Do you care enough about wild steelhead to stop fishing for them?

Discussion in 'Steelhead' started by Jeremy Floyd, Jan 23, 2007.

  1. Jeremy Floyd

    Jeremy Floyd fly fishing my way through life

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2006
    Messages:
    3,679
    Likes Received:
    1,792
    Location:
    Quesnel, BC
    I dont see the Native Americans giving concessions to the people they took the land from..
     
  2. Be Jofus G

    Be Jofus G Banned or Parked

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2007
    Messages:
    2,051
    Likes Received:
    53
    Location:
    Washington
    Re: Do you care enough about wild steelhead to stop fishing for them?

    Sure.

    Aren't we supposed to stop fishing for them anyway? I was under the impression they were on the endangered species list. Is that not correct? :confused:
     
  3. greyghost

    greyghost Member

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2004
    Messages:
    507
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    Coastal Rivers, OR
  4. gt

    gt Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2005
    Messages:
    2,618
    Likes Received:
    9
    Location:
    sequim, WA

    ok, so you have a 'statistical model' which is supposed to 'seed to habitat capacity.' do folks really believe it is an accurate predictor???
     
  5. Be Jofus G

    Be Jofus G Banned or Parked

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2007
    Messages:
    2,051
    Likes Received:
    53
    Location:
    Washington
    cool, thanks pete.

    Endangerd or not, I'll still avoid the spots where I see natives are spawning.
     
  6. greyghost

    greyghost Member

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2004
    Messages:
    507
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    Coastal Rivers, OR
    I hope that it goes without saying that we should always avoid fishing over active spawners, regardless of population size and state regulations.

    Pete
     
  7. rudejude

    rudejude Banned or Parked

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2006
    Messages:
    83
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    everett
    You drink too earlyptyd
     
  8. Be Jofus G

    Be Jofus G Banned or Parked

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2007
    Messages:
    2,051
    Likes Received:
    53
    Location:
    Washington
    of course :)
     
  9. Salmo_g

    Salmo_g Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2004
    Messages:
    9,866
    Likes Received:
    5,437
    Location:
    Your City ,State
    GT,

    I thought the issue was MSH/MSY. Now you're switching gears to address the level of precision in the wild steelhead spawning escapement goal model.

    Is it an "accurate predictor?" No. "All models are wrong. Some models are better than others." Somewhere I have the name of the Wisconson science professor who alledgedly made that quote. The steelhead model is based on juvenile fish surveys in 12 river systems where habitat was seeded to capacity by the available indicators. That produced parr production estimates per unit area for 4 stream gradient indexes. Potential parr production was converted to numbers of female spawners based on data from the river basins where data were available. Those were extrapolated to river systems around the west side of the state, and maybe others; I'm not sure. As it turns out, it's a better fit for some river systems than for others. Surprised? Is it any good? Well, it has served a critical conservation purpose where the alternative is even less desirable IMO.

    The model received a modicum of criticism from a lot of biologists. And they recognize its shortcomings. And they didn't have a better model to offer as an alternative. The principle critics, as I recall, were some tribal fishery biologists who advocated setting escapement goals based on the MSY Ricker spawner/recruit curve. In every case, escapement goals would be very significantly lower using that model.

    Sincerely,

    Salmo g.
     
  10. Todd Ripley

    Todd Ripley New Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2005
    Messages:
    107
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Seattle, Washington
    "The principle critics, as I recall, were some tribal fishery biologists who advocated setting escapement goals based on the MSY Ricker spawner/recruit curve. In every case, escapement goals would be very significantly lower using that model."

    ...and welcome to the Queets River...

    Fish on...

    Todd
     
  11. gt

    gt Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2005
    Messages:
    2,618
    Likes Received:
    9
    Location:
    sequim, WA
    salmo g., you missed the part where you lectured me about MSH/MSY not being used. i accepted your arguement.

    you instead stated that a statistical model is being used. ok fine.

    the issue then becomes, how is WDFW 'tuning' that statistical model??? that is, you make a prediction, you observe reality, they don't match. what happens to the model parameters?? or are the same parameters simply used over and over again producing the same mismatched results??

    and please don't fall back on 'something is better than nothing' notion of prediction. you and i both know that the statistics involved here are statistically insignificant and the only 'tool' you have is to correct the error variance via observation each and every year.

    so the question to you is: is the statistical model being corrected as a result of observations???

    if it is, bravo. if not, why not?
     
  12. Salmo_g

    Salmo_g Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2004
    Messages:
    9,866
    Likes Received:
    5,437
    Location:
    Your City ,State
    GT,

    Perhaps I owe you an apology. It was beginning to look to me like you were more interested in bitching about WDFW than discussing why several of us here don't see much benefit in quitting fishing for wild steelhead.

    In the arena of statistical modeling, the steelhead escapement model is crude. However, in the realm of what's available and necessary for fisheries management in the PNW, I'd say it's probably average, maybe somewhat better.

    Tuning the model can be done from two ends. Either from adult spawning escapement count/estimates or from field data on parr production. As far as I know, and Smalma would be closer to this than I, only one river system steelhead escapement goal has been changed since first set in about 1984. That is the Skagit.

    The method was to compare spawner:recruit performance with the parr production model. Higher escapements above about 8,000 haven't produced higher subsequent brood returns. The highest return of about 16,000 was from a brood year escapement of 8,200 if I recall. The Ricker MSY escapement goal is around 4,000 or slightly less, again, as I recall. The Skagit Sytem Cooperative and WDFW agreed to revise the escapement goal downward from the parr production model estimate of 10,000 to 6,000.

    To tune the model from the habitat end would require sampling parr production in every river system you wanted to refine, and conduct that sampling every year. The costs are prohibitive, and the most likely benefit would be either to not modify the escapement goal at all, or in my estimation, revise it somewhat downward for most watersheds. So in my estimation, the benefits are not worth the cost. If the result was to revise escapement goals downward, the result would be to predict some harvestable wild steelhead in rivers where they are not harvestable now. Again, the value in either sport harvest or commercial harvest is not enough to offset the cost of the work that would be required to do the fine tuning.

    One of the concepts I find difficult to sell outside the fish management community is that the management objectives for conservation and utilization can both be met with management models that are pretty imprecise. Yet they offer sufficient precision to achieve conservation goals on average - provided they are actually followed (my little dig at the Hoh, Queets, and Grays Harbor policy decisions).

    Sincerely,

    Salmo g.
     
  13. Will Atlas

    Will Atlas Guest

    Duff,
    I'm with the liberal camp, and we dont claim him.
    Salmo,
    and smalma a couple things. A question: what data sets are the MSY/MSH management strategies built around. Also, Salmo, what work are you basing your claim that wild steelhead dont spawn with hatchery. Certainly it seems obvious that hatchery fish are spawning in the wild and although it is with limited success, like you said yourself, the spawning effort of that wild fish is void if spawned with a hatchery mate. Whether survival to smolt age is lower, or ocean survival is lower (or likely both) we know that hatchery spawning in the wild produces almost no recruits. While this may seem a bit of a tangent, the question becomes, how do we know hatchery fish arent spawning with wild. Particularly on tribs where the timing of the wild is earlier any way and the densities may be lower than later in the season so the sexual selection is not as effective at weeding out the hatchery weaklings. Also, I've heard that WDFW read counts dont even start until after march 15, is that true, and if it is wouldnt they miss many chambers creek redds which had been mossed over/moved by highflows?
    Will
     
  14. Kevin J. Burnham

    Kevin J. Burnham Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2005
    Messages:
    2,194
    Likes Received:
    282
    Location:
    Auburn,Wa.
    Will, Is that you with the smile holding a Brown on the Madison ? Did you kill it ?:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
     
  15. Will Atlas

    Will Atlas Guest

    Got me kevin. In my uneducated ways, I released the fish unharmed. :). I will admit they are an excellent sportfish, although no match in fight to our native steelhead, or in agression to the fly to our native sea run trout.
    Cheers,
    Will:beer2: