In terms of the known results of integrated hatchery steelhead programs, what is presented here is not accurate. While productivity of studied steelhead programs did almost universally decrease, abundance, with or without the programs was not measured or evaluated in most of the scientific papers that I have read. This would include the often cited Hood River studies which only looked at changes in productivity as well as the more recent studies of the reproductive success of steelhead in Little Sheep Creek, OR (Ewann A. Berntson, Richard W. Carmichael, Michael W. Flesher, Eric J. Ward & Paul Moran (2011): Diminished Reproductive Success of Steelhead from a Hatchery Supplementation Program (Little Sheep Creek, Imnaha Basin,Oregon), Transactions of the American Fisheries Society, 140:3, 685-698). Interestingly enough, in the study that most use to criticize integrated steelhead programs, those changes in population productivity in the Hood River where relatively low, estimated at only 8% at the population level versus a totally wild population.

Changes in abundance, with or without the programs have been hypothesized in various ways, from "back of the napkin" type calculations you see posted on internet fish sites, to more scientific modeling by independent groups such as the HSRG, Col. River ISAB, or ISRP. Those put together by the scientific groups tend to show increased adult abundance from these types of programs. Although to be clear, these results are modeling results. It should be noted that unlike differential productivity based on parentage analysis, you can only observe one population abundance number and if a hatchery program exists, that abundance will always include adults resulting from the hatchery program. A separate abundance excluding those hatchery fish cannot be observed in the same time frame. You therefore have to rely on either some modeled results or comparison between supplemented and representative unsupplemented populations for analysis of changes in abundance. Few statistically valid comparisons of population abundance such as Before-After Control-Impact (BACI) design studies as recommended by the ISRP have been conducted and those results have varied, but they do not show the reduction in "every single one" as suggested here. Taken as a whole across species, changes to abundance in supplemented populations rank in the middle (more than some and less than some) when compared to unsupplemented populations. This would lead to the conclusion that you can show no improvement from supplementation. This is the conclusion about supplemented populations reached by the ISRP. This is a completely different conclusion than wild fish, in every population (as suggested above) would be more numerous without the program. In terms of steelhead programs alone, I am aware of a couple of evaluations that have shown an increase in abundance (in one case, an increase in productivity as well) when compared to unsupplemented populations. One would be in BACI analysis of Umatilla steelhead using John Day steelhead as a reference population. The other would be the Hamma Hamma steelhead program in Hood Canal compared to three unsupplemented populations in the canal.

This is what a google search of the science as well as a thorough reading of the science will show. If anyone is aware of any more recent results, particularly statically valid reviews of changes in abundance, I am capable of learning.

So I think the verdict is still out! Are we doing the brood stock for the sake of more harvest opportunities or sake of wild fish recovery?

If it works in favor of both then bring on Brood Stocking!

Still I just cant see how killing returning offspring of a once wild fish recovery when said same wild fish that spawned naturally would have had to be released to continue the cycle, up until Tomorrow that is @#$%!

I guess it doesn't really matter for the duck its being shut down.

Another question why are we doing brood stock programs on other systems that fish just perfectly fine in my eyes. Without real science showing in favor of wild fish it just makes no since. By doing this program your increasing harvest fish but also increasing fishing pressure on a system that was already over fished to begin with. Still confused sorry.....

In response to Kerry ... to each his own on what it used for. Most of my Snider's go back, so I see it as supplementation to spawn. No one from state or tribe has been able to help us determine how many early spawners may have increased since they never counted anything until March 1 for so many years ... and my gut feeling is now they (tribe) are only doing so the last few years to bump numbers up when we fell below goals for the system (Duc was still above). So, I'm basing my efforts on what I am seeing for wild returns in that timeframe vs. other streams in the system. Right, wrong ... we don't know for sure ... but from what I see swimming up the river each day, there's far more wild fish here now than there was at the inception of the program in the same timeframe. In the early days, it was often a struggle to get enough late Dec. / Jan fish as they had already been pretty much wiped out. Now, it's generally pretty easy as long as we don't sit idle for three weeks lookign at brown water. Immeasurable I know ... but it's what I see, it's what others have seen.

For others, it's harvest op in this timeframe. Good for town, good for giving an option to those who are gonna kill something anyhow. Todd is smokin' something pretty strong if he honestly thinks there won't be more poaching of unclipped fish without these fish around ... it's sad, but it's a reality and should be considered. It's NOT a black and white issue ... there's a lot that needed to be considered here and for peeps that don't fish here daily, all they can do is look on paper, and that's pretty friggin' sad in my book.

As for the pressure, there's one thing you're completely missing Kerry. Hundreds of Bogchiel brats enter the 'Duc every year ... you've caught them, I know. Now, if we all move to a different river early on, the effort that currently culls the majority of these fish may be elsewhere ... and the WS gene bank idea is far worse off having hundreds of Chambers fish in the system rather than escaping or released Sniders. Which scenario is worse for the wild Sol Duc fish. You know you can't eliminate the Bogey brats, the tribe would never let it happen ... so within the real world scenario, what is best???

" so within the real world scenario " / Oh for Christ sake Bob why do you keep bringing pragmatism and reality into the thread ?

Good question ... obviously, it never seems to factor into most fisheries decisions

In my pipe dream, Snider would not exist, WSR all season would be in place, tribe could fish no more than 60 hours per week and they could scoop up extra brats from the creek, poachers would lose all fishing / hunting rights for 5 years and 90% of all arguments about the fisheries in this areas would be moot!

Thanks for the info, OncyT!

What a good concise breakdown! I am with you 100%.

I hate the idea of moving the program to the Bogie,I have always enjoyed the mid to late January solitude on the river while everyone was pounding the Duc, their goes the neighborhood!!!PEACE

What if it's not working, Chuck?

Fish on...

Todd

Todd,
Unfortunately nobody can PROVE it is or isn't working, everyone has opinions..........

Maybe it's just the conservationist in me, but when we're doing something that clearly affects wild steelhead, but can't "prove" if it is good, negligible, or harmful, then the onus ought to be on the "let's do it" crowd to prove it won't be harmful, not the other way around.

Fish on...

Todd

I don't get the big debate. God clearly approves of brood stock programs. If you doubt that I refer you to Noah's Ark. The rest is history. All that is needed is another flood to get rid of poachers, deerlict gear, and snaggers.

And the Lord's people said Amen, Amen, and Amen. The offering plate will be passed around shortly.

I belive the Sauk will be one, along with the South Fork of the Skykomish (I think).

Fish on...

Todd

I'd like to push Bobs perfect world a step further, no netting on the Quiliut, wiers on the Sol Duc, and Bogi, and maybe the Calawa. And counters on the wiers saying one for me and one for you and wild release.........no nets and 50/50 on the hatchery fish with our co-managers. Catch and Release above the wiers......just so simple that it will never work as it doe'nt require a college degree !!!!!!!!!!!!!!

If the program ends next spring when will the last of the Snider creek fish return and will they keep it open to removing these fish in the coming years?

No shart, Sherlock. Glad you're here to let us know the obvious.

What is NOT obvious is the run timing of this supposed new broodstocking program that no one knows about.

Do you know WHEN they will swim through the Quill?

Seeing how no one seems to know squat over crap about the new program, no one can say now when those fish will return.

Padding the number of hatchery fish that return from Nov-Christmas won't help the tribal harvesting of Sol Duc wild fish from Christmas to now.

Can you personally guarantee that this new program will produce a fish that returns at the same time at the current run of early Sol Duc fish?

No.

Can anyone else now? No.

Keep in mind the track record of past WDFW programs and the tribes....

Keep this all in mind when all the best plans go to hell and in the end, the tribe just nets the remaining Sol Duc wild fish to extinction.

Enjoy those new bananas you so crave and wished for because I sure as hell don't see "recovery" to the Sol Doc early run now. Dreams do come true.....

Book it.

PS. In Parker's Perfect World, Snider is shut down along with any future broodstocking program on the OP, tribal gill netting is shutdown and replaced with traps, weirs or other fishing methods that will select for hatchery/wild fish, mandatory C&R on all wild steelhead state wide, and guides are restricted by a limited entry, as well as highly regulated 40 hours max on the water per week. Just to be fair on all side, fishing from a boat is prohibited on all OP rivers.

And Canadian's aren't allowed to fish on weekends...just to be fair

Good point!!! Only reason anyone from Canadia fishes on the OP is because they are guiding!!!!

I'll get that added in

I hope you're kidding when you tell me about the "bananas I crave" because anywhere that hatchery fish compete with wild fish, I could give a flyingfuck about the hatchery fish, or those who adore them.

You can love the program all you want, but until it or the future Bogachiel program is actually monitored, all we have to go on is the current science.

I know you think you're part of the School of Fisheries because you hook up their disk drives and make sure they have surge protectors, but scientist you are not...tell me a scientific reason why this should happen and I'll give you a second or two of listening space.

Until then...no.

Fish on...

Todd

Funny.

That's not what *my* degree says.

How about yours?

Scientist you really are not my friend.

So, if wild steelhead recovery was just about science, why are the wild steelhead *not* recovered now? We've known the sciences for years now..... Oh that's right, there's more to this equation than just "science".

Lastly, what makes a person a "scientist"? Education? Employment? Internet Board Postings? Something other?