Salmon need Trees
- Thread starter Derby
- Start date
"A recent study by David Reid, completed when he was a postdoctoral researcher at the University of British Columbia, found the full impacts of logging can take a surprisingly long time to kick in.""over the study period from 1976 to 2015: steelhead adults declined by about 80 percent and juveniles by about 90 percent."
And nothing about gillnets being the cause of this decline, neither. Some bloggers may be disappointed in the findings of this study, Derby. Thanks for posting!
And nothing about gillnets being the cause of this decline, neither. Some bloggers may be disappointed in the findings of this study, Derby. Thanks for posting!
Last edited:
Here's another recent related study:
Marine and freshwater ecosystems are increasingly at risk of large and cascading changes from multiple human activities (termed “regime shifts”), which can impact population productivity, resilience, and ecosystem structure. Pacific salmon exhibit persistent and large fluctuations in their population dynamics driven by combinations of intrinsic (e.g., density dependence) and extrinsic factors (e.g., ecosystem changes, species interactions). In recent years, many Pacific salmon have declined due to regime shifts but clear understanding of the processes driving these changes remains elusive. Here, we unpacked the role of density dependence, ecosystem trends, and stochasticity on productivity regimes for a community of five anadromous Pacific salmonids (Steelhead, Coho Salmon, Pink Salmon, Dolly Varden, and Coastal Cutthroat Trout) across a rich 40-year time-series. We used a Bayesian multivariate state-space model to examine whether productivity shifts had similarly occurred across the community and explored marine or freshwater changes associated with those shifts. Overall, we identified three productivity regimes: an early regime (1976–1990), a compensatory regime (1991–2009), and a declining regime (since 2010) where large declines were observed for Steelhead, Dolly Varden, and Cutthroat Trout, intermediate declines in Coho and no change in Pink Salmon. These regime changes were associated with multiple cumulative effects across the salmon life cycle. For example, increased seal densities and ocean competition were associated with lower adult marine survival in Steelhead. Watershed logging also intensified over the past 40 years and was associated with (all else equal) ≥97% declines in freshwater productivity for Steelhead, Cutthroat, and Coho. For Steelhead, marine and freshwater dynamics played approximately equal roles in explaining trends in total productivity. Collectively, these changing environments limited juvenile production and lowered future adult returns. These results reveal how changes in freshwater and marine environments can jointly shape population dynamics among ecological communities, like Pacific salmon, with cascading consequences to their resilience.
Abstract
Marine and freshwater ecosystems are increasingly at risk of large and cascading changes from multiple human activities (termed “regime shifts”), which can impact population productivity, resilience, and ecosystem structure. Pacific salmon exhibit persistent and large fluctuations in their population dynamics driven by combinations of intrinsic (e.g., density dependence) and extrinsic factors (e.g., ecosystem changes, species interactions). In recent years, many Pacific salmon have declined due to regime shifts but clear understanding of the processes driving these changes remains elusive. Here, we unpacked the role of density dependence, ecosystem trends, and stochasticity on productivity regimes for a community of five anadromous Pacific salmonids (Steelhead, Coho Salmon, Pink Salmon, Dolly Varden, and Coastal Cutthroat Trout) across a rich 40-year time-series. We used a Bayesian multivariate state-space model to examine whether productivity shifts had similarly occurred across the community and explored marine or freshwater changes associated with those shifts. Overall, we identified three productivity regimes: an early regime (1976–1990), a compensatory regime (1991–2009), and a declining regime (since 2010) where large declines were observed for Steelhead, Dolly Varden, and Cutthroat Trout, intermediate declines in Coho and no change in Pink Salmon. These regime changes were associated with multiple cumulative effects across the salmon life cycle. For example, increased seal densities and ocean competition were associated with lower adult marine survival in Steelhead. Watershed logging also intensified over the past 40 years and was associated with (all else equal) ≥97% declines in freshwater productivity for Steelhead, Cutthroat, and Coho. For Steelhead, marine and freshwater dynamics played approximately equal roles in explaining trends in total productivity. Collectively, these changing environments limited juvenile production and lowered future adult returns. These results reveal how changes in freshwater and marine environments can jointly shape population dynamics among ecological communities, like Pacific salmon, with cascading consequences to their resilience.
wildmanyeah
Crew Member
I think your kinda using one thing to discredit another thing.
bob never said that gillnets were the reason for the decline. Hess just said they dont help with the recovery and are the most immediate and easiest thing we can take care of.
i believe bob summarizes his thoughts on logging in his blog post about the gold.
bob never said that gillnets were the reason for the decline. Hess just said they dont help with the recovery and are the most immediate and easiest thing we can take care of.
i believe bob summarizes his thoughts on logging in his blog post about the gold.
Gold River Lament
You need to understand the past to navigate the future. I moved to Vancouver Island too late to see the best it ever had to offer a steelhead fisherman. Major systems such as the Cowichan, San Juan…
steelheadvoices.com
Last edited:
I think the issue of gillnets is neither a black nor a white issue, and there are examples from both ends of the spectrums with larger rivers with multistocks and multispecies comigrating with weak stocks being the most challenging to manage and effective timely management being another factor. I wish to acknowledge these challenges along with sometimes a lack of escapement data in certain watersheds; but also wish to point out that not all watersheds are the same, with all the same challenges including impacts from gillnets.
But it is also clear from these studies that a very significant proportion of all salmon species (e.g. ≥97% declines in freshwater productivity for Steelhead) are affected by other factors such as logging, climate change and seals.
I'm not seeing these facts being acknowledged by those whom wish to paint gillnets are being the reason for these declines - so I would characterize that narrative as being disingenuous, misleading and poorly informed and even ineffective.
Thanks for your post, WMY.
But it is also clear from these studies that a very significant proportion of all salmon species (e.g. ≥97% declines in freshwater productivity for Steelhead) are affected by other factors such as logging, climate change and seals.
I'm not seeing these facts being acknowledged by those whom wish to paint gillnets are being the reason for these declines - so I would characterize that narrative as being disingenuous, misleading and poorly informed and even ineffective.
Thanks for your post, WMY.
wildmanyeah
Crew Member
They have caused significant declines in mixed stock fisheries to weaker stocks.
There are examples of those impacts yes - but again - it's not necessarily black and white and there are many components to that issue (e.g. net lengths, timing, mesh size, enforcement, monitoring, etc.). And not all watersheds are the same, neither wrt run composition and bycatch.
Meanwhile, for some pundits - global warming and forestry impacts are largely unacknowledged or unaddressed as being potentially larger and more significant impacts.
The science listed in the above posts by Derby and myself indicates how pervasive and important those components are - (e.g. ≥97% declines in freshwater productivity for Steelhead). I think it's past time to address these issues as more major issues - if we can.
Meanwhile, for some pundits - global warming and forestry impacts are largely unacknowledged or unaddressed as being potentially larger and more significant impacts.
The science listed in the above posts by Derby and myself indicates how pervasive and important those components are - (e.g. ≥97% declines in freshwater productivity for Steelhead). I think it's past time to address these issues as more major issues - if we can.
Gillnets are of minor concern to most steelhead populations on Vancouver Island as winter steelhead, for the most part, migrate during the period of zero commercial gillnetting. In river gillnetting during the winter is limited to a few river systems. Because their is no enumeration, how many get caught is unknown but given the fact that winter steelhead tend to migrate during freshets I would guess that it is minimal most years.
The same would be true of most Vancouver Island summer steelhead with the exception of those that migrate in locations and times that coincide with any sockeye gillnet fishing.
Steelhead that migrate in the Nass, Skeena, and Fraser systems are inadvertently targeted by commercial and FN gillnets mostly during sockeye season but also during chum season on the Fraser.
The same would be true of most Vancouver Island summer steelhead with the exception of those that migrate in locations and times that coincide with any sockeye gillnet fishing.
Steelhead that migrate in the Nass, Skeena, and Fraser systems are inadvertently targeted by commercial and FN gillnets mostly during sockeye season but also during chum season on the Fraser.
OldBlackDog
Well-Known Member
Once a species is listed under the Species at Risk Act, it becomes illegal to kill, harass, capture or harm it in any way.
Threats (direct, from highest impact to least, as per IUCN Threats Calculator)
Was a threats calculator completed for this species? Yes.- Biological resource use (High)
- Fishing and harvesting aquatic resources (H)
- Natural system modifications (High)
- Dams and water management/use (L)
- Other ecosystem modifications (H)
- Invasive and other problematic species and genes (High-medium)
- Problematic native species/diseases (H-M)
- Pollution (Medium)
- Domestic and urban waste water (L)
- Industrial and military effluents (L)
- Agricultural and forestry effluents (M)
- Geologic events (Low)
- Avalanches/landslides
cuttlefish
Well-Known Member
Here’s a link to a bit of logging history on Northern Vancouver Island.
undiscoveredcoast.blogspot.com
And here’s a brief bit of my personal history as part of the logging industry.
One of the first jobs I took after moving to the area in the early 70’s was powder monkey. I worked for a guy who blasted stumps along right-of-ways for the three big logging companies. The old cable shovels of the day couldn’t dig out the whole stump so we went in after the fallers and blasted the stumps into pieces.
I remember one trip up behind Victoria Lake were we only blew up two spruce stumps for the day. One stump was 14’ in diameter and the other was 12’. On the way back we had to stop behind a flagman and watched while loaded gravel trucks pulled out onto the mainline above a stream where a bulldozer was pushing gravel onto the bank and front-end loaders scooped it into the waiting trucks. I didn’t have a clue at the time about the lifecycle of salmon (and I doubt many of those road builders did either) but I do remember seeing little eel-like critters squirming all over the roadbed in the wash of water coming out from under the tailgate of the gravel trucks.
North Island coho runs were decimated by DDT experiment
This article appears in the October 31, 2013 issue of the North Island Gazette. We don’t have to look very far into our history to see so...
undiscoveredcoast.blogspot.com
And here’s a brief bit of my personal history as part of the logging industry.
One of the first jobs I took after moving to the area in the early 70’s was powder monkey. I worked for a guy who blasted stumps along right-of-ways for the three big logging companies. The old cable shovels of the day couldn’t dig out the whole stump so we went in after the fallers and blasted the stumps into pieces.
I remember one trip up behind Victoria Lake were we only blew up two spruce stumps for the day. One stump was 14’ in diameter and the other was 12’. On the way back we had to stop behind a flagman and watched while loaded gravel trucks pulled out onto the mainline above a stream where a bulldozer was pushing gravel onto the bank and front-end loaders scooped it into the waiting trucks. I didn’t have a clue at the time about the lifecycle of salmon (and I doubt many of those road builders did either) but I do remember seeing little eel-like critters squirming all over the roadbed in the wash of water coming out from under the tailgate of the gravel trucks.
Spring Time in Vienna
Member
I always question motives when someone is so adamant about defending one threat to fish populations while quick to point to others as the smoking gun. The fact remains these fish are killed by a thousand cuts (Habitat, predation, non-selective fishing methods, over-fishing, climate change). To not be willing to adjust all methods of conservation is silly. Gillnets are an easy fix, habitat protection and restoration and predator control are a more long term battle. All remain a huge obstacle due to political ideology trumping scientific evidence.
searun
Well-Known Member
Couldn't agree more. And if we accept the importance of addressing the most impactful reasons for the declines that means we should consider a shift in approach to tackle multiple as opposed to single sources.
Picking just one is a silly approach. 3 things we should consider. First, develop a short list of top 3 or so likely culprits impacting recovery - we can't do everything. Second, important to consider in practical terms that taking action usually is dependent on access to limited resources - that means trade-offs are necessary to get down to a short list of what is actually in the art of the possible - develop a prioritized list. Lastly, consider timelines for achieving each potential solution, and break down our use of available but limited resources into priorities in terms of what can have the most benefit over the short term first, followed by longer term actions. But to get there, we need to have open minds and work collaboratively - the most significant if not impossible challenge for steelhead recovery IMO.
If we want to actually make a difference one practical approach is to start with a thoughtful and "collaborative" analysis to determine in rank order which of the many contributors to steelhead decline we actually have potential to take positive action to change. The reason I mention "collaborative", is if those who care about steelhead recovery want a sniff of a chance at success, we have to build a "strong and united coalition" of support to help create a safe environment for government and those who work within it to put forward policy solutions that they know won't be picked apart from stakeholders. The current stakeholder environment is far from that - in fact, I would argue the main reason government folks are taking little to no meaningful action is they fear that their potential policy efforts will be trashed by a fractured and argumentative stakeholder group to the extent their political bosses pull the plug on any program requests. AKA, time for "us" who care to take a long sober look in the mirror and figure out how to stop the infighting about what to do, and find a way to start working collaboratively. Which will require the egos to go into standby mode, and a little give and take when it comes to reaching agreement on a plan everyone can support. We need to help government take action, that starts by creating a positive united collaborative action plan that makes it "safe" for government to take action.
If we fail to build a positive and united coalition approach, with a well defined policy request for government to action, then I predict the current coast wide spiral towards extirpation will continue unabated. Sadly, it is probably already too late for us to arrest this, and I fear we have reached the tipping point and we are now beyond the place where it is functionally possible to change the apparent fate of steelhead.
OldBlackDog
Well-Known Member
And the end of Upper Fraser Chinook .
Also the end of Fraser Coho as shown by the many years of the Government showing how to save them and yet here we are still showing no increased numbers.
Meeting after meeting over Steelhead with ALL the groups you have been involved, with and nothing has changed.
The groups you discuss are no threat to the Government. Until they are a threat you have no power and they know that.
This is unlike the East Coast who are listened to by the Government.
searun
Well-Known Member
That's not how government works....they always opt for the "safe" way out. In this case with a fractured stakeholder group that fights at drop of a hat, they will just sit back and do....nothing. If the stakeholders can't get their crap together and start working and speaking with one voice in a coordinated and unified fashion not much will change IMO. Most people who cared (including me) have given up on doing anything constructive for steelhead for these exact reasons.
SpringVelocity
Crew Member
100 percent agree. Got to stop this fighting. It's silly.
OldBlackDog
Well-Known Member
Great, then let’s get under one group. Let’s use the BCWF as it is a group of volunteers who care and are from the whole province.
They have the most members and have shown they care about fish even when they were a hunting group.
I would suggest it is speculation on your part when you say that "most people have given up on doing anything constructive for steelhead for those exact reasons..." There are many people hard at work advocating for steelhead including those that will be attending the upcoming PAAT meeting next week. Unfortunately, it is coinciding the same day that the SFAB is having a workshop dealing with anadromous species. Two important meetings taking place on the same day, one "the province" who manages steelhead and the other one through the SFAB process....
Derby
Crew Member
OldBlackDog
Well-Known Member
And the group that you would recommend is ?Very well put... 2 thumbs up
Similar threads
