Are all hatchery coho clipped?
- Thread starter xavier
- Start date
ReelAffair
Active Member
Its all good
It is hard to tell sarcasm on hereReelAffair
Active Member
Its all good
It is hard to tell sarcasm on hereThey claim that they get way more back when they don't clip. Funny, DFO and the Americans have found through study that there is virtually no difference in the escapment rate. Sounds like a load of crap to me. There's a great C&R flyfishery off the mouth though...doesn't attract any of us meat mongers either...hmmm???
They got one of the best returns on the Straight last year but DFO won't allow retention of un marked fish off the mouth because of it's proximity to Black Creek which is their Georgia Straight indicator stream. Black Creek fish often stage with Oyster fish on their way down. I don't think it should be the choice of Hatchery staff(voulenteer of not) weather or not to clip. Clipping should be mandatory.
They claim that they get way more back when they don't clip. Funny, DFO and the Americans have found through study that there is virtually no difference in the escapment rate. Sounds like a load of crap to me. There's a great C&R flyfishery off the mouth though...doesn't attract any of us meat mongers either...hmmm???
They got one of the best returns on the Straight last year but DFO won't allow retention of un marked fish off the mouth because of it's proximity to Black Creek which is their Georgia Straight indicator stream. Black Creek fish often stage with Oyster fish on their way down. I don't think it should be the choice of Hatchery staff(voulenteer of not) weather or not to clip. Clipping should be mandatory.
Cuba Libre
Well-Known Member
X2
20ft Alumaweld Intruder
Charlie
Well-Known Member
Hmmmm... I doubt that? IMO I have to agree with codfather!
There was no fishery in Nootka before the Conuma hatchery, you can read the history here: http://www-heb.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/facilities/conuma/background_info_e.htm
"The wild adult salmon returns to Conuma River in the years just before the facility was built were approximately 13,000 chum, 850 chinook, and 1300 coho. The facility had limited impact upon these stocks until 1987, when "seapen rearing", before release as juveniles, was used for Conuma chinook and chum. The resulting chinook survivals to adult have since quadrupled.
In 1990, enhanced chinook smolt releases from our seapens had risen to over 1,000,000. The resulting returning Chinook adults in 1993, 94 and 95 led to a rapid increase in sport fishing in the area, thus making the Nootka Sound area a major sport fishing destination."
But, keep in mind, even starting with 850 Chinook and 1300 coho, once those fish spawn by themselves, they become "wild" and that rebuilds the natural stock! I seriously doubt if Conuma clips 1 in 6 Coho!
IMHO...
I also believe, you can thank the Campbell River collapse for the Conuma build up?
Steelhead S2
Active Member
Maybe clipping should be mandatory, but how would you enforce that? Fine the hatchery and take money from fish production? Fine workers and volunteers, creating a disincentive from helping? Clipping is good for fishers, though of little interest to the other organisms that benefit from strong runs. But in my opinion, for those hatcheries that have enough manpower to make fish and too little to clip them, it is better for every organism that they focus on production.
Just relaying what I was told by the creel guy. He didn't say 1 in 6 was clipped at the hatchery, he mentioned that he was reporting 1 in 6 adults being caught at that time were clipped. We talked to him at Bajo and again at the cleaning table. 1 in 6 marked was aprox. what we were catching out at Bajo that weekend and the one before. ( mid Aug) He indicated that they were clipping most Conuma fish now. Might not be true, but we might not be seeing those fish yet. Maybe next year? 1 in 6 seems quite high considering all the other wild stocks down the coast. What were others seeing around Nootka/esperanza?
Charlie
Well-Known Member
Approximately 2/3 of the fish caught in the Nootka Island area (both North & South) offshore and inshore, are from the Conuma fishery! DFO is VERY interested in protecting those "precious" fish and I DO NOT mean that sarcastically… THEY ARE PRECIOUS! I am fine with them only clipping a small percentage! That very well could be BC salmon future salvation!
75% of the salmon caught offshore south of Estevan Point are headed to the U.S., yep including the Coho? Hence the 1-mile surf line closure. What are you guys thinking… Keep catching those "Yankee" fish of ours, and protect and rebuild your runs!
The only thing I don't like, is having to turn back a "dead" fish! That needs to be fixed... I saw WAY to much of that this year, me included!
Just IMHO!
75% of the salmon caught offshore south of Estevan Point are headed to the U.S., yep including the Coho? Hence the 1-mile surf line closure. What are you guys thinking… Keep catching those "Yankee" fish of ours, and protect and rebuild your runs!
The only thing I don't like, is having to turn back a "dead" fish! That needs to be fixed... I saw WAY to much of that this year, me included!
Just IMHO!
codfather
Crew Member
Charlie, you hit the nail on the head. Throwing back a Coho that has its gills bleeding is sooooooooooo bad. It kills me knowing that a large percentage of those fish will die.
I know the rules are for the dishonest as they would say that all the fish in there box were bleeding but something could change.
I know the rules are for the dishonest as they would say that all the fish in there box were bleeding but something could change.
gallows
Member
H-core is 100% right. The Oyster hatchery doesn't clip any coho, not because they can't find volunteers to do it, it's simply because they don't want to. That is the reason I will never volunteer to help at that hatchery. Produce fish for the commercial fleet, yes, recreational anglers, no. There must be at least one volunteer from that hatchery on this forum reading this. Please explain your reasoning?
BTW Charlie, now that you mentioned the Campbell R., I can tell you that the Campbell has an awesome year this year. To the full surprize of DFO as it seems. I snorkeled the river recently and talked to some locals in the know. The pink returns are manyfold as what DFO expected and literally pile up below the hatchery gate. The only natural spawning grounds there are in the Quinsam and I bet every square-inch of suitable river bed were used up by the pinks before any springs and cohos showed up. End of Aug big numbers and sizes of springs showed in the Campbell - more and larger as were seen for long there. And the cohos were just starting to trickle in and were staging nicely outside. Seems they will have an epic year and I only hope the hatchery has enough capacity to utiltize most of those many large springs (50# plus) that I saw in the river since there is no way they will find any more unused natural spawning ground in the Quinsam. Oh, btw, I also identified an Atlantic salmon in the river - wonder were that came from??? [xx(] Sorry for the hijack but I thought you should hear a positive story too for a change!
I was at Costco tonight and they were selling fresh wild Coho. Out of curiosity I went over to check them out. Out of seven fish in the cooler, only one was a wild and the rest were clipped!
I was shocked, this shows you that without hatchery programs some salmon runs would be next to nothing. I wish the government would put less effort in fish farms and more into hatchery fish; the hatchery fish are obviously making an impact on stocks.
I was shocked, this shows you that without hatchery programs some salmon runs would be next to nothing. I wish the government would put less effort in fish farms and more into hatchery fish; the hatchery fish are obviously making an impact on stocks.
beemer
Well-Known Member
It would make sense to me to allow sportfishers to take 1 or 2 hatchery OR wild to stop the unnessasary killing of "wilds" that goes on. A guest caught a 20 lb wild coho yesterday (really) and it was done before it got into the boat. It seems like such a waste to throw it back. We continued to fish for several hours to get our hatch after stressing 5 or 6 wild coho. Doesn't seem to make sense.
perhaps we need to start changing the language we are using here. wild fish are something pretty special and distinct. what we are really discussing is clipped or unclipped. unfortunately, we have no way of knowing if any of those unclipped are actually wild fish.
the indians down here have been reluctant to clip, after all you and i might actually kill one of their fish if they clipped.
the hatchery fish are having a very big and negative impact on the few remaining wild stocks. there is study after study on this topic so google around if you are interested. the big push down here is not only clipping but finding a means of killing as many clipped fish as possible, before they enter any eco system.
the WDFW, however, seems to thing that terminal net fishing still is an ok strategy even though they also have tons of data indicating that the very fish they are trying to protect are being harvested via these nonselective fishing methods.
you just have to wonder what is actually going on behind the scenes to allow this sort of idiocy to continue.
and as i a sure you already know, all of those hatchery fish plugging up the available spawning gravel have next to a zero chance of successfully spawning. but since they are on the gravel, any wild fish who happen along are going to have a really tough time competing with the sheer numbers of hatchery fishes. that is the crux of this entire wild vs hatchery issue.
i still say that so long as there is not a concerted effort to clip every hatchery fish, the catch regulations need to be changed to allow the first X number of fish to be reduced to your possession. i also hate to see me releasing bleeders because of an intact adipose fin.
the indians down here have been reluctant to clip, after all you and i might actually kill one of their fish if they clipped.
the hatchery fish are having a very big and negative impact on the few remaining wild stocks. there is study after study on this topic so google around if you are interested. the big push down here is not only clipping but finding a means of killing as many clipped fish as possible, before they enter any eco system.
the WDFW, however, seems to thing that terminal net fishing still is an ok strategy even though they also have tons of data indicating that the very fish they are trying to protect are being harvested via these nonselective fishing methods.
you just have to wonder what is actually going on behind the scenes to allow this sort of idiocy to continue.
and as i a sure you already know, all of those hatchery fish plugging up the available spawning gravel have next to a zero chance of successfully spawning. but since they are on the gravel, any wild fish who happen along are going to have a really tough time competing with the sheer numbers of hatchery fishes. that is the crux of this entire wild vs hatchery issue.
i still say that so long as there is not a concerted effort to clip every hatchery fish, the catch regulations need to be changed to allow the first X number of fish to be reduced to your possession. i also hate to see me releasing bleeders because of an intact adipose fin.
Charlie
Well-Known Member
Reelfast –
You don't even want to get me started on U.S. wild salmon, especially since this is a BC forum! There are estimates as high as 90% of all our Washington fish are now result of and/or produced in HATCHERIES! I am NOT even going to argue that fact, as I believe that number very well could be true!
You don't even want to get me started on U.S. wild salmon, especially since this is a BC forum! There are estimates as high as 90% of all our Washington fish are now result of and/or produced in HATCHERIES! I am NOT even going to argue that fact, as I believe that number very well could be true!
