Hatcheries vs. No Hatcheries

[Tony Buzolich]

This ought to bring up a lot of armchair type discussion. In a previous post Dustin Revel metioned that he thought they (the Feds) ought to get rid of all hatcheries. It was stated that the Feds cut back on hatchery production and thus less steelhead in the rivers. I believe this hold true for salmon as well on other rivers such as the SAC and the Feather.

If this is in fact really true, then you could say that's why we're having such poor returns of both species in our rivers.

But, when the hatcheries where running in full capacity we had lots of fish in the rivers.

So, are were trying to get everything back to nature the way things were before dams and the lumber industry took it's toll with sedimentation, and miners did their damage with hydrolic excavation of gold?

We can't make things the way it used to be 150 years ago, anymore than we can reduce the population of California even if we sent every illegal back to where they came from.

My question is simply this: Would you rather fish in rivers full of hatchery fish or fish in rivers with few if any native spawned fish as conditions seem to be going by cutting back on hatchery production?
TONY

[luckydog]

My simple answer is I would like to see hatchery fish rather than few or no fish.

We have blocked off miles historical spawning/rearing habitat behind dams and weirs on most of our river systems. We've diverted river flows from one drainage to another. We export vast amounts of water south. Spawning gravels have been silted in and made unusable by fish by careless timber harvest, road building and past mining practices, even if the fish had access to them. Like it or not, the hatcheries we have are necessary to maintain fishable runs of steelhead and salmon in this State on rivers that have dams.

At the time the major dams were designed and built, the Bureau of Reclamation, Army Corp of Engineers and Cal Fish and Game knew that the dams would wipe out the fish populations over time and back in the 40's,50's,and 60's, it was considered an acceptable trade-off for water development and economic growth. Mitigation hatcheries were established and funded by the Feds as an afterthought to satisfy concerns for the loss of anadromous fish.

With that said, we should protect the wild fish that we have and work to maintain, expand and improve their habitat where feasible.

[Jgoding]

I'd have to say I would like to see an improvement in hatchery management. We're getting lousy returns but yet hatcheries seem to only want to meet their minimum numbers. Why not really load up on quality smolts and find new ways to introduce them into the system to get better survivability? At the same time we need to really improve management of resources for our wild stocks and really improve their habitat to ensure they get a fair shot and surviving. If this means eliminating sea lions in the river, reducing squawfish populations, and more closures during the spawn I'm all for it until populations and habitats are restored.

[luckydog]

I'd have to say I would like to see an improvement in hatchery management. We're getting lousy returns but yet hatcheries seem to only want to meet their minimum numbers. Why not really load up on quality smolts and find new ways to introduce them into the system to get better survivability? At the same time we need to really improve management of resources for our wild stocks and really improve their habitat to ensure they get a fair shot and surviving. If this means eliminating sea lions in the river, reducing squawfish populations, and more closures during the spawn I'm all for it until populations and habitats are restored.

While there is always room for improvement, I think the guys/gals that run our hatcheries are doing a good job given the funding and regulatory constraints they have. If I recall correctly, the Cal Department of Water Resources provides the funding for mitigation hatcheries and that funding is based on production and not directly on the number of fish that return. Improving monitoring of hatchery returns and escapement and gaining better understanding of the genetics of hatchery fish and naturally spawning fish are areas where improvements can be made.

When you look at what has been done with loss of habitat and water diversions/exports, it's a miracle that we even have any steelhead left in the Central Valley rivers. As far as survivability, the quality of smolts may be a factor but I think the greater impacts are ocean conditions, water diversion, water quality, and predation (due in part to conditions that exist in the Delta caused by the big pumps).

[Scott V]

Without hatchery fish there would be little to no fish in only a matter of time due to the amount of fish people keep. If we were to do away with all hatchery fish to try and bring things back to the way it use to, we would have to eliminate fishing in areas for years to allow nature to get back to what it was. But then everyone would be complaining that they can not fish and they no longer will be able to make money from guiding or whatever else it is they make money off of from the fish.

As much as I would love to see all wild fish, I do not think it can be achieved due to the pressure of the fishing that will continue. Having said all that I am for hatchery fish and hopefully they will have the funds to be more proficient in how they plant and what they plant.

[Mumbles]

My two cents is that if a river population has already been eradicated by man and his thoughtless pursuit of wealth then a hatchery program well managed is fine. If wild fish remain, protect the habitat, remove the fishing pressure and allow nature to rebound. I love bonking hatchery fish but to see them mixed in with the wild fish bothers me. The gauntlet of anglers trying to extract the hatchery drones also catch a lot of the wild fish and this can't be good. Are there not enough ruined rivers that we can afford to pump the hatchery stock into them and get the anglers there and off the rivers while wild stocks attempt to rebound?

[Jeff Fisher]

I've caught hundreds of steelhead on the American. There was not a single instance where I was disappointed or pissed off when, upon landing the fish, I realized it was clipped. I was freaking stoked on every steelhead I ever caught. I was thankfull for that hatchery up there at Nimbus. Hell.....it's a miracle that you can catch steelhead in the middle of an urban area of 2 million people, 5 minutes from my front door!

I always hated to see those pellet eaters on stringers. But, it's permitted, so I accepted it. But I always thought if everyone released every fish for a couple years, there'd be tons of fish in that river (a dream, of course).

But on places like the Mattole or other coastal streams where no hatchery fish exist, those are the ones that need the saving. The American and Feather are not fixable in regards to restoring natural orders. They are what they are, and I think we're lucky to have steelhead in them. Just think.......there could be none. And that would suck.......

Now pellet eating trout........that's a whole different story.......

[Larry S]

Just started reading "An Entirely Synthetic Fish: How Rainbow Trout Beguiled America and Overran the World" by Anders Halverson. A very interesting and detailed look at this
very question. I think you will be hearing a lot about this book in the near future.
Larry S

[trinity]

I'd rather see our rivers without hatcheries, and force better management of the streams. People talk about the poor returns this year on the Trinity, but I honestly think it's not really that bad, it's stealheading! A lot of the tributaries are loaded with wild fish. I'm not catching as many this year, but its still fun to me because it just adds to the challenge of the game. This year on the Trinity threw a lot of people off because of the timing of the runs. Lots of wild fish came early and headed for the tribs, fishermen missed them. Wild winter fish are starting to trickle in now, (which is the most fun to me, and the biggest challenge). I am not discouraged and I am still trying to find wild fish. It's hard, but that is why I love it. If it was easy, I would find something else to do. Stealheading can be so rewarding, why dumb it down with talk of "how many?" which is what hatchery programs do. If you want numbers just fish for trout on the lower sac, which is great fun, but it's not steelheading!

[Jgoding]

Hey lucky,

I didn't mean to imply that the hatcheries are not working hard, only that it could probably be done better and at the same time provide some answers to why returns are so low. I do know a lot of it probably has to do with funding as well and we all know they probably get minimal amounts to work with.