Great Elwha Bull Trout Article

Matt B

Matt B

RAMONES
Forum Supporter
This whole series on the Elwha has been good reading, but I've always had a special fascination with bull trout and I'm not sure why--Maybe it's something to do with this factoid from the end of the article: “When you study this animal,” Brenkman said, “you are seeing the actions and responses of a truly wild species.”

Good news for bull trout in the Elwha | Encyclopedia of Puget Sound

Bull trout appear to be thriving in nearly every section of the Elwha River. Populations there have at least doubled in the years since dam removal, signaling good news for a species that has struggled throughout the West. We bring you part six of our series 'Returning home: The Elwha's genetic...
www.eopugetsound.org www.eopugetsound.org
 
The whole series is a good read.
 
I am incredibly jealous of the geo tagging data, 🤤 what cool info to see. Awesome comeback story.

The mixing with isolated headwater strains of bull post removal is incredible, creating a stronger population. Amazing and sad.
 
Last edited:
Article should read:

“Good New For Bull Trout In Elwha - Bull Trout Still Not Targeted By Commercial Fisheries, Still Don’t Migrate Through Regions Of Intense Commercial Fishing Pressure”

Maybe I am just aging into a crusty old crab, but I get tired of these types of articles just because it is obvious that opening up habitat to fish, especially habitat like the Elwha watershed, should help fish. The articles should be about why more dams aren’t coming down. It’s a proven concept. It works, let’s fucking fund it and make it happen. Especially because we target anadromous fish so heavily with commercial fishing and eat them up for at our BBQs.
 
HauntedByWaters said:
Article should read:

“Good New For Bull Trout In Elwha - Bull Trout Still Not Targeted By Commercial Fisheries, Still Don’t Migrate Through Regions Of Intense Commercial Fishing Pressure”

Maybe I am just aging into a crusty old crab, but I get tired of these types of articles just because it is obvious that opening up habitat to fish, especially habitat like the Elwha watershed, should help fish. The articles should be about why more dams aren’t coming down. It’s a proven concept. It works, let’s fucking fund it and make it happen. Especially because we target anadromous fish so heavily with commercial fishing and eat them up for at our BBQs.
Click to expand...
I’d say there is a lot more to the article than stating the obvious just like there is a lot more to removing dams than fucking funding it and making it happen. See what I did.

I enjoy crusty crabs. I also enjoy fish, I see where you’re going with the BBQ argument. Nothing wrong with eating mother natures splendor, we all do it. Proper conservation though is needed which this article supports.
 
HauntedByWaters said:
Article should read:

“Good New For Bull Trout In Elwha - Bull Trout Still Not Targeted By Commercial Fisheries, Still Don’t Migrate Through Regions Of Intense Commercial Fishing Pressure”

Maybe I am just aging into a crusty old crab, but I get tired of these types of articles just because it is obvious that opening up habitat to fish, especially habitat like the Elwha watershed, should help fish. The articles should be about why more dams aren’t coming down. It’s a proven concept. It works, let’s fucking fund it and make it happen. Especially because we target anadromous fish so heavily with commercial fishing and eat them up for at our BBQs.
Click to expand...
So, I take it you did *not* enjoy the article.
Roger that and Duly noted. I learned some stuff from it and I like learnin’ stuff, especially about fish, especially about bull trout fish.

I think the articles you’re talking about would be very different articles. I’d love to read them. You should maybe write it or pitch it to that author; he’s contactable.
 
Our native bull trout are one fascinating critter exhibiting a wide range of behaviors and in areas with robust population they often illustrate they take advantage of habitats outside of what the "book".

For nearly 50 years they have been a special interest of mine both as angler and a biologist. Over the decades after nearly every field season a common refrain was with each piece new information more questions were created. Fortunately, those questions were more refined and seeking those answer expanded our collective knowledge of this interesting critter.

I suspect it would have been more correct that with the removal of the dams to stay those populations stuck above the dams were finally able to exhibit more of the life history common of the species in this part of the world. Rather than anadromous and say headwater resident populations being separate populations they are most often from the same population. In a basin like the Skagit it is not uncommon to see the various life histories spawning in the same area at the same time and the various life histories contributing to a mating. To even further complicate the picture on study on the Skagit found that about 8% of the population sampled (about 150 fish) changed life histories between one year and the next. An interesting example was a 7-year adult of about 21 inches in length that as a 6-year-old fish and after spawning once left the headwaters as about a 12-inch fish to make its way to Puget (an anadromous fish) to spawn once again and when it was sampled was returning to spawn the third time (once as a head water resident and twice as an anadromous fish.

HauntedByWAters While not targeted by commercial fisheries on the Skagit salmon netting seasons; especially the sockeye netting significant numbers are taken.

Curt
 
I’m sorry if it came off like I didn’t like the article. I did.

I get frustrated by the Elwha restoration and how it was handled. Did we do it for the fish or for the dollars?
 
Last edited:
HauntedByWaters said:
I’m sorry if it came off like I didn’t like the article. I did.

I get frustrated by the Elwha restoration and how it was handled. Did we do it for the fish or for the dollars?
Click to expand...
Here here, understand the frustration. There is another group but I won’t get into that. All I hope is wdfw is willing to deviate from the blanket all reg planning when it opens one day, and if food is given it is treated equally amongst ALL, with long term conservation in mind and some actual active policing.
 
Sam Brenkman is a super nice guy and is always willing to answer questions you might have regarding fish in the park.
SF
 
I found this part intriguing.

"While hatcheries are a fact of life for most salmonid species, bull trout have rarely been grown in confined conditions or moved from one stream to another. They have largely avoided the genetic distortions that such practices can bring to local populations."

Does anyone know why bulls haven't been raised in hatcheries? I'm not advocating for or against hatcheries (to be frank, I don't know how I feel about them and you're not going to convince me either way ;)), I'm just generally interested why they haven't been.
 
HauntedByWaters said:
I’m sorry if it came off like I didn’t like the article. I did.

I get frustrated by the Elwha restoration and how it was handled. Did we do it for the fish or for the dollars?
Click to expand...
Is it an either or?
I don't think it is.
 
Here's one instance I know of where they've been moved from one system to another.
This is a pretty special area, unfortunately a lot of it burnt in the 2020 fires and has yet to open back up.

 
Last edited:
charles sullivan said:
Is it an either or?
I don't think it is.
Click to expand...

I agree with you but a dam removal on this scale was/is a big deal. I grew up for several decades hearing about this dam and how it could be just the beginning of a major movement to open up fish habitat. But rather then have a sound plan with experimental control and research, it became about how fast can we start commercial fishing this system.

I honestly feel like a truly wild and strong recovery of anadromous fish was feared by the establishment. Hatcheries needed to be involved, commercial fishing needed to be involved, it was not okay for this to simply be a study of habitat restoration and wild fish. If it was a resounding success without any influence by man other than removing the dam, where would we be? Doesn’t Mother Earth need us to keep doing what we do? Doesn’t she need our hatcheries and our management? Let’s not find out!

It isn’t either/or but it is a missed opportunity to see and research something special, an opportunity that may never happen again, because money and profit trumps all.
 
mcswny said:
Does anyone know why bulls haven't been raised in hatcheries?
Click to expand...
I don't know as a fact, but I think the answer lies in the realm that bull trout are not an "economically important" species of fish in WA state. No interest group or agency observed any need or benefit to develop a hatchery program for bull trout, unlike every other fish hatchery program in the state.
 
Salmo_g said:
I don't know as a fact, but I think the answer lies in the realm that bull trout are not an "economically important" species of fish in WA state. No interest group or agency observed any need or benefit to develop a hatchery program for bull trout, unlike every other fish hatchery program in the state.
Click to expand...
Makes sense, thanks Salmo.
 
HauntedByWaters said:
I agree with you but a dam removal on this scale was/is a big deal. I grew up for several decades hearing about this dam and how it could be just the beginning of a major movement to open up fish habitat. But rather then have a sound plan with experimental control and research, it became about how fast can we start commercial fishing this system.

I honestly feel like a truly wild and strong recovery of anadromous fish was feared by the establishment. Hatcheries needed to be involved, commercial fishing needed to be involved, it was not okay for this to simply be a study of habitat restoration and wild fish. If it was a resounding success without any influence by man other than removing the dam, where would we be? Doesn’t Mother Earth need us to keep doing what we do? Doesn’t she need our hatcheries and our management? Let’s not find out!

It isn’t either/or but it is a missed opportunity to see and research something special, an opportunity that may never happen again, because money and profit trumps all.
Click to expand...
I admit that I'm not the most clued in on the history/process of the Elwah removal. But this was the general feeling I got as well as far as how the whole thing was handled. There was a whole lot of "look at the wild fish that STILL return to the bottom of the dam, how amazing they are!" as justification for removing the dam. But then there wasn't a lot of consideration given to NOT having a hatchery and instead supporting those amazing wild fish.

But maybe without the hatchery/commercial side, the whole thing would never have happened in the first place and we'd still have an outdated dam sitting there. I don't know. But from a strictly conservation angle, it seems like a real missed opportunity to learn what happens when we let nature try and repair our human mistakes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top