Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 30

Thread: "UNSPAWNED" A documentary about the mis/management of our central valley king salmon

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    1,067

    Default "UNSPAWNED" A documentary about the mis/management of our central valley king salmon


  2. #2
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    East Bay
    Posts
    681

    Default

    This makes me so mad. I just renewed my membership. Every fisherman in this state should be a member of this organization.
    Last edited by Rossflyguy; 03-07-2020 at 05:42 PM.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Sebastian, FL, USA, Earth
    Posts
    23,837

    Default

    Fishermen are a problem for the folks who want 100% of the water in California.


    Wild fish is the only answer.................no hatcheries.............zero.


    CA DF&W folks told me the politicians make all the decisions, or at least the big ones.


    Our government takes the money from the fishing and hunting licenses and put it in the General Fund.



    I have been in Florida for 15 years in the winter and our fisheries are crashing too.

    30 years ago all our restaurants on the water were wholesale fish warehouses.
    Bill Kiene (Boca Grande)

    567 Barber Street
    Sebastian, Florida 32958

    Fly Fishing Travel Consultant
    Certified FFF Casting Instructor

    Email: billkiene63@gmail.com
    Cell: 530/753-5267
    Web: www.billkiene.com

    Contact me for any reason........
    ______________________________________

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Garden Valley
    Posts
    1,076

    Default

    Interesting, but I have to say I found it hard to trust after the numerous comments about hatchery salmon being identical to wild salmon. I definitely think they hit on some important issues though, but the pro hatchery marketing kind of muddied the message in my opinion. There were a few claims that I’d love to hear more about, and from other sources: that wild and hatchery salmon had already interbred to the point of not being any different, and that all wild salmon in the Central Valley were eliminated by the drought. The point about salmon being a massive part of the entire ecosystem certainly has powerful merit, and no question that our water policies have been very hard on the salmon.
    "Lord help me to be the person my dog thinks I am"
    - unknown

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    East Bay
    Posts
    681

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JasonB View Post
    Interesting, but I have to say I found it hard to trust after the numerous comments about hatchery salmon being identical to wild salmon. I definitely think they hit on some important issues though, but the pro hatchery marketing kind of muddied the message in my opinion. There were a few claims that I’d love to hear more about, and from other sources: that wild and hatchery salmon had already interbred to the point of not being any different, and that all wild salmon in the Central Valley were eliminated by the drought. The point about salmon being a massive part of the entire ecosystem certainly has powerful merit, and no question that our water policies have been very hard on the salmon.

    Regardless if they’re wild or hatchery, dams prevent any wild spawning fish population from blowing up. Hatcheries are necessary to keep fish populations up. I don’t buy the whole wild vs hatchery genetics. Hatchery fish came from wild genetics and it’s been this way for longer than most of us have been alive.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Location
    Shatanistan
    Posts
    94

    Default

    This documentary identified the main issue with our salmon populations as their very first point and it took 27 minutes for them to mention it again. Juvenile habitat and survival is the main bottleneck to salmon populations in most of CA. They mentioned Georgiana Slough and Clifton Court Forebay entraining 65% of smolts. Reduce that number by a few percent and you are talking an increase of millions of smolts making it to the ocean and into the fishery. There was a very good reason the state and federal agencies were trucking smolts to the bay in the past. In years where delta survival is expected to be low (low flows), this should be an option.

    I do agree raising more fish has potential. I do not have any issue with the reduced numbers of smolts released from in-river hatcheries as they do compete with natural juveniles. We should be striving to have our salmon populations self-sustaining because in the long run, it is healthier and more economical cost-wise to do so. I would like to see more of what they do on the Mokelumne and release their excess juveniles in bays and estuaries to support commercial and recreational fishing in the ocean.

    One major issue I have with this video is assuming spawning more fish in rivers automatically equals more juveniles, which is an incredibly simplistic view. Density-dependent factors come into play such as redd superimposition, increased competition for food in juveniles, among other issues. In the truncated rivers of the CV, spawning and rearing habitat has been greatly reduced so adding more fish just leads to lower spawning success and juvenile survival. You are better off removing excess spawners like they do currently at the hatcheries or via fishing harvest. I do agree selling those fish to outside companies is not a good idea and those nutrients should be placed back into the river either by dumping the eggs or just euthanizing the spawners and dumping them right back into the river.

    Here is what I would like to see happen:
    1 ) Move the hatcheries downriver. Having the hatcheries at the terminus of the rivers greatly increases hatchery and wild competition which the HSRG says we should not do. They mentioned in the video about the success of hatcheries in OR and WA. Most of the hatcheries there are lower in the river systems and do not allow the intermingling of wild and hatchery fish like we see in CA. You even see this in parts of CA. The Mad and Smith have some of the most robust Steelhead populations in CA. Some of which is probably due to the wild fish having access to the bulk of the basin while minimizing hatchery competition. Coleman is another great example. The bulk of the spawning habitat is above BC and the bulk of those Chinook above BC are wild. Doing this also reduces juvenile competition between hatchery and wild fish, which should also improve wild and hatchery survival.

    2) Identify flow regimes conducive to juvenile growth and survival. Right now we manage our flow regimes for agriculture where we have much lower flows in the winter and spring, and much higher flows in the summer. We should be having the exact opposite.

    3) Restore historical floodplain habitat. The Yolo Bypass studies at UCD are a great example of the potential for reconnecting floodplains. Start allowing some of these levees in the Delta to fail. Allow the floodplains to be reconnected again.
    “There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.”
    ― Issac Asimov

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    1,067

    Default

    [QUOTE=Fishtopher;195211]This documentary identified the main issue with our salmon populations as their very first point and it took 27 minutes for them to mention it again. Juvenile habitat and survival is the main bottleneck to salmon populations in most of CA. They mentioned Georgiana Slough and Clifton Court Forebay entraining 65% of smolts. Reduce that number by a few percent and you are talking an increase of millions of smolts making it to the ocean and into the fishery. There was a very good reason the state and federal agencies were trucking smolts to the bay in the past. In years where delta survival is expected to be low (low flows), this should be an option.

    Agreed that entrainment in GS and the Clifton Court Forebay is a major problem. Unfortunately, BOR and DWR are unwilling to place screens and/or relocate pump intakes to reduce this. Whereas, trucking smolts reduces entrainment and in-river predation... the potential negative impact is the smolts failing to imprint on their river of origin.

    I do agree raising more fish has potential. I do not have any issue with the reduced numbers of smolts released from in-river hatcheries as they do compete with natural juveniles. We should be striving to have our salmon populations self-sustaining because in the long run, it is healthier and more economical cost-wise to do so. I would like to see more of what they do on the Mokelumne and release their excess juveniles in bays and estuaries to support commercial and recreational fishing in the ocean.

    If the in-river juveniles are ultimately derived from hatchery broodstock ancestors (which on the American River 100% of the natural-origin steelhead and salmon are..) then competition from hatchery fish will only drive natural selection toward survival of the fittest and that is a positive. Face it... 12 miles of marginal spawning gravel + unreliable water flow and water temperature regimes will prevent the American River from ever having a sizable population of natural-origin fish regardless of what the hatchery produces or does not produce or how much habitat restoration is applied to the river.

    One major issue I have with this video is assuming spawning more fish in rivers automatically equals more juveniles, which is an incredibly simplistic view. Density-dependent factors come into play such as redd superimposition, increased competition for food in juveniles, among other issues. In the truncated rivers of the CV, spawning and rearing habitat has been greatly reduced so adding more fish just leads to lower spawning success and juvenile survival. You are better off removing excess spawners like they do currently at the hatcheries or via fishing harvest. I do agree selling those fish to outside companies is not a good idea and those nutrients should be placed back into the river either by dumping the eggs or just euthanizing the spawners and dumping them right back into the river.

    Yes, I agree that the video assumes premises which are overly simplistic and not always scientific. Carrying capacity, competition, predation, and other density-dependent factors do play a role.... however, I believe that allowing the river to reach its own carrying capacity rather than CDFW making determinations based on calculations fails to let the river live up to its fullest potential regarding viability of spawning habitat and fitness/success of salmonid individuals. And speaking as one who has walked that river from Hazel to Paradise Beach 150-300+ days a year for nearly 30 years, I can concur that even as recent as 12 years ago, spawning was taking place up and down the river and I have witnessed a very sharp and steady decline in salmon spawning in the the mid to lower river.

    Here is what I would like to see happen:
    1 ) Move the hatcheries downriver. Having the hatcheries at the terminus of the rivers greatly increases hatchery and wild competition which the HSRG says we should not do. They mentioned in the video about the success of hatcheries in OR and WA. Most of the hatcheries there are lower in the river systems and do not allow the intermingling of wild and hatchery fish like we see in CA. You even see this in parts of CA. The Mad and Smith have some of the most robust Steelhead populations in CA. Some of which is probably due to the wild fish having access to the bulk of the basin while minimizing hatchery competition. Coleman is another great example. The bulk of the spawning habitat is above BC and the bulk of those Chinook above BC are wild. Doing this also reduces juvenile competition between hatchery and wild fish, which should also improve wild and hatchery survival.

    Those coastal rivers have cold water from their mouths to their hatcheries and in the 100 miles of headwaters above them. The lowest feasible point to locate a hatchery on the AR would be Discovery Park and the resultant headwaters would be a whopping 23 miles, the first 4 miles of which is mostly sand and not very productive as spawning habitat... CDFW is so poorly funded and managed, that the chance of them approving and funding a hatchery relocation is 0.0%.

    The temperature gradient on our river also draws fish upriver to the dam where water is always 4-8% cooler than the water downstream of Watt Ave. Returning adults would be inclined to bypass the hatchery in favor of the colder water upriver and hatchery smolts released in the river (especially steelhead...) travel upriver as well as down river and often holdover for a year before heading to the salt. I'm not sure how much natural spawning would occur nor how well competition would be reduced in the given scenario but my guess is that it would be negligible.

    2) Identify flow regimes conducive to juvenile growth and survival. Right now we manage our flow regimes for agriculture where we have much lower flows in the winter and spring, and much higher flows in the summer. We should be having the exact opposite.

    ONE CAN ONLY DREAM OF THIS... In case you have not heard... BOR just signed their (and the fishes...) lives away to Westland's Water District:


    Westlands Water District gets permanent U.S. contract for massive irrigation deliveries

    "The Interior Department on Friday awarded the nation’s largest farm water district a permanent entitlement to annual irrigation deliveries that amount to roughly twice as much water as the nearly 4 million residents of Los Angeles use in a year."


    3) Restore historical floodplain habitat. The Yolo Bypass studies at UCD are a great example of the potential for reconnecting floodplains. Start allowing some of these levees in the Delta to fail. Allow the floodplains to be reconnected again.

    AMEN BROTHER!! This is exactly what is needed and without which... additional spawning gravel will have no merit... I have echoed this long-held sentiment of Dennis Lee for many years now...

    To be sure... I have little faith in an agency (CDFG Commission) whose president (Eric Sklar) a master vintner... is in charge of making decisions about our watersheds and managing our fish and wildlife... It's really too bad that a TRULY VIABLE wild steelhead fishery (Eel and SF Eel Rivers) are likely headed for extinction because of the very two industries Mr Sklar is primarily invested in... namely, Napa Valley wine grapes and cannabis cultivation...

    It makes very difficult the task for folks like you and I and James Stone et al... to make a difference

    But I will keep fighting for the fish and I hope you will too

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Sebastian, FL, USA, Earth
    Posts
    23,837

    Default

    We still have too many dams.

    Hatcheries don't work well after 7 years for some reason.

    They are saying now we are wasting water to the ocean.

    CA wants to eliminate all non-native fish......Stripers, Shad, all Bass....etc.

    I heard the budget for the hatcheries was so bad they only take in fish for a short time to spawn.

    They want the water for agriculture, not fish.

    The CA state government does not have any transparency.

    The sport of fishing is a huge part of any economy. Boats, big vehicles to tow, tackle, restaurants, lodgings, guides......
    Bill Kiene (Boca Grande)

    567 Barber Street
    Sebastian, Florida 32958

    Fly Fishing Travel Consultant
    Certified FFF Casting Instructor

    Email: billkiene63@gmail.com
    Cell: 530/753-5267
    Web: www.billkiene.com

    Contact me for any reason........
    ______________________________________

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    Location
    On the River in Shastanistan
    Posts
    162

    Default

    My reaction to this video is "MEH", just another special interest group (guides), pimping for the cause that benefits them economically the most without considering the negative impacts their desire brings. The majority of the video was screaming we want more hatchery fish, and that is at best a short term band-aid solution. At worst, it causes significant problems for natural production. They want all the surplus fish returned to the river because they think that will increase production, but the reality is due to the density dependent mortality factors mentioned by Fishtopher, that production goal will not be achieved. What they advocate is bad science, and they really should discuss their goals with some professional and academically qualified people before they proclaim something that is not true. The downfall of our salmon populations have very little to do with not enough hatchery production and everything to do with poor habitat and water management practices.

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

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by WLREDBAND View Post
    My reaction to this video is "MEH", just another special interest group (guides), pimping for the cause that benefits them economically the most without considering the negative impacts their desire brings. The majority of the video was screaming we want more hatchery fish, and that is at best a short term band-aid solution. At worst, it causes significant problems for natural production. They want all the surplus fish returned to the river because they think that will increase production, but the reality is due to the density dependent mortality factors mentioned by Fishtopher, that production goal will not be achieved. What they advocate is bad science, and they really should discuss their goals with some professional and academically qualified people before they proclaim something that is not true. The downfall of our salmon populations have very little to do with not enough hatchery production and everything to do with poor habitat and water management practices.

    On rivers that have lost 70-90% of its spawning grounds it’s kinda of useless thinking and wishing to talk about habitat. Fact is these rivers do no drain naturally at 10,20,50,100k any longer. They drain at what humans tell them to drain at. So dumping more rocks and calling it habitat restoration is a joke! It’s like adding rock on top of a crap in a dug in crap house, and thinking you will have more room for crap, then adding more rock to subdue the smell and the same thinking that you will have more room. Fact is naturally river beds wash and flush at high river flows. That does not happen often at all in the valley rivers. Dams are the number one issue. So let’s be realists here, until dams are gone or a work around the dams is put in place.... Why fight over the ideas and opinions on habitat restoration in the valley I t’s to no avail.

    These rivers are like damn 5 gallon fish tanks and the idea that putting in a few hundred gold fish will work! Thinking to let the fish do their thing naturally will be enough, is a joke. Let’s quite trying to fight the fact that we are in hopes that thousands of fish will eventually show up, and there will be a bounce back of numbers. Nature is showing us as we freaking speak the numbers the rivers in the valley can handle. And all I see is angry people on all sides of opinions and beliefs. Commercial fishing, and people that fish like crazy and keep don’t help either if more hatchery fish are not put in. It’s either one or the other. And I agree that some guides that argue numbers are wanting more fish for their personal gains, which I don’t personally agree with either. Steelie and I ended up calling it exploitation of the system for personal gains.

    To each their own though.
    Tight lines of you get out for a day of fishing.
    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
  •