The real story reg. clipped vs. wild

[Kodiak1]

This is an excerpt from an article in the Spokesman Review. Very interesting regarding actual hatchery vs. wild. Mike




Fall chinook anglers in Idaho often wonder why “wild” fish are protected when they seem to catch more “unclipped” salmon than “clipped” salmon produced at hatcheries.
DuPont explains:
“Only about 30 percent of the chinook passing over Lower Granite Dam are fin-clipped. That is because a lot of wild fish are returning and because around half the hatchery fall chinook released in Idaho are clipped.” (The low clipping proportion was adopted years ago when returns were low to help build the run.) “Thus, anglers will have to catch around four unmarked fish for every clipped fish that can be harvested.”
Why can’t anglers harvest fall chinook upstream of Memorial Bridge?
DuPont answers:
• “Only about 25 percent of the hatchery fish released into the Clearwater River are clipped. When you mix in the wild fish, only about 15 percent of the fish are clipped. That doesn’t leave a lot of fish to be harvested. This clip rate is set (under federal endangered species oversight) until 2017. Discussion will occur to decide what the new clip rate will be starting in 2018.”
• Conflict likely would occur with the popular catch-and-release steelhead fishery.
• The Nez Perce Tribe, which is largely responsible for rebuilding the fall chinook run in Idaho, has rights to the fishery. Idaho fish managers want to be considerate of their interests especially because most of the Clearwater River is in the Nez Perce Tribal Reservation.
“We will have discussions with the Tribe about this when we feel the time is appropriate,” DuPont said.


[signature]

[Untangler]

That is because a lot of wild fish are returning and because around half the hatchery fall chinook released in Idaho are clipped.” (The low clipping proportion was adopted years ago when returns were low to help build the run.)

Interesting. The low clipping proportion was adopted to help "build" the run? I thought unclipped fish were considered wild. Was the intent of F & G to create the illusion of a wild run?

We are being hornswaggled about salmon recovery. It is the most expensive and ineffectual species recovery program of all time. If you have not seen the PBS Nature show called Salmon Running The Gauntlet, watch it. It is about Idaho Salmon recovery and provides an interesting perspective.

[url "http://www.pbs.org/wnet/nature/episodes/salmon-running-the-gauntlet/video-full-episode/6620/"]http://www.pbs.org/wnet/nature/episodes/salmon-running-the-gauntlet/video-full-episode/6620/[/url]
[signature]

[DocEsox]

Kodiak.....first off thanks for the information....I find it very interesting.

Untangler your comments are excellent also. You'd think the fish managers are giving a misleading reading of "wild" salmon. But they know all the salmon are either hatchery fish or their progeny. The term "wild" implies to many the wrong idea as if these are the aboriginal salmon....those disappeared decades ago. These original stocks appropriate designation is "native" salmon. So really the reference to "wild" just means they are hatchery fish born in the wild and we all know that without extensive stocking they would rapidly disappear.

There is an excellent book on this subject, "Salmon Without Rivers: A History of the Pacific Salmon Crisis", written in 1999 by Jim Lichatowich.....very good read. A testament to our own arrogance that with hatcheries we could not only do as well but improve on mother nature.....[].

At the same time the US (in the 1930s) decided they could dam all the Columbia drainage rivers and just stock the salmon, BC made the determination with the Fraser River to not dam it and preserve natural reproduction. It has been clear for more than a few decades which idea was best as the sockeye returns of the Fraser are still very healthy...without hatchery interference.

Sorry....this subject really gets me heated. Have, until very recently, lived in Alaska for nearly 2 decades and have watched a precipitous decline in the statewide king salmon numbers....primarily due to overfishing at sea. Managers there always told me at least Alaska hadn't screwed up the salmon.....my reply was that the Columbia River had a big headstart but given time they would still mess it up.

Ain't nice to mess with Mother Nature.....

Brian
[signature]

[AverysAdventure]

Great comments everyone and I couldn’t agree more.
Kodiak, I had a conversation with one of the fish counters in Sekiu about this topic in August. I was amazed at how many “native” coho I had to shake to find a keeper hatchery fish. Seemed to me there was no need for any hatchery fish as the “native” run was strong and healthy. Actually concerned me that the “native” strain may suffer from being diluted with hatchery stock. But she set my mind at ease when she explained to me that they do the same as ID and there are no “native” fish left. She explained to me there are “clipped” and “unclipped” fish and that they choose to only clip a small percentage of fingerlings released. Yes we have been hornswoggled!!

It will be interesting to see if salmon play a role in the 2014/2025 US & Canadian Columbia River Treaty review.
[signature]