B
bigsteel
was thinkin the same thingPlumb & MM
Correct, that is why I sourced my post for people to read, so they could see the details of the facts that I was using. So are you saying that the Hood River steelhead and rainbow trout interaction is a fluke or unique behavior to that watershed and that it isn't a fairly safe bet to assume that this is common behavior within most or all watersheds that contain genetically similar steelhead and rainbow trout?
Plumb & MM
Correct, that is why I sourced my post for people to read, so they could see the details of the facts that I was using. So are you saying that the Hood River steelhead and rainbow trout interaction is a fluke or unique behavior to that watershed and that it isn't a fairly safe bet to assume that this is common behavior within most or all watersheds that contain genetically similar steelhead and rainbow trout?
As the article states, "The scientists cautioned that results from one river might not be representative of all steelhead populations. Nevertheless, Christie said, “The importance of trout in maintaining steelhead runs should not be underestimated."
Scientifically, we're taught to not make assumptions. With only one study done extrapolating the findings to any other river would be making pretty large assumptions. Every river is different each contains (or used to contain until widespread planting of generic hatchery stocks) genetically different steelhead populations and until more studies like this are done it's not appropriate to use this study in a blanket statement about all steelhead populations. It's a very neat study and could have some far reaching implications about hatchery and wild steelhead interactions, just more studies need to be done. If more are done and they verify the findings, then it would be more appropriate to classify this as common behavior.
Does that make sense? Just typing "on the fly" so to speak.
I understand you for sure. But someone could come to a reasonable scientific hypothesis that this is a common behavior within the O. mykiss and be just as correct or incorrect as saying it isn't a common behavior(at this point there is no study saying this doesn't happen in other watersheds). After all, O. mykiss are categorized into a species of Oncorhynchus genus based on behavior, traits and most recently DNA. It is possible for O. mykiss gairdnerii(Columbia Redband Trout) and O. mykiss irideus(Coastal Rainbow Trout) to have different behaviors as they are subspecies. Subspecies are generally based more on location and isolation not behavior, traits and DNA(which would be grounds for a separate species).
Do Great Lakes Steelhead under-go smoltification?
Would be interesting to see whether red band trout in the willamette watershed and tribs. inter-breed with the native winters...
I do remember reading that it was thought at one time that summer and winter steelhead where one or both species had non-native hatchery supplementation, were thought to inter-breed, but there was no genetic link between the 2 when tested...possibly hood river study as well.
So, I'm pretty dense... if they stock adult steelhead into lost lake have they been sea-run? Otherwise they would simply be adult Rainbows right? this whole thread has made my head spin...