Washington Fly Fishing Forum banner

Well are they or not...

3K views 66 replies 22 participants last post by  FinLuver 
#1 ·
"We need to maintain healthy and abundant wild populations not only for their own sake, but to be a supply of fish for hatchery production and to keep hatchery programs cost effective," Bakke said.

Guess "they' are not as bad for our streams as has been previously purported...after all, this quote comes from the "expert".
 
#3 ·
If you don't think Bill Bakke is an expert then you are, well, ummm, how can I put this nicely? Uninformed?

What he is saying is IF we have a healthy population of wild fish then hatchery fish are okay. As the new science everybody loves to jump on says, if a river has reached its carrying capacity then hatchery fish aren't a big threat to wild fish. Problem is pretty much every river is WAY under its carrying capacity.

But I'm no expert, so you ain't heard it from me...
 
#9 ·
If you don't think Bill Bakke is an expert then you are, well, ummm, how can I put this nicely? Uninformed?

What he is saying is IF we have a healthy population of wild fish then hatchery fish are okay. As the new science everybody loves to jump on says, if a river has reached its carrying capacity then hatchery fish aren't a big threat to wild fish. Problem is pretty much every river is WAY under its carrying capacity.

But I'm no expert, so you ain't heard it from me...
I interpreted Bakke's statement as that wild fish for brood stock was a good idea to supplement wild runs. I liked the idea of the broodstock program before it was cancelled...... and I suppose there's probably more ways of trying to figure out what Bakke meant.
 
#12 ·
Yard Sale... "gray"

I used to work as a manufacturer's rep in the big orange box stores...we had a saying, "Everything Is Grey - In The World Of Orange"

What's that mean?

Loosely...it's only true, if it's for my own gain - not yours.

It's always convenient to live in a grey world, but then again that's exactly what we have been doing for decades... could just be why things are the way they are.

Bakke has access to this and other forums where I have posted his quote...He and only He can tell us what he meant... I'm sure a little CYA damage control will be his path. ;)
 
#14 ·
lets see over 100 years of nearly 100% reliance on hatcheries has given us what??? reduced harvest, reduced recreation there is one thing we have however increased,, the number of endangered species...

at least the wild fish "faith" is based on something that is not a completely proven failure like the hatchery "faith" is.
 
#15 ·
RA...
"lets see over 100 years of nearly 100% reliance on hatcheries has given us what??? reduced harvest, reduced recreation there is one thing we have however increased,, the number of endangered species...

at least the wild fish "faith" is based on something that is not a completely proven failure like the hatchery "faith" is."

Let me guess... I bet your "wild fish faith" says it's the hatcheries' fault for their decline too. ;)
 
#16 ·
Print the source of the quote or you are just attacking another person, anonomously, and taking their words out of context.

At least if you put it in context you will just be attacking a person anonomously.

BTW- I know little of the CR/ Oregon hatchery v. wild fish disagreements that this thread comes from. I do know that the personal way you (finluver) have attacked people, both on this board and off undermines whatever message you have.

Go Sox,
cds
 
#18 ·
Print the source of the quote or you are just attacking another person, anonomously, and taking their words out of context.

At least if you put it in context you will just be attacking a person anonomously.

BTW- I know little of the CR/ Oregon hatchery v. wild fish disagreements that this thread comes from. I do know that the personal way you (finluver) have attacked people, both on this board and off undermines whatever message you have.

Go Sox,
cds
Exactly.

Sent from my HTCONE using Tapatalk
 
#17 ·
After reading through this paper, my take is that the use of hatcheries (for experiments) to both improve wild fish stocks and satiate the demand for harvesting fish is a compromise. To Rob's point, the results we're seeing from the current paradigm of "the more we put in the more we get back" is proving to have only benefits for harvesting fish, while the situation for wild fish takes a diverging and depressing path.

The studies being done in controlled environments to benefit wild fish that are funded by harvest-based activities seems to make sense, especially if the research leads us to the answers for reducing wild/hatchery spawning interactions - one of the most telling bits of information taken from the paper.

"If reproductively sterile hatchery fish can be stocked in selective watersheds to support recreational angling harvest then a major concern of hatchery - wild interactions will be resolved."

If it is true that our watersheds are under carrying capacity, and that the demand for harvest isn't going away, then making consensus decisions about impacting opportunity would be easier to reach - the common ground being in the where and how those fish are harvested while protecting wild populations. I'd rather see the research being done with my tax dollars focused on developing solutions like eliminating spawning interactions between wild and hatchery fish while maintaining harvest opportunities for those who wish to. Like dams, not all hatcheries are bad, just the ones that have a negative impact on wild, native fish.
 
#19 ·
Note how those who attack science use the word "faith" to describe those who believe in crazy things like facts. Finluver is just a pro-hatchery, anti-science troll.

The science is clear on hatchery x wild interactions. No amount of static noise coming from the "know nothings" changes that.
 
#21 ·
Print the source of the quote or you are just attacking another person, anonomously, and taking their words out of context.

At least if you put it in context you will just be attacking a person anonomously.

BTW- I know little of the CR/ Oregon hatchery v. wild fish disagreements that this thread comes from. I do know that the personal way you (finluver) have attacked people, both on this board and off undermines whatever message you have.

Go Sox,
cds

What...You are not a card carrying member of the Native Fish Society?
If you were, you would have the source!

And you say I'm attacking someone's character.

Are you the "pot" or the "kettle"?
 
#23 ·
I am a person, Charles Sullivan, who read your post. In your post you took a quote out of context. I am asking that for the sake of honesty you put it in context. In that way I can make an informed decision, or even comment somewhat intelligently on your itentionally provocative post.

If you don't do this, your post is clearly not helping to truly make anyone think, as you aren't providing the neccesary information to do so. Please provide the context.


Go Sox,
cds
 
#24 ·
See, now I usually stay out of threads like this, but for fuck's sake, man. If you have a difference of opinion with someone, fine. But to take a man's quote out of context, and then bash him on a forum he isn't likely to read is chickenshit. Have you ever met the guy? Had a conversation with him? He is a guy who has been fighting for wild fish since way before it was cool. By all means disagree with someone, but whatever you type, frame it in such a way that you'd read it to their face.

And as far as the snarky "card carrying" comment, I am one. I am also a river steward for that organization. I have given up countless hours of fishing, time with my family, and gas to participate in scientific data collection, youth and public outreach and education, policy comment periods, and training. A TON of my free time, man. NFS was the first group that was able to put me into a position to actually change my home water for the better. I'm not pointing this out because I am special. I am pointing this out because I am a tiny part of the effort. There are many many people doing this type of thing. From NFS and other groups. I don't know you. Maybe you do the same type of thing. If so, you should know that there are better ways to expend your efforts than spouting divisive, uninformed bullshit from behind a keyboard. That type of stuff is killing us. It doesn't help the fish at all.

If you want to criticize something, criticize me. On the phone. To my face. Over a beer. On the water. I don't profess to know it all. I am willing to change my mind in the face of strong evidence. Show it to me if you have it. But for the sake of the fish, please stop with the hate shit. It's not helping.

My name is Jason Small, and I am a river steward for the Native Fish Society.
 
#27 ·
I am a person, Charles Sullivan, who read your post. In your post you took a quote out of context. I am asking that for the sake of honesty you put it in context. In that way I can make an informed decision, or even comment somewhat intelligently on your itentionally provocative post.

If you don't do this, your post is clearly not helping to truly make anyone think, as you aren't providing the neccesary information to do so. Please provide the context.

Go Sox,
cds

All one needs to do is read some other works from Mr. Bakke and the Native Fish Society to have ALL THE CONTEXT they would need to know where I am coming from for posting such a direct quote.
 
#29 ·
Yes, Jason Small - but you can put up the full quote/release as well, I would appreciate it. This is like listening to my 10 year old and 7 year old girls go at it over something. Fin - cant put up the full quote, everybody else (Jmills, CS, and OR ) say its out of context - but doesn't show how thats true.
Thanks
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top