Looking back at the historic runs of salmon and steelhead should give a pretty good idea of what a river system can support, right?
X river used to have 50,000 steelhead 500 years ago and now has 5,000. It worked with those high numbers before we got involved and started over harvesting.
Granted the system has changed a lot because X fish eats Y fish and Y fish numbers are low so X fish numbers can't grow. But when you have differences in runs that are as drastic as they are in every river in washington there should be some room to grow, shouldn't there?
If a river has 175,000 coho come up it each year and 7,000 steelhead, technically can't the steelhead numbers go up to 25,000 and the coho numbers go down to 158,000 and balance out fairly well? Winter steelhead and coho spawn around the same time and spawn in similar water (the far upper stretches of the watershed) so they are both hatching within a couple months of each other and a couple feet from each other.
Why can the Umqua support runs of up to 20,000 steelhead but increasing the hatchery steelhead in the big ol' skagit by a couple thousand is such a devistating thing to the ecosystem?
I am not a fisheries biologist, I don't know the answers. But someone who is please shed some light in detail if you know the answer bucause that has been bugging me for as long as I can remember.
Tim Tim, you have a degree in Icthiology don't you?
Atheism is a non-prophet organization
There's nothing quite as rewarding as teaching a poacher to swim with waders on! Half-Time Student
Full-Time Employed
Double-Time Daddy
I miss fishing.....
Previous
Index
Next
Flat
Re: 4 fish limit on silvers this fall
Edit
Reply
Quote
