Stop extinction of UMPQUA WILD STEELHEAD

Discussion in 'Steelhead' started by wantwetwitch, Jul 17, 2007.

  1. wantwetwitch

    wantwetwitch New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2003
    Messages:
    29
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    London, England, UK.
    Home Page:
    I just searched and found nothing on this board, I'm surprised. see this link....

    http://www.sexyloops.com/matts/umpqua.shtml

    Follow the above link, then you got until tomorrow night to sign the petition to protect the wild fish.
    By signing on the line, you may be able to help restore the regulations to the pre-2005 standard of allowing only hatchery fish to be taken; thus protecting a wild species.
    http://www.petitiononline.com/umpqua07/petition.html

    The petition closes on the 18th, meeting on 19th to decide the fate of the Umpqua's winter steelhead.

    Read, absorb, don't waste time - just sign

    Thanks,
    Roy Christie
     
  2. Crump

    Crump Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2004
    Messages:
    411
    Media:
    137
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Grants Pass, OR
    I'll be at the meeting on the 19th, this is a pretty big deal.
     
  3. obiwankanobi

    obiwankanobi Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2007
    Messages:
    1,322
    Media:
    2
    Likes Received:
    107
    I just signed and only 395 signatures have been posted EVERYONE SIGN AND GET YOUR FRIENDS TO SIGN!!!
     
  4. Diehard

    Diehard aka Justin

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2004
    Messages:
    867
    Media:
    189
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    Seattle, Washington, USA.
    Just signed it also.
     
  5. Gary Thompson

    Gary Thompson dirty dog

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2007
    Messages:
    3,898
    Likes Received:
    129
    Location:
    East Wenatchee, WA
    Sign on guys and gals, this is important!!!!
     
  6. Angler 77

    Angler 77 AKA Scott Jones

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2004
    Messages:
    160
    Media:
    30
    Likes Received:
    14
    Location:
    Port Townsend, WA
    Just signed :thumb:
     
  7. Jerry Cave

    Jerry Cave New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2007
    Messages:
    98
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Zig Zag, OR
    Signed. 403 sigs so far. :thumb:
     
  8. greyghost

    greyghost Member

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2004
    Messages:
    507
    Media:
    126
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Coastal Rivers, OR
    Wantwetwitch,

    If we sign the petition and the river closes to 1/day - no more than 5/year wild retention, how many extra hatchery fish does ODFW plant in the North and South Umpqua to make up for lost opportunity? What is the straying rate of hatchery fish in the Umpqua basin? How long will it take to significantly reduce the fitness of wild steelhead in the basin to the point that we need more hatchery fish just to have a run?

    Pete
     
  9. Zen Piscator

    Zen Piscator Supporting wild steelhead, gravel to gravel.

    Joined:
    May 7, 2004
    Messages:
    3,076
    Media:
    551
    Likes Received:
    13
    Location:
    Missoula, MT
    Home Page:
    I'm still not sure why we still kill wild steelhead, it just doesn't make sense...
     
  10. obiwankanobi

    obiwankanobi Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2007
    Messages:
    1,322
    Media:
    2
    Likes Received:
    107

    I don't get your thought process. More wild steelhead = greater genetic diversity = greater species fitness.

    If we sign today then the regs go to the C&R of ALL WILD STEELHEAD!! The ODFW doesn't have to produce more hatchery steelhead to make up for this regulation change, it is just calling for the release of all wild steelhead back into the river. In replace of this more hatchery steelhead could be harvested, while the wild genetic populations are preserved.

    EVERYONE VOTE NOW!!!:p
     
  11. wantwetwitch

    wantwetwitch New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2003
    Messages:
    29
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    London, England, UK.
    Home Page:
    Hi, Pete,
    1 re: how many extra fish will be planted - I have no idea, but would suggest that as there are hatchery fish already being introduced, there could be additional fish aded to cover any 'shortfall' or as you put it - lost opportunity. I'd recommend you take the question to the meeting on the 19th.

    2 re: straying rate - also no idea, but would consider straying as part of nature.

    3 re: how long...? again I have no statistics on this but would urge you to vote with your fingers before we find out. There are not really many millions left :(

    I am doing this because I see the regulation as misguided and a danger to wild fish stocks.
    I look forward to one day fishing the Umpqua, when I get over there from the U.K.
    It would be great if the stocks are not studied into extinction in the meantime.
    regards,
    Roy Christie
     
  12. nick42

    nick42 basket weaver

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2005
    Messages:
    83
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    NCW
    Just signed. Thanks for the 'heads up'
     
  13. greyghost

    greyghost Member

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2004
    Messages:
    507
    Media:
    126
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Coastal Rivers, OR
    Roy,

    Thanks for your response. I personally would love to see the Umpqua system go to all wild C&R, with no hatchery supplementation. Period. That being said, I believe that the reason the regs were changed in the first place was to see if the river could support a wild kill season, and if so, to phase out the harmful hatchery practices in the basin at the expense of a limited wild harvest. This would be monitored by adult counts at Winchester dam to ensure that wild steelhead numbers did not decline significantly. I personally don't want to see any wild steelhead killed, and would never kill one myself, but if the regs do change back to all C&R all the time based on pure emotion and no supporting evidence that the river cannot sustain it's population with retention, we will never get hatchery fish out of the gene pool on the Umpqua, or on any "healthy" river for that matter. Answer this question.... would you rather go fish in Alaska where wild fish are killed in limited numbers, but are correctly managed and still support healthy populations of wild fish, or fish at one of any NW river that has been flooded with hatchery fish to the point that wild fish no longer thrive. The data is out there, hatchery fish do terrible things to wild populations. I suspect more so than killing a limited number of pure native, wild steelhead.

    Obi,
    See thought process above. A few more wild fish + a lot more hatchery fish = less genetic diversity = many less wild steelhead.
    The Umpqua river system is a heavily fished system for winter steelhead. Most of us know of the North Umpqua, where the legendary Zane Grey casted for summer steelhead in his tweed hat. However, most folks that come fish the Umpqua system; Mainstem, South Fork, and North Fork below Rock Creek, come to catch and take a fish home. I suspect that the basin cannot support the current regulation of 5/year per angler, however I do trust that it will be monitored and changed when necessary. Maybe 1/ year per angler would be more realistic. What I do know, is that if all wild retention ends, ODFW will increase hatchery plants to keep a harvest opportunity for the catch and keep folks. They will keep it at 2/day, unlimited amount per season. They will allow bait, which will kill wild steelhead. They will plant the river so full of smolts they will outcompete the natives. The hatchery adults will bypass the rock creek hatchery and spawn with native fish in the mainstem and tribs. They will often produce zero offspring.
    I want wild retention and hatchery programs to end. Will that happen? HIGHLY UNLIKELY, unless we take the time to educate others and change their minds. Lesser of two evils? I already know what hatchery programs do to wild fish everywhere they've been, and I also see limited wild harvest work in healthy rivers that can sustain it. Take a pick, but please don't base it on the fact that a guy once saw crimson blood spill from fish gills.

    Pete
     
  14. wantwetwitch

    wantwetwitch New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2003
    Messages:
    29
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    London, England, UK.
    Home Page:
    Hi, Pete,
    thanks for the specifics, I argue with none of what you say.
    My policy is - manage habitat; no-kill- no stocking

    Stopping anglers from killing the wild fish in the meantime should be a good idea though, if diverse genetic integrity is to be preserved.

    Are the fish which ODFW stock- fry, smolt or whatever - not from this same stock, if not they should be.
    Manage the habitat, restoring as applicable, stop the stocking and go to no-kill for five years - that's a start
    Stop killing wildies for sure
    what do you reckon?

    Roy Christie
     
  15. obiwankanobi

    obiwankanobi Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2007
    Messages:
    1,322
    Media:
    2
    Likes Received:
    107
    Pete, I don't see how C&R will induce more hatchery steelhead being released into the system. I don't know specifics, but there was never any mention about increasing the hatchery brood, only eliminating the harvest of wild steelhead. Therefore, you get a reduction of hatchery steelhead, no reduction in native stock and altogether a stronger, more genetically diverse, spawning population.

    The regulations called for the potential of 5 wild fish per season, but now this would in turn, give the anglers 5 additional hatchery fish per season. The wild fish are left to breed and over time the hatchery fish numbers might decline and then the entire system will be one wild population that will solely be a C&R fly fishing only watershed. BRILLIANT!!!
     
  16. SRT

    SRT New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2007
    Messages:
    17
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    East Wenatchee, WA
    Just signed the petition. This is a step in the right direction.

    Sharon
     
  17. Citori

    Citori Piscatorial Engineer

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2006
    Messages:
    1,220
    Likes Received:
    134
    Location:
    Auburn, WA
    signed - 493 I think
     
  18. jeff bandy

    jeff bandy Make my day

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2006
    Messages:
    2,626
    Media:
    2
    Likes Received:
    556
    Location:
    Edmonds, Wa.
  19. Hal Eckert

    Hal Eckert Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2003
    Messages:
    615
    Media:
    1
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    West GLs
    Done, thanks for posting for us.

    BG
     
  20. shawn k

    shawn k Member

    Joined:
    May 24, 2005
    Messages:
    697
    Likes Received:
    18
    Location:
    buckets worldwide
    The north Umpqua doesnt have a winter hatchery run. Only the south fork does and they run earlier than the wild fish. If you catch a hatchery fish on the north Umpqua you are urged by the Steamboaters to give it the wood shampoo.
     

Share This Page