Steelhead Comeback?

[JayDubP]

An AP article. It is small sampling but encouraging. Seems to me that in years in which there is enough water in the streams/rivers then the next year the Steelhead show a "comeback". Even in the north of British Columbia steelhead have been C & R for years-- and the fishery is being maintained. Maybe steelhead are the early warning system for all of our river/stream fisheries.

The 10/87 post by KJE re: seeing lots of smolts on American is other proof of a good year for steelhead?


++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ +++++++++++++
Signs steelhead trout making Calif comeback

Associated Press October 18, 2010 04:53 AM Copyright Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Monday, October 18, 2010
.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(10-1 04:53 PDT Santa Cruz, Calif. (AP) --

Steelhead trout appear to be making a comeback in California.

The Santa Cruz Sentinel says scientists on the lookout for steelhead in the San Lorenzo River are finding more young fish making their way back to sea.

Santa Cruz water resource manager Chris Perry says this year's numbers bode well for a steelhead population that once boomed along the Central Coast. In 1997, the fish was listed as threatened species.

The October numbers haven't been compiled. Although it's still too early to tell if there's a solid rebound, Berry says the results so far are startling and it's clear something's going on.

Steelhead, like salmon, spend most of their adult life at sea but spawn and rear in freshwater rivers and creeks.

[jcanger]

I saw this article too, as well as a couple others to the same effect. They have to be an encouraging sign for Central Valley steelhead.

[huntindog]

goofy article ...they mention one river was positive signs and apply it to the entire state. Granted i will always like a good steelhead comeback story but the headlines for this one are misleading at best.

[Darian]

I gotta agree with Huntindog on this. A small central coast stream with a major comeback isn't much of an indicator of what's happening overall....

[Bill Kiene semi-retired]

The major thing I see happening in our lifetime is the removal of "some" dams.

**I want to see what is going to happen to the rivers that have the dams removed because that is what we blamed mostly for the demise of the anadromous species of fish besides logging.

Maybe these salmon/Steelhead river that have the dams removed need some protection, no hatchery and some wild genetics?

I am waiting to hear about these rivers.

Maybe in my lifetime some will make a real comeback.

To be great again these rivers need no more logging, only wild fish and total catch and release fishing.

If the fish come back big time we probably need to limit the angler days on these rivers so they don't get too crowded.

We talked about all this in the 1980s...........

[OnTheSwing]

I agree that article is very misleading. I work in Mountain View, in the Bay Area. I have watched the Stevens Creek flood and then dry up year after year, believing it was due to normal conditions. I know the flows are controlled by the dam but thought it's flows followed rain received and the inflow of the upper creek.

The creek receives a return of steelhead yearly. This past spring I noticed the flows were at a sustainable amount for the visible smolt in the creek. I did not know the actual CFS but it was approximately 10 inches deep. The following DAY, the level had dropped approximately 6 inches! Within a week the flow had dropped to a trickle. This was followed by cranes standing in the ever growing moss, picking off the smolt one at a time. I called and talked to a DFG biologist who said it was a system they hadn't monitored in a long time. They wanted me to record the data they should have been collecting and verify the smolt were steelhead!

I also happened along two employees with the Santa Clara Valley Water District working on plants along a high bank. I pointed out the now trapped smolt which were approximately 20 feet away. They were amazed there was fish in the system. I asked about the flows and one of them said it was the normal flow and typically dried up this time of year. REALLY? They said they would relay the information to their internal biologist.

Any guesses on what happened from the DFG or the SCVWD??? Big fat zero! The once creek turned into a pond is now dry.

However, I have gone to the reservoir where water level has remained high all year. There also use to be a decent amount of water coming in but I believe has since dropped due to upstream development and their need for water.

It absolutely kills me that I have to drive hundreds of miles away to fish for the steelhead I love and see the ones in my backyard killed.

[Larry S]

When the Smith returns to the 1960's levels, then I'll be convinced of a steelhead
comeback. No dams, little or no netting, and minimal logging. It is possible to have to
make four separate entries on your steelhead card for a single day of fishing on the various
portions of the Smith. I believe it was also the last river in the state where a wild fish
could be kept. End of rant!
Larry S

[Covelo]

When the Smith returns to the 1960's levels, then I'll be convinced of a steelhead
comeback. No dams, little or no netting, and minimal logging. It is possible to have to
make four separate entries on your steelhead card for a single day of fishing on the various
portions of the Smith. I believe it was also the last river in the state where a wild fish
could be kept. End of rant!
Larry S

Is there data for the levels in the 1960s for the Smith? The reason this river had take of wild fish was because it was the only river that had a sustained run until recently. Hard to believe the Smith had much larger runs in the 1960s considering the damage the 1964 flood did to all the north coast fisheries.

[Larry S]

Most of what I could offer would be anecdotal in nature. I did come across this from the
DFG - SHRESTMgtPlan_1996_1.pdf The authors state that both the number of fish
and anglers were less, circa 1996, than in the early 1980's (statewide.)
Yes, the Smith did have wild fish returning; all the more reason for a zero take.
Why wait until the numbers are no longer sustainable to implement sound and effective
regulations?
Hoping for the best,
Larry S

[Covelo]

I won't rehash it again here why C&R is not effective management. Below is a link to a earlier discussion on this forum where some good points were made. Relevant discussion is from page 5 on.

http://www.kiene.com/forums/showthre...t=10698&page=5