Hoorah for Hatchery Fish

[Alosa]

Alosa, as an obvious expert, do you think our fisheries here are also jeopardized by these hatchery fish? Or is this solely a CA issue given the native ocean going trout you have there?

Your talking about apples vs. oranges. In North Dakota, where the trout species you list are not native, there is no opportunity for hatchery strains to introgress with native populations (through genetic exchange; reproduction). The consequences of such introductions represent an entirely different suite of ecological consequences compared to the introgression of hatchery fish with native stocks of anadromous fishes in California and elsewhere. The scientific literature has demonstrated (repeatedly) that hatchery strains are a serious threat to the long term persistence of native fish populations.

Are we to risk their existence for the sake of anglers, or do we have a larger responsibility as stewards of the environment to ensure that wild fish (and the evolutionary processes that shape their local adaptations) persist and ensure their survival in the long run? I would argue the latter.

[Darian]

"....Are we to risk their existence for the sake of anglers, or do we have a larger responsibility as stewards of the environment to ensure that wild fish (and the evolutionary processes that shape their local adaptations) persist and ensure their survival in the long run? I would argue the latter."

Alosa,.... Your statement illustrates the dilemma facing CA DFW and all political entities in CA. Native vs Hatchery bred species. Hatcheries of all types were/are an attempt to mitigate for the loss of something necessary for their survival (habitat??) and required by existing law. Now, due to diversion of water from the Delta, we have the advent of "....conservation hatcheries...." for Delta Smelt and possibly other native Delta species. All in the name of mitigation.

In addition, there's the need to provide fish for license/permit holders for commercial and recreational uses (jobs/revenue). To make the point, in the recent past, a law was established that mandated funding of hatcheries on the south eastern side of the Sierra's. So, it doesn't look to me like hatcheries are going away anytime soon.

As a result of the current drought, both, federal and state legislators (politicians never wishing to waste a disaster) are currently making proposals to increase storage of water in the state in the form of new and raised dams, expanded reservoirs and diversions and increased management of water resources but not necessarily in favor of fish. Thus, will be the need for increased mitigation measures.

Given the current political atmosphere and the likelihood that one or more of these proposals will be passed and become law, when in your opinion do we cross the line into being unable to ensure the survival of all native species, not just Salmon, Steelhead, Trout. Are conservation hatcheries acceptable?? If so, what's the difference between conservation and mitigation hatcheries??? BTW, these questions are not meant as sarcasm.

Seems to me that this situation is already at a crisis level as some fisheries in this state are already crashing.

[Mike O]

About damns, in particular, engelbright. While there are a many a negative things, if it wasn't for this damn right now flows would be at 45 Cfs instead of 500. Something to ponder...... Engelbright acts as a safety net for flows in low water years

Except that low flow years are natural as well. The fish still made do. Your argument seems to say the Englebright makes things better for fishermen. I would posit that Englebright would serve to prove the other point, that fish would remain in rivers longer than they ordinarily would in low water years, becoming more "riverine" in nature...but then I am talking out my ass here, with no science to back it up.

[Randy Lee]

Tony,
The fire is starting to fade. Got another gallon of gas?

[cyama]

It is interesting to read through some studies performed by those jet boat guys and gals on the Yuba. There are some interesting reports on the Yuba Accord Website. They could even help you catch some fish. They show you when the Spring Run Chinook move past Daguerre. Something I learned and often thought was happening is that there is a good percentage of salmon on the Yuba from the Feather River Hatchery. Something I know is that there is an increasing amount of "steelhead" coming from the Feather...
http://www.yubaaccordrmt.com/Interim...ril%202013.pdf

[TonyMuljat]

How about if the hatchery fish I caught on the Feather this past fall made me care about Salmonids? Was it worth it?

PS. This is the single most interesting and informative post I've seen on the forum.

[JasonB]

I think there's a huge difference in having an interest in catching fish, versus an interest in the fish themselves. I like both, but I'm completely on the side of having healthy self sustaining fish populations above my own interest in catching (or keeping) them. I don't really see the point of yearning for "the good ol' days" of fishing, if you're talking about catching a bunch of hatchery fish. What's sad is that there were good old days where enormous runs of salmon and steelhead made their way up these streams, all by themselves, high water and low, drought and flood, for centuries. Then we came along, decimated them with our carelessness and greed, and try to remedy the problem by attempting to re-create them in our own artificial manner. More carelessness and greed, and once again turns out that we didn't quite get it all right or fully understand the ramifications of what impact our actions would have.

Healthy, wild self sustaining runs are a completely different thing than fish put in a pond (or stream) for us to catch. I'm not completely anti-hatchery, as I think it's a complex issue if you take everything into account. I just don't see hatchery runs as being a reasonable substitute for wild fish. I also find it hard to fathom that any angler would not be able to understand the difference between the two.

[Alosa]

Given the current political atmosphere and the likelihood that one or more of these proposals will be passed and become law, when in your opinion do we cross the line into being unable to ensure the survival of all native species, not just Salmon, Steelhead, Trout. Are conservation hatcheries acceptable?? If so, what's the difference between conservation and mitigation hatcheries???

Seems to me that this situation is already at a crisis level as some fisheries in this state are already crashing.

These are tough questions, and really get to the heart of the matter. Each native fish species (from various salmon species to Delta smelt and long fin smelt) probably has it own threshold for what it can tolerate in terms of environmental stressors, so when we 'cross the line' where we can no long support the existence of ALL native species is an incredibly tough thing to answer. I certainly don't know the answer, but I would argue that things are currently in poor shape (any fool can see that), and mitigation/conservation hatcheries do not currently contribute to the restoration, but probably only add to the current set of problems.

Is this a 'crisis situation'? I would say so. Various populations of several salmon species (and other species; e.g. Delta smelt) that we care about are federal listed as threatened or endangered, and the situation does not seem to be improving. Increasing the height of existing dams will only lead to our further political denial of the true problem - that current water management practices in the state of California are UNSUSTAINABLE.

[Alosa]

As a follow up, here's a blog post by Bob Triggs from Washington State. The parallels between what he has observed and what we see taking place in California rivers is not a coincidence...political mismanagement of our natural resources is rampant.

http://olympicpeninsulaflyfishing.bl...lhead-why.html

[Darian]

Alosa,.... Thanks for the reply and info. After reading the blog, I can see that it's not much different up north than here. Not really sure where to go from here, tho. I'm still involved with reviewing/commenting on portions of the BDCP and that's depressing enough.