Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 49

Thread: Half Pounder's

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    297

    Talking Half Pounder

    Thank you Scott, may'be I am showing my age, but I would prefer to call it a Jack Steelhead like they used to call them up north.
    "God grant me the serenity to accept the size of fish that I catch, the courage not to fib about it, and the wisdom to know that no one would believe me any way".

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Sutter Co and the KMP
    Posts
    274

    Default

    Bubzilla,

    I’m with you on this one. I find it difficult to believe that more than 1% from any run from any river is actually going to return on a true half-pounder “run” and approach let alone exceed 20”. IMO “half-pounder” is the most abused and misapplied term utilized by CA anglers. With anglers the term seems to be defined solely by size, with any fish deemed to be smaller than the norm, being a “half-pounder”. And there’s a lot of variability from angler to angler on what is defined as smaller than the norm. I’ve heard of fish to 26” described as “half-pounders”.

    In biological terms (where the term originated) as you pointed out, it’s used to describe a very distinct, and in most watersheds outside the Klamath, Rogue and Eel, a quite unusual life history. Even in the three aforementioned watersheds where the pounder lifehistory is common (Eel) and predominant (Klamath and Rogue) it’s still rather puzzling on how it definitively affords the fish an advantage to build population abundance. Yet it almost certainly has to be doing that or those lifehistories would not be the rule vs. the exception. There are definitely numerous viable theories on what factors drive the half-pounder lifehistory to become common or predominant in certain steelhead populations, but none IMO can be definitively supported, and all have varying degrees of viable counterpoints that seem to lack suitable explanation. It obviously has to be driven by the “pounder run” affording some advantage to the fish in either exploiting favorable conditions or avoiding unfavorable conditions. I’m more prone to accept the theories that support those favorable conditions being more linked instream and the unfavorable ones occurring in the salt.

    Clearly in the context the term was originated (Snyder), the term is loosely regulated to a probable (but not definitive) size range~10-14 inches tied to that specific lifehistory. With the most often cited source with respect to “half-pounder” size being Kesner and Barnhart’s paper on the Klamath’s fall run pounder component. There’s obvious some variability within that ~ 10-14” size range that’s influenced by both instream and oceanic conditions. Given that a good portion of Kesner and Barnhart’s data for that study was collected post the 1964 flood which wreaked havoc on the entire Klamath watershed (massive sedimentation and instream scour), the ages classes of the fish that provided their data for the study possibly had impaired instream development compared to fish from more “normal” years on the Klamath. Probably not by much, but size definitely matters in terms of outmigration. Predation in the salt is inversely tied to size and larger smolts can also exploit a greater percentage of the foodweb. The later, obviously garners potentially faster growth in the salt which drives size on a pounder run. I certainly wouldn’t claim to be any more proficient than other anglers at somehow being able to designate the difference between a “big” Klamath river half-pounder and a “small” 1 salt Klamath adult (and there’s clearly some overlap between the two), but I’d say the average size of Klamath pounders in “normal” years is probably +10% to Kesner and Barnhart’s stated range for the Klamath. That’s just a WAG based on by observations.

    The consensus option is that the American River steelhead exhibit Eel River genetic markers and largely follow typical Eel River lifehistories. Eel fish generally exhibit a half-pounder component in their respective lifehistories at about a 30% clip and I think there’s very little doubt that a good percentage of the “foot longish” fish that anglers catch in the fall on the American are indeed on an actual pounder run. IMO it’s more likely the larger 17-20+ inch “half-pounders” that anglers on the American catch are a combination of 1 salt adults or are simply age 4-5+ residualized resident fish.

    There really isn’t any scientific evidence that other Sacto River tribs (aside from the American) host populations of steelhead that express a half-pounder component in their respective lifehistories at anything above insignificant percentages. But there’s a fair amount of scientific data on said Sacto River tribs. Half-pounder misidentification is thus the rule and not the exception on rivers like the Feather and the Yuba.

    IMO the puzzling thing about American River half-pounders is that there still are American river half-pounders. When you consider the facts that there is no supporting evidence that the American nor any of the other Sacto River tribs ever historically supported significant pounder runs and none aside from the American in their currently altered states support significant pounder runs, you’ve got to question why and how it’s somehow being preserved on the American. I really don’t think it can be explained by hatchery “frankenfish” syndrome, or by in-river conditions or by a pounder run through the mess in the delta somehow being advantageous.

    Got a link to this 2011 regarding hatchery smolts decreasing? Sounds like an interesting read.

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    SacOfTomatoes, CA, USA
    Posts
    964

    Default

    Half pounder love the sound of that.......
    Aron-



    "I own a time machine, but it only moves forward at regular speed..."

    "So many rivers to fish so little time!"

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Sutter Co and the KMP
    Posts
    274

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Scott V View Post
    The half pounder things has been beaten like a dead horse so many times. Please, I beg of you all, lets not get into that again. Last time it got real nasty, if you do not like the term, please keep it to yourself.
    Respectfully, I think your wrong. Yes, we've had numerous discussions on pounders in the past, and I'm sorry you think it's been beaten to death. Those discussions on pounders however have never gotten nasty as you suggest. In fact the subject of pounders, has been the sole scientific topic regarding steelhead on this forum where those threads have never been trainwrecked and that those of us that are intrigued by the topic actually get to discuss it. Is it not relevant for Bubzilla to discuss the half-pounder lifehistory and what it is in a thread entitled "Half-Pounder's"?

    I certainly am not singling you out because I don't recall you ever trainwrecking any thread, but I really don't get the anti-science bent that this forum seems to have. Anytime the discussion gravitates towards the scientific, someone objects, the accusations start flying, and the thread derails. Never do the mods ever intervene and it usually does get nasty. Naturally us scientific "know it alls" are usually accused of wrecking the thread or worse. Ironic since the fact that our discussions are as much about what we don't know as much, if not more about what science does "know". Even more ironic considering I can't ever remember anyone on this forum that gravitates towards the scientific discussions ever saying anything in any of the numerous "fish mishandling" or "fishing over redds" threads that were train wrecks by design from word one. It isn't my take that Bubzilla was attempting any malice with his questions.

  5. #25

    Default

    Wow...okay. I am at a loss for the negative reaction. I guess my thought is if you do not want to engage in discussion related to the science of fisheries then don't participate, but why take issue? Is there a book burning planned on this site sometime later that I am not aware of too? I do the not want to argue about this--particularly given that there is nothing to argue about. No one suggested they don't like the term; the term is a scientific term with a precise meaning. I merely asked, given that there are some who frequent this board to whom the science of fisheries is important and therefore might know, if actual half-pounders ever got over 20".

    Thanks for the reply ycflyfisher. I think you are probably exactly right in regards to fish that size being either 1 salt adults or residualized residents. Obviously you are correct that we are not ever going to know why that life history may have been important, but I suspect that there was a diversity benefit that protected the run from potential adverse impact--the typical "don't have your eggs all in one basket" approach that nature, when left to her own devices, has geniously imposed in many instances. I believe this is where I had read about the increases in hatchery smolts resulting in reduced proportions of half-pounder life history.

    http://humboldt-dspace.calstate.edu/...pdf?sequence=1
    Last edited by bubzilla; 08-16-2012 at 08:53 PM.

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    North Highlands, Ca.
    Posts
    2,220

    Default A Dumbass's take on this

    Really dudes?

    A 20 inch fish?

    If you caught a 20 inch fish and it qualified as a 'half pounder' on anyones scale, well, you just caught an eel.

    Back to you, steelhead folk.

    Ed
    Elwood: It's 106 miles to Chicago, we got a full tank of gas, half a pack of cigarettes, it's dark... and we're wearing sunglasses.

    Jake: Hit it.

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Rescue ,CA Cromberg, CA
    Posts
    1,857

    Default

    Here we go again..... Time to go catch some of these juveniles and not get so caught up on the term. I'm going for the 20"+ pounders

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Sacramento
    Posts
    7,786

    Thumbs up Science....

    I usually don't post much in the Steelhead Forum for obvious reasons. Been watching this thread develop and couldn't sit on the sidelines any longer.

    I've participated in some of the discussions of the past mentioned by ycflyfisher and Covelo. Bubzilla has also participated in them. I've met Bubz and exchanged e-mails with the others in the past. Always enjoyed the discussions. I don't profess to have much in the way of anything scientific to add to what those guys have learned and are able to communicate but can ask questions to learn and that's what I tried to do. I learned a lot from those discussions.

    There is a decided negative bent in the Steelhead forum toward questions and/or theories put out there for discussion. A lot of traditional anecdotal stuff just seems to hang on regardless of what is presented to indicate it might possibly be incorrect. This tendency seems to have driven off one contributor (Covelo) who has a wealth of scientific knowledge about Salmon/Steelhead in California and elsewhere. When he attempted to post some information the response on this BB was mildly negative but the e-mails he received were less than friendly. It seems that everyone thinks they are an expert in this Forum whether they are or not.

    I was hoping that this time it might be different but am not surprised to see this thread go in the direction it has....
    "America is a country which produces citizens who will cross the ocean to fight for democracy but won't cross the street to vote."

    Author unknown

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Behind the Potato Curtain
    Posts
    996

    Default

    Hopefully Dennis Lee can chime in, he's writing the book, literally, on half pounders and has a lot of good knowledge about them.

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    SacOfTomatoes, CA, USA
    Posts
    964

    Default

    If the term get some on the idea to post info about half pounders then start a thread with info. Only reason I'm in this thread is because of the info on what to use to catch some and where to catch them. Also I think that is why this thread was started.
    Aron-



    "I own a time machine, but it only moves forward at regular speed..."

    "So many rivers to fish so little time!"

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •