Check

 

Defiance Boats!

LURECHARGE!

THE PP OUTDOOR FORUMS

Kast Gear!

Power Pro Shimano Reels G Loomis Rods

  Willie boats! Puffballs!

 

Three Rivers Marine

 

 
Topic Options
Rate This Topic
#191112 - 03/18/03 12:17 PM Support Mass Marking
ramon vb Offline
Juvenille at Sea

Registered: 07/10/02
Posts: 123
Loc: Duvall, WA
Please support legislation that will improve hatchery management and improve the chances for salmon recovery.

Washington Democratic Congressman Norm Dicks has recently passed legislation that would require 100% marking for hatchery salmon and steelhead produced by federal hatcheries and state or tribal hatcheries that accept federal funding. Since, he has encountered resistance from federal agencies and some stakeholders. He met with state, tribal, and federal representatives on Mar 17 to discuss their concerns and objections.

Mass marking hatchery salmon and steelhead is essential in order to manage fisheries and hatchery production in a manner at all consistent with the recovery of ESA-listed stocks.

Washington Trout, Native Fish Society, the Audubon Society, and the Wild Steelhead Coalition have sent a letter to Congressman Dicks outlining our support for his legislation. We are urging others to contact the congressman as well; he needs to know that his proposal enjoys wide support, and that his program rests on a technically credible foundation.

Congressman Dicks' legislation has been passed and signed, but passing legislation is often a long way from implementing it. State legislation and WDFW policy have mandated mass marking in Washington since 1995, and yet we still don't have 100% hatchery marking. The folks who met with the congressman yesterday don't appear to presume this is a done deal. It likely is not.

Don't let another attempt to get all these fish marked fall through the cracks. Contact the congressman and let him know you support his federal requirement for mass marking, you're still paying attention, and you want to see the mass-marking program fully funded and implemented. You can email him through his website at http://www.house.gov/dicks/ or mail, fax, or call his offices at:

WASHINGTON, D.C.
2467 Rayburn House Office Bldg.
Washington, D.C. 20515
(202) 225-5916 [voice]
(202) 226-1176 [fax]

PIERCE COUNTY
1717 Pacific Ave. Suite 2244
Tacoma, WA 98402
(253) 593-6536 [voice]
(253) 593-6551 [fax]

Thanks for your support. To find out more about hatchery management, wild salmon and steelhead recovery, or Washington Trout, visit www.washingtontrout.org.

Ramon Vanden Brulle, Communications Director
Washington Trout
PO Box 402
Duvall, WA 98019
425/788-1167 x222; fax 425/788-9634
ramon@washingtontrout.org
www.washingtontrout.org

Top
#191113 - 03/18/03 11:47 PM Re: Support Mass Marking
bodysurf Offline
Returning Adult

Registered: 11/28/01
Posts: 324
Loc: olympia
yeah....norm told them to mass mark everything and gave them no money......he should've wrote the bill better from the get go....they're gonna need more cash to do it...get your clippin' scissors ready!!!

Top
#191114 - 03/19/03 12:55 AM Re: Support Mass Marking
Bob Offline

Dazed and Confused

Registered: 03/05/99
Posts: 6367
Loc: Forks, WA & Soldotna, AK
This would affect the Quinault and many other streams where I think they ought to be doing it.

More $$$? Maybe they should take a portion of the revenues from the net fishery to pay for it and quit taking fed funds.

Frankly, I think this is a good idea all around!

Thanks for the heads-up Ramon!
_________________________
Seen ... on a drive to Stam's house:



"You CANNOT fix stupid!"

Top
#191115 - 03/19/03 10:48 AM Re: Support Mass Marking
salmonbelly Offline
Returning Adult

Registered: 03/12/01
Posts: 359
Loc: Kirkland, Wa USA
I agree, this is incredibly important. Mass-marking gives fish managers tools to perpetuate fisheries instead of closing them, not to mention the scientific benefits of knowing hatchery/wild ratios in fisheries and on the spanwimg grounds. It's good to see Washington Trout actively supporting programs that will boost fisheries, instead of opposing fisheries. Everyone needs to realize that every time a fishery is closed, we lose a few more anglers -- constituents for clean water, healthy habitat and viable fish runs.

Top
#191116 - 03/19/03 11:30 PM Re: Support Mass Marking
bodysurf Offline
Returning Adult

Registered: 11/28/01
Posts: 324
Loc: olympia
if norm expects mass marking of all columbia river chinook he gotta get more cash...he knows it....he was too specific in his wording(among other problems)and the money went where it ain't gonna help mass mark enough fish.....so hopefully he does it right this time....

Top
#191117 - 03/20/03 04:00 PM Re: Support Mass Marking
cohoangler Offline
Three Time Spawner

Registered: 12/29/99
Posts: 1604
Loc: Vancouver, Washington
Yes, it's going to take alot more $$ to mark all salmon and steelhead from National Fish Hatcheries. There isn't much of a problem with spring Chinook, coho, or steelhead. However the issue is fall Chinook. The Feds (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service) release millions of fall Chinook every year that aren't marked. Even with current technology, fall Chinooks are difficult to mark because they're so small when they migrate downstream (85-100mm or about 3 inches) and there are so many the Feds can't marked them all between March (when they hatch) and June (when they migrate). Maybe the Feds should stock fewer fall Chinook?

But there is also a bigger issue. That is, fishing opportunities may go down considerably, particularly on the Columbia River with a selective fishery for hatchery fall Chinook. If only marked fish can be harvested, the fall Chinook fishery for upriver brights that return to the Hanford Reach will likely be eliminated. The Hanford Reach fall Chinook are all wild fish, they are not endangered/threatened, and they are not marked. In fact, Hanford Reach fall Chinook are perhaps the healthiest population of fall Chinook in the Pacific Northwest. But with a selective fishery (i.e., harvesting only marked fish), Hanford Reach fall Chinook cannot be harvested. However, Hanford Reach fall Chinook are a major contribution to the Buoy 10 fishery in August and September. Without those fish, you might just as well shut down the Buoy 10 fishery.

So I have a question for the folks who think that marking all hatchery fish, including fall Chinook, is a good idea. How do the Feds mark them all and still maintain the fishery for the fall Chinook populations that are healthy (e.g., Hanford Reach)? Remember, there is no point in marking fish if there isn't a selective fishery to avoid them.

Nothing is ever easy in fishery management....

Top
#191118 - 03/20/03 10:07 PM Re: Support Mass Marking
Steelie Tamer Offline
Smolt

Registered: 02/16/01
Posts: 69
Loc: SW Washington
glad to hear it,whatching people measure dorsal fins w/credit cards on some of the coastal rivers is getting pretty painful too see! shoot
_________________________
Fishing is much more than fish…. It is the great occasion when we may return to the fine simplicity of our forefathers.


Top
#191119 - 03/20/03 11:41 PM Re: Support Mass Marking
Plunker Offline
Spawner

Registered: 04/01/00
Posts: 511
Loc: Skagit Valley
cohoangler - I also wonder how the marking of those tiny fall chinook might be implemented?

Thanks for your well thought out appraisal on the effects of the legislation in relation to fall chinook fishing opportunity. Unless a ban on fishing for all wild chinook becomes the management rule, and I hope it does not, we should still find opportunity to catch the healthy stocks from the Hanford Reach. At least that would seem reasonable.

In any case, for those who missed it...
Here's a good article from the Olympian:

--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---

U.S. fish farms clip fins for cash


"Recent legislation requires that all federal and federally funded salmon and steelhead hatcheries mark the fish they release.
For several years, a program for marking fish produced in hatcheries has allowed anglers to fish for salmon and steelhead, keeping the hatchery fish and releasing the wild fish -- a method known as selective fishery.

The alternative?

"Would there be any fishery at all?" asked Greg Cloud, 55, an Olympia salmon angler.

Legislation introduced by U.S. Rep. Norm Dicks, D-Wash., and signed into law by President Bush requires the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to begin mass marking fish, including coho, chinook and steelhead, released from federally operated or financed hatcheries.

Without the marked fish, areas inhabited by salmon listed under the Endangered Species Act, such as threatened chinook in Puget Sound, would be off limits to salmon anglers like Cloud. But not all hatchery fish have been marked, and that leaves holes in the selective fishery.

"Rep. Dicks' initiative is a major step forward in the new era of selective fisheries," said Jeff Koenings, director of the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. "Mass marking allows us to direct fisheries toward abundant hatchery stocks while providing protection for depressed runs of naturally spawning salmon and steelhead."

Marking machine

The legislation also provides money to pay for portable, automated mass marking machines that can process large numbers of fish, clipping the adipose fin -- a small fin between the dorsal fin and tail.

The mark makes hatchery fish easily distinguishable from wild fish.

"It's about the only way we could have a significant fishery in areas with (Endangered Species Act) listed stock," Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife spokesman Craig Bartlett said.

Without hatcheries, Washington couldn't offer much salmon fishing. About 70 percent of the fish caught and landed in Puget Sound and about 90 percent of the fish in the Columbia River are hatchery raised.

The state, tribes and federal government operate about 100 hatcheries in Washington.

For many decades, they have been used to compensate for declines in wild salmon and to provide recreational, commercial and tribal fisheries where natural salmon habitat has been lost to development.

Partial marking

Since 1998, marking hatchery salmon and steelhead has opened selective fishing on the Washington coast, the Columbia River and parts of Puget Sound, Bartlett said.

But not all hatcheries mark all of their fish.

State hatcheries in the Puget Sound region mark about 90 percent of chinook and coho salmon.

The Nisqually Indian tribe marks all of the chinook raised at its two hatcheries on the Nisqually River and some of the coho, said Georgiana Kautz, natural resource manager with the tribe.

Federal hatcheries mark about one-third of the chinook and coho they raise, said Tony Floor, head of Fish and Wildlife's Puget Sound Sport Fish Enhancement Program.

Dicks' legislation changes that.

"The mandate for marking hatchery salmon applies to all federal hatcheries, as well as state and other hatcheries that receive federal assistance," Dicks said in a prepared statement.

"We think this is good for wild fish. We think this is good for sport and commercial fishing," Floor said. It will increase the opportunities for recreational anglers to fish for salmon.

Some anglers think the effort to protect fish should go further.

"I'm still a firm believer in catch and release," said Bjorn Beech, 27, manager of The Fly Fisher in Lacey. Beech also enjoys fishing for salmon in south Puget Sound and local rivers. He lets all of them go, he said.

In some cases, even the hatchery fish need protection, he said. But he supports keeping as many fisheries open as possible.

The Nisqually tribe has concerns about the effects of selective fishing on ongoing salmon recovery efforts, and about hooking mortality in wild fish, Kautz said.

"We don't want to manage fish for political reasons," she said. "We want to manage for the resource."

Hooking mortality

Selective fishery comes at a cost to wild fish.

Fish experts note that hatcheries have contributed to the decline of salmon. Hatchery fish compete with wild fish for limited food and habitat, weaken wild stocks by interbreeding, and can spread disease.

Environmental groups also note that some hatchery fish prey on threatened juvenile chinook.

Catch-and-release fishing might not be as harmless to the fish as it seems.

Some wild fish die after being released. They die of injuries from being hooked or handled, or from exhaustion, or exhaustion may make them more susceptible to predators.

Fish and Wildlife biologists estimate that in Puget Sound, 15 to 25 percent of chinook and about 12 to 20 percent of coho die after being caught and released, Floor said. In the ocean, the estimated hooking mortality for coho and chinook is 19 percent.

Those numbers underscore the importance of recreational anglers learning to handle and release fish properly, Floor said. That means, for example, not hoisting them from the water for a photo before releasing them.

The key to the success of selective fishing is reducing the death rate of released fish. Anglers who have trouble releasing wild fish should consider taking up golf, Floor said. They shouldn't be fishing.

"Take home the hatchery fish. That's what they were raised for," he said.

Beech agrees -- sort of.

"If somebody has to have a fish dinner, it had better be a hatchery fish," he said. But then they might as well go to the grocery store."

--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
_________________________
Why are "wild fish" made of meat?

Top
#191120 - 03/21/03 04:23 PM Re: Support Mass Marking
Todd Offline
Dick Nipples

Registered: 03/08/99
Posts: 27838
Loc: Seattle, Washington USA
Quote:
The Nisqually tribe has concerns about the effects of selective fishing on ongoing salmon recovery efforts, and about hooking mortality in wild fish, Kautz said.

"We don't want to manage fish for political reasons," she said. "We want to manage for the resource."

In my opinion, there are only two reasons why a tribe would actually rally against mass marking, and they both boil down to the same reason...

One, they don't selectively fish, and if you could tell the difference between wild and hatchery fish, you could see just how many wild fish, and how much damage to the wild run, a net fishery is doing.

Politically, and possibly legally, this would be a big deal.

Two, if we have to fish selectively, and they don't, and a great number of hatchery fish are not clipped, it provides them with access to a lot more fish than non-tribal fishers. The most obvious example of this is the Columbia River.

"Managing for the resource" is disingenuine, unless they mean "managing the resource for us".

Fish on...

Todd.

PS It's pretty clear that EVERYONE except tribal fishers would benefit from mass marking, including the resource.
_________________________


Team Flying Super Ditch Pickle


Top
#191121 - 03/21/03 10:42 PM Re: Support Mass Marking
salmonbelly Offline
Returning Adult

Registered: 03/12/01
Posts: 359
Loc: Kirkland, Wa USA
Coho angler, hatchery tules, not brights, are the main contributors to the Buoy 10 chinook fishery. Some brights are taken there sure, and might have to be released, but they can be and are fished heavily in the Hanford Reach.

Top
#191122 - 03/22/03 12:40 AM Re: Support Mass Marking
grandpa Offline
Three Time Spawner

Registered: 08/18/02
Posts: 1714
Loc: brier,wa
I think all hatchery fish should be clipped.

Ramon: Why would you care about clipping fish? I thought you wanted all hatcheries closed...If all hatcheries close there won't be any clipping..will there?
_________________________
Join Puget Sound Anglers...
www.pugetsoundanglers.org

....Support the RFA rfawashingtonst.org

Top

Moderator:  The Moderator 
Search

Site Links
Home
Our Washington Fishing
Our Alaska Fishing
Reports
Rates
Contact Us
About Us
Recipes
Photos / Videos
Visit us on Facebook
Today's Birthdays
Rocky
Recent Gallery Pix
hatchery steelhead
Hatchery Releases into the Pacific and Harvest
Who's Online
0 registered (), 1330 Guests and 3 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Newest Members
MickLee, NoyesMaker, John Boob, Lawrence, I'm Still RichG
11500 Registered Users
Top Posters
Todd 27838
Dan S. 16958
Sol Duc 15727
The Moderator 13947
Salmo g. 13586
eyeFISH 12619
STRIKE ZONE 11969
Dogfish 10878
ParaLeaks 10363
Jerry Garcia 9013
Forum Stats
11500 Members
17 Forums
72970 Topics
825623 Posts

Max Online: 3937 @ 07/19/24 03:28 AM

Join the PP forums.

It's quick, easy, and always free!

Working for the fish and our future fishing opportunities:

The Wild Steelhead Coalition

The Photo & Video Gallery. Nearly 1200 images from our fishing trips! Tips, techniques, live weight calculator & more in the Fishing Resource Center. The time is now to get prime dates for 2018 Olympic Peninsula Winter Steelhead , don't miss out!.

| HOME | ALASKA FISHING | WASHINGTON FISHING | RIVER REPORTS | FORUMS | FISHING RESOURCE CENTER | CHARTER RATES | CONTACT US | WHAT ABOUT BOB? | PHOTO & VIDEO GALLERY | LEARN ABOUT THE FISH | RECIPES | SITE HELP & FAQ |