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 - 8 of 8 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,084 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Anybody see the article in the Oregonian a couple of weeks ago about the private rearing ponds in Washington.

I had cut it out to save it but alas, it is recycled and I can't remember which day it ran.

Apparently, this guy constructed some backwaters on his private property in which thousands of native smolts took refuge to rear in.

Somebody blows the whistle on him and lets the bureaucracy in on what he's got going on.

A federal court makes WDFW fill it in because he didn't go through the 'proper legal channels' for constructing anything in the creek. :mad:

The article quotes as saying the outmigration of chinook went from something like 100 smolts to more like 6,000-7,000!---And the feds make 'em fill it in! Somebody turn that judge in for taking a protected species...by the thousands.

If there was already a thread on this I guess I missed it, but I just wanted to put it out here before I forget about it completely.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
542 Posts
I saw that :shrug: ...didn't make much sense to me either. I think the WDFW didn't want to shut him down but were forced to...at least that was the impression I got from it. Kind of silly as it sounded like he was helping the resource. Here in Oregon the hatcheries are happy to have private landowners help them out by raising smolts in their ponds.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,252 Posts
the key words to the article were..... didnt have the correct permits ......in other words....the feds didnt get the share of the $$$$$$$$.....so *******the important stuff
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,933 Posts
True story, just made me sick........
just another "I'm from the Government and I'm here to help you"

What happened to when common sense prevaled.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,642 Posts
I'd love to say I agree with you all, 5 years ago, I would have. Don't now, though. The last thing we need is armchair biologists who just charge in and do what they think is best.

There's avenues to do this type of thing. There's many clubs who get things done all the time. Going it on your own is a recipe for disaster. Suppose something would've happened, sudden water lowering, etc., and all those fish were stranded and died? What if disease got into them while they were kegged up in those areas, where they wouldn't naturally be?

Kudos to the person for wanting to do something, but good for the authorities to take control.

TR
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,084 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 ·
TR-

From what I can remember the creek was nearly devoid of a wild salmon run before this project was put in place. One of the most important things a watershed can have for smolt production is backwaters and side channels for rearing.

This smells more of a hurt ego in the bio community than any sort of rational decision.

On the other hand, I have spoken to an ex logger on Eagle Creek who has been complaining to every agency he can think of about some gravel and nursery ops going on in the upper reaches of that watershed. His complaint was that he has suffered great pains in his line of work to restore salmon while these guys are makin' a buck under the table and single handedly shutting down thousands of potential smolts.

The fact is that there are a million (that's probably NOT an exaggeration) other projects that the courts should be watching if they are truly trying to 'help' our fish.


I know what you're saying, but I think it's a clear case of a judge not knowing when to bend the rules-and in my opinion they must be bent for our system to work at all-otherwise we're just blowing smoke.

-JCB
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
370 Posts
I remember reading an article last year about a guy, in Washington, who had some chum coming back every year to his place- this isn't the same guy? Is it? How sad!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,494 Posts
Rogue I am inclined to agree with you.. Our club is helping out with a small project that sounds very similar in nature to the one in this story but the man heading this project up has spent the countless hours getting all the appropriate permits and paperwork and the channel had wild adults using it just weeks after it was completed..
However i think the feds should have evaluated the project then given it approval or disaproval..

The main thing to learn here is that we need to not do damage to our wild stocks to begin with to keep them from becoming listed. Once a species is listed the Feds get involved there is no wiggle room. which is as it should be..

Restoration and mitigation are far worse than just saving what we already have...
 
1 - 8 of 8 Posts
Top