Hatchery or wild?

Discussion in 'Steelhead' started by generic, Sep 29, 2012.

  1. freestoneangler

    freestoneangler Not to be confused with Freestone

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2006
    Messages:
    7,802
    Likes Received:
    2,730
    Location:
    Ruby Valley, MT
    I release them because it's legal to do so, the wife and I don't have a craving for them as table fare and because it does afford another angler (maybe me) another chance to catch them...God knows, it's like the rivers are overflowing with them these days. At this point in time, YOU haven't been placed in charge of deciding which reasons are or are not good...when that changes, be sure to shoot me a PM. And, bonking wild fish (of which the vast majority are hatchery origin) should be no more an issue than dispatching hatchery fish if their populations have been determined sufficient to allow harvest.

    There is a big split within the sport-fishing fishing community concerning hatchery and wild and it's been a heated issue for a long time. Rigid positions, taken by both sides, have and will continue to alienate one another...why I think some compromise (as suggested) might work better.
     
  2. Derek Day

    Derek Day Rockyday

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2005
    Messages:
    577
    Likes Received:
    149
    Location:
    Olympia
    Compromise is having hatchery fish, but bonking them when encountered.
     
  3. Charles Sullivan

    Charles Sullivan dreaming through the come down

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2005
    Messages:
    3,233
    Likes Received:
    1,480
    Location:
    bellingham wa
    Home Page:
    The vast majority of columbia river fish may be of hatchery origin. The opposite is true of coastal and PS winter steelhead.

    Go Sox,
    cds
     
  4. Salmo_g

    Salmo_g Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2004
    Messages:
    9,868
    Likes Received:
    5,445
    Location:
    Your City ,State
    " And, bonking wild fish (of which the vast majority are hatchery origin). . ."

    Freestoneangler,

    Why do you write this when the preponderance of the available steelhead genetic information shows that native, wild steelhead, lacking hatchery introgression, remain quite common through their range in Puget Sound, the WA coast, and the lower Columbia River tributaries? Your allegation is probably true for most of the Columbia River tributaries upstream of Bonneville Dam, but not the westside of the state.

    Are you just trying to be provocative? Or are you keeping yourself deliberately uninformed, since the information has been available for a few years now?

    Sg
     
  5. freestoneangler

    freestoneangler Not to be confused with Freestone

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2006
    Messages:
    7,802
    Likes Received:
    2,730
    Location:
    Ruby Valley, MT
    How common, in what percentages? I was not limiting the approach I favor to Columbia systems only.
     
  6. Chris Bellows

    Chris Bellows Your Preferred WFF Poster

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2003
    Messages:
    2,178
    Likes Received:
    1,473
    Location:
    The Salt
    the scientific data on dna testing is "conflicted" and we should just go on what we think is correct (gut feelings) rather than trust elitist, egghead scientists who don't have unity of the sportfishing community as their number one goal :rolleyes:
     
  7. Irafly

    Irafly Indi "Ira" Jones

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2003
    Messages:
    6,471
    Likes Received:
    4,769
    Location:
    Everett, Washington, USA.
    Again interesting information Salmo. So in the Puget Sound, OP and Lower Columbia tribs I should keep all hatchery, but don't have to, yet on most of the Upper Columbia tribs where the genetic code is less sure I have to keep all hatchery. I don't understand all the ins and outs, but wouldn't it make better sense the other way around, or is it all about the ESA listing of those fish in the Upper Columbia. If the hatchery truly are all that bad why isn't there a mandatory keep on all river systems?
     
  8. Derek Day

    Derek Day Rockyday

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2005
    Messages:
    577
    Likes Received:
    149
    Location:
    Olympia
    Exactly, it's in the managment plan, the feds wanted it (from what I understand).

    We don't have mandatory hatchery keep because, "This proposal would restrict option for catch and release fishing and would be very hard to enforce. " (http://wdfw.wa.gov/fishing/regulations/rule_proposals/comments/original.php?id=DFW234122)

    It's not a scientific reason, or a good one.
     
  9. KerryS

    KerryS Ignored Member

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2001
    Messages:
    8,447
    Likes Received:
    4,415
    Location:
    Sedro Woolley, WA, USA.

    His motives are to antagonize and instigate; nothing but a somewhat sophisticated troll. He cares little for facts.
     
    cabezon likes this.
  10. Irafly

    Irafly Indi "Ira" Jones

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2003
    Messages:
    6,471
    Likes Received:
    4,769
    Location:
    Everett, Washington, USA.
    Again, if the hatchery fish are so bad then why not make it mandatory on all waters. I found out more and discovered that the feds did require the order on the upper Columbia because of the number of people continuing to fish and catch even more of the "Wild" fish.

    As for difficult to enforce, I've never bought that argument. Enough people are intrinsically motivated out there to obey the law regardless of enforcement and enough others are negatively extrinsically motivated enough to not do it because they fear the punishment. The others, are the same folks do whatever the hell they want anyway and then complain when they get caught.

    So I guess for now I will again selfishly admit that where legal to do so, I will likely release hatchery steel so I can keep fishing. Although I will admit that I'm also likely to keep and leave as that negative intrinsic guilt starts to get to me. But my guilt is my guilt and I will not judge others for not breaking the law by releasing steel when still legal to do so.
     
  11. Charles Sullivan

    Charles Sullivan dreaming through the come down

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2005
    Messages:
    3,233
    Likes Received:
    1,480
    Location:
    bellingham wa
    Home Page:
    Well put IRA. I agree that it should be mandatory catch and kill hatchery steel statwide. The state has never really been ahead of the curve with regards to steelhead management so it should not come as a surprise.

    I will say too, that as a westsider I do not know of anyone who releases hatchery steelhead, especially flyfishermen. The limit is 2 and if you catch 2 hatchery fish on an S river, then you should go home....and celebrate your awesomeness.

    I may head over for hatchery fish on the coast in Dec. We'll see if it's better fishing there as I've never done it before.

    Go Sox,
    cds
     
  12. freestoneangler

    freestoneangler Not to be confused with Freestone

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2006
    Messages:
    7,802
    Likes Received:
    2,730
    Location:
    Ruby Valley, MT
    It only antagonizes those with closed minds and who believe their side of the discussion is absolute truth. It's this way of thinking that will keep the debate polarized, as it has been for years, and any meaningful, timely improvements from being implemented.
     
  13. freestoneangler

    freestoneangler Not to be confused with Freestone

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2006
    Messages:
    7,802
    Likes Received:
    2,730
    Location:
    Ruby Valley, MT
    Gotta throw the yellow flag on Salmo-G for selectively extracting a part of my post...taking it out of context. The complete sentence is:

    "And, bonking wild fish (of which the vast majority are hatchery origin) should be no more an issue than dispatching hatchery fish if their populations have been determined sufficient to allow harvest."

    What would be wrong with killing wild fish if they were returning in sufficient numbers to allow harvest? Are some of you saying that if all hatchery fish were eliminated and we were successful in rebuilding populations of wild fish, such that fisheries managers could allow harvest, you would still be opposed?

    We don't have deer and elk hatcheries (at least that I know of), yet they too are resources needing constant oversight on harvest management. Assuming the aforementioned scenario happens, why would steelhead be treated differently?
     
  14. Charles Sullivan

    Charles Sullivan dreaming through the come down

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2005
    Messages:
    3,233
    Likes Received:
    1,480
    Location:
    bellingham wa
    Home Page:
    Although I shouldn't speak for SG, I'm gonna cuz this is easy.

    He responded to the factual inaccuracy that you were trying to get by everyone. That innacuracy being that most wild steelhead are of hatchery origin. I know SG pretty well and he dislikes factual innacuracy.

    No one responded to your assertion that wild fish should be allowed to be bonked if they were returning in sufficient numbers because that is a defensable position. I hope it's an actual discussion we get to have all over the state one day.

    Clear enough?

    Go Sox,
    cds
     
  15. Derek Day

    Derek Day Rockyday

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2005
    Messages:
    577
    Likes Received:
    149
    Location:
    Olympia
    Ira,
    You point out the perverse incentives that the fishing regulations create. You don't want to keep hatchery fish, becuase you want to keep c&r fishing. You can't keep c&r fishing after retaining two hatchery fish because of the way that WDFW wrote the regulations--you can catch and release until your daily limit is retained. WDFW could easily rewrite the regs to allow people to continue to catch and release after retaining fish. That's what happens when you have biologists writing policy I guess.


    Freestone,

    Even if it were true that all wild fish are of hatchery origin anyway, it still wouldn't make sense to leave F1 hatchery fish in the system. Over time, hatchery prodgey would become better and better adapted to the system that they've been returning to. But the fish fresh from the hatchery are essentially reset--they exhibit all of the crappy adaptaions that make hatchery fish less fit than wild fish. Allowing those fish to spawn with the better adapted fish would reduce the overall viability of the stock.

    Also, steelhead don't require the same population managment measures as ungulates (here we go)--because we haven't extrapated their primary predators--wolves. And, they can reach carrying capacity and not destroy the ecosystem.

    But as Charles mentioned, arguing over how to dipose of "harvestable surplus" would be a pretty awesome problem to have.