WA Chinook cost $768 for each one caught

Sushihunter

Active Member
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2011571859_fishaudit10m.html


State on the hook for $768 for every salmon caught in Puget Sound
And audit revealed Puget Sound's popular blackmouth fishery costs $768 for every fish that's caught.

By Craig Welch

Seattle Times environment reporter


Puget Sound's popular blackmouth fishery — made possible by a complex system of hatcheries that produce and rear these plump young versions of chinook salmon — costs $768 for every fish that's caught.

That's a calculation made by the state Auditor's Office in an audit released Friday of the state's politically popular key winter fishery.

Each year the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife produces hundreds of thousands of the juvenile salmon in hatcheries, then raises them for 14 months or more in ponds until they lose the instinct to migrate. Then the fish are released for fishermen to hook for sport.

But some of the same environmental conditions that helped push wild chinook onto the Endangered Species list — such as pollution and habitat loss from development — mean few of the young blackmouth live long enough to get snagged. And the many fishing restrictions imposed in response to the 1999 listing of wild chinook also scaled back chances for anglers to try to catch the hatchery chinook.

That means catch rates for blackmouth are such a fraction of what they once were that the state may produce 900 fish for every one an angler nets. And each of those 900 fish costs about 85 cents.

"They're expensive to raise — more expensive than most fish," said Heather Bartlett, hatcheries division manager for Fish and Wildlife. "And their survival lately hasn't been very good."

The auditor's performance review suggested the program was so inefficient it must be changed, a charge Bartlett's agency doesn't dispute.

But the program's goals were dictated by legislative edict in 1993 as a means to sustain and promote sport fishing in Puget Sound. It's paid for by license fees derived from saltwater anglers, money that is dedicated to improving fishing. So as salmon listings have curtailed other angling opportunities, there's been little political will to cut back blackmouth production.

"Fishing used to be open unless we closed it," said Jo Wadsworth, Fish and Wildlife's deputy assistant director for fish. "Now it's closed unless we open it. And this is a unique fishery because it is open in winter when many other things are not."

Sport fishermen on Friday were immediately wary. The audit calls on the Legislature to change the law to let hatcheries produce far fewer and far younger fish — juvenile chinook that cost only about 11 cents each.

But that could reduce even further the number of fish available to be caught. And that frustrates longtime fishermen.

"Has this program always worked right? No," said Clint Muns, with Puget Sound Anglers. "But I think we've made great strides. The department's commitment to hatchery reform is without question."



Environmentalists, meanwhile, say the recommendation would be a step in the right direction, but they believe the auditor missed the key issue. They say blackmouth production should have been halted years ago because the large hatchery-bred fish are built tough and compete with threatened chinook for food.

"The financial issues absolutely must be considered," said Kurt Beardslee, with Wild Fish Conservation Northwest. "But I always hoped they would kill this program for biological reasons — not just because we can't afford it."

Fish and Wildlife officials have said they support the auditor's recommendations.

Craig Welch: 206-464-2093 or cwelch@seattletimes.com



Jim's Fishing Charters
www.JimsFishing.com
http://ca.youtube.com/user/Sushihunter250
 
quote:Originally posted by LastChance

During the winter, 9 out of 10 fish I catch are tagged Springs. To my knowledge, us Canucks don't tag our springs, so I figured they were US fish. Summer yes, most anything on the banks are US fish, but during the Winter I understand that we are getting Puget Sound fish.

Last Chance Fishing Adventures

www.lastchancefishingadventures.com
www.swiftsurebank.com
Well, I agree... "most antyhing on the banks are US fish"... and I also agree, "during the Winter I understand that we are getting Puget Sound fish"! But those are "not" our Blackmouth!

And, Oh yes! You Canucks do tag your springs... I think, "my" tax dollars are going there... At least to the tune of about 3 million! :D
 
quote:Originally posted by LastChance

During the winter, 9 out of 10 fish I catch are tagged Springs. To my knowledge, us Canucks don't tag our springs, so I figured they were US fish. Summer yes, most anything on the banks are US fish, but during the Winter I understand that we are getting Puget Sound fish.

Last Chance Fishing Adventures

www.lastchancefishingadventures.com
www.swiftsurebank.com
Well, I agree... "most antyhing on the banks are US fish"... and I also agree, "during the Winter I understand that we are getting Puget Sound fish"! But those are "not" our Blackmouth!

And, Oh yes! You Canucks do tag your springs... I think, "my" tax dollars are going there... At least to the tune of about 3 million! :D
 
LC: It seems those "Blackmouth" springs are projects like our recent pink salmon net-pen 'put an take fisheries' such as in Nanaimo, Cowichan Bay and the one's proposed but declined in Sidney and Victoria - except it seems those Blackmouth really never migrate anywhere but stay really close to where released. The hatch springs we catch here in the winter are "real" enhanced stocks from Puget Sound river hatcheries. That's at least how I understand it from various info sources.
 
LC: It seems those "Blackmouth" springs are projects like our recent pink salmon net-pen 'put an take fisheries' such as in Nanaimo, Cowichan Bay and the one's proposed but declined in Sidney and Victoria - except it seems those Blackmouth really never migrate anywhere but stay really close to where released. The hatch springs we catch here in the winter are "real" enhanced stocks from Puget Sound river hatcheries. That's at least how I understand it from various info sources.
 
quote:Originally posted by LastChance

Wherever they come from, they are a damn fun and hopefully sustainable fishery. Charlie, where did you find out we clip our springs? BIologist at SFAB a few meetings ago said we don't clip 'em.
The "ONLY" way to really determine "where" they are from... is to turn "ALL" those heads in!

Yes, they are "probably" Puget Sound fish this time of year - as that is their migration! Very, very few would be our "Winter Blackmouth"! You "might" pickup a few out of the San Juans as they will still follow the food, but I think very few... Those we try keep to ourselves! :)

I gotta love the "biologist" "we don't clip 'em" comment! I wonder if that is the same "reliable""biologist"“source" referred to by someone else I know of? [:0] [:0]

The removal of a fin has been going on for years under the Mark Recovery Program (MRP). More so, of late. It is also, considered part of the Pacific Salmon Treaty and why "Washington" shelled out $3,000,000 dollars of my tax money, to Canada...
quote: it is understood that the evaluation of mark-selective fisheries in Canada may be subject to funding or other assistance "provided by" the "State of Washington" (with support as appropriate from the United States) in an amount not to exceed $3 million (U.S.)...
Does that kinda make me a stakeholder? And based on that "biologist" comment... Am I getting my monies worth? [:0] [:0]
http://www.psc.org/pubs/treaty.pdf

Now as far as the adipose fin clippings, Harrison Chinook have been "marked" since 1984. I am not going to find when the first were clipped, I really don't care - but if you want to contact the Chelalis First Nation they can probably provide some information on that? They did CWT and adipose fin clipping on 100% of 210,000 "Chinook" in April 2008, which was the second year of this particular program. There were previous programs - not as sucessful in the past. So, I think that will pretty much take care of any of the Fraser not clipping Chinook comments?
http://fund.psc.org/2008/Reports/SF_2008_I_18_McNicol.pdf
http://www.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/fraserriver/firstnations/2008FrasRvrChkInformDocument.htm\

The Spius Creek Hatchery Produces Chinook for the Nicola River, Salmon River, Coldwater River, Deadman River, and Spius Creek. Those are "tagged" and I believe some are now being clipped, but not positive. So, you’ll have to contact the hatchery to confirm - one way or the other.
http://www.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/sep-pmvs/projects-projets/spius/bg-rb-eng.htm

I don’t remember if it was ‘The Okanagan Nation Alliance’ or the ‘South Okanagan-Similkameen Conservation Program’ (SOSCP) or "Whoever" - and it did take me awhile to track about a year or so ago, but I remember there was about 700,000 Canadian Chinook released on the Okanogan River, of which all (100%) were clipped! These fish migrate through and are considered "Columbian". They are caught off WCVI, along with the U.S. fish. "DFO" must considered them U.S. and of "NO" importance to "THEM", as based on "THEIR" recesnt decision not to put them on SARA? That decision and "DFO" reasoning was/is complete "BULL SH'T"! DFO just basically wrote those fish off - Not even sure that is "legal"? [V] Those fish need protected, period!

Now… just because I like you! [:I]
Here are just a few Canadian Facilities in British Columbia that I know clip "adipose” fins! Since we know the Fraser clips, I think... there is one or two of these close enough to Vancouver Island... I can still "safely" say... "Just because it's clipped, it doesn't mean it is a U.S. Chinook", whatta ya think? :D

Cowichan River Hatchery (CWT and adipose fin clipped)
http://www.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/sep-pmvs/projects-projets/cedp-pdec/cowichan-eng.htm

Capilano River Hatchery (CWT and adipose fin clipped)
http://www.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/sep-pmvs/projects-projets/capilano/operations-exploitation-eng.htm

Quinsam River Hatchery (CWT and adipose fin clipped)
http://www.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/sep-pmvs/projects-projets/quinsam/bg-rb-eng.htm

Snootli Creek Hatchery (CWT and adipose fin clipped)
http://www.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/sep-pmvs/projects-projets/snootli/bg-rb-eng.htm

Just thought... Do you think it would be possible to request, ask, or find another "biologist" to take care of our fish? [}:)]
 
I know for sure that Cowichan and Quinsam hatchery do typically only clip the CWT tagged fish and that is a small percentage of all hatchery raised salmon. So does the Sooke hatchery and I am pretty certain Nitinat and Robertson Creek as well. Although there were some efforts at the Sooke in the last few years to clip a good number more - especially coho - but nowhere near 100%. There may be other procedures in other CDN hatcheries but you hear often the argument that funding is too short to allow for clipping all released (and un-tagged) salmon.
 
quote:Originally posted by chris73

I know for sure that Cowichan and Quinsam hatchery do typically only clip the CWT tagged fish and that is a small percentage of all hatchery raised salmon. So does the Sooke hatchery and I am pretty certain Nitinat and Robertson Creek as well. Although there were some efforts at the Sooke in the last few years to clip a good number more - especially coho - but nowhere near 100%. There may be other procedures in other CDN hatcheries but you hear often the argument that funding is too short to allow for clipping all released (and un-tagged) salmon.
Well, that brings up the other “myths” – “all” U.S. Chinooks are 100% clipped… And, if it is “unclipped” – it’s wild! And the term U.S. fish are “cookie cutter”! “Cookie cutter” would be very much "only" be our Puget Sound fish!

On average, since 1981, 14% of Spring Creek’s adults return as two year olds, 64% return as three year olds, 21% are four years old, and less than 1% return as five year olds. The following fish can be and are “very” easily in the 50-80 pounds range! If you really want to see some interesting numbers? [?]

In 2004, out of 15,000,000 smolts being released at Spring Creek hatchery, only 450,000 were clipped? That would be three (3) percent. With approximately 13% of those harvested in British Columbia… and the latter percentage has to be increasing? If you use a survival rate of .05 that would equates to 97,500 of these fish are taken in BC, with 94,575 “ of them “unmarked” and only 2,925 of them marked! Just from this one (1) hatchery!
quote: Presently, only 450,000 tule fall Chinook salmon are being marked at Spring Creek NFH to access survival and evaluate harvest potential.

On average for brood years 1980 through 1994, the percentage of fish harvested in the Columbia River gill net fishery has been equal to the number of fish returning to the hatchery, approximately 34%. About 13% of Spring Creek fish are harvested in British Columbia sport and commercial fisheries. Washington and Oregon commercial fisheries each take about 6%. Brood years in the 1970’s routinely provided over 100,000 fish for harvest in ocean fisheries. Table 4 provides information on escapement and harvest of Spring Creek NFH tule fall Chinook.

Currently, mass marking of fall Chinook salmon has not yet been implemented except for special cases, but will be looked at in the future. Presently, cost and logistics of marking 15 million smolts are the prohibitive factors for mass marking and could be a future concern if all Spring Creek NFH fish must be marked.
http://www.fws.gov/columbiariver/pdfdocs/hatchery/Spring Creek_CHMP_Final_Feb_2004.pdf
http://www.fws.gov/gorgefish/springcreek/species.html

If you jump to, and read the 2009 report will see the production of this hatchery” appears” to have declined, but not really, just a little “reprogramming”. Spring Creek NFH now releases 6.0 million sub-yearling tule fall Chinook salmon during April and 4.5 million fall Chinook in May. Additionally, the hatchery transferred 1.7 million tule fall Chinook salmon in March to Little White Salmon NFH for acclimation and release and 3 million tule fall Chinook salmon eggs to Bonneville Hatchery, operated by Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, for eventual release below Bonneville Dam. That is still 15.2 million and the British Columbia “total” take has increased to over 20%!
http://www.fws.gov/gorgefish/springcreek/reports/sc2009.pdf

And… this is just from one (1) hatchery! :D
 
Not too many hatcheries with that kind of output up here. Interesting that they also only clip a small % of total...
 
Back
Top