Philisophical Differences...

Discussion in 'Steelhead' started by FinLuver, Mar 18, 2014.

  1. FinLuver

    FinLuver Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2012
    Messages:
    1,550
    Likes Received:
    683
    Speaking of "opportunity"...

    Fish (specifically winter steelhead) in a system are on the rebound and with all the talk of "gene banks"; as someone who is concerned with conserving the species from extinction...is it ethical to fish over them - whether it's for harvest or C&R?

    Two such watersheds come to mind (and I'm sure there are others)...the Umpqua (OR) and the Skagit (WA).

    Seems both sides of the aisle wish to have "opportunity".

    Just because we have opportunity doesn't necessarily mean we need to proceed.

    (Just a thought)
     
    bjornjon likes this.
  2. PT

    PT Physhicist

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2003
    Messages:
    3,926
    Likes Received:
    1,170
    Location:
    Edmonds, WA
    I thought opportunity was being able to bonk a hatchery fish?

     
  3. FinLuver

    FinLuver Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2012
    Messages:
    1,550
    Likes Received:
    683
    Nothin' wrong with that...PT...BONK away on the "hatchery" fish. :D
     
  4. _WW_

    _WW_ Geriatric Skagit Swinger

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2005
    Messages:
    3,031
    Likes Received:
    2,096
    Location:
    Skagit River
    If fishing C&R is not detrimental to the long term health of the run, why shouldn't we fish?
    If allowing more fish to spawn does not increase the smolt to adult survival (indicating carrying capacity has been reached) why shouldn't we fish C&R?

    Other streams are allowed to borrow steelhead 'impacts' from the Skagit to bolster the salmon harvesting when they don't have enough abundance to supply their own 'impacts' . Why wouldn't we want to change that to give those struggling runs more protection?

    Basin by basin determination of allowable impacts gives each individual run of fish a voice. Each stream will determine it's own future. Under this kind of closer scrutiny, streams that need more protection will get it, and streams unduly influenced by being part of an aggregate determination (the Skagit) will be free of the federal listing.

    It ain't about philosophy. It's about numbers - and always will be.
    If it's philosophy you're looking for, join PETA.
     
  5. David Dalan

    David Dalan 69°19'15.35" N 18°44'22.74" E

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2007
    Messages:
    2,629
    Likes Received:
    1,322
    Location:
    Walla Walla, WA
    C&R mortality is almost nil.
     
  6. freestoneangler

    freestoneangler Not to be confused with Freestone

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2006
    Messages:
    7,648
    Likes Received:
    2,662
    Location:
    Ruby Valley, MT
    Not according to the Skagit's state biologist... but I forget it's only the opinion of a few on this forum that really matters :rolleyes:.
     
  7. James Mello

    James Mello Inventor of the "closed eye conjecture"

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2003
    Messages:
    2,819
    Likes Received:
    99
    Location:
    Tacoma

    C&R mortality is definitely greater than nil, but the science around it says that it doesn't limit run size. Of course if you have a run size of like 50 fish on a river like the Skagit, then having an open season is probably a bad idea. But a catch and release season on 2k fish isn't going to finish the run off if managed properly (shorter fishing seasons, limiting fishes to less dense spawing reaches, etc.).
     
    Ed Call likes this.
  8. Charles Sullivan

    Charles Sullivan dreaming through the come down

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2005
    Messages:
    3,199
    Likes Received:
    1,446
    Location:
    bellingham wa
    Home Page:
    Oddly, I have had the exact opposite impression of Mr. Barkdull's position on C&R mortalitybased on what he saw regarding mortality on a study he conducted (albeit not on C&R impact).

    Go Sox,
    cds
     
    Chris DeLeone and Derek Day like this.
  9. David Dalan

    David Dalan 69°19'15.35" N 18°44'22.74" E

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2007
    Messages:
    2,629
    Likes Received:
    1,322
    Location:
    Walla Walla, WA
    I'm open to being wrong, any data to support his/her contention? I'm not a believer in anecdotal information.
     
    Jason Rolfe likes this.
  10. freestoneangler

    freestoneangler Not to be confused with Freestone

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2006
    Messages:
    7,648
    Likes Received:
    2,662
    Location:
    Ruby Valley, MT
    Discuss it with him yourself, but "almost nil" (whatever number you choose to believe) still means dead fish from a threatened stock.
     
  11. Ed Call

    Ed Call Mumbling Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2008
    Messages:
    19,557
    Likes Received:
    4,556
    Location:
    Kitsap Peninsula
    I wonder if postings in this thread, perhaps even creating it is less about steelhead and more about ones inability to catch steelhead. I wonder if the days fished, hours fished and number of fish not felt, fought or landed have some manipulating statistics to justify why they've put away their steelhead setups and turned to fishining chironomids.



    No offense to legit chironomids fisherman that love the indicator under duress tactic as their preferred passtime. We know who you are.
     
  12. David Dalan

    David Dalan 69°19'15.35" N 18°44'22.74" E

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2007
    Messages:
    2,629
    Likes Received:
    1,322
    Location:
    Walla Walla, WA
    Possibly.

    But without actual data its all conjecture. For a number of reasons, i think accurately measuring the absolute impact of C&R is nearly impossible.

    The thread title sums it up pretty well, this is more often about personal philosophy, than it is about logical conclusions based on observed data.

    For example if C&R mortalities are small, and there is natural mortality (there is) then it is hypothetically possible that some of the fish that would die anyway get caught and released. Any overlap further diminishes the impact of C&R.

    But thats mental masturbation.

    Look at Skagit escapement numbers and see if adding/removing C&R fisheries as a statistically significant impact. Its been awhile since I looked at historical escapement estimates, but I think they were pretty variable when fisheries were allowed...and still are without said fishery.

    Want to help Skagit fish survive C&R impacts? Time the hatchery fish for late arrival (Feb-April) and don't allow fishing until spring. Keep it C&R. It provides hatchery fish to run interference and reduces the chances of a single fish being caught repeatedly.
     
  13. ChrisC

    ChrisC Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2003
    Messages:
    651
    Likes Received:
    30
    Location:
    .

    To that point, why would someone post about a species they don't fish for, other than to bring attention to themselves. It would be analogous to a muskie, walleye, you name it fishermen posting on this forum. And yet these other fishermen don't. For the non-steelhead fishermen posting their opinions here, post all you want but to Ed's point, you don't have much basis for doing so other than just to stir the pot.
     
  14. Adrian

    Adrian Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2013
    Messages:
    172
    Likes Received:
    91
    Pe
    Folks over in the Saltwater and Stillwater section are so much friendlier! I wonder why?
     
    FinLuver likes this.
  15. Chris Johnson

    Chris Johnson Member: Native Fish Society

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2006
    Messages:
    2,979
    Likes Received:
    1,120
    Location:
    Bellingham Wa.
    Because they can go fishing anytime they want, pretty close to home?