I know we can not fish it, but the escapement reports for the George Adams hatchery are a bit concerning. Any idea what is going on? The way the numbers are coming out, we probably will be allowed to fish it again next year.

09/19/2016 ***** 19279 adults 4592 Jacks
09/21/2017 ***** 19805 Adults 8372 Jacks
09/19/2018 ****** 20909 adults 4559 Jacks
09/19/2019  ****** 9520 adults 1665 Jacks
09/17/2020 ***** 2083 adults 2612 Jacks

Have took at the fisheries in front of the hatchery, how many fish were released in the brood years, and such. Plus, the N Pacific is crashing and this just may be what it looks like.

Because I enjoy "Coho jack fishing"......It is such a waste to see the Coho jacks "surplused" in the numbers they are at many hatcheries.


I asked on another thread how long the legal limit has been 6 for "Coho jacks", never got an answer, can't find an answer on the "net". Personally I would like to see the number of "jacks allow per day" be raised to 10 - 12. Coho jacks smoke up very well, and if not over cooked are very good table faire, when cooked fresh caught.

I suspect that CM has hit the major variables but I will add that since the river has been closed due to the battle over the reservation boundary the State has opened/liberalized both rec and NT commercial fisheries in the lower Canal targeting those fish in trying to get its numbers.

The take away is that no matter what the returns it is unlikely that there will be a recreational fishery on the river until the boundary dispute is resolved.

I think the boundary dispute has been resolved as the State has done nothing. Not to decide is to decide.

I heard a few weeks ago that they were netting the south end of the canal in front of the Hoodsport Hatchery where 391 adults and 1,896 jacks have returned. Creel surveys showed fish being caught in the Skok tideflats. Unsure how many taken by the tribe.

**** from the agreed upon fisheries****

Ntrty Area 12C: Hoodsport Hatchery Zone Only, Wks 31 (wb
7/26) – 36 (wb 8/30); 10,000 Chinook quota. BS fishing
pattern: 2,2,2,2,2,2; release all Chum per the SCSCI.

********

If it is a non-treaty fishery that is taking up an addition 10K fish, then someone should be looking to see how much the state is collection on what is probably a $500,000+ dollar windfall for someone. Maybe this is part of the reason the in river fishery is not being pursued

Having been in salmon management, from the 70s WDF prioritized Chinook and Coho for recs with one huge exception. A net fishery can harvest a lot of fish, in a short time.

Could an orderly Skok River fishery take 10,000 adult Chinook? I doubt it. Not to say they couldn't, or that the recs shouldn't be allowed opportunity. But, if the recs can't get the fish, the hatchery gets too many. Or, the Tribe will claim foregone opportunity and take the surplus.

Terminal fishing, which is by far the ecologically and biologically most appropriate, also requires efficient removal of surplus. Nets are much more efficient than orderly hook and line.

Looking at past escapement, neither the tribes nor the recs could harvest all the excess. This never appeared to be a problem. The main constraint appeared to be the impacts on wild fish. With the beach seines, they feel they can avoid this constraint by easily releasing any wild fish.

From what I can tell, the state drew the names of 6 previous holders of permits to be allowed to conduct this fishery. The cost of a permit for an emerging fishery is $$440, otherwise it likely would fall under their existing permits. They now are allocated up to 10,000 fish. This could very potentially allow them up to $150,000 each, depending of the condition and quality of the fish. In addition, if I am reading it right, they are going to allow them to scoop up the excess chum at Hoodsport.
I understand the logic, but suddenly with a pen, they are allocating a new fishery to a few guys and and giving them access to thousands of dollars. Under this type of thinking, I could see it move to other areas, and basically wiping out some terminal recreational fisheries. And so, the problem of solving non-selective fisheries (to the recreational fisher) can be seen.

Well, yeah. And the commercials are much easier to manage and work with.

If the conservation of wild salmon and SRKWs is actually a priority then more fisheries will have to be terminal; preferably in-river.

This.

Fish on...

Todd

Here is a link to the RCW setting excise rates: https://app.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=82.27.020.

Using the rate of .0525 the excise (landing fee) would be $26,250 on the low value estimate of $500K and $31,500 on $600,000 value which covers the range estimated in this thread.

In my opinion the rate is too low but the bigger issue is that the excise tax goes to the general fund.

Just a bit of a different perspective. I believe the last year the entire Skok was open to recreational fishing (2015/2016 pamphlet) the daily limit of hatchery Chinook was two (2) and in MA 12 was four (4) south of Ayock Point. This year's pamphlet reflects the Skok closure and the same four (4) fish limit south of Ayock Point with the added note that anglers may fish with two poles with the Two-Pole endorsement.

So what has changed for recs? Loss of the river fishery off-set by the "opportunity" to purchase a two pole endorsement. What a deal! (NOT!!)

So how about no daily limit and unlimited rods w/o an endorseemnt fee south of Ayock Point if the goal is to remove hatchery fish before they hit the river?

One more thing. The main boat ramp at the Coleman powerhouse/Skokomish Park has been closed to non tribal due to covid concerns. The Twin Totems has been off limits as well for ice and E-0 fuel.

Larry,
I sure the argument is that the seines are more selective than line and hook and have less mortality involved. I am sure the tribes push this hard, as it is to their benefit. This allows a full out commercial fishery, while limiting the recs. It would be fun to see how well they actually sort these fish out. If they are in a hurry and just pull the net in extremely shallow, it seems a heavy set could really damage some of the fish. If they take their time it and don't concentrate the fish too much in shallow water, it probably works ok.

I was on a PS once, collecting chum on the 9/10 line for stock identification. The goal was to kill 100 chum and release everything else. First set or two worked. Then we got a big haul and killed a whole lot of stuff. Just too many fish to work. The seines will work when each haul has a relatively few fish.

I was also part of a beach seine test fishery to see if one could harvest male Chinook and release females. Simply didn't work; it was too hard to safely C&R the hens. Those with hands-on experience in Doc Donaldson's pond know how hard it is to handle adult salmon one at a time, safely.

Having utilized seines I can safely say it is all about weight, gravity and numbers. If beach seining you must slowly bring the net in and I mean slowly. If you go fast the fish are jammed into the bow of the net and simply the pressure of the weight of captured fish injures the fish piled up against the web. Add current into the mix and it really gets dicey. In open water seines the same applies with the added risk of the weight of the fish lifted out of the water crushing those on the bottom to death. It does not matter if your marketing the captured fish but if your releasing fish it is a big deal. Watching videos of seiners I seriously doubt that any mortality rate is correct. Commercial harvest is driven by getting as many fish as possible in the shortest amount of time. What it is not about is slowly and carefully going about your business to insure you can release alive any unwanted catch. You do not make money with the last mentioned manner of harvest only create inaccurate data to enable commercial harvest.

So after reading through a lot of analysis in this thread was there any consensus as to why the escapement just sank like a 8 oz ball in a kiddie pool?

Those numbers are extra puzzling because with the changes mandated for water releases on the N Fk Skok like 10 or more years ago, which is prime spawning habitat, and with the additional estuary created with the reflooding of diked farmland, one would think that river should be choked with fish.