7755 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

tions on the native stock is illustrated by the significant change in spawning time..." Disease, another likely factor, was probably brought in with non-native stocks. The hatchery was almost dis- ease-free through the 1940x, but dis- ease and juvenile loss increased in the 19:50x. Rearing fish for longer periods exacerbated the disease problem. Authors \elson and Bodle concluded t}tat, ";~Ithough well intentioned, the efforts to perpetuate a stock of salmon led instead to itsdemise."Thevwenton to say that it "would he convenient to solely blame Bonneville Dam" but that "...the causes for extinction of this stock...apparently included the inu•o- duction of different stocks, which altered their genetic fitness and intro- duced diseases, and the management decision to rear fish longer: which de- creased their survival both in the hatch- ery and after release." The hatchery continues to raise other kinds of fish. A 1985 switch to a ne~v swain of fall (:hinooks "received a set- back" in 1987, when a disease outbreak forced destruction of the entire year's production. TROUT STOCKING PROBLEMS ~•1'isconsin fishery adminisu-ators of 3Q to 40 years ago doted on their system of a dozen or so hatcheries. Onlyone of the hatchery managers-and• few of their supervisors-were trout fisher- men. Field biologists and Borne anglers questioned the appearance and perfor- mance of~ hatchery u•out, but the gen- eral pnhlic and politicians assumed stocking w-as a good ding. In the 1960x, stream studies began to reveal how bad the results of stocking were, and man- agement began to change. Instead of stocking virtualh• all waters that could support u-out, streams were evaluated, then stocked according to whether dev lacked natural reproduction and whether they could grow u•out w=ell. Wisconsin officials say there's still nntch room for improvement. ti4'hen a recent. three-year drought forced fish- ingclosure oradoption of no-kill regu- lations in about half of the state's trout su-eams, population surveys to gauge t}te effect of those regulations revealed that, on average, stocked fish survived onlyone-sixth as well as wild trout, even under no fishing pressure and where environmtnrtl conditions remained good. That's caused renewed discus- sion of the wild-versus-hatchery u•out issue and may change ~h`isconsin's hatch- er~ program. Foreseen are decreased stocking and "rnc:~re wild-type stocking of diverse su-ains.'' Despite Montana's progressiveness in hatchery ttse, problems of inappropri- ate stocking still exist there. By halting su-eam stocking in the 1970x, that state changed its policy to an extent that none other in the ~'.S. has matched. But an obstinate fish culturist mind-set lingers, and a localized political atmo- sphere favoring stocking persists. This makes it hard to administer the pro- gram. Some Montana hatchery managers still insist on raising the "Ar•lee"rainbow trout strain, which is severely domesti- cated, docile, and grows well, making it a fish culturist's favorite. But, even in lakes, it performs tar lesswellthan other kinds of :~4ontana hatchery u-out. It survives poorly and reproduces poorly. Field biologists responsible for main- taining lake fisheries prefer to use wild, naturalh reproducing u-cxrt or use hatchery su-ains of recent wild ancestry that are adapted to local conditions. Yet because some hatcheries continue to raise the.-lrlec su-ain, the illsuiteci prod- uct isstill stocked. Reportedly, there are also major problems and inefficiencies with a warmwater fish hatchery that Montana took over and poured mil- lions of dollars into after flee federal government ,rhandoned it in the 1980x. TAKING THE LAKE The State of W5r'ashington may tt3ke the cake for overdoing Fish hatcheries, probably also for letting a world lass wild fishery resc:,urce deteriorate. t-1'ithin do boundaries of that m odest-sized state are, at latest count, 1?1 major fxeblic- hatcheriYS, almost all raising salmonids. This may be more than in amp other state or province in I`rn•th Arnerica- perhaps in the world. The hatcheries are run by various agencies: the ~'4~ashingu~n Deparunent of Fisheries (responsible fi~rsalmon and marine fishery resources, and operat- ing 39 hatcheries), the ~-Vashington De- parunent of ~M1~'ildlife (responsible for steelhead, trout and other freshwater ,. ~ `~. COIDWATER LAKES THAN IN STREAMS. MONTANA FISHERY MANAGERS GET BEST RESULTS BY STOCKING TROUT THAT HAVE WILD PARENTS FROM A LAKE HAVING SIMILAR HABITAT, NOT BY STOCKING STANDARD DOMESTE GATED STRAINS. ~1U'I'CM\ 1992 'rKOl "f HATCHERY TROUT SURVIVE BETTER IN