If you had to pick one what would you say Is the biggest killer of our salmon and steelhead?

I voted for "bad environmnent", by which I assume you mean habitat.

I voted that way because it is a general concern for all runs, everywhere.

For individual runs, however, it totally depends on the conditions surrounding that run.

Tribal/commercial netting is devestating on some runs, while some runs don't have either, so it must be something else for them.

Some are heavily fished, while some aren't fished at all (recreationally).

Dams destroy runs...but only on rivers that have dams.

Some runs deal with horrible habitat issues, some runs swim through national parks with virtually pristine habitat, and are still in trouble.

Some runs coexist with hatchery runs, some have hatchery runs that are affecting them horribly, and some don't have hatchery fish at all and are still floundering.

I guess my point is that you can't point at one thing and say that's the problem. The interaction between factors is very relevant, too.

On a system like the Columbia, which has serious commercial overfishing problems, extensive sportfishing in the tribs, dams, really bad habitat, and millions upon millions of hatchery fish released each year, the wild fish are doomed. Fixing any one of the problems, except maybe removing all the dams in the mainstem and tributaries (yeah, right), won't save the fish.

Pointing at every other problem and doing nothing about the one or ones you can do something about won't help the fish at all, either.

Fish on...

Todd.

You really shouldn't try to point to 1 problem because it's a combination of all of your answers. The duck

Don't become a pollster for a carrear, and I will not be a professional speller. I had to vote Dams due to the Columbia, Skagit, Green, Cedar, and anything else with a dam. That said, Todd sumed up everything else. I think commercials and tribes do there damage, but are predominatly hatchery stocks, I don't think hatcheries play as large a role as some think. Finally, bad environment, what are we possibly going to do about ocean conditions, especially in the short term.
A better question on those might be which has the least impact on Salmon, I would have to say HONEST sportsfisherman, because we know that poachers are not honest or sportsfisherman.

NEN

If it was a one answer question it would be an easy solution. If you would have included "Mankind" that would have been pretty close to the truth.

Damn... caught me again !!! please throw me back or bonk me quick !!!

Like Todd, I equated bad environment to habitat. Furthermore, I feel that dams fall under the umbrella of habitat because they adversely affect the fish's habitat.

Duck is absolutely correct; we cannot point a finger at any one problem. It is a culmination of effects man has had on the resource. And I believe the biggest obstacle to fish recovery is our reluctance to recognize that fact. Too many special interest groups pointing fingers at each other-- and that includes sportsfishers.

I think most are aware of the 4Hs: Habitat, Hatcheries, Harvest, and Hydropower. Perhaps a better question would be, "In what priority should these be addressed in fish recovery?" My thought would be habitat/hydro, then harvest, then hatcheries.

We can, and must, fight a multi-front war on the recovery of our fishing resource, however, I feel we should set priorities (realistic, achievable goals) and focus on those.

And that's my 2¢.

IMO, pretty simple on the coastal streams in my area:

1) Tribal Harvest
2) Sport Harvest
3) Hatchery Impacts (this ties in with 1 and 2 somewhat)
4) Temperature Pollution of rearing areas by shade tree removal (really the only "pollutant" found in recent studies in our area).

Loss of habitat, from dams and pretty much all other human development activities, is the real killer of our salmon and steelhead runs. Yeah, overfishing wipes out a cycle of fish, but leave them alone and they will come back if they have something to come back to. But take away the habitat, or really even a piece of the habitat, and they will never come back.

The reason I say even a piece is because the bottleneck in the system is the limiting factor. You can have all kinds of spawning and rearing area in freshwater, and a good year in the ocean, but if the estuary is turned into a contaminated container port with 99% of the rearing habitat gone (Seattle, Tacoma, etc.), the juvenile fish have no place to adapt to life in saltwater and nothing to eat while they do, and they die. This phenomenon would be similar to, say, taking the I-5 bridge off of the Lewis River and making all commerce unload their cargos into rowboats to get across to load up on the other side and continue on. Hey, it's just a tiny piece of I-5, shouldn't hurt anything, right?

By the way, 60 bills were introduced into the state legislative session to eliminate or water down the hydraulic code so that WDFW would no longer protect fish habitat, by all your favorites like Doumit, Buck, Oke, etc. 32 are still alive and some are probably going to pass in the name of legislative reform. We are well on the way to losing what is left of fish habitat, and the fish won't be far behind

All of the answers combined. You can't point your finger at one and block out the others. They must all be taken into consideration simulataneously. The salmon issue is like a gem with various facets. To understand the problems one must take care not to overlook even the tiniest of facets. I won't participate in a biased poll.

I have to agree with Todd 99.8%.Nets are diffinitely killers,but steelhead are in low numbers,even on ,somewhat virgin streams.Ocean survival through predation and diseases,I believe ,play a large roll.Also ,on some of these'virgin'streams,I believe during the 70's and 80's,meat anglers(maybe at the time,they just weren't educated to the fact that this is NOT an endless resource)were taking large hacks at these somewhat lesser known streams.No doubt the local rednecks going to catch dinner.(jk).
I voted habitat.pollution,over logging,development.
All the choices,except the nets,have a common thread,and can actually be tied together.
That's my .02% of a loonie.

I simply think harvesting is the biggest problem the fish face. My take on the way to control harvest is to make the use of all boats (sport and tribal) transportation only.

Leaky Boot

That's why you will never be a fish manager!


Thank goodness that you are not in the majority.

What is possibly wrong with a guy who wants to sport fish from a boat?

Cowlitzfisherman

Well Gawldarn Cowlitz! Now you be presumin' to tell folks what they will and won't be! Is there no end to your abilities...

I voted for the most obvious Nets. , but the one thing I think is the real problem is predation. I think you have to start at the beginning , when and where the salmon and steehead start thier lives , Mergansers, Commerants, Herons, River Otters, these critters take a tremendous amout of the fry/smolts before they can even start thier next gauntlet in life, which would be trying to avoid getting eaten by seals, sea lions, other salt water birds , salt water otters and finally NETS. To give you a few examples Four years ago Reider ponds holding ponds had no netting over the ponds , there was 305,000 steelhead in each ,summer runs in one winter runs in the other, when the ponds were drained down( I was there) there was 44,000 left in one and 140,000 left in the other! that summer there was nets put over the ponds and the total loss from both ponds was under a thousand! Big differance! the year before we watched 5 otters eat and terrorize the smolts to the point when they were done eating they relentlessly chase the smolts to the point of exhaustion in the ponds, we watched the same thing happen in the river, A Merganser eats about 20-25 fish a day ,has between 5-18 young .-do the math it dosen't take long to figure out where the fish went PREDITORS think about it protect your young. Oh yeah 'I forgot to mention all the fisherman I saw using eggs and ripping the hooks out of the few remaining smolts as if they were pissed that the "Little *******s" had the nerve to bite there eggs when they were fishing for real steelhead , and of course you know that after having there thier heads almost ripped off ,planed across the water , hooks torned out of thier stomach and thrown back they LIVED!! NOT...........

4 Salk

You are right ! There is no end

Are you willing to stop fishing from your boat? <img border="0" alt="[wall]" title="" src="graemlins/wall.gif" />

Cowlitzfishwerman

So Leaky Boot, do you have a problem with people who are fortunate enough to own boats or do you have some statistical data (to which I have never seen published) that segregates fish caught from the pier or the beach vs a boat....?

I think I may be able to clear this up a little. Leaky Boot must have mis-spelled his moniker when he registered. He actually meant "Leaky Boat" and that's why he doesn't think fishing from them is a good idea. j/k

Jeff - I'd bet he was talking about river fishing, not saltwater.

That's pretty funny 4Salt!

When I made my edit to my post, it was because I addressed my letter to "Leaky Boat" instead of "leaky boot"

But what the heck is the difference if you are fishing from a boat in the salt or a boat in a river? If you follow the logic what leaky boot says; it would be ok to set your net in a river and leave it (because you are only using your boat to get there). Then it would be ok to "pick up your net" and go, as long as you were not saying there fishing from your boat (the fishing part has already been completed!). What a bunch of goof's!

Tell us 4Salt, do you really agree and support what leaky boot says? Or are you just blowing off wind?

Cowlitzfisherman

Bob, I'm surprized why you said tribal harvest and didn't include commercial harvest too.

First of all, let me say I know just how this works. If someone new makes a post that differs slightly from the general opinion of this board, they are immediatley lambasted. Secondly, obviously I am refering to river fishing. All I am saying is that if you eliminated drift netting and made fisherman stand on the bank and cast the fish would stand half a chance.