producing the best numbers in 50 years and the hatchery coho had a dismal year.

And the worse case scenario is when hatchery fish spawn with wild fish, the wild fish are degraded and things just go down hill from there.

Look around you and see the mess we have created.
Some of it might be beyond repair.
And yet you have the pro hatchery guys out there saying; "let's fire up these hatcheries and raise more". Come help finclip... :hoboy:

It's late and I have a lot to do yet tonight but I'm sure others can point out other inferior examples where hatchery fish have failed and caused us all some very serious problems.

I think in the very near future we will be seeing some major management changes in hatchery fish and hopefully major cutbacks in raising them.
The jury is in and there is over whelming evidence that hatchery salmonids are causing serious problems with wild fish.
Some have known this for many years as the science has indicated.

In some cases raising more fish doesn't result in more fish but is counter productive and results in less fish. The Oregon coast is a good example of this. :wink:

Did you see last Thursday's Oregonian article? :wink:

Dan

[ 10-23-2003, 12:29 AM: Message edited by: DepoeBayDan ]
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,841 Posts
Re: Please Don\'t Catch and Release!

Dan - thank you very much for your extremely detailed post. I appreciate the time you spent to respond to my post. I'm studying Fisheries and Wildlife and hopefully someday I'll be able to do some major studying into this area.
I did not see the article in the Oregonian. If someone has the URL could you post it?
Perhaps if I have some spare time laying around I'll e-mail you Dan, and ask you some more questions about broodstock, etc, etc. Thanks again!
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,437 Posts
Re: Please Don\'t Catch and Release!

You always see in these studies that they use the words MAY, MAYBE OR LIKELY. They never say they ARE or DO or IT’S ABSOLUTELY A SINCETIFIC FACT.

I don’t think they have ever proved they are genetically different. I have never seen anything in print that proved it anyway.
They all came from wild fish in the first place.
Has anyone seen a DNA test?
I would think they are the same because of where they came from in the first place.

DBD
I wrote the above before I read your post and am now amending it.

I wish you would share where I can read the articles where you got this information.
“That is a genetically proven fact". "They are vastly genetically inferior in many aspects". "They don't attract mates as well as the wild fish.”

I don’t mean to be flip about asking where you got it. I would really like to read it.

Yes they come back at different times but from what I was told at the hatchery it is when they are hatched and released that makes the difference, not weather it is wild or not. I was told it is by time. Of course the guy feeding and taking care of them could have been wrong but I would like to see something in print that says to a scientific certainty that they are bad for wild fish.

As I said above, I see is lots of speculation. Mine included. I don’t know anymore than the next person. I am guessing like a lot of people. I don’t know for a fact either way. I would just like to be shown they are bad for wild fish to believe it.

I did not see the article in the paper; I will have to try to find it to know what you are talking about.

ST
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
947 Posts
Re: Please Don\'t Catch and Release!

they don't have to be genetically different. If they spend part of their lives in a concrete pond (even for broodstock fish), then they lose wild traits, act different, and spawn different.

Even though the rigors of scientific peer review will always keep words like "may" in the scientific literature - after all, we deal in probabilities, which are always "maybe" - the majority of evidence supports the issues that Depoe Dan raised
 
S

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
Re: Please Don\'t Catch and Release!

The eggs they use for the winter steelhead in the Nestucca,Wilson,Kilchis rivers are from the Alsea hatchery.
These fish over the years have become, as one fish bio put it, domesticated and are not very good fish as far as fighting quality etc.
They hopefully will be eventually replaced with the broodstock fish.
Floatnfish your post is right on the money but since the tag buying public wants a harvestable run of steelhead the wild broodstock program is our best bet.

[ 10-23-2003, 01:46 AM: Message edited by: Stew ]
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,904 Posts
Re: Please Don\'t Catch and Release!

Has anyone seen a DNA test?
<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">I painstakingly typed about two pages of a DNA genetic report a month ago or so dealing with Clackamas hatchery summer and winter steelhead and wild winter steelhead before Pete (the mod) informed me of a way to copy/paste pdf files.

Yes both the adults and progeny were identified through DNA testing in a Washington genetics lab and yes the evidence was very clear and incriminating showing the decline of the Clack wild winters was caused by the hatchery summers that were introduced in the Clack back in the 70's.

I offered to email anyone that requested the report and even had an ifisher that is a biologist in Denmark request it for there evaluation of hatchery fish in that country.

I should have been to bed hours ago but if you do a search on DNA report it should come up and maybe use the word Clackamas.

Some of these studies/reports don't use the words "MAY, MAYBE OR LIKELY" for some of these issues and they are indeed fact.

Yes I have many of them and some of them are reports out of Canada or the east coast for example where they are having the same problems as we are in the pacific northwest.
Science has caught up with the hatchery fish problem world wide.

The Oregonian article came out last Thursday and was on the front page of the metro section and someone posted it and it shouldn't be difficult to find on ifish or the Oregonian live web site.

I have all this on my own PC but it is in storage and I'm over using someone elses PC.

Tom I believe the difference in run timing is due to the hatchery practice of years past of gathering eggs from the first hatchery fish to return thus breeding the late genetics out of the run.

For those of you that believe broodstock are the way to go consider the fact that broodstock are indeed altered wild fish by man selecting the mates and by man hatching nearly 100% of the eggs that is a whole lot different in the wild and science shows that a wild fish with only a year in the "tank" (hatchery environment) is genetically altered.

Problem is you now have created a better quality hatchery fish so to speak, but he isn't genetically the same as a wild fish but now if he decides to stray, he will spawn at the later timing of the wild fish and you have just created another potential problem.
(That just brought up another point Tom that once you use wild broodstock eggs you have a later run timing that is the same of the nates because of the genetics and not "hatched and released that makes the difference").

So I agree with what you said Stew that they (domesticated stocks) don't intermingle that much when it comes to spawning and I believe it is because of their difference in run/spawn timing.

For those of you that might question if a fish is a fish (genetic differences) I often use the early & late strain coho comparison up in Washington.

Take for example the early strain (type S) and the late strain (type N) hatchery coho in the Lewis and Elocoman rivers.

When the earlies migrate down the Columbia they migrate south off the Oregon coast thus the "S" desigination. And when the lates out of the same river, same hatchery migrate down the Columbia they migrate north off the Washington coast thus the "N" desigination.

The difference why one migrates north and the other south?
They are genetically different.
They are both hatchery coho and they look like a fish, taste like a fish, swim like a fish... but it is obvious there is a difference the eye can't see.

Ask Keith Braun the district salmon biologist in Tillamook sometime if there isn't all the difference in the world when it comes to feeding the domesticated hatchery juveniles and the broodstock juveniles.
They had to cover some of there ponds with wood because unlike the eggs hatched from the domesticated stocks the broodstock fish would go nuts (spook) when they tried to feed them.
Amazing ain't it? No wonder the broodstock return at a higher percentage than domestic stock.

But I and many others are very concerned in these broodstock programs where they are creating a better fish but also one that is more likely to spawn with native fish if they stray.
We know that broodstock are different than wild to some degree and their performance in the wild is degraded.
Knowing this do you think it is a good idea creating these things not certain they won't further degrade our wild fish?
Are you willing to possibly jeopordize the future of salmonids when there is sound science clearly indicating this might be a big mistake?

I'm not!

It's best to leave them (wild fish) alone and get rid of the hatchery fish where not needed as we did here on the coast with our threatened coho that might be well on their way to being recovered and a very rare exception of a species being de-listed once they have made the dreadfull list.

I believe the original warnings on cigarette packaging said; " might cause cancer...

Not any more! Says; causes cancer...

Never saw anyone light up and die from cancer and never saw hatchery fish harm wild fish, but I will trust the sound science that have reached those conclusions.
I have read many of the reports and it is over whelmingly clear that we (man) have screwed up another thing.

Dan

[ 10-23-2003, 03:30 AM: Message edited by: DepoeBayDan ]
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,430 Posts
Re: Please Don\'t Catch and Release!

I'm no scientist (though I did stay at a Holiday Inn once) :wink: but I'm definitely lacking understanding on one point. How would taking wild broodstock fish and breeding them in captivity genetically alter them? Unless there was some factor mutating the genes of these fish I don't understand how living in a cement pond for a year would do that. :shrug:

Maybe I slept to much in a beer induced coma through my genetics class but could you possibly explain how that happens?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
195 Posts
Re: Please Don\'t Catch and Release!

1. By using broodstock we have taken out the selection mechanism (of which I am ignorant) that fish use for choosing a mate. This in itself may result in genetically inferior progeny. I do not know how hatcheries choose which fish to use eggs from or the methods for choosing mates but I would bet that it is fairly random.

2. Behaviorally how are the hatchery fish different? How much does their early environment effect later behavior versus native fish? The rearing conditions(higher population density and steady conditions) in a hatchery are much different than the wild so I would suspect that there are significant behavioral differences (variations in agressiveness to each other, feeding behavior etc).

3. Environmentally hatcheries are so different from the natural environment that fish reared in a hatchery probably develop differently than wild fish. They have a steady food supply, mostly steady water conditions and few if any predators all mechanisms that are involved in survival (selection).

So besides the breeding we are altering natural selection taking out the stresses that native fish face early on that weed out the "inferior" stock. Also behaviorally we may be having significant impact.


My opinion only and it is not based on any research other than what I have observed.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
22,364 Posts
Re: Please Don\'t Catch and Release!

Not that I catch a lot of steelhead but I will continue to catch and release hatchery fish and wild fish. I enjoy fishing and I realize my moniker is Catch AND Eat but if the freezer is full then no need to waste fish.

Seems I remember someone in this thread that said "take only what you need". Well, that is what I intend to to. Depoe Bay Dan said one time that I am not very well read. You may be right on this subject Dan but I still don't by the supposed facts. One study does not mean it is gospel (clackamas study) in fact it may only raise more questions to validate.

So I will continue to be ignorant and stupid and release fish both hatchery and "native" :rolleyes: fish that I don't need. Oh yeah, and I will release the hatchery down hillers too. :cool:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
391 Posts
Re: Please Don\'t Catch and Release!

Originally posted by Sturgeon Tom:
You always see in these studies that they use the words MAY, MAYBE OR LIKELY. They never say they ARE or DO or IT’S ABSOLUTELY A SINCETIFIC FACT.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">to me it seems like there is always an exception to the rule, so saying "are" "do" or "it's absolutly a scientific fact" would be wrong..
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,494 Posts
Discussion Starter #16
Re: Please Don\'t Catch and Release!

" One study" ???

( I will use an absolute)
I am sorry but there are literally hundreds of studies and EVERY SINGLE ONE of them says the same thing..
The only decenting view i have ever heard was from a group of RETIRED!!!! ODFW biologists saying that hatchery and wild fish were the same. This was NOT a study they conducted it was their OPINION about the issue. keep in mind these guys for whom hatcheries were the beginning and end of fish managment techniques. They wrote a paper saying hatchery fish and wild fish were the same only to justify their careers.

here are some absolutes that I can and will if asked provide the evidence for.

Hatchery fish are always different genetically, behaviorally and reproductivly different from wild fish

hatchery fish that spawn with wild fish always do harm.

everyone has a neighbor who'd love a steelhead dinner...
 

·
Ichthyomaniac
Joined
·
3,187 Posts
Re: Please Don\'t Catch and Release!

RichH,

How could you ever sleep through a genetics class?! :grin: You're right, raising a fish in a tank doesn't change it genetically. The genetic make-up of individuals don't change, but the make up of a population does. Brokeitoff summed it up about right. A population of wild fish in a stream is continually adapting to the specific environmental conditions of that stream. By raising a portion of the population in a hatchery, certain selective pressures are eliminated, allowing the survivial of fish who would not likely survive without the boost that the hatchery tank affords. If these fish are then allowed to reproduce, they spread those genes to the rest of the population. That may be ok as long as most of the fish are raised in the tank, but if those genes make their way into the naturally spawining fish who don't get to grow up in the hatchery, then we have a wild population that has a lower overall fitness. It wouldn't matter if the hatchery stock were originally from within the basin or from somewhere else entirely. The "depression" in overall fitness would be the same. I guess theoretically, if there was some way to guarrantee that there was no interbreeding between hatchery and wild populations, than the wild population would not be genetically affected by the hatchery depression, but I don't think this can ususally be guarranteed. Another interesting angle is competition between hatchery and wild smolts for the same resources. I think I read somewhere that hatchery summer steelhead smolts in the clackamas are 50-60% bigger than wild winter fish of the same age, and they outcompete the natives for food resources during their residency in the river. That is a non genetic but clearly important issue.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,964 Posts
Re: Please Don\'t Catch and Release!

DBD

Very good post.
This thread has turned into a broodstock discussion so I will add a little facts to this fracas.

In February of 2002, Cedar Creek Hatchery began spawning wild native steelhead for the new Broodstock program on the Nestucca. In 2002 they spawned 22 pairs of adults to create the needed 55,000 smolts called for under the current plan. In 2003 they spawned 23 pairs. Along with being way too few of adults to start a new hatchery population, there was a problem with collection of the adults creating this new hatchery population. In 2002, 18 of the 22 pairs were spawned on or before March 25th. In 2003 only 2 of the 23 pairs used that year were even collected before March 25th. The vast majority of 2003 spawning occurred at the end of April, where only 4 pairs in 2002 were spawned in April and those were done on the 3rd.
We create artificial selection in many ways, spawn timing is just one.

RichH
You do not change the DNA of a single fish by raising it in a cement pond. You can alter the genetic make-up of a hatchery “population” by adding or removing individuals or by spawning only the fish that meet hatchery criteria.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,848 Posts
Re: Please Don\'t Catch and Release!

With that in mind i really want to encourage people to get out and fish for them and when you encounter a hatchery fish please for the sake of wild fish add it to your daily limit,
<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">All I have to say on the topic:

You don't have to ask me twice. "Mmmmmm, steelhead <drool>" :grin:

--Skahorse
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,289 Posts
Re: Please Don\'t Catch and Release!

What I am curious about is where the genetically marked wild fish came from? Would also like to see a study where they back cross the wild X Hatchery to see what the long term affect is, if any, of hatchery fish spawning in the river.

The biggest beef I have with these studies is they all claim a genetically different hatchery fish is produced, for example in the above study, in two generations. But I have yet to read, in the few papers I have read, what specifically has changed relative to the wild type and how much. Some of these fish coming out of the hatchery have to be identical to the wild type. Not every one is going to be “genetically altered” after one generation in the hatchery. It would also be interesting to see if the “hatchery genotype” ever occurs in nature.

It seems the effect the hatchery has is to artificially increase survival of the fry thus allowing some crosses to survive that would not in the river. Why not hatch the eggs and plant the fry into the river not smolts? Allow the selection process to start earlier.

[ 10-23-2003, 04:36 PM: Message edited by: FallRiverGuy ]
 
1 - 20 of 49 Posts
Top