Tag out!

[jbird]

I think there is a gap in the education of a healthy steelhead population. Hatchery fish SHOULD be killed. That is what theyre there for. The more that survive, the more there are to poison the native gene pool. There are many other things we can do that have been discussed extensively here on this board. But one of them certainly is to KILL finclipped steelhead. I scratch my head when i see people get upset about killing these fish. It is our responsibility as sportsmen to help keep things in balance this way. So get out your steelhead tags and "tag out" That goes for me too. I let way too many go just cause of laziness. Also, here in oregon, you can purchase suplimental tags if you fill the original.

Its also "wild" as compared to the farmed fish you buy in the store. So the quality is hugely better. Lets enjoy these fish that were supposed to enjoy. If you dont like them, I bet your neighbors would like a filet or two

Steelhead, the other pink meat :D

Jay

[Bill Kiene semi-retired]

jbird,

I'm with you all they way here. Just as I see it too.

We have way less fish in our river, lower A, so we let them go so we can catch them over and over again for months. Especially those little Halfpounders.

But eating those hatchery fish is OK.

[jlmelend]

Bill and Jay,
Could you brief us on how we can tell hatchery from wild? Is it just the dorsal fin being clipped? Is it true that hatchery fish taste worse than wild?
I saw a king fisher (that's a bird I key in on to find stripers...not Andy Guibord or Bill Kiene!) ambush an 8 inch youngling just 15 feet from me today. I wonder if they can tell the difference?
Joe

[bigtj]

At the risk of sounding like a broken record, if you don't know the difference between a hatchery and wild steelhead, DON'T FISH. It's a sportsman's responsiblity to completely read the fishing regulations. There is a description of how to tell hatchery from wild steelhead in the fishing regulations booklet. Get the booklet (you can download a .pdf) , read it, and know the regulations before you go. If you have to ask questions, ask the fish and game, not folks on a fly-fishing bulletin board.

Jbird,

One reason some people don't whack hatchery fish is they want to keep fishing if there is a 1-fish limit. Once you bonk your fish on rivers with a 1-fish limit, you are done fishing for the day. That's what it means to "limit out", i.e. once you fill your limit you cannot keep fishing. Some people would prefer to keep fishing. For that reason I wish there were a 2-fish limit on these waters but there isn't. So I release my hatchery fish until the end of the day or if I'm going to take off in the middle of the day. Seems crazy, but those are the regs, and that is how we have to work within them.

I am going to call fish and game to double check to make sure you can't fish after taking your limit, but in the past when I checked on this (maybe 10 years ago) it was the law.

[jbird]

Big TJ

That is very true and also has to do with why i let too many go. Here on the rogue, the limit is two fish. If your with your buddy, you can spread the cheer :D

My over arching point here is that people think a steelhead is a steelhead and they should all be released. My point is all wild fish MUST be released...all clipped fish SHOULD be kept.

These forums are great places to educate!

Jay

[Adam Grace]

Jay, If I ever make it up to your neck of the woods this steelhead season I would love to bonk a hatchery steelie and try that Parmesan recipe, or grill it up. I'm curious about how they taste.

[Charlie Gonzales]

It scares me to think that our local fisherman are getting the message to kill their limit. Hatchery fish or not our rivers do not see the numbers that northern waters do. I would go the other way and suggest that that the entire American river be zero limit.

[aaron]

Charlie,
Beside dams hatchery fish are one of the most harmful things to our wild runs.

[Charlie Gonzales]

I realize that and dont argue that point. But my point is that the American doesnt see that many returning fish. I know someone is going to say that the numbers of fish counted at nimbus last year were more than doubled from previous years but those are hatchery fish and I would rather see those than none at all.

Besides if we kill these then what are the stripers supposed to eat :D

[jhaquett]

bigtj,

Jlmelend never even said that we was going to do any steelhead fishing. He asked a very simple question. Maybe he is a bass fisherman who was just curious. Why do you ALWAYS feel the need (some way or another you WILL have a response of this manner in nearly every thread you post in) to treat people like that? Tomorrow you'll probably apologize for it, blaming it on a "bad day" and then do it again next week.... :? Just answer the question next time, for once :roll:

[jhaquett]

Jbird,

Are hatchery fish a part of our rivers just to keep catch and kill fishermen who couldn't care if it was wild or not quiet?

Excuse me for asking a fly fishing board that question if it happens to be in the regulations....I realize how great of a faux pas that is :roll:

[jbird]

Mr. jhaquett

It sounds to me like you have been offended deeply by this topic. There is no other explanation than a lack of education. TJs "tone" was exersized by his deep passion for native steelhead.

Hatchery fish are there for the substinance fisherman. They are to encourage the take of clipped fish and the realease of wild fish. There is no easy answer to the prevention of declining wild fish numbers. We are given hatchery fish to save the wild fish, but in the process the hatcheries interbread with the natives and delute the gene pool. A "rock and a hard place". Killing hatchery steelhead is only going to assure that the fish you killed will have no chance of spawing with a natve fish....Which is a good thing. If it doesnt go up a tributary and in fact ends up in the hatchery. It becomes cat food and fertilizer.
Form your own oppinion on this. I deeply believe it to be true.

Jay

[Darian]

Your question is being addressed to an Oregon resident and I can't answer for him. However, in California, hatchery bred Steelhead, Trout and Salmon are the result of construction of artificial barriers to spawning areas (e.g. dams, wiers, etc.). As a part of the programs responsible for construction of these barriers, mitigation was included to offset for loss of spawning habitat necessary for survival of these species.

At the time of construction of these hatcheries, the impacts of hatchery bred fish on naturally spawning fish was not well understood and, in truth, there was an element of recognition that the fishing public (fly/gear fisherman) would not easily accept the loss.... So, I guess the reasons are a little of both, appeasement and mitigation. 8) 8)

Since that time (within the last two years), a newer motivation for maintaining hatcheries has come up. With the passage of AB 7, hatchery funding was guaranteed by mandate. The bill was sponsored by Chambers of Commerce and commercial (wholesale/retail interests), mainly in the eastern and southern Sierra districts but applicable, statewide. 8) 8) 8)

[jhaquett]

No I wasn't offended, certainly not deeply offended, just tired of the constant condescending nature of his posts.

Basically, all I was asking you was, do you think that if everyone would accept catch and release, would we have hatchery steelhead? I thought part of the reason they were around was to increase the chance of successful spawning at least with one of the members being wild?

[Bryan Morgan]

Charlie, I am with you. With the population boom in our local area and the taking of any of the Salmonid species on our local AR is something that is going to deplete the runs to a point that we wont even have the opportunity to target these wonderful fish. If your livelyhood doesn't depend on it, you can always buy it in the store.

[jbird]

You guys, Hatchery fish are a renewable resource. They are pretty much Tyson Chicken! It is very important...like BigTJ pointed out, To know how to identify hatchery fish. A hatchery steelhead in all westcoast fisheries that I am aware of have had their adipose fin clipped as smolts before release from the hatchery. An adult or even a 1/2 pounder will have a (usually) clearly removed adipose fin with no sign of a scar. If there is a scar there, its possible some joker caught a wild fish, clipped the fin and released it...yes, people are doing that who are opposed to the restriction on wild fish.


The adipose fin is the small, fleshy fin between the dorsal fin and tail

It is absolutely false that hatchery fish are bread in hopes of interbreeding with wild fish. That is a tragic result of hatchery fish over-populating our rivers.

Killing hatchery fish is NOT going to decline the steelhead population. remember the potatoe chip add? "Go ahead and eat them...We'll make more"


Its a misconception that releasing hatchery fish will help the steelhead population. If you really want to help, get involved in habitat enhancement programs. Dont walk on redds when your wading (this is HUGE). Land your fish quickly with beefy equipment and release them carefully.



The message I am trying to make...without causing an arument...is, dont be afraid to bonk a hatchery fish, thats why theyre there. Nobodies gonna yell at you for letting them go, but I'm tired of people whining when they see one tagged.

Jay

PS Joe, There is no differene in taste between wild and hatchery...this is an assumption since I've never eaten a wild steelhead. Both fish follow the same life cycle, eat the same stuff and are exposed to the same environment,

[mike N]

I took a steelhead once. It was a long time ago. I don't think there are enough fish in the A to justify taking them, even if they are clipped. At least that is what my catch rates tell me.

King salmon on the other hand..... :-)

MN

[Charlie Gonzales]

Im gonna play totally ignorant on this just to see how you answer this, but arent hatchery fish spawned from the native fish that come up the ladder and then pen raised and released back to the wild as juvies. And even if this is remotely accurate then how can it weaken the gene pool that much. Its not like they come from a test tube.

And on the other hand just because it has an adipose fin doesnt mean it didnt come from a hatchery fish at one time.

We used to have quality runs of steelies on the American but that was 20 years ago. I would just like to see these numbers increase before advocating to kill your limit.

I am a hunter not a member of PETA. And stripers make great tacos so dont get me wrong.

[jbird]

Im gonna play totally ignorant on this just to see how you answer this, but arent hatchery fish spawned from the native fish that come up the ladder and then pen raised and released back to the wild as juvies. And even if this is remotely accurate then how can it weaken the gene pool that much. Its not like they come from a test tube.

And on the other hand just because it has an adipose fin doesnt mean it didnt come from a hatchery fish at one time.



Excellent points Charley! A good perspective i suppose.

I cant point out genetic differences between the two because I'm no scientist. Anyone who has caught a considerable amount of both will tell you there is a distinct difference in the way they fight(with a few exceptions) I dont know what that means exactly, but it does tell me there is a definate genetic difference between them,
I definitly dont have all the answers. What I do know is that hatchery fish are there for sportmen to take. I suppose my suggestion to tag every clipped fish you catch isnt one that will go over well on a flyfishing board. I probably could have thought a little longer before typing. But, what I will take to my grave is, its allright to take hatchery fish. And if they are using natives to brood the hatchery, how will taking hatchery fish hurt the future population? I will let the knowlagaeble guys like Tristan, BigTJ and Bubzilla ( didnt mean to leave anyone out :D ) explain the real threats to our fish population. Or you can search the archives and wake a dead horse, because its been discussed at great length.

Jay

[Digger]

bigtj,

Jlmelend never even said that we was going to do any steelhead fishing. He asked a very simple question. Maybe he is a bass fisherman who was just curious. Why do you ALWAYS feel the need (some way or another you WILL have a response of this manner in nearly every thread you post in) to treat people like that? Tomorrow you'll probably apologize for it, blaming it on a "bad day" and then do it again next week.... :? Just answer the question next time, for once :roll:

ditto.... but he's just that way. Tact is not one of his finer points.
It's the CKIA syndrome.

[jbird]

Basically, all I was asking you was, do you think that if everyone would accept catch and release, would we have hatchery steelhead?


Absolutely! Catch and release is a great thing and should be practiced (I believe) for all native species. But it is a microscopic drop in the bucket compared to all the other problems our native steelhead face. Lack of C&R has very little to do with the overall decline of anadromous fish.

Jay

[Digger]

So let's see how this works;

the more hatchery fish we take, the overall population declines so DFG puts MORE hatchery fish in the system?
Hmmm, I'm not understanding that philosophy.

Folks, it’s 2007, the Genie’s out of the bottle and the 'gene pool' is tainted.
I personally like to see wild fish left alone, and if you HAVE to take, take a man made one.

That being said, you paid for a license and have the privilege within the regs, to kill and keep whatever you wish.
Let your conscience be your guide.

[jbird]

the more hatchery fish we take, the overall population declines so DFG puts MORE hatchery fish in the system?
Hmmm, I'm not understanding that philosophy.

Digger, you are describing a lake habitat. In the anadromous environment, every year has a "new' population, based largly on oceanic impact. The fish we catch this year were bred 2-3 years ago. Its not like if we deplete the population by overfishing, theyre going to dump a new batch of adults in the river. If we take our limit of hatchery fish this year, it will have no effect whatsoever on how many are available next year.

Yes indeed, let your concience be your guide! :D Just a message to the folks relatively new to steelhead fishing... Gathering facts can sway your concience in a new direction. :D :D

Jay

[jhaquett]

My conclusion to this thread is if you like to eat fish, keep your hatchery steelhead. If you don't, release everything. I would be curious to hear a lecture about the genetics of hatchery vs. wilds. :?:

Too hot of an issue...I don't enjoy the taste of fish so I'm going to continue C & R for all fish. :)

These threads are always very informative though 8)

[bigtj]

jhaquett,

If you got a problem with my posts, then send me a PM and let's handle it offline. No need to clog bandwidth with dirty laundry, if you got a problem with me, I'll listen. I don't post here to impress new friends, or intentionally piss people off, I post here because of my passion for the sport, and I tell it like I see it.

Digger,

It doesn't work like that...additional hatchery harvest in no way means more fish need to be planted. Once the "escapement" of hatchery fish is taken (not that many - perhaps a few hundred fish), the rest of the hatchery fish in the system are essentially useless for the purposes of propogating additional hatchery fish. The are also essentially useless at propogating additional fish in the wild.... excess hatchery fish in the system interfere with the wild fish spawning. Studies have shown that hatchery fish are dramatically less successful thatn wild fish at spawning fish in the wild, and their genetics contribute to inferior fish. Reducing the number of hatchery fish in the system actually improves the odds for the wild fish spawning successfully (which are the only fish that have a decent shot at success with wild spawing) and helps maintain the genetic diversity of the fish in the system. Increased harvest of hatchery fish every year (along with habitati improvements) could theoretically actually lead to an eventual REDUCTION in the number of hatchery fish released, if it has a positive effect on the number of wild returning fish, thus reducing the need for hatchery supplement of the runs. This is why Jbrid (Jay) can't understand why more people don't kill more hatchery fish.

Bottom line, hatchery fish are put in the river for the espress intent of angler harverst. They do not put hatchery steelhead in the river to help the wild steelhead population or increase the success of wild steelhead. To do that, habitat improvement and all-wild fish policies are much more effective. Simply put, hatchery fish are intended for people to take home and put on the table and nobody should feel they are hurting the resource by harvesting them.

All of this being said, I prefer to fish for wild steelhead in rivers that do not have hatchery enchancement. I would be willing to reduce my catch by 50% or more and release all of my catch forever if it meant all the fish I caught were wild steelhead. They are such a vastly superior gamefish in so many ways I can't count them all.

Regards,

-John

[Adam Grace]

If you got a problem with my posts, then send me a PM and let's handle it offline. No need to clog bandwidth with dirty laundry, if you got a problem with me, I'll listen. I don't post here to impress new friends, or intentionally piss people off, I post here because of my passion for the sport, and I tell it like I see it.

.....

Regards,

-John

John, Thank You for your effort to keep more arguments on out in the public! If we all could concentrate more on keeping disagreements private or behind the scenes this board would remain as friendly as it has started out. I want to follow in your direction and limit my negative public postings.

[EricO]

I completely disagree that clipped hatchery steelhead and wild fish fight differently. I've been fishing the American for a number of years and there's no way you can tell the difference. If a hatchery fish and a wild fish have both been to the ocean, they'll both fight with just as much vigor.

I think Mike N stated it best:

"I don't think there are enough fish in the A to justify taking them, even if they are clipped. At least that is what my catch rates tell me."

And if the hatchery fish spawn, then the babies grow up with an adipose fin...therefore, if you catch a half pounder with an adipose fin, how do you know it isn't just a hatchery fish young'un?

Plus, the A isn't some blue ribbon fishery....I'm thankful for any type of steelhead run we get- the last few years haven't been that great, but this year has produced some pigs. But hey...if you wanna whack one, have at it. Maybe some of the fisheries in Oregon are a different story, but it's a little late to keep the American "pure" with wild fish.

EO

[OceanSunfish]

Wow!

All I know is that we are in an era where:

1) the current administration can at least say the "war" on the environment is going well.

2) Our "Guvinator" that has competely sold out the Fish and Game of this state.

3) Human population growth is predicted in the 10's of millions

4) Water diversion increasing regardless of endangered species.

5) DF&G actually celebrates the closure of fishing access, etc. (MLPA)

Yeah, we do have some fish building redds every year, but they are also downriver from dams controlled by DWR and BuRec who bounce flows up and down faster than an Smother's Brother's Yo-Yo.

I think it's nonsense to be spliting hairs over "hatchery fish" vs. "wild" fish especially with the trend of government affairs regarding our fisheries.

C'mon folks, be damn happy that after all that is recking havoc on our fisheries today, there is even something to fish for in the American or any other river in our state.

BTW, Coastside Fishing Club is proposing to DFG a plan that will allow them to release up to 720K salmon smolt from Pillar Point each year going forward. So, here you go; these folks just want to fish and catch salmon at sea. It makes no difference if these fish were born under a rock or in a tray. It's doubtful that many of the 720K will even make it back to their original hatchery too, but that's not important.

This is how desperate things are getting today. Arguing over the value of a hatchery fish vs. a wild fish with our abridged rivers is another example of the uppity and snooty fly fishing mentality that needs to vanish, IMO.

[WinterrunRon]

Jay and all,

I’m simply looking to understand your point, which I don't... not here to argue. Fact is, I’m not convinced one way or another. I release all my fish because I enjoy seeing them swim away. But I’m willing to be convinced that this practice is harmful and change my ways for the good of the steelhead population.

Excuse my not having read every word of every post, but I feel I did read enough to understand the points being made.

A couple of questions come to mind:

If the dam were built, and hatchery not built as a condition of them being built (talking only about what I know, the American River), would we have any steelhead at all?

Which leads to the next question, which is, if your answer is “unlikely” (mine is), isn’t it better to have an “altered” gene pool to cast to than no gene pool?

Which leads me to my next question, which is, if your answer is “yes”, (mine is), what point is there in killing any steelhead? Shouldn’t we allow as many to reproduce as possible, hatchery or not?

Which leads me to my next question, which is, if Mr. Hatchery fertilizes Mrs. Hatchery’s eggs and Jr. is reared to adulthood in the sea and subsequently returns having avoided the hatchery, is Jr. a hatchery or native?

If your answer is “hatchery”, how would we know? The adipose is intact, and this “hatchery” fish must be released (no natives allowed to be retained on the American). If your answer is “native”, how can that be, it was reared from hatchery stock?

So you see, I’m a bit on the fence about this whole release native-kill hatchery thing. But I respect everyone’s opinion and like I said, I’m willing to be convinced. So educate away!

PS. Gone Fishin'. Be back soon to see your responses. Heading to the American this evening to ponder the keeping/release of that nice fish I’m going to catch!

Ciao…

[mr. 3 wt.]

I let them all go, don't need to be a hero and show off a dead fish. :evil:

[jbird]

Hi Ron

I love your non biased, non confrontational attitude :)

The best way I can describe my view on this issue is to quote from BigTJs post above...


excess hatchery fish in the system interfere with the wild fish spawning. Studies have shown that hatchery fish are dramatically less successful thatn wild fish at spawning fish in the wild, and their genetics contribute to inferior fish. Reducing the number of hatchery fish in the system actually improves the odds for the wild fish spawning successfully (which are the only fish that have a decent shot at success with wild spawing) and helps maintain the genetic diversity of the fish in the system. Increased harvest of hatchery fish every year (along with habitati improvements) could theoretically actually lead to an eventual REDUCTION in the number of hatchery fish released, if it has a positive effect on the number of wild returning fish, thus reducing the need for hatchery supplement of the runs.

To answer your question about "would there be any steelhead at all if they werent suplimented by the hatchery in light of dams" It depends on the river system, but by and large I would say yes, by the simple fact that most of the rivers in question still have a self sustaining population of wild fish. Hatchery fish obviously add a good percentage to the run in our rivers. They allways will as long as our hatcheries continue to operate. Killing a hatchery fish doesnt jeapordize the 1000's of offspring that killing a native will. A very large majority of hatchery fish eggs are "flushed down the toilet".

The way I look at it is like this, When I tag a hatchery fish, A. It has no chance of spawning with a native fish, adding problems to the gene pool stated in TJs quote. B. There is no concern whatsoever in the future stock of our steelhead because the fish is on a one way, dead end trip anyway. C. Fish is one of the healthiest things you can eat and my wife likes it.

I am a hipocrite cause I have been tagging less than 3% of the fish I catch. I have mentioned before that I think its a hassle and I'm not that crazy about eating them. Like everyone else here, I love them, I love to watch them swim away...its totaly bitter sweet tho.

As far as the comment above about not telling the difference between a hatchery and native fish by its fight.. Without trying to sound condescending, you will once youve caught a WHOLE BUNCH of each. Ive caught hatcheries that have blown my mind and Ive caught wild fish that just rolled over, but a good majority is noticable about 1/2 way thru the fight when the hatchery fish loses its will to live and the native keeps pounding the current.

Jay

[jhaquett]

I have some more questions that can be answered by anyone who knows the answers 8):

-A solid point that has been made throughout this post is the fact that hatchery fish supposedly taint the native gene pool.

I'd like someone to explain how this occurs? Hatchery fish come from native fish. This means alleles are passed from two native fish, making the hatchery fish 100% native, genetically. There is no such thing as chromosomes metamorphosizing into an inferior gamete just because its a hatchery egg. Meiosis is meiosis, doesn't matter where its done. If they were genetically engineering hatchery steelhead from carp I could understand this logic a little easier...

-I do understand the fact that they do not fight as well as natives, because they have the exact same life cycle I also agree that this would appear genetic, but just for the sake of it, think about if it was proven to be something not related to genetics. Which, to me, would make the most sense biologically.

-Technically most people have the same life cycles, yet we see very different phenotypes. Maybe its possible that the fish which are caught for the hatchery are inferior native fish? I don't know the process.

-Another point that is brought up is that hatchery interfere with wild's ability to spawn:

I would also like to hear the explanation for this? Its not like they are two different species; we've got the same species and an even mix of male and female with working parts, so what the issue?

-I think another good point to this thread is one as simple as Darwin's theories of natural selection. These hatchery fish are being released into brute nature, they are fighting evenly with native juvenile steelhead and they are surviving more successfully than many truly native fish who die in the process, so what makes them inferior?

My apologies for the breathiness, thanks to anyone with the answers! 8) 8) :D

[Ed Wahl]

I'll bite, even though I'm not a steelhead expert or geneticist. You could say I'm even talking out of my _ss. But since you did bring up Darwin, his main point being survival of the fittest doesn't it seem that allowing two SH to breed randomly, not the best mating with the best, would deteriorate the survival instincts of the race? In the wild only the best get to breed, either by making their way to the breeding grounds, i.e. being able to clear certain falls, or by driving off the "lesser males" surrounding the female. There's got to be tens of thousands of survival traits that successfully breeding SH must have to perpetuate the species. Hatcheries take none into account. When these "hatchery" fish mate with "wild" fish it stands to reason that the 50 percent of the gene contribution from the hatchery fish,being already compromised of an unknown number of survival traits, dilutes slightly the gene pool that once had 100 percent of those traits. The offspring just got shortchanged geneticly. Then maybe the offspring mate with another "wild" fish and it progresses through the generations. :shock: :shock: Sorry, just looked back at how long that went on. Jay, look what you started.

[Frank Alessio]

Wow ........ Compairing Fishing in California to Fishing in Oregon would be like comparing Hunting in California to Hunting in Montana..... Not a task I would care to undetake............

[sculpin]

It looks like Ed beat me to it above while I was typing this post


Jhaquett
I'm not going to spend much time on this thread because it seems to be going sideways.
Not all hatcheries have used the eggs from fish Native to the river they are released in and to my knowledge, few hatcheries get fresh Native fish for spawning each year. I don't know about how hatcheries are run down south. The survival ratio of Native fish far exceeds the survival rates of hatchery fish. Perhaps someone can give us some specific statistics about the survival ratios of hatchery and naive steelhead. I guess it's because of Mother Nature or Darwin's theory you mentioned. In Native fish only the best and strongest will survive to return to spawn. It's the same with all wild things. For instance, pen raised game birds, deer, elk ect. don't do well in the wild either.
Hey, if you want to toss hatchery fish back in because you don't like to eat fish or it makes you feel good, just do it. :D

Mark

[jhaquett]

Ed,

One of the questions I'm looking to get an answer to is something that you said in your reply about the offspring getting 50% of shortchanged survival traits. What I was asking was, if the fish survived, how is that survival trait a shortchanged one? A specific allele led to a successful genotype and I'm not understanding what the difference between a fit fish is, whether it be hatchery or native, it is still fit enough to survive.

Plus, I'm still looking to understand how these fish have lesser genes. Although, sculpin clarified that a bit by telling me that not all hatchery fish are from the river they will eventually be released into.

Sculpin,

Thanks for clarifying. I am not trying to TELL anyone anything here I am merely ASKING, I don't know how they go about choosing steelhead for eggs and sperm. I just made an assumption and if it was wrong I assumed that someone would correct me.

That is my point about the survival rates of hatchery fish being lower. That must mean they are not fit enough to survive. But, the ones that DO survive, why are they still considered lesser fish?

I still am yet to hear any answers about the background genetics to all of this and would really like to hear them from someone who knows, thanks. 8) 8)

Sorry to all who are tired of this post but it is very interesting to me and I hope I see answers to all of my questions. :!:

[jbird]

jh

I dont have the scientific data you are seeking. I know a couple guys that probably do and will hopefully see this and make all our eyes cross with their plethora of knowledge on this.
Here in Oregon, we have a lot of rivers that do not have hatcheries, but they get stocked with hatchery fish. The hatchery engineers build a diversion site and release the smolts at this location. They set up "boxes" for the fish to return to. Why set up the boxes? so the fish DO NOT SPAWN with native steelhead. And so they can use these fish to reproduce a new run of hatchery fish. They actually collect the fish that return to the boxes. As you are aware, anadromous fish have a miraculous capacity to find their way home. The vast majority of surviving steelhead make it back to these boxes...with a few inevitable exceptions that end up who knows where.
We have a lot of operations that use hatchery fish to make hatchery fish. It is proven that this creates a downward spiraling gene pool and these same hatcheries do use native fish at certain intervals (I assume) to offset the complete deterioration of the hatchery gene pool.

If you do have a hatchery fish that was borne from say, 5 generations of hatchery fish that ends up in the sack with a native fish, The offspring are going to be retarded and as this goes on for generations, you have an ecosystem that is under some serious change. I know that doesnt answer your question as to "why hatchery fish are 'inferior'" But if science says they are, you can see where I'm going with this.

Rogue river fish (from what I'm told) are quite a bit larger on average now than they were prior to dams and hatchery influence. Is that a good thing? For me and you, its great, for the aquatic ecosystem? hard to say. But I would bet these fish are bigger because we have taken brood stock from elswhere to supliment our hatchery...I'm not saying the hatchery fish are just bigger, the wild ones are too. Whether you think that change is good or not, it is likely a result of meddeling with the ecosystem. And if science proves that hatchery fish are inferior in their ability to reproduce, you have a somewhat retarded steelhead population that could be very volitile.

I am really just thinking out loud here. I am not good at refering to scientific data and providing links and lecturing to the wise. but these are all thoughts that swim around in my head that I've picked up along the way from some very well educated individuals.

Are you still awake?! :D :lol:

Jay

[WinterrunRon]

I’m awake, Jay. I’m back…fishless tonight so I avoided the kill/release dilemma altogether!

I find this very interesting as well, so pardon my additional input, but I think I have something to add.

It seems with every posting, another question comes to mind. Or in jhaquett’s case, no one seems to be able to adequately answer his questions, which I find thought provoking. It’s my experience when someone asks a thought provoking question and no one answers… no one knows the answer.

But I feel that Jay has done his part to try and explain and support his position, to the extent he knows and can. Especially as it relates to his home water.

I’d like to provide a little education of my own for all who fish the Amercian, with the caveat that what I’m referring to ONLY applies to the American River.

Now I’m no expert. I’m claiming no first hand knowledge obtained as a result of personal research or investigation. I’m simply stating… restating, what’s been said to me by DF&G year in, year out, and asking you trust what I’m relaying is accurate, but not necessarily true. I tend to believe it’s true, however.

I spend a lot to time each year visiting with the well-intentioned people at DF&G down at the Nimbus Fish Hatchery. I ask A LOT of questions every y ea r of the staff, biologists, and game wardens. Here’s what they have to say:

The amount of eggs taken each year by DF&G is determined in advance from data obtained in previous years. When they’ve reached their quota, the artificial spawning of hatchery steelhead ceases. Sometimes this occurs in the spring, but I’ve seen them shut down in December! So they never take “as much as possible”.

They’ll also tell you 90% of ALL returning fish spawn naturally in the river system. In other words, DF&G supplements the existing population to the tune of 10%, or very little, and in fact, is not needed at all for the purpose of sustaining what they consider a healthy population of steelhead! HOWEVER, they are contracted by law to provide the level of support they do from contracts written and agreed to prior to 1955, resulting from the building of Folsom Dam. To my knowledge, there’s no “cease and desist” clause that states the DF&G can shut down operations when the population reaches a certain level. If fact, the opposite is true. Regardless of the population, they must continue to operate.

Therefore, a reasonable argument can be made that harvesting hatchery steelhead hurts nothing, because they’ll make more, whether it’s needed or not. From this level of knowledge, it doesn’t bother me in the least to see someone keeping a hatchery steelhead. The argument that retaining a hatchery steelhead is hurting the population of returnable fish is, well, not valid. Hatchery reared steelhead from Nimbus are like chickens, turkeys or cows or any other artificially bread animal. They are there for our enjoyment and consumption. And in fact, if you talk to DF&G, they want you…literally encourage you, to keep any hatchery steelhead caught.

I guess I just don’t see how the existence or interbreeding of a hatchery fish with a wild fish hurts the wild population by “diluting” the gene pool to a level I should be concerned with. So, once again, I’m with jhaquett when it comes to wanting to know more about this aspect of the wild v hatchery issue.

Are you awake, Jay?

[jhaquett]

I'm still awake and I'm happy to see that this thread is turning out to be a strictly educational rather than argumental one, it is excellent. :unibrow:

Thanks Jay, Ron & Tristan for some interesting information and points. Everyone has their own level and area of education here and its cool to see all of it combine. :cool:

This has helped a lot and I will definitely not care if someone takes a hatchery steelhead anymore (I may even take one for my grandpa every now and again) so thanks for all of the clarification there.

Like Ron & I agree on, I still really want to hear the biological evidence and the explanation for the the dilution of the wild gene pool. Any other example in nature shows that more variability results in a stronger hybridized individual (mutt dogs vs. purebreds) and a smaller gene pool results in quite the opposite (cheetahs).

Although I have taken in and believe everything else that has been said, at this point I'm thinking that the gene pool ideology may be falsified and could be a general misconception. :confused:

Until tomorrow :fish:

[OceanSunfish]

I do appreciate the elaborate and passionate dialogue regarding the subject matter even though my previous comment was rather flippant and tearse. I was reacting to, more or less, to the overall big picture, where I cannot ever remember a time where our fisheries were in such poor shape. Ocean salmon, rock fish, striped bass, low end food chain species, etc.

IMO, the hatchery reared stuff is inferior. It cannot be argued that man can replicate what would otherwise be accomplished my "mother nature". We know better than to fool "mother nature". But, does this make hatchery fish bad, per se?

If the hatchery fish are what are providing entertainment value for those that have been fortunate to fish a little after work these days, then hooray for these fish, I say. It beats having our rods and reels sitting idle like all those ocean salmon boats this summer or the rock fish boats after October 1st.

If the Feds and State are really concerned about mitigating the effects of dams and want to see the occupants of the river systems be 100% wild in nature, then I believe we would see a program geared more towards actually placing eggs directly into the river to hatch in lieu of hatcheries. We would also see a conscientious effort to control flows that favor the productiviy of redds. Gary Loomis' program in certain Washington rivers comes to mind. I'm not so sure this is really feasible here in CA due to circumstances here far different than those in Washington state. With our dams and ever growing population, we have a high roof, low ceiling. I think that's how it's put.

So, for now, the status quo seems to be providing entertainment value and opportunities for those that want to take home a fish for dinner. It's all good.

So what are we arguing about? I forgot. :D

[jbird]

So what are we arguing about? I forgot.

This thread is about to hit a 4th page on a controversial issue and it has remained 100% civil. How do you do it folks? BRAVO! This thread wouldntve made it past 3 posts on most other forums. I really like your post "oceansunfish".

I would think the inherent hazard of trying to spawn wild fish in a natural setting like you suggested is. It would be impossible to control an unattended redd in an otherwise wild environment. Fish instictively know how, where and when to place their roe after they have instictively built a redd. I would think the percentage of error in trying to replicate this would be very high.

To Everyone..
I am not proclaiming that hatchery fish are the equivelant to a ravenous cancer that will contaminate everything they touch. I love them and I'm glad we have them. Without them, many rivers would be closed to protect the wild stock that is deminishing due to so many adversities.
The message I want to say is that its Okay to tag hatchery fish. I have gotten a few derogatory comments in the past regarding the taking of a hatchery fish. It is really from a lack of education I believe. Absolutely release ALL your fish if you feel led to do so. (I will try to tag a few more, but I will continue to release most. I would rather another angler have a chance at it than it sit in my freezer for a year). But know that it is Okay to bring a fish home to the family sometimes :)

Thanks everyone for keeping this one on the civil side of the fence :) :) =D>

Jay

[MSP]

Done

[Finsane]

Thanks to all who have contributed to this thread. I have learned a considerable amount. When the thread first started up I was on one side of the fence and now I'm on the other(kinda). I see both sides and understand the other side better now.

If you want to catch 98% wild fish, guys I have 1 word for you, KLAMATH. I can't remember the last hatchery fish I landed on that river.

[danb]

I dont have a solid education in Biology or Darwinism, and it seems to me that you dont either. It seems to me that the reason you are confused is you dont have a thorough understanding of Darwin.

Their is nothing corrupt about the DNA, it is just that positive traits are passed along in wild fish, and random traits are passed along in hatchery fish.






Like Ron & I agree on, I still really want to hear the biological evidence and the explanation for the the dilution of the wild gene pool. Any other example in nature shows that more variability results in a stronger hybridized individual (mutt dogs vs. purebreds) and a smaller gene pool results in quite the opposite (cheetahs).

Although I have taken in and believe everything else that has been said, at this point I'm thinking that the gene pool ideology may be falsified and could be a general misconception. :confused:

Until tomorrow :fish:

[SuinBruin]

Two quick points.

First, spawning in a hatchery fails to take into account the selectivity in spawning in the wild. I.e., in a natural setting, the most robust and dominant males and females will seek to spawn with each other, which will have an obvious effect on the genome of their offspring. Hatcheries combine milt and roe more or less at random, which negates this key component of natural selection.

Second, survivability in downriver migration and at sea is only one component of a steelhead's adaptation and suitability to its environment. Fish born in the wild have to survive what is arguably the most dangerous phase of their lives as alevin and fry, whereas hatchery fish don't face the same hazards and "weeding out" process. Hatchery fish are thus given a leg up on survival that they haven't "earned," and therefore traits that are less desireable for the alevin/fry/smolt stages (which would be selected against in the wild) can easily be passed along by hatchery fish. Indeed, having large numbers of steelhead be born and bred in a hatchery will tend to select for traits that are advantageous in the hatchery environment but harmful in the wild -- a tendency to crowd, to be more surface-oriented (and therefore more subject to predation by birds, otters, humans), etc.

[Covelo]

The majority of natural selection occurs in the first 12 months of a salmonids life. I cannot support the value, but I have always heard 90% of selection occurs during the first year which makes sense since survivability is less than 10% for many species during their first year. So the greatest factors that make a wild steelhead what it is are removed by a hatchery and replaced with runways, pelleted food and nets to keep the birds off them. Pretty cozy stuff where the only thing a fingerling really needs to worry about is his neighbor nipping his fins. :D For hatcheries that spawn mainly or solely hatchery returners, you can compound this deviant selection pressure by however many generations the hatchery has been in existence. Therefore, the product you get likes to swim around on the surface waiting for pellets to fall out of the sky while birds and other predators (striped bass) pound them. That is why hatchery fish have lower return rates than naturally spawned fish. Basically, offspring of naturally spawning hatchery fish survive poorly in the river because they have missed several generations of selection for fitness in freshwater. Selection in the ocean does not substitute for selection in the river. Just means you get a fish with strong ocean instincts and poor river fitness, and since 90% of motality is in the first year, fewer fish are going to reach the ocean.

As for making rivers like the American all C&R, there is no need for a hatchery on any river that is totally C&R. Hatcheries have a negative effect on naturally spawned fish as I explained above. Hatchery fingerlings also compete for food resources in the river and bay after they are released. When they dump hundreds of thousands of hatchery fry on top of a system already saturated with wild fry, the only outcome for the wild fish is negative. The idea that the American River can survive without the hatchery is questionable. There just is not that many miles or near enough surface area of river to sustain that large of a run. Throw in the degraded condition of the system and the often deadly water temperatures during the late summer period and you have a run on its way to extinction without the hatchery constantly chipping in stray spawners.

As someone else mentioned, this is really an academic discussion since the stock of fish in the American is not native due to releases of Eel River stock after the construction of the dams. Therefore we are having an discussion about whether it is OK to retain a non-native hatchery fish bred solely for take by fishermen, instead of releasing it and further polluting the gene pool of a non-native run of steelhead that we are treating like a native and truely wild population, but know are not. Tell me again why the limit on the American is only one and why we are protecting the non-native naturally spawned fish, some of which are probably the offspring of lower quality, river spawning hatchery fish themselves.

[jhaquett]

Hey Covelo,

Thanks a lot for the information you have cleared up some more info for me. I am aware that fish have type 3 life curves, where there is a large numer of offspring reared and little are expected to survive. I did NOT realize that they are kept in cozy situations during this time. That really gives a serious advantage to the hatchery steelhead!

DanB,

I'm a semester away from a BS in Biological Sciences. You certainly don't have a solid foundation in biology, I would be surprised if you could define the word. Wild fish only pass on positive traits and hatchery fish pass random traits? If you want to go ahead with that theory you're going to be challening any other genetic theory every made in the history of biology! Please do me a favor and at least look up the terms genetics, meiosis, and independent assortment before you EVER make a statement like that again.

JBird,

Overall I agree with you and thanks for posting this thread. I'm sorry but you spoke too soon of the civility of this thread, we had a nice thing going but education time is over and I think this thread is going to turn over to people like danb. I'm done with this one. Thanks for all of the education though to everyone who attributed some awesome information. :D

[bigtj]

Some of these comments are getting too personal. I suggest we all drop this thread and go out there and do some fishing.

[ycflyfisher]

I spend a lot to time each year visiting with the well-intentioned people at DF&G down at the Nimbus Fish Hatchery. I ask A LOT of questions every y ea r of the staff, biologists, and game wardens. Here’s what they have to say:

The amount of eggs taken each year by DF&G is determined in advance from data obtained in previous years. When they’ve reached their quota, the artificial spawning of hatchery steelhead ceases. Sometimes this occurs in the spring, but I’ve seen them shut down in December! So they never take “as much as possible”.


Very interesting thread.

What you've described above is fairly common, and in past decades, even more so. The main fisheries related goal of the hatchery manager is and has always been to reach their egg quota so they can meet their production quota. This places more emphasis on the early component of the run progression in years where the return is average or above, and on the later portion of the progression on years when the return is low. In very general terms, hatcheries lead to a phenomenon know as run compression. What you (again, in very general terms) get is a run progression that's somewhat frontloaded since the emphasis is placed on the earlier arrving fish, and too a lesser degree, the later arriving fish. Hatcheries tend to be good at preserving the run timing characteristics of the earliest portion of the run progression that begins pounding at the boards when they have the proper facilities and evironmental conditions that limits in hatchery mortality and allows them to successfully begin harvesting the spawn. This creates a condition where even if there were never any large or lengthy out of basin transfers and the hatchery strain is largely exhibiting the genetic markers of the native strain, hatcheries for the most part (again in very general terms) aren't usually preserving all the adapatbility in something as simple as run timing, let alone the more important survivability aspects present in the native strain.




They’ll also tell you 90% of ALL returning fish spawn naturally in the river system.

I wouldn't disagree with this statement.



In other words, DF&G supplements the existing population to the tune of 10%, or very little, and in fact, is not needed at all for the purpose of sustaining what they consider a healthy population of steelhead! "


I'd totally disagree with this one. Just because a great deal of the hatchery fish are spawning in basin, certainly that's not where most of the returning fish are originating. They're coming from the hatchery. Again, I've never spent any deal of time fishing the American, but I'd wager a guess that 90 percent of the stream born fish are caught either early in the run progression or very late in the run progression and are largely in the one salt size range. Simply because of the fact that those are characteristic of the largely VA strain of the hatchery and IF the first arrivers spawn early enough for emergence to occur before the latter arriving Chinooks start tearing up the limited amount of substrate present on the A you're going to see some instream production from those first arriving fish. Likewise, the later arriving (also predominantly single salt) fish probably are responsible for the bulk of the instream production on the A due to the very limited amount of suitable substrate and the fact that they get the last crack at it. I could be totally off base here, but I'd predict that 80+ percent of the wild fish above 10" caught in the A get caught either early on, or in the spring and aren't in the multisalt size range.


Therefore, a reasonable argument can be made that harvesting hatchery steelhead hurts nothing, because they’ll make more, whether it’s needed or not. From this level of knowledge, it doesn’t bother me in the least to see someone keeping a hatchery steelhead. The argument that retaining a hatchery steelhead is hurting the population of returnable fish is, well, not valid. Hatchery reared steelhead from Nimbus are like chickens, turkeys or cows or any other artificially bread animal.


Totally agree.




I guess I just don’t see how the existence or interbreeding of a hatchery fish with a wild fish hurts the wild population by “diluting” the gene pool to a level I should be concerned with. So, once again, I’m with jhaquett when it comes to wanting to know more about this aspect of the wild v hatchery issue.

Maybe more basic than what you're looking for but here ya go:

http://www.coastrange.org/salmon&survivalpg1.html
Salmon & Survival

[ycflyfisher]

If the Feds and State are really concerned about mitigating the effects of dams and want to see the occupants of the river systems be 100% wild in nature, then I believe we would see a program geared more towards actually placing eggs directly into the river to hatch in lieu of hatcheries.

This has been tried extensively and exclusively when the hatchery concept was first applied to anadramous fishes. It simply doesn't work. It isn't the fact that the fish are spawned artifically that allows for hatchery fish to develop to the point of returning, but that they are artifically grown to the stage and dumped into the river just prior to where smoltification and outmigration occurs. I.e. hatcheries insure abnormally high rates of survival in the early stages of life from emergence to outmigration, when mortality is the highest.

[Steelie Bill]

After reading through this thread, I am amazed at some of the posts. First, do Wild Steelhead only spawn with Wild or is there a mixing? Is there really an all natural Wild Steelhead run left on our rivers? Where did the first Steelhead used in the hatchery come from? I don't remember God creating a special Steelhead just to be used in hatcheries! So, are they not the same original genetic DNA?

Second, my understanding of the hatchery approach is to promote survival in the fish in the early stages of development when they are most likely not to survive. Agreed that natural selection does not occur, but good cross breeding does, so wouldn't this help stabilize the whole hatchery group (for some of you that don't know what cross breeding is . . . that's why you don't marry your sister or cousin)? We use several techniques to help couples have children when they can't seem to reproduce on their own. Are these children inferior because we have used frozen embryos or artificial insemination, or god forbid the test tube babies?

Finally, I don't know all the answers, but I do know fishing! And, the rivers in Oregon that have had the hatcheries closed on them are some the poorest Steelhead fishing rivers. These fish seem to need a little help due to all the logging, destruction of spawning beds, modern farming and cattle ranching practices, and encrochment from man. I like catching fish, so I release them, so I or another lucky angler can catch them again. If I want to eat a fish, I buy it at the store . . . it is cheaper and most of the time farm raised. Take a picture, you can still go . . . "Look at me, Look at me!!" And maybe, someone else or even me can catch it further upstream and have the same "Look at me" experience.

[jhaquett]

No god certainly did not create a specific hatchery steelhead :roll:

WE don't marry our sisters or cousins because of social restriction and fear of being ostracized. It happens ALL the time in nature, especially cousins. In some species it is nearly exclusive. In nature it is BEST if you don't inbreed because of the need for variability to alter genotypes that create more fit phenotypes for a species. This is all due to natural selection. It is also best to not inbreed because it can lead to over expression of recessive alleles. Recessive alleles can often lead to individuals who are not fit (will not survive to reproduce). This is an obvious disadvantage. An example of an over expression of recessive alleles would be trisomy 21 in humans, otherwise known as Down Syndrome. Obviously, any human can be fit to breed because society allows these type of people to survive. They simple WOULD NOT in nature, ever.

Cross-breeding has nothing to do with it. A mule is a cross-breed of a horse and a donkey. A puggle is a cross-breed of a pug and a beagle.


:thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:

[mr. 3 wt.]

Finally, I don't know all the answers, but I do know fishing! And, the rivers in Oregon that have had the hatcheries closed on them are some the poorest Steelhead fishing rivers. These fish seem to need a little help due to all the logging, destruction of spawning beds, modern farming and cattle ranching practices, and encrochment from man. I like catching fish, so I release them, so I or another lucky angler can catch them again. If I want to eat a fish, I buy it at the store . . . it is cheaper and most of the time farm raised. Take a picture, you can still go . . . "Look at me, Look at me!!" And maybe, someone else or even me can catch it further upstream and have the same "Look at me" experience.[/quote]



Best paragraph in this whole thread, without hatcheries here in California, we wouldn't be fishing much if at all. If and when these hatcheries close and the fishing goes down the tubes, your gonna wish that there was a bunch of fin clippers swimming around the river.

[Jgoding]

I think Covelo made a good point about how the fish are raised that leads to the major problem. Genetics aside, hatchery practices lead to fish more susceptible to predation as the conditions they are raised in lead to fish which have inferior survival instincts. Environmental factors play a huge role in behavior development.

On other points of hatchery fish competing with wild fish, it could be argued that hatchery fish help wild populations as they are preyed upon easier by natural predators and thus less wild fish are predated due to the abundance of "dumb" hatchery fish..... But, hatchery fish will be competing for resources which may play a larger factor in the competition equation.

Gentically speaking though, you would have to do a study and look at many years of data. Also, you would need a baseline to compare all the data too so having samples from the "native" strain would help. If samples from the original strain(s) introduced were kept you could also use this as a baseline to compare the genetics of the current hatchery stocks as well.

Lastly, in theory, hybrids tend to be more vigorous than both adults due to increased genetic variability as even a "native" strain is susceptiple to inbreeding depression as natural genetic bottlenecks can occur very readily. That being said, a well managed hatchery system could actually help fish populations if it was managed correctly, but our current system pretty much does suck.

In the end though, the decision to bonk a fish lies with the fisherman who caught said fish. Personally, I don't give a rats ass if it's clipped or not, that fish survived the trials of life and deserves a shot at passing on their genes in my opinion, but this desire is subject to change depending on how much the wife yells at me for not bringing home a fish.....

[jhaquett]

The #1 issue with these fish is that they are kept safe during periods of time when wild fish are experiencing predation as high as 70%. Hatchery fish are reared into a type 1 life history curve in the sense that there is very low mortality rates. Wild fish, on the other hand, are reared into a natural environment that will lead to a type 3 life history curve, or very high infant/young mortality.

Hatchery infants get to survive when 70% of them should have been prey. Once they are released they are not nearly as vulnerable as they had been as smolts. That's the genetic issue. Like you mentioned though, bottlenecks are the issue if hatchery fish are not allowed to breed with wilds.....

Its a very interesting topic that simply does not have a "best" answer.

[Dave Neal]

Alright, so I'm waaay late to the party here. But, I read EVERY post on this thread and I am pretty excited...a lot of good things said and great points discussed, on both sides of the fence.

Anyway, I don't mean to start anything but I thought this hilarious...from Jaybird...
"Wow. Thats too bad that such a wonderful fish has become an invasive species. Killing them would be hard for me to swallow...." :lol: :lol: :lol:

This was on the other thread regarding killing browns on the Trinity. What? So hatchery steelhead taint the gene pool, but brown trout (on the Trinity) don't ravage the juvenile steelies and smolts and shouldn't be tagged?

Anyway, Jay...I really believe your intention was to stir the pot and invoke a thought provoking thread, so good job.

[Dave Neal]

But seriously, here's my 2 cents...

We just need to manage our rivers better and do follow through with markeeting their strengths.

We need to identify two types of rivers.

For example:

(A) Group Rivers...Already has solid wild SH populations, no hatchery influence, bring in major funding efforts for stream restoration, habitat improvements, proper flow regimes etc. and have ZERO KILL regs...Pump these rivers for what they are...REAL STEELHEAD rivers for WILD BITCHIN fish...but you may get skunked, have to pay your dues and it will be real steelheading.

(B) Group Rivers...Already too far gone (American?) Support the hatchery effort in a big way and just simply get tons of fish back in the river, do some habitat rebuilding efforts, have looser regs for the meat hunters and folks who want to eat a nice steely for the Holidays etc. etc. These rivers will build the sport and hopefully spurn more people to care about both rivers (A) and (B)

Take the Trinity River situation: TONS of crowds, but TONS of fish...but TONS of hatchery fish...not wild fish. Do we lesson the impact of the hatchery and try to save the wild ones (which are not far removed form the hatchery ones.) Or do we just go full bore with the hatchery and write off the wild stocks...hoping that more anglers having success and getting a great intro to the sport will say, "This is Awesome! How can we make other rivers this good?" Down come the damns on the Klammath and boom...more participants = more advocates.

[mr. 3 wt.]

Great idea Mr. Neal. I'll buy into that. Some rivers, like the T, F and A are so far gone, just keep those hatcheries running at full bore just to appease the masses. Then start to manage the small coastals and any other wild steelhead streams with strict regs, DFG presence, stream restoration projects and more enviromentally friendly logging practice. Then maybe in the future we (state of california) will have something better than what is going on now. But in all fairness, put in your time, learn a river or two and the fishing really isn't that bad for some.