Advertisement

Catching Pike Minnow for money

MattK

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 3, 2003
Messages
1,207
Location
Montana
PORTLAND, Ore. -
Fishing in the Columbia and Snake rivers this spring and summer could be very rewarding for those who pursue the northern pikeminnow. The Northern Pikeminnow Management Program will pay $4 to $8 for each of the salmon-eating predators delivered by fishers to stations along the Columbia and Snake rivers.

The 2005 sport reward program opens on the lower Columbia River May 2 and upstream into the Snake River May 16.

The program is designed to reduce the number of mature pikeminnow in the lower Columbia and lower Snake rivers. These larger fish thrive by devouring juvenile salmon. Since 1990, fishing has removed nearly 2.4 million northern pikeminnow. Last year alone, 268,000 of the predators were turned in for reward, saving thousands of juvenile salmon.

The more northern pikeminnow each angler catches, the more the fish are worth. The first 100 bring $4 each. The next 300 are worth $5 each, and after 400 are turned in, they're worth $8 each. As an added incentive, specially tagged fish released into the rivers will garner $500 each.

To be Credited fish must be at least nine inches long and must be caught in the lower Columbia River (mouth to Priest Rapids Dam) and Snake River (mouth to Hells Canyon Dam). Anglers have averaged several hundred dollars during a season; the top 20 have made from $15,000 to nearly $35,000 fishing for pikeminnow.

Program participants must register in person at one of the registration stations each day prior to fishing. The catch must be turned in each day and reward vouchers are issued for qualified fish.

Information about where to find northern pikeminnow, how to fish for them and how to qualify for the sport reward program is available from the Washington Sport Reward Hot Line at (800) 858-9015. For voucher information, call (800) 769-9362 or (503) 595-3297 in Portland. Visit the Web site at www.pikeminnow.org.
 
Living in Lewiston where tons of people fish for these things I have never understood this program. Didn't the salmon evolve with them?
 
Its the complete opposite here if I remember correctly they want pike minnows in the colorado river. they are endangered here.

Again if I remember correctly

Delw
 
TheTone, salmon did evolve with pikeminnows. What they didnt evolve with is 100's of miles of slack water (behind the dams) thats jacked the pikeminnow population through the roof. Salmon also didnt evolve going through dams and having nitrogen poisoning...which either kills them or stuns them so pikeminnows can easily gobble them up. Salmon didnt evolve with being ground up into pikeminnow bait by dams either.

See the difference?
 
FCB- He won't change it and in fact wants to lessen the restrictions on dams. Even the BPA is against his latest energy bill as it will hurt the environment, jack rates, and cut funding...

Yeah, GWB's doing a helluva job!
 
Buzz,

How does nitrogen poisoning happen? Is it because of the impounded water behind the dams?
 
Bambi- Its actually (and Buzz feel free to correct me if I'm wrong ;) ) the water going over/through the dam...not that impounded behind it.

When water is “churned” it can develop nitrogen gas. Can happen both through a dam (turbine) or even with diversions if the spill is too fast or concentrated (it needs to be a bit of a balancing act by the operators). The nitrogen supersaturation below the dam can enter the fishes bloodstream through the gills and can injure fish by expanding as it attempts to return to the atmosphere- similar to that experienced by human deep sea divers when they ascend too quickly from a dive (the bends).

As the unstable nitrogen gas expands, it injures fragile tissues within the body, especially the eyes. Since the eyes contain some of the most delicate structures in fish anatomy, nitrogen poisoning often reveals itself in swollen or ruptured eye tissue, a condition known as "pop-eye." Also makes them more prone to disease/infection.
 
Matt,

Is the BPA in favor of dam breeching? Are you in favor of welfare ranchers paying the going rate for federal land grazing? Are you in favor of balancing the budget?
 
Del, you're right, but it's a different species of pikeminnow. You've got the endangered Colorado pikeminnow in the C. River, vs. their northern pikeminnow.

Oak
 
Oh I definitely understand that all Buzz. Does anyone think this makes any real difference in salmon numbers? One would think there are better uses for this money.
 
TheTone,

No, I dont think it makes much difference...and I agree, that money should be used for dam breeching.
 
What's the biggest dam ever breeched? That is, can they breech these dams there. Who tested those ladders? They don't even know what's wrong, do they? Is there a report somewhere on it?
 
Tom,

The ladders for returning fish are fine. They've removed and breeched plenty of dams.

They do know whats wrong...90%+ mortality on smolts. We've spent over a BILLION dollars in trying to reduce smolt mortality...cant get it below 90%, most years its more than 90%.

Lets see...before the dams were put in we had 30 million anadromous fish a year entering the Columbia...after dams we have maybe (on a real good year) 800,000...I wonder what the problem is??? It isnt rocket science...
 
Did they know that when they built the dam(s)? Do you think they have one of those environmental impact reports on the web somewhere?
The news I heard, said they didn't know what it was, did they decide what it was, or are you just saying what you think it is?

Here's some rocket science type stuff on it, it looks like, but these curves have some higher survival rates in them, 30%, I think.

http://www.sciencedirect.com/scienc...d=108488&md5=0674b65810745c88c269868d7ab9d8e6
 
Tom,

The research is out there, the PATH report would be good place to start. Check out the army corp of engineers too.

We've posted an ass-pile of data on the board...I bet even a search on salmon in SI could get you started.
 
Tom, did you read this part in the link you provided?:

"THE SCIENTIFIC CASE FOR PARTIAL REMOVAL OF THE LOWER SNAKE DAMS

Current smolt-to-adult return rates for spring and summer chinook are less than one-half of one percent that is, for every 100 smolts (migrating young salmon) that head for the ocean, less than one-half of one adult fish returns two to three years later. This return rate is four times below the rate needed for replacement, and far less than the four-percent rate, last recorded in the 1960s, needed to rebuild salmon stocks.

These dismal returns reflect two failures: in existing in-river migration conditions, and in fish barging and trucking. Each year, 50 percent to 80 percent of smolts are collected at lower Snake dams, loaded on trucks or barges, and transported downstream past Bonneville Dam. The rest migrate in-river. Recent studies ratify the real-world results: neither the barging/trucking program, nor status-quo river conditions, can restore salmon, and neither should be part of a long-term recovery plan. Studies comparing fish barging to existing in-river migration are largely irrelevant to salmon recovery, since both are failures.

What will succeed? The official Independent Scientific Advisory Board (ISAB) for Columbia/Snake salmon has stated the general scientific consensus crisply: "Return to the River." Migration conditions in the river must be returned toward those under which the salmon evolved and thrived.

Taking up where the ISAB left off is PATH, the other official science process for Columbia/Snake salmon. PATH (Plan for Analyzing and Testing Hypotheses) was given the task of predicting whether specific measures would restore salmon. PATH is conducting the most rigorous, technically-based natural resource decision-making analysis ever done, anywhere. Federal, state, tribal and independent scientists are teamed in PATH. Uncertainties that cannot be resolved are explicitly recognized and factored into the analysis. An independent scientific panel provides rigorous peer review of PATH results.
 
Back
Top