Spey Pages banner

Will you fish the Thompson River if it becomes hatchery enhanced?

  • Yes

    Votes: 117 44.0%
  • No

    Votes: 149 56.0%

Thompson River Hatchery Poll

30K views 60 replies 36 participants last post by  sinktip 
#1 ·
Interested to see your views on this one. Poll open to all who fish or would fish the Thompson.
 
#2 ·
They played that card once before long ago. That would be it, kiss it good by! I guess they would propose using native broodstock and sell it on junk science. maybe it's time for a visit the Deschutes to see what a mess they made out of that river and at the same time check out the North Coast of Oregon and see what they accomplished with their winter run native broodstock program. Hatcheries are designed to fail and they do it well.

Chas
"it's all about the hunt"
 
#22 ·
Never fished the thompson but NO hatchery fish



The addition of hatchery fish to any river system is a fool's errand. Name a river system that has been rehabilitated with hatchery fish to the point where there are no longer needed. . . . .
The brood stock program on the North Coast of OR has certainly helped the aluminum hatch. Lots of people looking for limits. This increased pressure means that natives are getting caught and released multiple times.
I used to skip school to fish the Nestucca back in the day. I remember, one January day in particular, during clear midday sun, swinging up a fish, on a red leech, on a floating line. At the time the only tips I dealt with were at the donut shop I worked. This is not going to ever happen again with 70 boats on the river.
Increased competition for the fish to spawn. Increased pressure from those wishing to harvest. Funding for fish production, instead of protection.
FIGHT AGAINST HATCHERY FISH TOOTH AND NAIL.
Or just grab a bottle of Oban, head to your favorite run, and dump some out for the steelies . . . the rest down your throat.
For you Thompson folks, if you get hatchery fish, you'll need it.
Good luck. Tight lines.

Peace.
 
#3 ·
I would , begrudgingly . But in no way do I support having a hatchery on this magnificent river . I`d fish it simply because the T is the only steelhead river (excluding the Coq , which is also closed) within 3 hours of home .
I fish the Skeena tribs for three weeks every year , and would gladly trade at least one of those weeks to fish the Thompson if her wild stocks were healthy enough to warrant an opening .
 
#7 ·
Read again Pete. No I'm not. Key word to look for there is "if". Note I asked "if", not "when". As you know the system does not have hatchery fish. There is a proposal on the table to introduce hatchery fish. The issue you raised was:

"Lets not make the assumption that it has already happened."

My question does not make that assumption. Etc. Blah blah blah. I'm already bored with this.

Further, please see my comments in the inflatables thread. Rather than engage in silly debates on the internet, why not do something constructive? Just as I challenged Brian to stop stirring the pot, I issue the same challenge to you. The Thompson could use an intelligent fellow like yourself as an advocate.
 
#8 ·
if, and, or, but. (none of my favorite words)
the reason i think it is an interesting question is: there are alot of people that would and do fish rivers that are hatchery enhanced, BUT, if had the choice would prefer to keep it wild in the first place. So, someone might answer yes to your poll yet disagree with hatchery enhancement.
PK
 
#9 ·
though I understand and appreciate your genuine intention D, the poll really is poorly worded.

The key point to take from this is that wild systems are valued higher than hatchery enhanced systems.

unless of course the primary intention of the excercise is food for the table.
 
#10 ·
Agreed Peter (not with Brian re wording--editorial note Brian and PKK are pals). The important thing though is that, from the economic perspective (which is what drives the hatchery proposal) the pro-hatchery folks need to determine whether a hatchery really would increase angler traffic in Spences Bridge thereby boosting the economy. From this perspective, it doesn't really matter whether you agree with hatchery enhancement or not; what matters is will you fish if a hatchery is placed on the river.

The hatchery proposal on the Thompson is based on junk science and the economics of Spences Bridge. In this case hopefully enough folks will reject fishing a hatchery river that the economic benefit argument will be questioned. One thing I think the pro-hatchery folks in SB don't realize is that most of the Thompson anglers are from the lower mainland and won't contribute a lot to the local economy because:

A. they bring all their stuff with them from home and tend to day-trip or do one overnight anyways;

B. without a gas station, well-stocked local store, and reliable accommodations (I believe Acacia Grove is now the only place in town that is actually open) those local anglers will seek what they need elswhere (Lytton, Cache Creek).

I believe that if a hatchery has any appeal at all it will only appeal to local (south coast and perhaps kamloops-area anglers) who are used to fishing hatchery rivers like the Vedder. But the fact is that those guys already fish the Thompson, so a hatchery won't bring them in because they are already there.

I agree with Brian that it is the travelling anglers the folks in SB need to attract...but does SB now have the tourism-related infrastructure to support them? At this stage of the game--other than the pub, the Packing House Restaurant, and Acacia Grove, all great places--there's nothing else to support the travelling angler. They can't get gas, they probably wouldn't be able to get a room, they can't swing in to the local store to get a candy bar and a bottle of gatorade. So they have to bring everything with them or stay somewhere else.

I don't believe a hatchery will attract more anglers to SB, especially over the long-term--the science doesn't support it, plus the mystique of the Thompson will be shattered. The folks voting "Yes" in the Fly Fishing poll--I believe Chas speaks for these folks. It is about history, tradition, and the mystique of the river that brings us back whether we catch a pile of fish or not.

If the Thompson stays wild, and if anglers have opportunity to fish it, they will come. Simple as that. So the question is, how do we create predictable angling opportunity on a river with depressed stocks? If we leave the ethics aside for a minute (and I don't believe we should, but let's run with it a minute), we have to consider what would maximize angler opportunity while minimizing angler impact on these fish. Brian's FF Only regs with floating line etc would be the best choice, but without careful enforcement guys would be fishing intruders on floating lines etc so the chances of that working without a huge amount of hypocrisy are slim. Plus the gear guys would say "then we won't fish" which would cut into the positive economics for Spences Bridge, which in turn would cause the advocates in Spences Bridge to reject it as a management plan. So short of ethically adopted FF Only Regs, the next best would be a simple bait ban. This would minimize repeat encounters with tired fish, but everyone would still get to fish, Spences Bridge would realize the economic benefits of a fishery, and some of us would wrestle with our conscience.
 
#21 · (Edited)
If the Thompson stays wild,
This is the world of dreams Dana.

How do you control population growth and greed? Did you see the "Thompson Estates - SOLD" sign by Walchachin, the massive construction projects in Kamloops and just about any place you can imagine?
Four years ago even I wasn't a BC resident.:chuckle:

According to a recent article in BC Outdoors, the smolt recruitment in the Thompson is good with over 240,000 juvenile fish; fewere spawners - better productivity. At normal ocean survival rates the above number was supposed to translate into 10,000 adults!! If that is the case, then indeed a hatchery wil be of no help.

So, instead of that we have to look out at the ocean and fix what is happening in there. Now you would wonder why Columbia stocks seem to survive well in the Ocean but Fraser stocks do not.
 
#12 ·
Yes, BUT>>>

I voted yes, but on the sole condition that there is a 3-4 year study group charged with producing at least 5 draft AMP's and recommendations to charge NRA's at least $250/day and that all the Classified Water fees and Steelhead licences fees are dedicated to enhancing local politicians' re-election funds and financial benefit for the study group participants.
of course I jest! but....
 
#13 ·
I can fish for hatchery steelhead in many rivers. I haven't fished the Thompson in a long while, but I've never driven or flown to BC to fish for hatchery steelhead. The main reason to fish BC is wild steelhead. I write as I'm packing to head to the Clearwater or Deschutes to fish for the abundant hatchery runs this season.

Sg
 
#14 ·
Hell No!!! that would be a final blow for a sadly depleted wild run which was once one of the worlds greatest. Hatcheries are for one thing...harvest. They are incompatible with wild fish and produce biologically inferior animals.

Dana, your question of how do we create a sustainable c&r fishery on the T is a bit complicated. Less incidental harvest on migrating fish would certainly help, but even then we might see about the same number of fish as the skagit gets which this year was about 2500 fish. The primary problem is early marine survival is TERRIBLE on puget sound/georgia basin stocks. I have ZERO data to back this up but I suspect the huge hatchery supplementation in the basin is a major part of the problem. Limited, degraded resources/lots of preds and whammo you get 3% smolt to adult survival on steelhead when historically it was probably 15% on average.
 
#15 ·
I think the hatchery enhancement is definitely creating a "tragedy of the commons" situation with these stocks. And I don't think we can discount the possibility that fish farms are impacting migrating smolts. We know now that Fraser sockeye are being wacked by sea lice--not a big stretch to think that steelhead smolts might be experiencing a similar fate. Ed Ward (who is ahead of the curve on most things) suggested to kush and I years ago that fish farms might be impacting steelhead returns in Puget Sound. I think he was right.
 
#16 ·
Yes there were hatchery fish in the past, as were noted inother posts.. I caught a very well clipped fin fish in 1985 ,, a 15 lb buck that fought as good as any T fish I have caught since. And that is a fewww. I am not saying have a hatchery but the wild strain... Is it really wild after the old hatchery??? I Don't think so.. Maybe some...Food for thought!
 
#17 ·
GB, I caught a clipped fish on the "T" about 5 years ago. I believe I showed Dana and Kush pics at the Log Cabin? It was one of the smaller steelhead I have landed on the "T". Where did it stay from, I can't guess just that it was one misguided fish.

I don't support a hatchery on the "T", would I continue to fish her? It's easy to say yes or no. I have been blessed to swing flies in her currents. If that experience were to change due to a hatchery I can't say I would continue to fish her. SB is a special place that holds a place in my heart.

Regarding economic impact, $20-25 a night for a cot, $25-50 a night at the pub, $10 a day break/lunch, plus non res., alien lic fees.
 
#19 ·
Rain,

thanks for the notes on the acoustical info. I wonder do the young head straight for the open ocean? If they move up the west coast of Van Isle there are lots of fish farms for them to pass by/through:

http://www.focs.ca/fishfarming/map-bcfarms.asp

The other thing I should add to this conversation is that I wont be fishing the T any time soon regardless of a hatchery or not. I just moved the the Lower Mainland BC and so it is definitely tempting, but I will hold off for now. I most DEFINITELY oppose a hatchery but I just can't justify the impact of my own sports fishing on a stock that depressed. If it ever recovered to the point of consistently having over 3 or 4 thousand fish I might think otherwise.
I must admit that I am currently doing a lot of soul searching on this one myself right now.
 
#23 ·
Who knows

A hatchery I could live with, if it actually tackled the real issue, but unless they are planning to protect the steelhead from being a by-catch of the salmon comercial fishing industry, there is no real sense in a hatchery. However if the hatchery is using wild Thompson fish as broodstock and not continously taking eggs from previous years hatchery offspring, it may be a good way to get Thompson fish populations closer to stable.

I really don't know what the true effects of hatcheies on wild fish are, I doubt many of us do. A really important thing to do is keep people fishing the Thompson because it is the anglers that will fight the hardest to protect these wild fish, and if a generation goes by with the Thompson being closed then there will be less people to fight to keep these fish from slipping into extinction.
 
#24 ·
A hatchery I could live with, if it actually tackled the real issue, but unless they are planning to protect the steelhead from being a by-catch of the salmon comercial fishing industry, there is no real sense in a hatchery. However if the hatchery is using wild Thompson fish as broodstock and not continously taking eggs from previous years hatchery offspring, it may be a good way to get Thompson fish populations closer to stable.

I really don't know what the true effects of hatcheies on wild fish are, I doubt many of us do. A really important thing to do is keep people fishing the Thompson because it is the anglers that will fight the hardest to protect these wild fish, and if a generation goes by with the Thompson being closed then there will be less people to fight to keep these fish from slipping into extinction.
Completely agree with your point about by-catch. Would caution against faith in broodstock. The most successful spawning of broodstock would be in a protected (no fishing, no mining, no clearcutting) trib.
The danger of the use of broodstock lies in the possible loss of genetic diversity.
To continue with my relation of the Nestucca River, a run of 5,000 native winter fish is not just 5,000 Nestucca fish. It consists of multiple demes. The true count is more like 1,000 Nestucca fish, 500 Beaver Creek fish, 300 Moon Creek fish, 200 Bible Creek fish, etc. Some of the smaller tribs may only support 20 spawning pairs @ carrying capacity. Any harvest of native fish to create broodstock, runs the risk of placing an entire deme in the hands of the agency producing the fish. Assuming competence (trying to be nice) this is still quite a risk.
I worry about the impact on a fairly healthy river. If it's healthy, let it go. On a river that got only 850 fish, I would be very worried that entire demes could be hatched in something other than their native gravel. Broodstock for the sake of restoration has been tried (check out "Totem Salmon") without smashing results. I trust protected tribs. Steamboat Creek drainage, on the N. Umpqua, is completely closed to fishing and more importantly mining. I don't think there has been a clearcut in the drainage in the last twenty years. Though the run is nowhere near its historical levels, it is healthy and fishable. There is also a hatchery on the river, but the native numbers are strong because of healthy tribs.
I would fight for the tribs before a hatchery.
Amen to keeping people fishing. The more we can share and spread our love of treasured waters, the better.

Peace.
 
#26 ·
I try to fish the Salmon River of Idaho all fall, last year (2009) on my first 1 week long trip of the year I landed 10 fish but only one was a “clipped” Hatchery fish. I no idea that is was not “wild” until I had it by the tail. Just a thought.:rolleyes:
 
#29 ·
I was told hatchery's in BC are different and much "better" than US ones. I don't know anything about American hatchery's so I could be wrong.

Our hatchery's in BC use only wild steelhead for their program. They raise the fry for a month and then release them. Since 80% of fry born die in the first month this saves many of them.

Also can a week, slow, dumb fish live in the the ocean for 3 years and live? This isn't the Great lakes. There's Orca, otter, sea lion, seals, sharks and lots of things we don't even know about yet eating them.

So if these fish are purebred wild fish with a month in the hatchery aren't they still 98% wild?

I like opening cans of worms :D. Don't shoot me.
 
#30 ·
I have been to ALOT of canadian (BC) and a number of american (washington state) hatcheries. My observation is that hatcheries in washington seem archaic and compared to more modern canadian hatcheries. Other than that, the american hatcheries still seem fine...they are doing their job so what else can you ask for?

VEDDER - CHILLIWACK R VEDDER #119289 Smolt 82g Adipose

Steelhead are not released as fry (seen above from an actual stocking record). They are released as smolts, so i dont agree with you saying that 80% die. These fish were released at 82 grams (smolt), as opposed to 1-4grams (fry). These fish are raised at the hatchery for over a year.

"So if these fish are purebred wild fish with a month in the hatchery aren't they still 98% wild?" HAHA what...no....what happens when two hatchery fish spawn...you get a wild fish?...no you get a second generation hatchery fish that isnt clipped, which comes across as wild.

Im just wondering, where do you get all these "facts"?
 
#31 ·
I've been thinking about this and changed my mind to not use hatchery fish. The reason is because I don't enjoy fishing around gear guys and hatchery fish bring in the meat hookers.

So if we leave it as it is and get the numbers a little higher with better conservation and environment tactics then we can have a river that's probably the most difficult to catch a steelhead on but also the most rewarding.
 
#33 ·
Why on earth ...

Why on earth would someone want to change what in heaven was clearly mastered to be as it is ??!!

For the last 35 years I've been fishing the Rio Grande in Tierra del Fuego.
I live there.

The Rio Grande holds the best wild anadromus Brown Trout of the planet.
I have seen that river get better and better every season since 1980,
We ,the fly-fishermen in TDF, have battled against hatchery on the Rio Grande and it's tributaries, in which government would systematicaly seed rainbows, for years ...
We all know theyr'e anadromous fish eggs worst enemy !
We finally made it and managed to regulate the fishery in a better way.

It can be done.
If possible, do not touch the Thompson , it's a way of enhancing it !

As I said, I'm not from the States , but I'm a passionate fly-fisherman , as my grand-father , my dad , and my son. I've been living from this sport for the last 20 years and I know about the mistique of fishing for wild Trout.
Wild fish are a unique TREASURE !!

Sandokan
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top