SW Oregon Steelhead

[Langenbeck]

My neighbor hooked 5 and landed 3 and I went 2 for 2. Doesn't get much better than this. The fouth and fifth picture are the same fish that I landed. All released to fight another day.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/1003/gordonl/Jeff7Mar2013Applegate_zpsd89dd2db.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/1003/gordonl/25Steelhead7Mar2013Applegate_zpscb9400eb.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/1003/gordonl/JeffTwo7Mar2013Applegate_zpsadc48aad.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/1003/gordonl/30Steelhead7Mar2013MyfishwithJeff_zpsf54ea108.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/1003/gordonl/30Steelhead7Mar2013Applegate_zps33eab21a.jpg

[Bill Kiene semi-retired]

I guess this is why you move from Sacramento to southern Oregon.......

[Larry S]

Gordon,
Nice going. Trusty bead head? You guys are
off to a great March!
Best,
Larry S

[Langenbeck]

Larry, Both the bead head nymph and a large stonefly. Must say it was a good day.

[jbird]

Very nice Gordon!

[Randy Lee]

Amazing! Although, I did'nt recognize you Gordon with out your wader toes in the picture. What a day. The force was with you.Thank you for sharing.
Randy

[midger]

Really nice looking fish Gordon! Must be nice to be so close to those babies.

[Loren E]

Sweet! Nice work! I would strongly encourage you to consider taking the ones without an adipose fin home for the BBQ ;)

[DLJeff]

Help me understand that last comment, Loren. I understand and agree that hatchery reared fish are more wimpy and flaccid than native reared fish. But if a hatchery reared fish breeds naturally in a river, doesn't it produce a solid, good fighting native fish? Regardless whether it breeds with another hatchery fish or with a native? And those steelhead are in their spawning run so wouldn't it be better to let them breed and perhaps take them for the table during the non-spawning or post spawning times? Do the genetic, hereditary traits of the hatchery breeders carry over into their spawn?

Don't get me wrong, I'm not proposing hatchery fish be designated C&R. I've fished plenty of trout streams that depend on hatchery fish and they're just not the same as the natives. On the other hand, give the hatchery fish two or three seasons in the river and it's pretty hard to distinguish them from the natives.

[winxp_man]

I will bring out the popcorn :)

Gordon,

Nice fish buddy!! They look good, and must have been a ton of fun :D

[Alosa]

Help me understand that last comment, Loren. I understand and agree that hatchery reared fish are more wimpy and flaccid than native reared fish. But if a hatchery reared fish breeds naturally in a river, doesn't it produce a solid, good fighting native fish? Regardless whether it breeds with another hatchery fish or with a native? And those steelhead are in their spawning run so wouldn't it be better to let them breed and perhaps take them for the table during the non-spawning or post spawning times? Do the genetic, hereditary traits of the hatchery breeders carry over into their spawn?

Don't get me wrong, I'm not proposing hatchery fish be designated C&R. I've fished plenty of trout streams that depend on hatchery fish and they're just not the same as the natives. On the other hand, give the hatchery fish two or three seasons in the river and it's pretty hard to distinguish them from the natives.

I'll chime in on this (if that's ok Loren). First, my background is fisheries conservation genetics, so what I am about to say isn't my opinion, but what has been demonstrated repeatedly by multiple independent studies of various anadromous fish species (primarily salmonids). Just to show that I'm serious about that, I've listed some of those key studies below, but I'll provide the cliff notes here:

1) The negative effects of stocking practices on the genetic integrity and fitness of wild fish populations have been well documented;

2) There are two general categories of stocking:
i) supportive breeding - reproduction of a segment of the wild population is conducted in captivity followed by the release of the captive progeny to supplement that same wild populations. Here, no genes from other populations are introduced into the system (but there are OTHER negative effects);
ii) stock transfers - the relocation of individuals between wild populations that can introduce genes that would otherwise not normally be observed in that population;

3) Supportive breeding favours the reproductive rate of one segment of the wild population. This can lead to an increase in the variance in family size and a corresponding decrease in genetically effective population size (Ne). Maintaining a large Ne is important for long term population persistence, because the rate of inbreeding, and thereby the loss of genetic diversity, is proportional to the inverse of Ne. The effects of supportive breeding on Ne are particularly important in small populations, b/c stocking can reduce Ne below what it could have been had no stocking occurred at all. This is important b/c the loss of genetic diversity can impede the capacity of populations to respond to environmental change and increase extinction risk;

4) Domestication selection in hatcheries are another important consequences of supportive breeding. Traits that are important in a hatchery are not necessarily beneficial in the wild, and selection in hatcheries can shift trait distributions away from their wild optimum. If many hatchery raised individuals (with traits that are optimized for life in captivity) are released into a wild population, this can result in a reduction in the average fitness of the wild population, and may negatively impact population persistence;

5) Stock transfers among genetically different populations can reduce fitness and jeopardize the long term persistence of those populations. Many anadromous fishes home to their natal rivers and this restricts gene flow leading to the establishment of genetically distinguishable populations and local adaptations that optimize population fitness. Stock tranfers remove the reproductive barriers established through homing, and create opportunities for non-native genes to introgress among wild populations, and can eliminate those important local adaptations.

This is an abridged version of some of the details. There is more to the story, but I think I've highlighted the key points without getting too technical (I hope). Those of you interested in specifics can check out the references below (Laikre et al. 2010 provide an EXCELLENT comprehensive review). If anyone wants it and has difficulty finding it, PM me and I'll try to pass it along.


Here are a few key references:

Araki, H., B. Cooper, and M.S. Blouin. 2007. Genetic effects of captive breeding cause a rapid, cumulative fitness decline in the wild. Science 318: 100-103.

Hasselman DJ, Limburg KE (2012) Alosine restoration in the 21st century: challenging the status quo. Marine and Coastal Fisheries: Dynamics, Management, and Ecosystem Science 4: 174-187.

Hindar, K., N. Ryman, and F. Utter. 1991. Genetic effects of cultured fish on natural fish populations. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 48: 945-957.

Laikre L, Schwartz MK, Waples RS, Ryman N (2010) Compromising genetic diversity in the wild: unmonitored large-scale release of plants and animals. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 25: 520-529.

Lynch, M., and M. O’Hely. 2001. Captive breeding and the fitness of natural populations. Conservation Genetics 2: 363-378.

Pearse DE, Martinez E, Garza JC (2011) Disruption of historical patterns of isolation by distance in coastal steelhead. Conservation Genetics 12: 691-700.

[JasonB]

Guys,
I think this is all great but not really so appropriate in response to the OP. I mean let's let a guy share some success stories, and pics without going around and around on this old debate. We all know where that tends to go, and it's kinda crapping on a nice (and unrelated) post.

To Gordon: Very nice pics of of some lovely steelhead!!! Thanks for sharing.
JB

[Larry S]

+1 Jason.
Best and enjoy the Daylight Savings Time,
Larry S

[jbird]

Guys,
I think this is all great but not really so appropriate in response to the OP. I mean let's let a guy share some success stories, and pics without going around and around on this old debate. We all know where that tends to go, and it's kinda crapping on a nice (and unrelated) post.

To Gordon: Very nice pics of of some lovely steelhead!!! Thanks for sharing.
JB

Took the words right outa my mouth... er, uh, keyboard.

[DLJeff]

Excellent point Jason and I apologize for hijacking this thread and the beautiful steelhead shots, Gordon.

[Alosa]

Yeah, those fish are pretty outstanding. Great pictures!! Sorry if I contributed to derailing this thread...I was just trying to help answer the question.:cool:

[Walter]

Help me understand that last comment, Loren. I understand and agree that hatchery reared fish are more wimpy and flaccid than native reared fish. But if a hatchery reared fish breeds naturally in a river, doesn't it produce a solid, good fighting native fish? Regardless whether it breeds with another hatchery fish or with a native? And those steelhead are in their spawning run so wouldn't it be better to let them breed and perhaps take them for the table during the non-spawning or post spawning times? Do the genetic, hereditary traits of the hatchery breeders carry over into their spawn?

Don't get me wrong, I'm not proposing hatchery fish be designated C&R. I've fished plenty of trout streams that depend on hatchery fish and they're just not the same as the natives. On the other hand, give the hatchery fish two or three seasons in the river and it's pretty hard to distinguish them from the natives.

http://oregonstate.edu/ua/ncs/archives/2011/dec/hatcheries-change-steelhead-genetics-after-single-generation


http://bakke-nativefish.blogspot.com/2011/06/hatchery-steelhead-impact-wild.html?m=1

[JasonB]

Yeah, those fish are pretty outstanding. Great pictures!! Sorry if I contributed to derailing this thread...I was just trying to help answer the question.:cool:

I actually appreciated the information, as I'm sure others did. I just could envision another 10 page debate ensue on the merits of wild vs hatchery, keep vs kill, swing vs indicator, photo vs no photo, governmental regulation vs free enterprise, free flow vs damn control, conservative vs liberal...etc etc etc. All because a guy posts a nice set of pics of a pretty stellar day of steelhead fishing. I never used to think twice about posting fish stories and fish porn pics, but I don't know if I'll ever post them in this particular forum. Of course I suppose I'd have to actually CATCH one first.... :rolleyes:
JB

[Randy Lee]

Only steel head pictures taken from the dorsal fin to the nose will be displayed from now on. Any dorsal fin shots will be edited. My two pasos worth. Wader toes are still ok.
Cheers
Randy

[Loren E]

sorry for my late reply here. I tried to convey my tone of enthusiasm and support for Gordon in my original post, as he clearly had an awesome day of fishing and his report(s) are a welcome and valuable part of this forum. The guy knows his local waters well!! I just tried to also bring up the point of killing hatchery steelhead in a light-hearted way, because hatcheries are a huge issue with the health of wild steelhead populations on the west coast. I think that bringing it up, when done respectively, is appropriate because with this issue the idea is to educate, not to attack someone for their differing point of view like fishing indicators instead of swinging. Hatchery steelhead are detrimental to the health of wild steelhead, and many anglers like DlJeff, or myself 6-7 years ago, have no idea and believe they are doing good rather than a disservice to wild steelhead by releasing hatchery steelhead. If educating another angler like DlJeff can be accomplished as was done in this thread thanks to the fantastic post by Alosa, and we can maintain a positive tone and sense of community which was easily accomplished here IMHO, then I am glad I brought it up and it instigated some learning. This is not an issue of swing vs indicator. There are no attacks here. Gordon had an awesome day on the water and we all are excited for him and excited to hear about it. This is an issue of education, and maybe after reading Aloso's post and following up with the links, more steelhead anglers on the west coast will kill hatchery fish and advocate for the removal of hatcheries on systems with struggling wild stocks that can be recovered. Please guys, don't dumb our community down to not being capable of engaging in a critical topic to the health of our wild steelhead; an issue on which many are not as educated or informed as they desire to be. Those people can have the opportunity to learn meaningful fisheries lessons here, which I think takes a fishing report to a way more valuable level than just seeing some fish photos. Once again, awesome report Gordon and stoked for your and your buddy on a hell of a day. -Loren

[Alosa]

...hatcheries are a huge issue with the health of wild steelhead populations on the west coast. I think that bringing it up, when done respectively, is appropriate because with this issue the idea is to educate, not to attack someone for their differing point of view like fishing indicators instead of swinging. If educating another angler like DlJeff can be accomplished as was done in this thread...and we can maintain a positive tone and sense of community which was easily accomplished here IMHO, then I am glad I brought it up and it instigated some learning. This is an issue of education, and maybe after reading Alosa's post and following up with the links, more steelhead anglers on the west coast will kill hatchery fish and advocate for the removal of hatcheries on systems with struggling wild stocks that can be recovered. Please guys, don't dumb our community down to not being capable of engaging in a critical topic to the health of our wild steelhead; an issue on which many are not as educated or informed as they desire to be.

HERE HERE!!! Well said!:cool:

[JasonB]

Loren,
Can't say I differ with you on any of your points, which you put forth quite well I think. I certainly didn't mean to infer that we shouldn't be discussing or debating the impacts of hatchery steelhead. The only reason I made mention that maybe this was sliding a bit off topic was that there had been an ongoing debate about this that had gone beyond sideways quite recently, and I had visions of Gordons nice post ending up being another rehash of all the same issues (and who knows what else). Thankfully this didn't go further and further down that path, in fact it would be refreshing if further debates could remain as open and civil as this one stayed.
cheers, :)
JB

[Loren E]

Loren,
Can't say I differ with you on any of your points, which you put forth quite well I think. I certainly didn't mean to infer that we shouldn't be discussing or debating the impacts of hatchery steelhead. The only reason I made mention that maybe this was sliding a bit off topic was that there had been an ongoing debate about this that had gone beyond sideways quite recently, and I had visions of Gordons nice post ending up being another rehash of all the same issues (and who knows what else). Thankfully this didn't go further and further down that path, in fact it would be refreshing if further debates could remain as open and civil as this one stayed.
cheers, :)
JB

thanks for providing the context for me Jason, I hadn't seen that post.

[Steeliejunkee]

The APPLEGATE put out some fish this march despite its low water, a lot of natives this year compared to last year. I see your fishing below the murphy diversion dam, To bad they put that fence up at the josephine county public works yard probably wont be able to make it in their any more. Maybe I will see out on the apple next season, I already saw your neighbor a couple of times. By the way Im a native northern california who goes to school in southern oregon.