How many fish do you harvest oriented anglers need anyways to sustain your need to kill and eat fish.

I myself combineing salmon, steelhead, trout and all species of bottom fish on avarage kill maybe 20 to 25 fish a year tops. My family of 3 eats fish about once a week and eat fish I catch about 95% of the time.

RIGHT ON RICH!!!!

I wouldn't mind seeing some state salmon hatcheries close down....and they can start with
the one in Issaquah!!! I'am sick and tired of watching our tax dollars flushed down the drink
every year on hatcheries that have and will always
have poor water quality and continue to put weak fish into the system.

Cigar

Cowlitz,
So glad to see your posts again! (Really!) I think you can state the case for hatcheries as well as anyone and I sometimes have to actually think about the "Big Picture" before I can respond to your ideas. To me, however, the big picture includes the condition of our rivers and fish populations decades from now, when we will be judged on our actions or inaction. You mentioned filling the need of the majority. The majority of people in the northwest 1) don't fish, 2) want their tax revenues spent on education, transportation, and social services, and 3) think a salmon is a fish that returns to the place it was born to spawn and die. They actually derive inspiration from that!

If you still think the "majority" need fish for harvest, how about the financial practicality of sustaining the current level of harvest into the next century? How many more fishermen will there be in 2102? 4 times as many? 5? Are we 21st century anglers actually the minority? Is each 22nd century angler going to be entitled to 30 salmon/year? Who is going to pay for maybe 5 times the hatchery production we have now? The expense of running hatcheries is already accelerating at a rate that is forcing closures in Washington and Oregon. Lastly, how many more wild fish stocks will disappear to ensure the future fishermen get to tag several fish per month?

I anxiously await your reply!

"If we were to do one thing to save our wild fish the single best thing we could do would be to shut down hatcheries!!!!! Anyone who has a problem with that has a problem with science!"

I just love the balanced, scientific and open-minded view that Rob Allen and his nutso wild fish fanatics have. Unbelievable!

Some of you guys need to get down off your moral superiorty soapbox.

Rich,you kill and eat more fish than I do.i have to ask you,since you seem to catch alot of fish, what do you do with the hatchery fish that you don't eat?Do you release them unharmed or what?

I eat my share of fish,but my freezer is full of salmon from the salt.I have another trip,for chinook next week.I probably won't bonk any steelhead I catch this year.I fish for sport,not meat.

I do not want to lose my sport in an effort that I do not believe will have any positive effect on wild stocks.Remove dams and nets,restoring habitat and nutrients to the river will help.killing off the sportfishing interest won't.

I've kept my distance from this discussion but I have decided to enter the fracus.

I must say that I agree with Rich...to me fishing is so much more about catching and killing fish and to me wild fish are so much more prized as not only a quarry but as an organism and it is OUR duty to fight for their long term survival. If you do not agree, sell your driftboat or sled, your steelhead and salmon rods and take up trout fishing at the local lowland lake.

Is Washington Trout's call for the closing of so many hatcheries truly necassary??...probally not. We all know there are succesful hatcheries and unsuccesful hatcheries (succesful being measured in benefits to sportsmen with as little if any detriment to wild fish populations). Succes is usually determined by many factors and yet at sometimes, success can come from the fact that a hatchery is isolated from wild fish populations.

Leadslinger-
You totally contradict yourself...at one point you tell Rich that he eats more fish then yourself but in the next paragraph you state you have a freezer full of salmon caught from Puget Sound. Last time I checked, Puget Sound did NOT have selective fisheries and some of those fish could be wild...how does that make you any better then Rich???? I would rather you kill a hatchery steelhead then a wild salmon...

...I still dont get how you can you fish for sport when prior you state you have a freezer full of salmon?? Sure do hope those fish can eaten up and not thrown away!!

Rich G -
Welcome back glad to see you posting again!

However, your recent post illustrates clearly why hatchery fish are needed in today's society. On the surface taking 2 fish a month doesn't seem excessive but consider the following: there are easily 400,000 anglers in the state (most likely over 1/2 million). At 25 fish per angler per year that would be 10,000,000 fish a year! Doubt that even Washngton's hatchery program can support that kind of consumptive recreation; the wild resource certainly can not. It seems to me that the first step in reducing the spiralling increase of hatchery production is to look at how the fish are allocated. This is even more critical if we want to intelligently reduce or change production levels.

Are there problems with the exist hatchery program? -certainly.
Are changes needed? - of course.
Do we need to eliminate all hatchery fish? - I'm not so sure.

This knee jerk reaction of eliminating all hatchery fish because of the problems (even wide spread problems) with fish is not neccessarily the most productive approach. Clearly urban sprawl, water issues, aggressive land management, etc have all contributed greatly to the current state of our wild fish resources. Should we stop all building, stop using water or electric, stop using wood products - off course not. What is needed is some careful thought and examination of all of the issues and starting down a more balanced path. In the hatchery arena that may mean examining the causes of the detrimental impacts on the wild fish by hatcheries and setting about reducing those impacts. Actions depending on the situation may mean elimination of some programs, downsizing others, changing brood stocks, planting strategies, etc. The specifics are for a later discussion. Once we as a group come to grips with the need for change we have made the first and hardest step.

Remember it took nealry 150 years to bring us to this state and it unlikely that there are any easy fixes. Likely it will mean careful consideration followed by changes in a broad spectrum of the 4 Hs. I would much prefer to see a more balanced in this rebuilding effort. Clearly adjustments in the hatchery and harvest arena is needed but the habitat arena can not continued to ignored. I've seem very little meaningful changes in land management issues - at best all that is being proposed is slowing down the destruction of key fish habitat.

I'm more than willing to do more than my fair share (reducing my fishing impacts!) but any fish recovery success is dependent on the rest of society willingness to meet me part way. Don't see that happening.

My 2 cents
Tight lines
Smalma

I Agree lets get rid of all the hatcherys, after all, native fish are more able to survive the cycle of life than weak hatchery stocks. But only after we remove the obstacles that made it necesary to have hatcherys in the first place. Lets see First the dams would have to go then the nets all of them Then clearcut logging Then We would have to have a drawing to see who could fish what year as there are way to many fisherman nowadays. No problem perfect solution!
Ramprat

I did not say Puget Sound.I said the salt.Westport.Next week Canada.It doesn't take many large fish to fill a freezer.Don't you know?

You actually want to speculate that these fish are wild?You have no idea.No clue.

Yes,I fish for sport,not meat.That is why I release fish that I don't eat,yet still continue to fish.

I did not attack Rich,as you tried with me.I refuted his agrument about harvest,harveat,harvest being the motive for my opposition to closing down the hatcheries.

I did not lie or contradict myself.Rich stated a figure on what he kept.it is more than what I will keep.

I enjoy an argument and will not give up the moral highground to an opposing viewpoint if it is not warranted.Don't take it personal.

In reading the posts it seems clear that some of us are like wild steelhead and others are like hatchery fish.

Kudos to RA3, Rich G. etc.

some of us may indeed be genetically superior

Both sides have made some good points, so how about this.

1. Designate some rivers as hatchery only rivers to satisfy the folks who would want to catch an kill a few fish for home. These would be rivers with the lowest chance of recovery of the wild runs based on scientific factors. Stock the holy hell out of them, producing a sporting opportunity for the masses. Choose these rivers so that each region has at least two or three.

2. Close a select number of rivers to all fishing, including negotiated netting moratoriums with the tribes that use those rivers, for 2 complete generation cycles, meaning 8 years. These rivers would have the best chance of recovery for their wild runs.

3. Buy back the commercial gillnetter licenses through higher sport license fees.

4. Don't buy fish in the store. I haven't for years. I have bought some eggs in the past that were gillnet caught, but I doubt I will again. I have since learned to fish other methods that don't require eggs. I will still use eggs, but just eggs from hatchery fish that I catch.

5. Limit some rivers as catch and release only, no bait, to serve as somewhat of a control to gauge how the "no fishing" rivers are rebounding.

Just a thought.

United we stand, divided we fall.

Andy

The problem is 100% the fault of tribal and non tribal commericals. Hatcheries were created AFTER the wild runs were decimated. Get the nets out of the rivers and ocean and you'll have more wild fish.

Commerical harvest is what has ruined the fishing in this state and on the entire west coast. Most likely, all ocean fishing deeper than 150 feet will be closed from the border with Mexico through Alaska because the bottom fish are in such bad shape thanks to the draggers. No hatcheries there, just commerical rape.

Hey 4 Salt, those guys are such purist they would never lower themselves to using Allstar rods or vision hooks, all of you that support this group may as well get the **** off of this board because the reason hatcheries were started was to supplement the runs for harvest by all user groups.
I am all for wild fish, but how many pure wild fish runs actually still exsist, very few, you guys best pull your heads out of your asses and wake up, there is a hundred times more people using the resorce then the wild element can support, even in the best conditions. So all of you purist and washington trout ***s best pack up your toys and go somewhere else and play!!!!
Peace Superfly

Sure glad your not a moderator 'Fly!! This is just a discussion of what people believe, Some with science[on either side], some with just "I want", on either side. The answer will lie somewhere in between. There WILL be hatchery reform driven by the needs of wild fish, NOT by the wants of sportfishers. We can be part of the solution or just b!tch because while we were fighting each other some group helps formulate a management policy that helps neither the wild fish nor the sport fisher. There will have to be some comprimises on all sides to accomplish some changes, and changes WILL occur, with or without[my guess] the sportfishers imput.

Personaly hatchery fish do not satisfy my fishing wants.The best satisfaction comes from sneeking into a canyon on a section of a river not frequented by others and finding a wild fish or two.This is just me and I try hard not to put my self on moral ground it is just what I seek when I go fishing.

I have become intimate with some of our native stocks of salmon and w/s steelhead out here on the hood canal.They need to be shut down from sport fishing.Those waters are some of the most pristine in the state as far as logging,polution goes,and the fish still can not make a recovery!?Why are they even open?Because the state has created an artificial fishery based on winter steel head plants.

That is my big problem with the hatcheries.I see them more as a tool to cover a bunch of political based science that does not work.I believe the state is more into covering there asses and defending themselves then they are into managing our fisheries.I do know,based on there actions,that they could care less about the fish.

I would have to agree that the majority of our watersheds have much bigger problems than the hatcheries that need to be addressed.Actually I think that there are MANY small things that combined show just how delicate the relationship betweeen mother nature and our androminous runs are.Replacing culverts is not going to solve it,we need less dirt roads,way bigger buffers along the rivers etc,comeercial liscense bought buy the tax payer,seal, sea lion population controls etc..

I got to watch two poachers go into a favorite section of the skoke this year and litterally wipe out a strain of resident spawning fish.This was done by two guys and a bucket of worms.This shows me that our wild stocks cannnot stand up to the preasure of our current population.We will always need a source of hatchery fish to satisfy the needs of the majority of our fishermen.I have no problem with this but unfortunately I believe that the hatcheries are more a tool to cover the truth.

got to go to work

This topic of saving the wild fish has been going on for as long as I've been fishing for steelhead and salmon (over 25 years)and the problems have not gotten any better. The resources are limited while the user groups have increased. This is true not only in Wash. but also British Columbia where to fish some of their premier rivers there is now a lottery to limit the numbers of fishermen and to my knowledge there aren't any hatchery suppliments to those rivers. It wasn't that far back that there was a world class fishery on the Quillalute system if I remember correctly the game dept estimated a native return of over 17,000 native steelhead the fishery today isn't close because netting is allowed and if the wild stocks in other rivers would recover they would also be subjected to the same practice. I doubt seriously if that practice will change in my lifetime because the tribes get the feds involved. To get rid of all the hatcheries is not the answer to saving the wild fish better hatchery management and practices will help using native brood stock. I know some of you have fished the Quinault. Thats what they do and it's a great fishery even though it's netted heavy. Before jumping on the band wagon to get rid of all the hatcheries at this point you should ponder on what you are willing to give up since you are at the bottom of this food chain, and if there are fishermen who quit fishing due to a lack of opportunity that is less support for the resourses. It is not a win for us or the fish.

Just for the record, Washington Trout is pushing for the closing of what, 10 hatcheries? How many are in the state?, the northwest? hundreds? thousands? I've heard nobody in this discussion say the aim should be to eliminate all hatcheries. I certainly don't think that's necessary or realistic. I do think some need to be eliminated and others overhauled. I like hatchery fish and would rather have one jerk my line than skunk. I also like eating them. I had my last piece of a 16 pound summer brat last night. Tasted great on the grill. I've got another thawing for tonight. That said, I believe wild fish are much better sportfish and that they are the only salmonids that truly belong in the river. I'd be happy with some planted rivers and some unplanted, and I think the fish would too.

On that subject, I've heard bio's from the forest service and PGE talk about that as a strategy to recover and maintain wild fish stocks. It is also being pushed by Trout Unlimited. Essentially they want to establish certain rivers as wild fish sanctuaries with no hatchery fish and C&R regs. Here in Oregon, the John Day and Sandy rivers are two candidates mentioned.

What if half our rivers were unplanted, C&R, and received the majority of habitat restoration? Would that help the wild fish survive and thrive without eliminating harvest?

Wild Chrome, But what about ME, what about what I want, What About Me?

Wild Chrome:

It's 18 state run hatcheries they are after. Follow this link to see the list of state hatcheries: http://www.wa.gov/wdfw/hat/facility.htm

The link includes McAllister which is now closed.

I can't claim to know the status of all these facilities but if I run through the complexes located in Puget Sound I can eliminate the trout hatcheries down to about 22 potential salmon hatcheries. A few of the 22 left are likely trout hatcheries. So at best it leaves 4 state salmon hatcheries open for all Puget Sound.

I have an idea lets point finger at everyone else.

Commercials blame the land owners.
Land owners blame the recreational fisherman.
Recreational fisherman blame the Native American.
The Native americans blame ocean conditions.
Blah Blah Blah.
When you point the finger at someone else you have a bunch pointing.

Don't take away our harvest oportunity it is our Right to whach fish and besides it isn't our fault. It is everyone else. Let's point fingers until we don't have any wild fish left. Is that a good option?

Face it Wild fish are hurting. Due to a lot of reasons. Ocean conditions, Hatcheries, harvest, land use, comercials, Native Americans. Guess what we don't control the oceans, floods, Native American fisheries(as much as we would like to we don't). Guess what we control harvest, hatcheries, land use, etc. Everyone has to give some. Hatcheries are have been proven to be bad for wild fish. We can control that.

Shame on Washington Trout to hold WDFW to Federal laws. How dare they look out for wild fish.

I am as far from a Left wing Liberal as you get and I agree with what they are doing. At least they are trying to help the situation. As for them being a group of fly fisherman. Please, if the hatcheries shut down there probably won't be any fishing to be had(which may not be a bad thing on the wild stocks for now) so how is that looking out for fisherman? That is looking out for fish. Someone has to do it.

Go Washington Trout.
JJ