[Barviewrocks]

I have seen a lot fo conflicting information regarding which rivers are stocked, supplimented by hatch boxes, and primarily native runs. I wonder if a knowledgable person can enlighten me on the following Tillamook runs:

Is the Tillamook Bay spring salmon run a man made run or one that is supplimented by other means? And if Supplimented, by who - State hatchery program, Tillamook Anglers, others?

How about other runs and specific rivers like the fall run in the Wilson ( I believe it is no longer enhanced). Is the Trask, Kilches, Tillamook Rivers enhanced and by whom?

Are there any hatch box programs in operation in the Tillamook area?

Which specific runs do the Tillamook anglers enhance?

You might guess that I am trying to determine how I want to get involved in enhancing the runs.

Thanks in advance for the information!

 

[Point-of-Sale Clerk]

First you must decide if you want to try to increase the total number of returning adults or if you merely want to play with hatchery fish. Those two options are nearly never the same.
Hatch boxes are the biggest fraud ever perpetrated upon native salmon and we sport fishermen. We can do better… :nerd:

Flame away
:grin:

 

[rebell]

Answers to your questions with out personal opinions.

1)The Trask and wilson rivers have native spring chinook. They are also suplemented by the state and by the Tillamook Anglers assoc.

2)The wilson fall run is strictly wild (depending on who you talk to). The Trask fall run is estimated to be between 10% hatchery and 20% hatchery. They are stocked by the state. To my knowledge, no others rivers in the Tillamook system are stocked with chinook. But there are strays in to all of the Tillamook rivers.

3)I believe there are a few still around. I would suggest calling the ODF&W office in Tillamook for acurate informaton.

4)The Tillamook Anglers only enhance spring chinook in the Tillamook area.

Please take the time to call the local ODF&W office to get correct information.

 

[garyk]

Is the Tillamook Bay spring salmon run a man made run or one that is supplimented by other means?

BVR, you would have really enjoyed former ODFW Fisheries Chief Jim Martin's presentation at the 2004 Bounty on the Bay event.

Martin explained that native spring chinook were originally Tillamook's largest run, in the range of 100,000 returning adults. This was THE major fishery for the area - mostly commercial harvest.

Contrast that with today, where the fall chinook are the remaining somewhat healthy run. The springers are a relic population, reduced by over 90%. Why is that? What can be done?

The point is you can waste a lot of time on seeminly worthy, feel-good projects that actually divert attention from the underlying problem(s).

It's great that you, BVR, want to be more involved with our fisheries! :yay: :yay: The fish need all the help they can get. Keep asking questions :wave:

 

[Flatfish]

Ok, I'll bite....What was sooo wrong with hatch boxes?

Did they produce inferior fish to what product is being turned out in the concrete ponds?

Please do enlighten me.

Mark and the dog.

 

[Point-of-Sale Clerk]

First, it is not my intention to hijack this thread into a debate over hatchery augmentation. :flowered: I will explain my belief that current hatch box programs are ineffective and counter productive. :nerd:

In the standard model of how adding unfed fry or hatch box releases into a given stream works is that conventional wisdom would indicate that if you have 50,000 emergent naturally produced juveniles in a given stream and you add 50,000 hatchery hatch box juveniles you get, regardless of how well they survive, twice as many as if you did not add the extra release.
However, in the recent Coastal Coho Assessment, ODFW staff put forth a new paradigm based upon what was observed within salmon populations that reflected a more density dependant view. The new paradigm is habitat or carrying capacity reflective, it indicates that no matter what the seeding level of a given stream, as long as it meets some bare minimum, density dependant factors will balance out the population until it reaches the portion of it’s life history where the production bottleneck occurs. Meaning if fewer juveniles emerge from the gravel then percentage wise more will survive. The reverse is also true, if huge numbers of juveniles emerge then more will die due to a lack of food and habitat (hiding places from predators) According to the assessment. over-winter habitat was the bottleneck for OCN Coho and that within limits, virtually any changes to survival that happened before that life history stage did little to effect the total number of out-migrating smolts.
This simple change in theory by ODFW staff may now have farther reaching implications. As presented to NOAA fisheries, this new paradigm makes suspect any hatchery augmentation that takes place before over-wintering. That would include hatch box and unfed fry programs. It may require many a fortnight for staff to come to grips with the requirements of the NFCP and HMP.
Lets see how they do… :grin:

As to why I believe hatch boxes are detrimental, under the new understanding, they can at best simply replace a portion of what any given stream would have produced naturally. And as many here are aware, out of basin, hatchery origin fish generally survive at half the rate as native fish when heading to the ocean. Thus you can actually get less fish in the long run… :smirk:

 

[NFN fisher]

*** clerk, you are correct in a few areas although you fail to realize that most of the unfed fry are actually "true wild fish". Only 20% of those fall chinook are finclipped. When fall chinook come back to the hatchery they are spawned regardless of finclips. Those eyed eggs are then transfered to a few hatch box projects on the Trask and Wilson Rivers.These fish get a jump start in incubatortrays and that is it. Also, this program allows anglers and volunteers to be involved in our fisheries. It is also a very, very, cheap way to enhance our runs. The S.T.E.P (salmon trout enhancement program) was developed to involve anglers and volunteers to construct ways to increase production without harming wild runs.

 

[garyk]

IF we want to involve anglers and volunteers, then we'd get the greatest return on our effort by focusing on the underlying problems - what *** and the biologists refer to as the 'bottleneck' in the system.

It's instructional to look at what Gary Loomis and FishFirst have accomplished in their watershed. While there was some enhancement using netpens (to get the fish past the rearing habitat shortage bottleneck), they concurrently worked on solving the underlying problems, the bottleneck issues unique to their streams - culvert blockage, lack of stream nutrients (carcass placement) and restoring critical overwintering habitat that coho rely on and is essential to their survival.

As FishFirst incrementally resolves these bottlenecks, they seem to be well on their way to again having abundant, self-sustaining coho. What a great success :cheers:. Check out their FishFirst.org website for info and newsletter copies.

Regarding Tillamook coho, the primary bottleneck as I understand it, is the loss of low elevation overwintering habitat. All the off-river channels and sloughs that were ditched and filled as the area was developed. (Tillamook Bay has lost over 90% of its wetlands, an astounding figure). If we focus on strategically solving these problems, we and future Oregonians will reap the perpetual dividends of healthy fish runs.

The keenly interested public, like Barbviewrocks, are a wealth of talent and energy. :yay: That effort simply needs to be focused where the rewards are greatest. :wave: Otherwise, the misconception that all that's needed is some more hatchboxes is perpetuated, and we never get out of the expensive box of artificial production that drains so much of our scarce resources.

[Note:my comments are about the Tillamook system, which this is the subject of this thread - not other rivers like the Columbia with a different set of issues]

 

[freespool]

Regarding Tillamook coho, the primary bottleneck as I understand it, is the loss of low elevation overwintering habitat. All the off-river channels and sloughs that were ditched and filled as the area was developed. (Tillamook Bay has lost over 90% of its wetlands, an astounding figure). If we focus on strategically solving these problems, we and future Oregonians will reap the perpetual dividends of healthy fish runs.

Thank you Gary for pointing out this fact. And as shown in other ODF&W research, not only will the coho rebound, with low elevation habitat retoration, but all anadromus species as well. :cheers:
Sadly, hatchery agmentaion seems to be the plan, rather than habitat restoration.
And as a added bonus for the residences of Tillamook County, it will help with flood control. :dance:
This could be a win/win concept for the fish and the people that live near the rivers.



salmon hugger