Click on photo for full image

An Interview with Chuck Baranski, Fish Biologist Chuck Baranski is a fish biologist with the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. He received a fisheries degree from the University of Washington and began working for WDFW while in college in 1969. An avid angler, Baranski says his love of fishing was a major factor in his decision to make salmon stewardship a career. Chuck and his wife Jeanne have two sons, John, a junior at Linfield College, and James, a freshman at Capital High School in Olympia.

Q: You have been responsible for developing some new fishing opportunities, tell me what they are and how they came about? A: Not only has that process been a positive thing for the public, but it really pointed out some of the benefits of going from a centralized type agency that we used to have back with the Department of Fisheries to regionalization. We had a problem with excess fish coming back to our salmon hatcheries. We were given the task of finding something constructive to do with the fish rather than ship them off to be converted into cat food or whatever under our surplus contract. So we got together our regional management folks, enforcement people and hatchery folks and came to some conclusions about what the possibilities were. Not all of them worked out, but some of the good things included the idea, which predominately came from the enforcement officers, that we might do something with these fish like we do with kids' fishing derbies. Put them in ponds where people have a second shot at catching them. So we put surplus coho salmon in a couple of juvenile-only ponds, DeCoursey Pond in Puyallup and Wapato Lake in the Lakewood-Steilacoom area, some in Tule Lake over in the Nisqually system, which is walk-in only, and some in Waughop Lake near Steilacoom. We didn't know if these fish were going to be particularly good for a fishery, we didn't know how well they were going to bite, but we were willing to take a chance on it. As it turned out, about 10 percent of the fish did enter into the catch and they provided thousands of days of angler opportunities - it was a real success and now it is an on-going program. There has been great public reception, demonstrated by the fact we've got people calling the hatcheries now asking, "Hey, are you going to be putting extra fish in these lakes?" They are looking forward to those opportunities, which I think is a sign of a successful program. In addition to lake plants, we also made these fish more available to various food bank outlets. We also had a cooperative venture with a church in the Tacoma area to distribute fish to needy folks in the neighborhood. Additionally, there is a fish passage facility being put in the mainstem Puyallup River in the Electron area where Puget Sound Energy diverts water for a generation project. We took some of these surplus hatchery fish and hauled them up into this area (above the diversion) to let them spawn naturally, to give nature a jumpstart. We are going to do that for three years. It appears from the first brood that spawned up there that we got excellent survival of the fish resulting from the spawning. Hopefully, down the line those fish will adapt to the environment up there and provide a greater level of naturally produced coho in the Puyallup Basin. So there were a bunch of different things we tried to do and for the most part, we have been successful. It is a testimony to the cooperative process that went on, not being tunnel-visioned and thinking you are the only one who has a good idea. In the past, before regionalization of the Department, my responsibilities were on almost a Puget Sound-wide basis for coho salmon, predominately stock assessment work. But with regionalization, we've been given more limited geographic areas with broad responsibilities within them. For instance, I'm pretty familiar with the anadromous salmon in my areas, but it has been kind of a stretch all of a sudden getting involved with steelhead and inland fisheries management. Maybe having a little more to do with the habitat issues there as well. With regard to steelhead, (Puyallup Hatchery Complex Manager) Darrell Mills and I sat down and were thinking the hatchery steelhead program in the Puyallup Basin had been less than successful in recent years. The past program has been to take all of the steelhead production and disperse it throughout the watershed in off-station plants. Q: What do you mean by off-station? A: Putting the steelhead smolts in a truck and taking them to bridges in various locations throughout the basin and dumping them into the Puyallup River or tributaries as opposed to planting them, like we typically do with salmon, on-station. In other words, just opening the (hatchery) gates and letting them go. One of the concerns about having an on-station steelhead program is that perhaps the fish more readily return to the hatchery and don't mill around in the lower river, don't go into other areas where they are more available to the recreational fisher, which would be a huge concern on our part. The problem was, we had gotten to the point where recreational harvest wasn't that great in the Puyallup Basin anyway. It appeared like survivals and contributions were going steadily downhill. We thought this was an opportunity to try something different, so we have committed to planting fish on-station at Voights Creek Hatchery. An advantage of being planted at Voights Creek as opposed to the Puyallup Hatchery, which is in the lower part of the watershed, is that the fish have to move up through the Puyallup System and the Carbon River before they get to Voights Creek, which still offers a very significant recreational opportunity. Not only was survival and contribution to the recreational fishery a concern, but we were concerned with compliance with the Wild Salmonid Policy. By spreading fish all over the watershed, you are inviting those fish to spawn in the wild. There probably isn't a great concern about cross-spawning with the natural fish because the hatchery and wild fish spawn at different times. However, if there is successful hatchery stock spawning going on, the juveniles will be competing with "native" juveniles in that system and may have some negative effects in that regard. So we were trying to get the fish to come back to an area where we can get our hands on them. That allows us to do two things-- first, minimize the effect we may be having on the wild stocks. Secondly, in the past, we had to import fish on an annual basis into the Puyallup System--meaning we did not have enough fish returning to the hatcheries in the Puyallup system to supply the necessary eggs. So we would end up with fish coming from the Green River system, Bogachiel or wherever there were surplus eggs for the (Puyallup) program. So what you have then is a constant influx of "foreign genes" coming into the system. We are thinking that if we can develop an in-basin broodstock, we might be able to develop a stock of fish that is actually adapted over the long run to the Puyallup system, increasing survivals and as a result, increasing fishing opportunities. This year, 1998-99, the return is the first from a partial on-station release and the results are very encouraging. This year alone, with only 50,000 to 60,000 fish released at Voights Creek, it looks like we are going to get enough fish back for our entire Puyallup in-basin program, which is about 250,000 fish. For each succeeding group we have put the entire production, 180,000 fish, into the Voights Creek program. The fish are allowed to migrate out in their own time--it is called volitional release. There may be an advantage to that at well. Fish migrate out in bits and pieces, rather than being taken out in a truck and forcibly released--then you've got this mass of fish in one place at one time, which may or may not be supported by the environment there or may be more susceptible to predation. There is the possibility we will have increased survival on out-migration because the fish may be less concentrated as they move downstream Another concern was that it has been demonstrated in some on-station programs that a lot of the steelhead smolts may residualize, in other words they may want to stay as resident trout within the system you put them in -- just not go to sea at all. Then you end up with problems with regard to competition with resident game fish. Darrell says this last year when we had our first full scale on-station release, there was essentially no residualization in the (hatchery) pond, which means all these fish had a migratory sense to head out. There was food there in the pond, there was reason to stay if they desired to do so, but, in fact, they all moved out. We are really encouraged by that program. The proof is going to be in the pudding, of course, what kind of harvest do we get from these fish. Increased survival doesn't do us any good if we don't get any net benefit to our user groups out there. That is yet to be determined. Q: Is that because the adults don't come back or they are intercepted somewhere else? A: The main concern expressed by people more experienced in steelhead management than I am was that the fish would be more likely to move through the system quickly and up into the hatchery and not provide as much fishing opportunity. That probably wouldn't be felt so much in the tribal net fisheries but it may have an impact on the harvest by the recreational anglers. We won't be able to analyze that until we see what the catches were this year and what our catches next year look like. Preliminary indications have all been positive so far. Q: Why are there surplus hatchery fish available for these purposes? A: It's a function of the weaker natural stocks. We have hatchery fish mixed up with the natural fish throughout their life history. Up to this point in time, we haven't been able to distinguish those fish in the fishery. So, you end up having to manage for the stock that needs the greatest protection and you reduce fishing opportunity to the lowest common denominator. You have greater juvenile survival of hatchery fish compared to wild fish, because they are protected during the freshwater stage of their life history. Therefore, you don't need as many adults coming back to maintain a hatchery run of fish as you do for a natural run. So if you protect the natural run, you end up with a surplus of the hatchery fish coming back. We may be able to harvest hatchery fish at a 90 or 95 percent rate--catch 90 to 95 percent of the fish and still have sufficient fish back at the hatchery to maintain the run. There is no way a natural run can sustain that same harvest rate. If we manage everything for a 50 to 60 percent harvest rate, which protects the wild fish, then, all of a sudden, you've got that additional 40 percent of that hatchery stock showing up at the hatchery. You've got to do something with those fish. Q: Won't that change with marking? A: That's the theory. If we can identify these fish in the fisheries, we can open up opportunities that allow us to harvest hatchery fish only. There will be some limitations on that, as well, because there will be some associated fishery mortality on the wild stocks simply because they are being handled. It isn't like we can go out and harvest every single hatchery fish because at some point in time you are going reach a level of unacceptable fishery mortality on the wild stocks, even with a selective fishery program. Obviously it is going to offer a whole lot more opportunity than we have right now without selective fisheries. If we are able to incorporate that in commercial fisheries as well, we are likely to have a very positive influence on natural returns. Q: When you say 10 percent of the hatchery coho placed in lakes and ponds enter the fishery, you mean they are caught? A: Yes. We did some creel surveys and found two things: anglers were catching fish and the great appreciation the public has just to have an opportunity with a reasonable expectation of encountering a fish. By far and away, not everyone is catching fish and it is the same old adage, probably 90 percent of the fish are being caught by the 10 percent of the fishermen who know what they are doing. But the thing about the coho in these ponds is, they are jumping around all over the place and swimming around in schools. The people see the fish in there and it really maintains their interest level. And you see the occasional fish brought to the beach--they can be caught. It is a lot of extra work for the hatchery people to plant these fish, but they seem to receive the same satisfaction as well, seeing their product providing some recreation. I can't understate the amount of extra work that goes into this program by the hatchery folks. Q: What do you mean by stock assessment work? A: That's really a large part of my job. Stock assessment is, essentially, inventorying spawning fish, estimating the spawning populations. I've been doing stock assessment work since 1981, primarily coho stock assessment. Since regionalization, I'm working predominately with chinook, coho and steelhead with some chum. What that boils down to is going out on to the spawning grounds and counting fish. Methodology differs by species but essentially we have specific reaches of rivers within southern Puget Sound and Hood Canal that we survey on a systematic basis--weekly or every 10 days--over the course of the spawning season. We have a very long-term data base by which we can compare these numbers to get relative indications of spawning escapement from one year to the next. In the case of chinook, chum, pink and steelhead, we're able to make absolute escapement estimates from those numbers. By that I mean we can take the counts of either fish or redds--spawning nests--and estimate actual numbers of fish that are spawning in those areas. In the case of coho, it's not that straightforward because the fish spawn everywhere. One of my peers likes to say they are like rats, they are river rats, they spawn everywhere. They require very small tributaries to spawn in. So it is impossible to go out and cover all the available spawning habitat. So you have take a look at a select number of streams and assume they are representative of what is going on in the rest of the area and extrapolate from those counts. We look at the spawning densities in those index reaches and use them to estimate total basin escapement. Q: How do you make these estimates, from an airplane? By snorkling? A: We tend to use helicopter or fixed wing flights to do redd surveys for chinook and steelhead in some of the mainstem areas. We also do raft surveys, floating down rivers, particularly for chum, chinook and steelhead. When it really gets down to the chum, coho, chinook and steelhead work, it is a lot of walking down the river and counting fish or redds. That is the most enjoyable part of the work, just getting out and walking along the rivers. You get to see a lot of things other people just won't have the opportunity to see. Q: Are you electroshocking or do you just know what to look for? A: It's really funny because you tell people you are out counting fish and they look at you like you are kind of screwy. How do you count fish? It is an acquired skill. I remember the first time I went out to survey with (Olympic Peninsula Region Fish Biologist) Tim Flint he asked, "What kind of fish is that over there?" And I don't see any fish. By the time we finished that survey, I thought, "I can't do this." He just laughed at me. He said you have to develop search patterns so you know what you are looking for. After a while you realize you are keying in on colors, movement and shapes --not fish-- and all of a sudden that brings your focus to the fish. And over time you learn the behavior of the animal as well. Take the coho salmon early in the season, when water levels are low and clear. The fish aren't quite ready to spawn and they are vulnerable in those small streams, so they are hiding. So you find yourself looking for a piece of a fin hanging out from under a log or something like that. And you'll go and investigate those areas where you expect to find fish holding and you'll spook them out of there. Later on, when the flows come up and they start spawning, they become more oblivious to you and they are more open and easier to survey. Surveying coho in the small tributaries, you sometimes have to survey 40 to 50 feet ahead, in order to see the fish before they see you. Once aware of your presence, they go into their little hidey holes and you will never see them. Surveying spawning fish is very enjoyable. It is the kind of thing that has kept me in the job I'm in right now -- that one-on-one relationship with the resource. I think sometimes folks move into jobs where they lose touch with the resource and then find it difficult to relate the numbers on the page to the animals they represent. Maybe you lose some degree of the passion for the resource that you had. Quite frankly, if I wasn't able to maintain that contact, I really don't know if I would still be in the business.