Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 33

Thread: Blue Backs On The American?

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Aug 2019
    Location
    Guerneville
    Posts
    290

    Default

    Thanks for all the great info everyone...ive heard/read about bluebacks from older steelhead fisherman and was interested in what they were exactly...theres a guy i know on the russian who grew up in guerneville and knew bill schaadt when he was a kid, he told me about the bluebacks in our river...the past couple years ive seen many 2-4 lb mostly wild fish caught, however theyre usually in december, before many big winter adults are being hooked rather than spring. He made it sound like the bluebacks were very much a thing of the past on the russian.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    1,067

    Default

    Ycflyfisher > Mark > Ycflyfisher

    I'm just an angler like you that's totally obsessed with Mykiss that inhabit rivers that run unobstructed to the Pacific. I have had too many discussions to count with well over a dozen fisheries professionals about late run fish and here's my thoughts.

    Thanks for your reply and your appreciation, knowledge and thoughts on the subject of these absolutely precious, priceless and miraculous creatures. Though many of us on this board may have disagreements, I do believe we are all united in our passion and concern for the fish as well as the sport of angling.

    First, I've heard about local anglers catching these late run fish in the single salt range on the A for decades, but have never seen any photos, so thanks for that.

    For many reasons, I no longer post fish reports and/or photos on public website forums but I made an exception here because A) I have met Troutsource on the river and he's a good guy and he asked a question I thought I could partially answer and B) I wanted to incite discussion so that I too could be further educated on the subject. You have fulfilled that desire so again, Thank You


    I'd go all in that you're right about the origin of these fish (they're likely the progeny of hatchery fish but benefit from some unintended temporal isolation from hatchery products and are forced to spawn in basin, hence a disproportionately large percentage of stream born fish.,.)

    I would guess that these fish would exhibit Eel river genetic markers if tested despite how physiologically different they may seem from the typical multisalt fish on the A. Virtually every where I've ever caught steelhead in the spring from the Feather, to the KMP to the northern coastals seems to feature a late run of predominately 1 salt sized fish. Wendy Jones told me that this is the case with the Eel as well, and I'd guess that's what you're seeing here.

    This makes sense to me. They had to descend from some strain of existing steelhead and though markedly different than the typical, winter Eel R. fish, they certainly more resemble them than say, a Coleman, Feather, Moke or other CV steelhead stock.

    None of the ecology pros I've ever had this discussion with (even Gerstung who had some fairly divergent opinions of CV steelhead) felt that these fish were some kind of vestige of the original AR fish, and that they were likely simply the preservation of the late run Eel fish.

    I at one time thought they might be 'distant relatives'... I have since changed my thinking. The original strain of OM on the AR were summer runners, not spring fish and there just could not possibly have been enough individuals of the native AR strain in the ocean, after several years of dam construction, to provide future broodstock and keep the strain in existence. Successive, subsequent inbreeding with multiple subsequently-introduced strains of O. mykiss would certainly put a nail in the coffin of the 'remnant of original AR strain theory'. I think that I even entertained that idea was the hopeful, wishful, magical child in me wanting to believe, LOL.

    I would also guess that those first two fish were from the 2017 year class not 2019, simply because I can't see any fish from 2019 being mature enough to undergo smoltification. They would have to hit a pretty amazing growth curve inland in the first months of life for that to happen and I'm guessing that these fish would exhibit a predominant 2-1 LH.

    Oops, I did say 9-10 months old rather than a firecracker which had spent 9-10 months in the ocean...Yes. that would be some miraculously-fast growth rate... And as for LH-1 (that one was way over my head so I looked it up) you meant luteinizing hormone?

    It does make sense that these fish would hatch and grow more quickly than winter-run offspring simply because available food in the spring and summer months is far more abundant than in the winter time. At least egg, embryo, alevin, fry, fingerling development would be much faster.

    Is it possible that the smoltification process is hastened in the blue back juveniles because the early and vulnerable stage of their life cycle overlaps with warmer river temperatures and the proliferation of would-be predators? Natural selection surely
    would favor a faster maturation process and an early exit of the river to a larger body of brackish water. (think Stone Lagoon up north or the Sac Delta here).

    Getting to these larger, salty environs would likely reduce mortality by diffusing predation and the salt would better induce smoltification than residing in the river for a year or more as the current strain of hatchery smolts quite often do.

    I believe one of the greatest problems our valley steelhead face whether of hatchery or natural origin... is that they do not have abundant and sufficient nursery habitat. And because of this, all of the spawning-gravel enhancement projects in the world will fail to create a healthy, much less self-sustaining population of steelhead or salmon on the AR.

    I'd also attribute the intermittent nature (you're only seeing lots of these fish every few years) like you to inland conditions on the A. To have abundant amounts of these fish, they're not only going to need to be able to survive emergence, but also at least a season of development if not two seasons inland.

    Agreed... and as we had abundant high flows and cold water through the spring and early to sometimes even mid-summer months in 2016-2017-2018-2019, I believe that we will see decent returns of these fish for at least the next couple of years.

    The things I find totally bizarre about these fish is that everywhere I've encountered them ( the Feather, the KMP, Mad, Redwood -huge sample sizes, and the Smith a single fish), they're all fairly strange looking- deep bodied, well developed fish for their respective length, but somehow have smaller, less developed caudals than you'd expect for fish that are so thickly shouldered. And by my experience an insanely huge percentage of the fish are females, way more than 50%. They definitely get extremely violent when you stick 'em.

    Well... when your THAT aggro and strong, you neither need to 'sit on your tail' nor to mobilize as quickly as the fish WITHOUT an Atlas body... There will be no sand in these blue backs' faces. *****You will get the joke, youngins likely won't*****

    and on another note, I never remove them from the water nor touch their bodies with my hands so there will be no sand on any part of them as far as I am concerned...


    Just my take.

    THANKS for your take
    Last edited by STEELIES/26c3; 03-30-2020 at 04:00 PM.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Granite Bay, CA
    Posts
    505

    Default

    Awesome information and discussion. I've been fishing 5-6 hours one day every weekend since August, and the last two weekends the size of fish has spiked. I thought this was because "the blue backs were in." I've caught a 16, 18, 19 and 20-inch fish (2 swinging caddis pupae and 2 high sticking a Frenchie). The fins were clipped on all of them. Two were silvery, two were more colorful. The 20-incher was silvery and had a broad head and shoulders. Another silvery one had a semi-healed gash on its side, and a more colorful one had a tail that looked like it had been chewed on (prey?).

    Below is a picture of the silvery one with broad shoulders -- it doesn't look like it but it was probably around 20" (yes I know, likely story). I'm curious why the sudden spike in fish size (maybe I'm just an anomaly?). If they're not blue backs, they seem too small to be exiting winter strain, and the wrong time of year for the normal half-pounders.

    Thanks for all this awesome stoke-inducing info.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	steelie.JPG 
Views:	305 
Size:	82.5 KB 
ID:	15542
    Last edited by Troutsource; 03-31-2020 at 03:11 PM.
    TroutSource.com
    we deliver the river

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    1,067

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Troutsource View Post
    Awesome information and discussion. I've been fishing 5-6 hours one day every weekend since August, and the last two weekends the size of fish has spiked. I thought this was because "the blue backs were in." I've caught a 16, 18, 19 and 20-inch fish (2 swinging caddis pupae and 2 high sticking a Frenchie). Two were silvery, two were more colorful. The 20-incher was silvery, had a broad head and shoulders -- but had its fin clipped. Another silvery one had a semi-healed gash on its side, and a more colorful one had a tail that looked like it had been chewed on (prey?).

    Below is a picture of the silvery one with broad shoulders -- it doesn't look like it but it was probably around 20" (yes I know, likely story). I'm curious why the sudden spike in fish size (maybe I'm just an anomaly?). If they're not blue backs, they seem too small to be exiting winter strain, and the wrong time of year for the normal half-pounders.

    Thanks for all this awesome stoke-inducing info.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	steelie.JPG 
Views:	305 
Size:	82.5 KB 
ID:	15542
    It's all so complex... the issue of steelhead strains on our river...

    There are the dominant, Eel R. strain winter run fish the hatchery currently cranks out, there are other strains they once propagated but have since discontinued (ie, Mad R., Russian R., Washougal R. summer run and most recently, Coleman strain from Battle Creek). There are strays from various rivers. There are Folsom and Rainbow trout of natural and hatchery origin, which spill over Nimbus Dam in high water years. Finally, there are strains derived from interbreeding of various hatchery and natural-origin fish (though I do think the former is no longer practiced by CDFW). This can sometimes make identification difficult.

    In between the Eel winter run fish and the 'blue back' run of mid to late March through April, there is also what I call a B-run class of 3-5# class which shows up mostly between Sailor Bar and Nimbus hatchery in late February to early March which are also thick-bodied like the blue backs but even girthier. Their color is more dark slate gray to almost black over a blinding white/silver body with translucent white fins.

    And now, to really throw a wrench in things... it is quite possible that what we are calling 'blue backs' are really NOT blue backs at all but merely a color variation which better serves the fish in a saltwater rather than freshwater habitat. The blue back life cycle is, after all, more of a coastal than valley river trait.

    The geography and relative conditions these likely Eel R. strain derivatives are forced into is not natural (neither is the Eel R. winter run for that matter...) I think it's safe to say they are more of an approximation of an actual blue back... just as the winter Eel River Steelhead of the AR today are an approximation of the ACTUAL Eel River brood stock from which they descended...

    If you don't grasp that, I encourage you to go fish the Eel or the SF Eel or the Van Duzen (or any northern/coastal river) and you will see and FEEL the difference

    Similarly, I question the term half-pounder as it is often used to describe smaller steelhead on our river. The Klamath has a magnificent, and TRUE half-pounder run which without exception involves the ocean and a premature return to the Trinity/Klamath Watershed.

    I believe (and I am by no means an expert on the subject) that what many call 1/2-lbers on the AR are often strays or hatchery (mostly) and/or natural origin (sometimes) steelhead smolts which either took up residency in the AR for a year or more prior to leaving for the salt or migrated to the Sacramento River and/or the delta and returned to the AR in the summer or fall rather than remaining in the delta or heading to the ocean.

    Perhaps D. Lee can chime in here.

    From your photo, I would say that fish was released at the Sunrise Boat Ramp in February of 2019 as an 8" hatchery smolt. It grew another 12 inches in the delta/ocean and returned January-February of 2020 to the Nimbus Fish Ladder. You can tell it was received by the hatchery twice because there are two V-shaped notches in its caudal fin.

    When steelhead enter the ladder in January, they are often not ripe enough to spawn. They receive the notch in the tail and are returned to the river. If they come up again, whether or not they are ripe, they receive another notch in the tail. This is done to prevent them from being counted twice.

    Looking closely at your fish, it appears to have been up the fish ladder twice.

    NICE FISH BTW!

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Granite Bay, CA
    Posts
    505

    Default

    Mark, That's some serious mykiss forensics. I guess my fish was a horny "repeat offender." I didn't even notice the notch on the tail and would have guessed it was just a natural occurrence. Well, even if my recent quarry hasn't been in the vaunted BB class, they fight like hell and are my latest addiction on the A. I'm going to see if I can fish and do so successfully every month of the year there now for trout/steelhead. The A is starting to feel like an old shoe, at least the small stretch I frequent. PS Your pics were incredible, and now I have a better idea what to look for in terms of a BB.

    Dennis, your book on Halfpounders is great (I borrowed it from GB Fly Fishers).

    YC, thanks for all your glorious info, too.

    I'm glad I had a virtual prenup with my wife whereby she agreed never to block me from fishing (I just try to be reasonable about it).
    Last edited by Troutsource; 04-01-2020 at 08:32 AM.
    TroutSource.com
    we deliver the river

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    California
    Posts
    57

    Default

    STEELIES/26c3 is correct, California steelhead genetics are complex considering the movement of steelhead eggs and fingerling fish from California hatcheries and egg taking stations, and even attempts to establish Washington State summer run steelhead in several California rivers. In the late 1800’s and early 1900’s, a number of egg taking stations operated on the upper Klamath River. Late summer/early fall steelhead were trapped, spawned and the hundreds of thousands of eggs transferred to the Sisson Hatchery (later renamed the Mt. Shasta Hatchery) and the fingerling fish stocked in streams all over California. The same can be said for several Eel River egg taking stations although the distribution was somewhat more limited. And it has been shown rainbow trout can demonstrate different resident and anadromous life histories. Many years ago Dr. Graham Gall from UC Davis while working on domesticated rainbow trout suggested fish genes were very "plastic."

    In the past, fish size, color and geographical location were often used to discriminate different species. Later studies proved that was not such a good idea. There have been several genetic analysis/studies of California steelhead stocks, and even more on West Coast populations. Most of the information can be found on the internet with a little searching. I also agree the American River does not have a half-pounder steelhead run if you accept the original 1925 description of a half-pounder from the Eel River. In my previous book The Half-Pounder, A Steelhead Trout Life History and Fly Fishing I tried to explain the difference between the life histories of half-pounder steelhead runs from the Rogue, Klamath and Eel rivers and Sacramento River steelhead (NMFS folks like to call them Central Valley Steelhead although there is little hard evidence the San Joaquin River tributaries historically supported steelhead runs, they use the distribution of spring run Chinook salmon to justify steelhead distribution; and the late Dr. Robert Benhke suggested Sacramento River steelhead were an anadromous redband trout). Notwithstanding, most anglers today will still call any silvery trout less than 2 pounds from a California anadromous river a half-pounder.

    BTW every genetic analysis/study of winter steelhead trapped at the Nimbus Fish Hatchery (not every fish in from the river) in spite of all the different hatchery strains/stocks introduced and there have been several, the adipose fin marked adult fish continue to genetically resemble Eel River winter steelhead from which the original broodstock was derived.

    Dennis
    www.dennisplee.com
    Last edited by DPLee; 04-01-2020 at 10:22 AM.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Sutter Co and the KMP
    Posts
    274

    Default

    Mark,

    LH= life history which for steelhead is expressed as freshwater-salt water, ex 2-1. Or for fish that have a legit half-pounder LH phenotype, 2-H-1.

    ------"It does make sense that these fish would hatch and grow more quickly than winter-run offspring simply because available food in the spring and summer months is far more abundant than in the winter time. At least egg, embryo, alevin, fry, fingerling development would be much faster."

    I would agree with that, but on the A I think the progeny of the later arriving stream-born fish you're describing, would still be at a significant disadvantage to the progeny of earlier arriving and potentially earlier spawning hatchery fish, because they'd be smaller. I think it's difficult to apply anything I THINK I might know to a truncated, compromised system where you have things like potential red imposition and all kinds of "lack of habitat" bottlenecks that impact survival to the next life stage. Is it possible potential later emergence would favor these later arriving fish? Definitely. Is it likely? I would not think so but I don't know. The only post emergence, pre-emigration survival data/discussions I've seen that's similar to the A is from the Feather. And the Feather is WAY different because of the two flow intro points. The low flow Feather is a channelized death trap for anything emerging from the gravel very much like the pre project upper T. It's gotten much more favorable and shallower with the gravel placement but it is still far from ideal. The HF Feather is also compromised, but doesn't suffer from the channelization of the LF and there's vastly more feathered edge habitat, and temps in the HF are significantly warmer and the data from the F that I've seen for chinooks shows that fry do develop faster in the HF due to less comp and better conditions for growth and they do close the developmental gap pretty quickly even though spawning happens significantly later in the HF than it does in the LF. Could that apply to the A? I wouldn't think so but I don't know.


    "Is it possible that the smoltification process is hastened in the blue back juveniles because the early and vulnerable stage of their life cycle overlaps with warmer river temperatures and the proliferation of would-be predators? Natural selection surely would favor a faster maturation process and an early exit of the river to a larger body of brackish water. (think Stone Lagoon up north or the Sac Delta here)."

    I don't think so and I wouldn't expect there to be much difference in emigration timing between the potential progeny of these largely streamborn fish your describing and the progeny of hatchery products on the A. I would think they'd both need a minimum of at least a season of in stream development prior to smoltification/ outmigration. Fish from the same year class I'd think would be subject to the same environmental triggers that spur the process and I'd guess they'd all go over roughly the same window.

    ----Getting to these larger, salty environs would likely reduce mortality by diffusing predation and the salt would better induce smoltification than residing in the river for a year or more as the current strain of hatchery smolts quite often do. ----

    My understanding about smoltification is that the fish must undergo that process and reverse the osmotic salt retention vs salt excretion process prior to hitting the salt or they perish. The data I've seen from the F does show that some of streamborn chinooks do start emigration prior to smoltification. I wouldn't think that necessarily applies to streamborn Mykiss from the F but I'm not certain of that. I have been told that emigration prior to smoltification is common among Mykiss pops in Socal where the fish hedge their bets and express a multitude of LHs. I wouldn't think any strategy that increases dwell time for outgoing Mykiss in the delta would be very successful and I think selection pressure would limit those.

    I could very well be be wrong about some, most or all of this.....
    Last edited by ycflyfisher; 04-02-2020 at 02:43 AM.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    California
    Posts
    57

    Default

    Smoltification in anadromous salmonids has been intensely studied and research indicates it is initiated by water temperatures although there are other factors involved including fish size, photoperiod, etc. Check out my blogs for a more detailed discussion on smoltification and some of the issues with early release of hatchery produced juvenile fish.

    The question of the origin and life history of late season, i.e. spring run fish, on the lower American River remains unclear. Steelhead/rainbow trout spawn in the river but the river does not produce large numbers of naturally produced smolt-sized fish. This is support by outmigration trapping studies conducted during the 2013 to 2015 seasons. While hundreds of natural origin steelhead/rainbow trout fry and parr were trapped, obviously from in river spawning, only two smolts were recorded in 2013, 31 in 2014, and only one in 2015.

    In addition, if you have ever swung a fly on the Rogue River in the summer, you can catch a small rainbow trout on every other cast. On the Klamath River it might take 10 casts to catch a juvenile fish. You can fish the American River all day and never hook a juvenile or smolt sized fish. I contend the American River does not produce a significant number of steelhead/rainbow trout smolts due to a number of factors including lack of suitable habitat, high summertime water temperatures and predation. The lack of significant numbers of unmarked adult steelhead to the Nimbus Fish Hatchery continue to support this contention. However, returns of marked winter steelhead do not account for the unmarked (presumed naturally produced) spring steelhead/rainbow trout observed in the river.

    Over the past several years I have examined the scales from a number of unmarked steelhead/rainbow trout from 14 to 18 inches from the lower American River caught in March and April. The growth rings (circuli) do not demonstrate the classic steelhead closely spaced freshwater and later wider spaced ocean growth. Growth appears to be consistent throughout the fish's life indicating they did not migrate to the ocean.

    So where do the springtime American River fish come from? Angler surveys conducted by CDFG personnel in the early 1970’s on the lower American River suggested a large portion of the catch was made up of fish released from Coleman National Fish Hatchery. This was based on the high proportion of marked fish observed. The fall steelhead fishery on the lower American River declined after CNFH stopped releasing juvenile fish at Rio Vista. In addition, it was reported “From September through December a large proportion of the American River steelhead run consists of steelhead probably produced in the upper Sacramento River System. These fish are typically smaller than American River winter run fish.” Similar to observations made in the 1970's, I suspect naturally produced juvenile steelhead/rainbow trout emigrate from the Sacramento River below Keswick Dam. It is possible some fish entered the Delta and some researchers have used the term “weakly anadromous” while others call this a "migratory resident” life history.

    Dennis
    www.dennisplee.com

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Granite Bay, CA
    Posts
    505

    Default

    OK, so in layman's terms: the 18"-20" hatchery fish I caught probably originated from somewhere other than the American -- because (a) summer conditions on the A are very tough for trout survival, and (b) scales for larger spring mykiss on the A indicate that they never went to the ocean -- but rather grew larger upstream on the Sac (and then somehow ended up on the A, perhaps after falling downstream to the Delta, the migrating back up into the A).

    Did I get it right?
    Last edited by Troutsource; 04-04-2020 at 08:45 PM.
    TroutSource.com
    we deliver the river

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Sebastian, FL, USA, Earth
    Posts
    23,837

    Default

    We are very fortunate to have fisheries expert Dennis P Lee posting here because he has a lifetime of actual experience

    and knowledge working for the California Fish & Game.


    Dennis is also a dedicated two hand /Spey fly fisher as well, with a special connection to our Steelhead rivers.


    He is one of the best local fly tiers with a passion for tying classic Steelhead and Atlantic Salmon flies.


    Dennis is also an author with his great book on Half-Pounders........"The Half-Pounder, A Steelhead Trout Life History and Fly Fishing".


    Dennis P Lee's Blog: https://dennisplee.com/blog/


    Thanks Dennis.........
    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........
    ______________________________________

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
  •