New study on steelhead genes - "...up to 40% come from wild trout..."

Discussion in 'Steelhead' started by Luke77, Feb 1, 2011.

  1. Bruce Baker

    Bruce Baker Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2007
    Messages:
    969
    Likes Received:
    304
    Location:
    Olympia, WA
    I have a pdf copy of the article. Send me a pm with your email address and I'll be happy to send you a copy of the article.
     
  2. yuhina

    yuhina Tropical member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2005
    Messages:
    2,320
    Likes Received:
    56
    Location:
    Boston-Idaho
    Home Page:
    Just to be clear,

    the 1% of "residualized" hatchery fish is the fish stay in the stream (river dwelling fish from hatchery program). This 1% did not includ other hatchery fish that went to the ocean ( hatchery steelhead).

    If you included all hatchery genes that flow into anadromous Hood River steelhead, that would be 19% (18% hatchery anadromous + 1% hachery resident).
     
  3. Leroy Laviolet

    Leroy Laviolet Aint no nookie like chinookie

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2008
    Messages:
    994
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    do'n it 4 the chinookie
    Nothing above supports this:

    "This study was carried out in the Hood River, Oregon. Same research group found the hatchery fish decrease the wild run's fitness (life reproductive success) by more than 50%"

    are you sure this is accurate Yuhina? Did I miss something ?
     
  4. yuhina

    yuhina Tropical member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2005
    Messages:
    2,320
    Likes Received:
    56
    Location:
    Boston-Idaho
    Home Page:
    quote:

    Tom B:

    Leroy- The study's authors say in their discussion section that the contribution of genetic material by wild resident fish to steelhead populations may dilute the negative effects of anadromous hatchery fish spawning in the wild (i.e. if there are anadromous wild and hatchery fish, and you add more wild resident fish, the total % of wild goes up)...their results DO NOT say anything about hatchery fish being more fit than previously thought at reproducing in the wild. In fact, the same group used the same dataset to analyze the fitness of hatchery fish and their descendants spawning in the wild, and found that they have much lower fitness than wild fish...see this link

    http://www.sciencemag.org/content/318/5847/100.full


    I have no idea where or how you arrived at the conclusions you did above, but they are way off base. The article says nothing about dams, and their research program reinforces what we already know about the poor fitness of hatchery fish spawning in the wild. You might be well-served by actually reading such articles before deciding what their conclusions and implications are. Either that or risk sounding misinformed or biased.
     
  5. Leroy Laviolet

    Leroy Laviolet Aint no nookie like chinookie

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2008
    Messages:
    994
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    do'n it 4 the chinookie
    Read the first line in YOUR post, that's where i got it , I checked all your links, none of which supports YOUR original statement.... Misinformed, Are you misinforming us?
    Biased you say? Might you be biased?? My question was not about Dams to you , re-read above if you need to re -focus on the topic.
    Maybe you should read a little before you cut copy and paste the gospel .... I asked you to back up your statement with a link to support the statement you made:
    "This study was carried out in the Hood River, Oregon. Same research group found the hatchery fish decrease the wild run's fitness (life reproductive success) by more than 50% " You bailed on the topic, accused ME OF BEING BIASED AND UN INFORMED . Looks like factual clarity is something you are not privy to on this one ... Others ??
    That's all we needed to know-
     
  6. yuhina

    yuhina Tropical member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2005
    Messages:
    2,320
    Likes Received:
    56
    Location:
    Boston-Idaho
    Home Page:
    For those who interested ...

    a paragraph from the original paper - Abstract " ...additionally, we documented that resident hatchery males produced more offspring with wild anadromous females than with hatchery anadromous females. One explanation is the high fitness cost associated with matings between two hatchery fish..."
     
  7. yuhina

    yuhina Tropical member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2005
    Messages:
    2,320
    Likes Received:
    56
    Location:
    Boston-Idaho
    Home Page:
    Leroy,

    Please reread what TomB said.

    Tom.
    Nice lay out!
     
  8. Leroy Laviolet

    Leroy Laviolet Aint no nookie like chinookie

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2008
    Messages:
    994
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    do'n it 4 the chinookie
    Nope, doesn't answer the simple question i asked, tom didn't even see that my info was a Paste from YOUR POST !!!
    Priceless!
    You read toms post again if you like , I'm gonna go look for facts, not agenda driven opinions-:thumb:
     
  9. Charles Sullivan

    Charles Sullivan dreaming through the come down

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2005
    Messages:
    3,192
    Likes Received:
    1,438
    Location:
    bellingham wa
    Home Page:
    Leroy,

    Are you questioning the 50% figure?

    Go Sox,
    cds
     
  10. Rich Simms

    Rich Simms Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2003
    Messages:
    248
    Likes Received:
    66
    Location:
    Occupy Hearings!
    The WSC has been submittting regulation calling for increased protection of resident rainbow trout, provided is the our testimony to the Commission in '09. We urge others to do the same.


    Good afternoon, The Wild Steelhead Coalition would like to thank the commission and WDFW the opportunity to provide testimony. We would also like to commend the department for putting forth some good proposals that will benefit wild steelhead.

    However we would like you to pay particular attention to the WSC comment regarding proposal #23 and take this opportunity to bring focus to the importance to protect wild riverine rainbow trout, the resident form of wild steelhead and the importance to protect this vital element.

    The WSC has provided each Commission member a copy of John McMillian’s article published by the American Fisheries Society on resident rainbow trout and wild steelhead interactions.

    Research is showing that resident rainbow trout in our anadromous highways and by-ways plays a significant role in the diverse life histories of wild steelhead. Resident rainbow trout, through participation in the late winter/spring spawning interactions of wild steelhead improve the success of fertilization of female steelhead, especially during April, May and June. During this period, male wild steelhead become depleted and the steelhead population is in part reliant on rainbow trout to provide the male partner for spawning.

    Steelhead and resident rainbow trout can produce independently the opposite form and resident rainbow trout can be the leading or single source of anadromous smolt production when the abundance of steelhead is depleted or extinct.

    The WSC finds it scientifically enigmatic to understand why the WDFW can protect one form of steelhead trout, the anadromous steelhead, but continues to allow harvest and/or gear methods that induce high mortalities of the other form, the resident rainbow trout. Both forms, by definition and taxonomy are classified as the same species, steelhead trout, and are genetically the same in each watershed. Each form contributes to the abundance and productivity of the other form.

    Rainbow trout can be an important component in the recovery of wild steelhead stocks and the rebuilding of declining stocks. Improved regulations are needed to protect resident rainbow trout

    We encourage the WDFW to pursue stream management strategies that protect all juvenile wild salmonids and rainbow trout while continuing to allow selective fisheries for adult salmon and hatchery steelhead. Aside from being confusing proposal #23 needs to be simplified and provide stronger regulations to further protect resident rainbow trout.

    Respectfully Submitted,

    Wild Steelhead Coalition
     
  11. Chris Johnson

    Chris Johnson Member: Native Fish Society

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2006
    Messages:
    2,965
    Likes Received:
    1,114
    Location:
    Bellingham Wa.
  12. Randall Clark

    Randall Clark Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2007
    Messages:
    1,608
    Likes Received:
    1,333
    Location:
    Orygun
    I apologize if this has been mentioned earlier, but I didn't actually have time to read all of the posts here.

    If anyone spends any time fishing the Deschutes River down here in OR during the spring, no doubt they will have noticed that many of the redds are highly visible. just about all of the time there is a mix of redbands and steelhead. It's not really a shock to see a single steelhead on a redd with several redband trout and vice versa (Every year I witness this). So it stands to reason that they do indeed interbreed.

    now, if we can just get the damn guides to stop sending clients over to dredge the water right on top of the redds so they can get into fish (I'm tired of getting cursed out every time I point this out to them)....but that's for another post.
     
  13. yuhina

    yuhina Tropical member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2005
    Messages:
    2,320
    Likes Received:
    56
    Location:
    Boston-Idaho
    Home Page:
    Charles,

    The reason I said more than 50% is because the effect of hatchery genes has "Cumulative Fitness Decline Effect" see this link for abstract one generation will have ~ 40% decline (if the parents are hatchery fish). However, if two generations were involved in the hatchery program (grandparents and parents are hatchery fish), the fitness will be remain 37% compare to wild fish. That would be -63% decline. That is the reason I use 50% fitness loss. FYI
     
  14. yuhina

    yuhina Tropical member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2005
    Messages:
    2,320
    Likes Received:
    56
    Location:
    Boston-Idaho
    Home Page:
  15. TomB

    TomB Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2004
    Messages:
    1,642
    Likes Received:
    91
    Location:
    seattle,wa
    Leroy-

    My original post was referring to this post of yours:

    “The genetic influences of hatchery fish on wild steelhead populations are still a concern,” Blouin said. “But the good news from the Hood River is that the hatchery genes are being diluted more than we thought, and thus may not be having as much impact on dragging down the fitness of the wild steelhead.”

    Could this mean that everyone may have to re-think there adamant hatred for hatchery programs and hatchery fish and dams ? Wouldn't that be a bitch if every yuppy blog had to drop that mantra ?????????????

    By referring to the two studies and their results, I had hoped to illustrate:
    1) the trout/steelhead study did not find that hatchery fish were any fitter than previously thought.
    2) The previous study done with the same data is one of the most well-known examples of low fitness of hatchery fish and their offspring.
    3) None of the studies address dams and their affects on population productivity.

    Your original post quoted above seems to imply that the results of the trout/steelhead study should make people reconsider their thoughts about the poor fitness of hatchery fish or the effects of dams. Given the content of the body of research you are referring to, neither of the conclusions are accurate or appropriate. If you have issues with the methods or findings of either paper that you would like to raise, I am all ears.