Possible changes coming

[TimberTodd]

I know this has been talked about, but some folks may not be aware of what's being considered.

http://www.oregonlive.com/sports/oregonian/bill_monroe/index.ssf/2014/01/post_104.html#incart_river

 

[Casting Call]

Guys read the comments! The fly fisherperson sure gets hammered by the ignorant SOBs. Saying fly peeps don't care,they want the rivers to themselfs and and destroy everything whereever we go. BS. Somebody go and reply to such nonsence. My old computer does'nt comply with some of the formats required in todays electronics. Somebody please! Tony

 

[jamisonace]

I don't see that this is a result of the fly fishing groups. I'd be curious to know why they are making these changes and what impact they are hoping to create. I fly fish for these fish too but I'm completely opposed to what the fly fishing groups are trying to do to our hatchery fish runs in the Mckenzie and I understand the gear anglers animosity for everything fly fishing as a result.

Guys read the comments! The fly fisherperson sure gets hammered by the ignorant SOBs. Saying fly peeps don't care,they want the rivers to themselfs and and destroy everything whereever we go. BS. Somebody go and reply to such nonsence. My old computer does'nt comply with some of the formats required in todays electronics. Somebody please! Tony

 

[DrTheopolis]

I have an issue with eliminating the summer steelhead fishery on the Wilson, since it's a hugely popular summer destination. Otherwise, the rest of it doesn't seem too harsh.

 

[TimberTodd]

I also didn't read anything about fly fisherman in the article other than the mention of Frank Moore. I agree Jamie, I am curious why the ODFW are looking into the changes. I fly fish and gear fish and have no animosity against either and I am all for the hatchery programs. As far as calling out the guys with their comments, would it really accomplish much other than start a mud slinging contest?

 

[halibuthitman]

So odfw does a study and determines spring chinook and winter steelhead are the two largest targets and money makers in the state.. Then tailor a managment plan that suites that exactly.. This is why there is no hope for Oregons wild fish , and **** that stinky little ditch they call a river the nestucca.. They should plant all those fish in the clack or slaw and end that joke of a system.. Stinky.. Just plain stinky and ugly-

 

[Casting Call]

TT not in the article but the comments. Your correct about the mudsling thing, I won't go there. Here's an old quote of mine" One who responds to foolishness, responds as a fool". I got had on this one, foolish me. Tony

 

[jamisonace]

I agree, I'm not sure why anyone would be too concerned unless they read more into it than what is there. But.....most of the water affected I know little about. Two new springer runs down south sounds good.

I have an issue with eliminating the summer steelhead fishery on the Wilson, since it's a hugely popular summer destination. Otherwise, the rest of it doesn't seem too harsh.

 

[rogerdodger]

the article sounds like some of what might be coming from the "Coastal Management Plan", this is from our January STEP newsleter:

"ODFW Plans Open Houses On Draft Coastal Management Plan
The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife will host six public open houses in January to solicit public comment
on a draft management plan for six coastal salmon and trout species.
The draft Coastal Multi-Species Conservation and Management Plan describes the conservation status of these species
and outline a suite of actions related to harvest and hatchery programs, predators and habitat to sustain these species
and improve overall fishing. The goal is to better balance risks to wild fish populations by being conservative in some
areas while also increasing fishing and harvest opportunities in others, according to Tom Stahl, ODFW’s Conservation
and Recovery Program Manager.
The species and area for the plan include spring and fall chinook, chum salmon, winter and summer steelhead and
coastal cutthroat trout along much of the Oregon coast, from Cape Blanco to Seaside.
Dates for meetings include January 23 in Newport at the Best Western Plus Agate Beach Inn,
2019 N. Coast Highway, January 28 in North Bend at the North Bend Community Center, 2222 Broadway St., North
Bend, and January 29 in Reedsport at the Reedsport Community Center, 451 Winchester Ave..
All three meetings will be from 6-9 p.m.
Some key elements of the draft plan include increasing fishing opportunities by increasing total hatchery releases
by five percent; providing more protection to wild fish by clearly identifying areas that will not have hatchery
programs; proposing harvest opportunities for wild steelhead in three new areas; proposing managing wild coho,
chinook and spring chinook harvest on a sliding scale that increases or decreases the number of fish that can be
retained based on anticipated returns.
For complete information about the program, go to http://dfw.state.or.us/news/2014/january/010314b.asp"

 

[troutdude]

I wish that, cutting the summer steel population on the Siletz was NOT in their plan. The system, is the closet summer coastal stream for me to get to.

 

[eat, sleep, fish]

To make it clear for everyone here's a brief summary of SOME of the proposed changes to the hatchery program. Nothing has been decided yet...

• Kilchis

Elimination of the hatchery winter steelhead program

• Wilson

Elimination of spring Chinook and summer steelhead plants
Slight increase in winter steelhead plants (from 140K to 150K)

• Trask

Increase in fall Chinook plants (from 113K to 150K)
Increase in spring Chinook plants (from 220K to 400K)

• Nestucca

Increase in spring Chinook plants (from 110K to 200K)
Increase in winter steelhead plants (from 110K to 140K)
Increase in summer steelhead plants (from 70K to 100K)

• Little Nestucca

Establishment of a spring Chinook hatchery program (30K plants)

• Siletz

Reduction in summer steelhead plants (from 80K to 50K)

• Yaquina Bay

Establishment of a spring Chinook hatchery program (100K plants)

• Big Elk

Elimination of the winter steelhead hatchery program

• Alsea

Slight increase in winter steelhead plants (from 120K to 140K)

• South Umpqua

Increase in winter steelhead plants (from 120K to 150K)

• Coos Bay Frontal

Increase in fall Chinook plants (from 1.99M to 2.09M)
Establishment of a spring Chinook hatchery program (100K plants)

• Millicoma

Elimination of fall Chinook hatchery program

• Coquille Bay

Reduction in fall Chinook plants (from 175K to 120K)

• East Fork Coquille

Elimination of winter steelhead hatchery program

• South Fork Coquille

Increase in winter steelhead plants (70K to 90K)

• Elk

Reduction in fall Chinook plants (325K to 275K)

You'll notice that many of the basins with hatchery programs that are being eliminated also have an increase in a nearby river. The hatchery fish are just being shifted within the basin. An example of this is the Wilson and Nestucca springers and summer steelhead. The Wilson fish are going to be shifted to the Nestucca.

Here's a summary of the proposed OVERALL total change in annual hatchery fish releases per species:

Fall Chinook - decrease from 3.50M to 3.43M
Spring Chinook - increase 797K to 1.172M
Winter Steelhead - increase from 1.091M to 1.125M
Summer Steelhead - decrease from 345K to 315K

 

[troutdude]

Well done ESF. Outlining it like that, makes is clearer. Too bad the journalist who wrote the article--didn't line it out in that format. I'm glad to see that, I was mistaken...only a REDUCTION on the Siletz summers (not elimination).

 

[eat, sleep, fish]

Well done ESF. Outlining it like that, makes is clearer. Too bad the journalist who wrote the article--didn't line it out in that format. I'm glad to see that, I was mistaken...only a REDUCTION on the Siletz summers (not elimination).

No problem. It was posted on another board, and definitely makes the picture a lot clearer.

If you figure that hatchery fish roughly return at 1% on an average year, you're looking at going from 800 summer runs returning to 500 on the Siletz, while gaining 1000 springers in Yaquina Bay and 200 extra winter steelhead on the Alsea.

 

[rogerdodger]

No problem. It was posted on another board, and definitely makes the picture a lot clearer.

If you figure that hatchery fish roughly return at 1% on an average year, you're looking at going from 800 summer runs returning to 500 on the Siletz, while gaining 1000 springers in Yaquina Bay and 200 extra winter steelhead on the Alsea.

thanks ESF, I also heard that the Siuslaw winter steelhead plantings done by our Florence STEP group will stay the same under the plan, I think it is ~65K per year...cheers, roger