Restaurant serving wild steelhead

Discussion in 'Steelhead' started by TomB, Mar 19, 2007.


  1. not sure what you are referencing here, but i bonk every single hatchery fish I am legally allowed to.
     
  2. i have to say that if 50% means killing 50% of wild stocks then i want to know where is my share. since the non NA community has regulations which limit the killing of wild fish, i would have to say it is past time to institute the same set of rules for our NA friends. if that fails, then lets all go participate in the last great wild steelhead round up, once and for all, we will turn all river systems into mutant fish races. i just don't think we can have it both ways. and while on the subject, if 50%is the allowable NA take, then 50% of all costs associated with the take need to be distributed fairly among all participants.
     
  3. Rockyday.
    We had the "best available science" at our disposal in the 70's and look where the North Atlantic cod stocks went!!!!!! Better yet,, look at our state of affairs with the Atlantic salmon!!! Federal Minister of Fisheries,, Fred Mifflin,, went against his own scientists,, who were screaming for a zero quota in the mid 90's and went ahead and allowed 77 metric tonnes:beathead: :beathead: :beathead: to be netted by the Newfoundland and Labrador netsmen:eek: Goes to show you should never trust a suit when it comes to the welfare of your favorite finned friend!
    Salmon Chaser
     
  4. My point was we need to stop operating under treaties signed in the 1800s and apply science, the best we have. I think that everyone here would agree that if what scientists recommended were to be implemented, it would be better than what we have now.

    Did they implement the recommendations of the scientists in either case you mentioned? I would guess that they didn't. But if they did, at least they tried, which is more than we could say for our current situation.

    Also, the "best available science" is, by definition, always at our disposal.

    Derek
     
  5. If hatchery fish (hen steelhead) lays her eggs and a hatchery fish (buck steelhead) fertilizes the eggs then the off-spring are wild steelhead correct.
    If wild steelhead eggs are mixed with wild steelhead sperm at a hatchery then the off-spring become hatchery steelhead regardless of their heritage. If those statements are correct there must be an awful lot of interbreed and mixing between the two strains and it might be difficult to know he difference if some fins weren't clipped. Is this not correct?

    KEH
     
  6. unfortunately, the 'scientists' we have at WDFW as well as the other agencies which oversee fisheries in the salt as well as inland, have their collective heads up their most prominent feature.

    historically, runs of anadramous fishes were distributed over the course of MONTHS. that allowed a natural way of survival given droughts, floods and other uncontrollable environment events. WE the sportfishing community wanted these runs concentrated so it was more conveneient for us.

    as habitat degraded, the hatchery system was put in place pumping out billions of mutant fishes all hitting the salt at the exact same time. as all of that was occurring, the major food source in puget sound was being overharvested while the natural spawning areas collapsed from a variety of runoff reasons.

    when you stir that 'science' based pot, you end up with runt fishes headed for the same rivers in a very short span of time. any native fishes are now in a crowd of mutants trying their best to simply spawn and head out, a very tough assignment.

    now we mix in a 50% take by our NA friends, thanks boldt, and we have indiscriminate netting of whatever passes by. i am sure you have seen the bank to bank sets on the hoh and quileute. nothing gets past these sets, nothing. so while the sport community is lobbying for a zero native fish kill, the NAs are killing everything.

    these are mutually exclusive objectives and what is not working is wild fish escapement. a wild fish at this point in time is one that is not fin clipped. you can argue till you are blue in the face about mixing of strains and so forth, in 2007 that arguement don't float. the 'true' native fishes are probably long gone and fondly remembered.

    so whats the beef? everyone who is fishing needs to play by the same rules, period, no exceptions.

    if the unclipped returning fishes on the hoh, as an example, are below projections, ALL fishing for steelhead needs to be closed. and yes that means sport, commercial and NA fisheries. if the NAs involved in this indiscriminate killing of unclipped fishes refuse to stop, take um to court, period.

    i am really tired of the stories of just how well NAs are taking care of the resource only to have this sort of thread get started. we have done the NAs in this country many injustices over the course of the centuries, but it is past time to get on the same page if we have any hope of saving anadramous runs for future generations.
     
  7. Anybody notice how "native catch and release season" is Feb, March and April? There are exceptions, but in the Evergreen state this is the window we have systematically jammed our native stocks into with piss poor management, overfishing, overlogging, hatcheries, development, overestimating run "forecasts" (my personal favorite) and that a flippant and shitty quality control system by our "co-stewards". Then when we get a soldier for a biologist who is willing to kick some ass ala the Salmos of the world, we throw enough red tape at them to break them down and take away their spirit early in their careers. Speaking of that bullshit, I'm going to toast Salmo's edgy old ass tonight with a single malt I just bought. For those of you who just will not quit, thank you.:beer2:
     
  8. Wow fellas. This thread has really taken off. I agree we're in a paradoxical situation here. While the state and the natives are "co-managers" we really only have a say in the way that the state conducts themselves, since at present we cant do anything about netting. While I think most of us agree that at present the number of fish being taken in certain tribal fisheries is absolutley unacceptable, we arent doing a great job as comanagers either. Think of all the production lost in the 600 or so fish harvested on the Hoh by "sport fishermen" every year. Throw in the obscene dependence on hatcheries and negligent collection practices, and our half of the deal isnt doing much for the future of steelhead. Throw in the fact that many of us are driving massive trucks and SUVs and living in giant suburban homes that are driving the changes in the climate, and we as individuals have to step back and take a look at our hand in the future of our steelhead.

    Duff, I'm impressed by your stance and ability to articulate your opinions on the issue. Since I'm recently 21 I'll drink some whiskey (or perhaps a can of rainer) to our friend Salmo:beer2: . James, I've gotta say in my opinion, sport fishing should ethically never take precedence over wild fish conservation, and therefore releasing hatchery fish so they can be caught again is absolutely unethical. I'm not familiar with the Kalama but from what I understand hatchery fish have been a big part of the problem. Anyway, I think alot of people had good things to say on this thread, and thanks to Tom for starting this.

    Cheers to all,

    Will
     
  9. Yeah, there's a part of me that is extremely concerned about the wild fishery, but there is still a part of me that wants to catch fish. These ideals are paridoxical, and unfortunately difficult for me to sift through. The reason is simple. Most people are NOT in a position to give a crap about anything, unless there is something in it for themselves. This means that without a strong representation of sport fisheries that most people would care less than they already do about the plight of wild steelhead. But with that, are the costs associated with wild fish to high to justify this position? In the eyes of some, yes, but in the eyes of others no.

    So thinking out loud, does this line of reasoning make me a bad person? Does it mean that I don't care about wild fish? I don't know, but my opinion can certainly be changed, and it probably will.

    BTW, If there is a fisheries person a bit more familiar with how the Kalama is managed, I'd like to hear about it.

    -- Cheers
    -- James
     

Share This Page