Something Needs to Change.

Mossback

Fear My Powerful Emojis 😆
Forum Supporter
Washington was the salmon capital of the world in the 1950's and 1960"s. We can be again if everyone drops their egos and goes to work to accomplish just that.

Dave
Doubt it seriously.
Carrying capacity of the rivers is not anywhere near what it was then, ergo not as many fish possible via wild runs.
Hatchery fish flooding the basins is out now, that is not happening.

So in short, the whole salmon capital thing returning is a non starter.

Wishing for the past will not make it so...
 

wetline dave

Steelhead
The past is the past but we can improve habitat and better manage fish runs for maximum returns to rivers. That is what I am advocating rather than the status quo with the excuses. I want maximum numbers of fish on redds verse maximum fish in nets. I think that is very basic.

Dave

Dave
 
  • Like
Reactions: JS

Salmo_g

Legend
Forum Supporter
I want maximum numbers of fish on redds verse maximum fish in nets. I think that is very basic.
I not sure that you're "getting it" Dave. Maximum fish on redds means zero fishing, as in ZERO net fishing, ZERO sport fishing; NO fishing at all by anyone. That is the only way ever to have "maximum fish on redds."

We could, hypothetically at least, have zero fishing. And indeed there would be more fish on redds. However, that would not lead to a massive recovery and increase in salmon populations. It would increase some populations, maybe by a significant amount, and not increase others at all by any significant measure. No matter what fish management does, habitat carrying capacity is determined by its intrinsic productivity, capacity, and diversity. These factors are always at work, along with marine survival rates, which are a measure of ocean productivity and capacity.
 

wetline dave

Steelhead
Salmo I have thought about how to reply as I really do get it.

MSH does not work and that is self-evident. Instead of managing for maximum harvest I want the escapement of fish equal to or slightly more than capacity. With a downward sliding scale every year the runs keep diminishing. Yes, there is the ocean and loss of habitat but what I want to correct is over harvest, that I define as harvesting too many fish and not allow the carrying capacity to be met.

If people want their cake and eat it too then let's just open it wide as it can go with catch and no season and just get it over with rather than a slow death by a thousand cuts.

My other big objection is when a run is far larger than expected and the commercials are given X number of days to harvest with no limit as to numbers taken. This is easy to monitor but total BS. I think it was the Makaws were given 3 o4 days to fish Kings a few springs ago thinking of a small harvest and every boat on the beach went out and when the water quit dripping they had greatly surpassed the number expected and it affected everyone down the line. Then there is the debacle of the roe fishery on Chums out in front of the Snohomish of few years back. No limit on numbers harvested just number of days fishing. Chum are almost non -existent in the Snoqualmie and it had a nice run of decent sized Chum willing to double you rod. MSH at its finest!!
Then there is the true cod fishery that once existed in the Sound. The netters figured out most of the cod came down the west side of Vashon Island and they were given basically free reign to net them. That was what 30 years ago maybe more, It has been a long time since any numbers of True Cod have been seen in mid or south Sound and that too is MSH .

I concede Salmo I really don't get it and MSH "science" is infallible. I have learned the errors of my ways and so I now sing out gill nets forever!

Dave
 
Top