I haven't got a chance to read through the whole thread, but while I wait for my car reservations page to load, I thought I'd bring something up to GP in FnP's defense.

Coho have a terrible mortality rate. Studies in the Susitna drainage have shown that bait caught fish do die roughly 80% of the time. Even 50% + of the fish that got caught in the fish wheel pens die ... most other species have no trouble.

C&R is a good thing, but not always. This is one of the reasons that even ol' BOb will not allow C&R'ing of a coho on our trips here in AK ... we sell short trips, run several a day, and harvest every fish that is landed. A different philosophy than we normally subscribe to, but a salt or estuarine coho is a different fish too

Now that we are clear that this whole revision of quotas is all about back-room wheeling and dealing between the trollers and the WCBA, it is clear that 20,000 coho to the sport fleet were traded for 5,000 chinook to the trollers.


Official quota explanation

There are a few lingering questions that are not so clear:

1) Are we sports getting 20,000 additional hatchery coho? Or are we getting 20,000 total coho? In either case, why did the original Westport sport quota of 74,900 get revised DOWN to 54,900? What am I missing here?

2) Where does the 10,000 number fit in to all this? Does that mean the counter starts over on Aug 29, and all coho (fin or no fin) will be counted as part of that 10,000? How did they arrive at the 10,000 coho that are now officially left to harvest before shutting the season down?

3) If you look at the Westport catch summary thru Aug 22, we have taken only 29% of the revised hatchery coho quota (15,633 out of 54,000) That should leave us with a residual of about 39,300 hatchery coho left to catch. Why would sports need an additional 20,000 coho from the trollers, if we can't even catch the ones that were already allocated to us?

This goes way beyond "fuzzy math".... anybody care to explain this? Or is everyone as lost as I am?


Here's my best shot at trying to figure out their warped rationale. Before the swap, we had 39,300 hatchery coho left to catch. The trollers "gave" us 20,000 more for 5,000 of our chinook. Now we have 59,300 hatchery coho in our pot. WDFW figures that the impact on wild coho in trying to harvest all those 59.300 hatchery coho would be equivalent to killing all coho (fin or no fin) but quitting at 10,000 fish? Does that mean they are figuring on us killing 5900 (roughly 10% of 59,300) wild fish and 4100 clipped fish? or am I just way off base with this analysis? This is all conjecture so please correct me if you know the answer. Anyone?

fishNphysician,

The best answer I can give you is that you are not going to get an answer. It is not that anyone is trying to hide anything or dupe anyone. The reason is that the management is much more complex than you seem to be aware of at this time.

There are trades going on between ports and between commercial/ recreational and they are not just 1/1 trades. There are Thompson coho impacts and OCN coho impacts and lower columbia coho impacts that are all factors in this. Which impact is the most critical is dependent on the location of the fishery and also varies from year to year.

The only people who can answer all the questions you have are the ones who volunteer or get paid to understand all of it. These same people don't have time to come online and spell out every intricate detail and the department cant be putting out press releases that are 6 pages long.

My suggestion is that if you (or anyone else) are so interested in how it works that you get involved in the up coming north of falcon process and learn it.

Fishingdoc, I often disagree with Grandpa, but he's right on here and has explained it as clearly and rationally as possible. The bottom line is that these are paper fish that were shuffled and there will be no impact on salmon stocks beyond what was anticipated in the season-setting process, while the change will allow for an improved fishery for anglers. There isn't a conspiracy behind every regulaton change...

thanks salmonbelly.....glad to see you add the caveat that you usually disagree with me....hopefully you disagree with my political alter ego who messes around alot....fishing issues are debatable too but easier to be civilized about.

I agree with Bob's assessment on Coho being way more fragile. That's why I like to troll spoons for them. Herring trolled with a double hook set up is more likely to grab a gill or two and so long coho. Being able to keep both types of Coho makes the most sense to me but would definitely shorten the charter season..

At the end of the season, when everything is reduced to pure numbers, the WDFW will be able to point to the improved catch numbers as a signal that their enhancement policies are truly working and boosting the sports fishery. Allowing the smaller Chinook to be kept and now the natives!! It is truly a sick feeling to have to watch bleeding native fish, which has fought so hard, drift off bleeding with virtually no chance for suvival. On the other hand it will become part of the food chain again, that's better than being tossed a year later with freezer burn?? It's also not as simple as bait vs. spoons when you see the single siwash hook of the spoon out throught the eyeball of the fish! Just my 2 cents.

I may have missed it somewhere in the thread but the coho in the salt have a high mortality rate. Does anybody know what the mortality rate of a fish in a river? For the past few years I have been C&R Coho in rivers but if the mortality rate is steep in the river also then I will stop I dont like to see fishies die when they dont deserve to.

Mike Gilchrist,

I find your response to fishnphysician interesting coming from some one who is involved with a group that is supposed to be representing sports fishermen. To not be able to get answers for why are seasons and quotas are drastically changed mid season is ridicules. We all know that the management of the fisheries is much more complex than it needs to be there is either enough fish to fish them or there is not. I also know for a fact that the WDFW didn’t go to the Trollers Association and or the Wa. Charter Boat Association and ask them if they wanted to make a trade. I am a curious if you were at these meetings or if some one from the RFA was and if so witch group of sportsmen do you represent, the ones who go out on charter boats or their own boats, or do you represent the charter boats and guides who make a living on the sportsmen’s seasons. There is a big difference between the two.

The facts are Mark Cedergreen who is a paid lobbyist by and president of the WCBA approached the WDFWfor the second time this season to change the rules because they were losing costumers. The first was to change the size limit of kings to down to 24” witch they had changed up to 26” several years ago when the fishing was getting better because the quota was being used to fast. Now they needed more fish. When that didn’t work and it was obvious the quota for the second year in a row would not be reached they went for the wild silvers because that’s all they could catch with any reliable numbers. Where was the sportsman represented in these trades? THE WCBA DOSNT REPRESENT THE SPORTSMAN THEY USE THE SPORTSMANS QUOTA FOR THERE GAIN.. To expect us to believe there will be a surplus of these wild fish at this time of the season will not fly, especially on a year where they have so far this season missed the fish counts by 200,000 springers and lake Washington sockeye by 85,000 fish. The don’t have a clue whats out there this year. A portion of those kings they just gave away where Grays Harbor fish why not increase opportunity in the river.

I also do not like this late end of June openings, and five days a week fisheries that the WCBA pushes for and gets. Historically mid may early June is when some of the best king fishing is here. And to have any where from 150 to 300 sports boats show up on a Sunday morning when these guys fill there boats and trucks with gas, food, and bait at home and then go back home that night does nothing for the town. I know they all don’t do that but the vast majority do I don’t blame them, I would to. If they can change the seasons to be more liberal during the season than they surly could let us start fishing June 1st with a seven days a week fishery and then later in the season start cuttings back if need be. Are quotas are to small and to hard to get now I just don’t think we should have to give the to another group because we can not fill them.

keep in mind that the charter boat fleet is not a commercial fishing fleet per se. There are large groups of sports fishers going out on those boats every day. I my opinion those folks count just like you and I. They can go out when you and I are stopped by the coast guard. Most of the effort is weighted towards the middle and end of the season so opening it in May and June wouldn't accomodate the majority of fishers. As Mike said earlier, it is a complex process and if you want to try to understand it and offer your 2 cents go to the North of Falcon meetings in advance of the season and see what it is all about.

Dreaming -
The hooking mortality on coho and other salmon varies considerably depending on the condition of the fish. Typical mortality in the salt is in the 10 to 20% range. When the returning adult fish first hit the rivers, especailly if their scales are loose the "handling" mortality can jump into the ranges that Bob was talking about. Once their scales become "set" (the fish darken up with their river/spawning colors) they become much tougher. At that stage the hooking mortality is typical of we normal associate with steelhead fisheries.

Mortalities can vary considerably dependent a number of variables - in the salt small shaker fish often have high mortality from the "gaffing" by hook sizes designed for larger adult fish and drowning from being drug around on, especially on downsriggers. Adult fish often have higher mortality when caught on bait, especailly in places like the ocean where they are still actively feeding. In rivers the mortality is typically higher with bait than lures, especially for fish caught while plunking, free drifting (long leaders or no weight), bait divers, etc. ; methods where the fish have a chance (time) to take the bait/hook deeply.

Tight lines
S malma

Smalma,

Your information on hooking mortality helps clear up some of the questions surrounding this issue. I am a bit confused about the actual numbers used to calculate the mortality in this situation though.

You said that, "Typical mortality in the salt is in the 10 to 20% range", and later that, "Adult fish often have higher mortality when caught on bait, especially in places like the ocean where they are still actively feeding."

Did you mean to imply that adult fish caught on bait where they are still actively feeding will likely experience a hooking mortality greater than the 10 to 20% average range?

If so, I then wonder "what is the actual rate used by the DFW" to calculate hooking and handling mortalities at ocean fisheries like Westport? What rate is utilized for fisheries at Neah Bay and for Sekiu?

Are mortalities, during the adult feeding phase, experienced with hooking and releasing coho higher than those normally experienced with chinook?

Thanks for any information you might provide.

Plunker-
Sorry - don't have those details at my fingertips. Since I'm one of those unfortunates that suffer greatly from sea-sickness I don't play close attention to those fisheries.

I had just posted some general information on hooking mortalities so that folks would have a general sense of the various factors than influence the mortality.

One fator in the issue like the "trading of allocations" such as occurred at Westport is what the value of the fishery is. Clearly in recreational fisheries the ultimate value is the number of angler days the fishery supports. As long as the fishing is good enough to keep anglers on the water the longer the season the more valuable it is to local economies. Just as clearly if one is a hardcore angler interested in catch large chinook then trading chinook for coho makes little sense while for the charter fleet it may make great sense.

As always fishing issues are hugely complex and I can only echo the previous suggestions that if folks have questions, concerns or wish to lobby for particular fisheries they or their representatives need to become involved in the salmon season setting process - North of Falcon. While this is a ways off (spring) it would not hurt those interested in these issues to begin working on collecting background data and concerns.

Tight lines
S malma

Grandpa,

I’m not trying to get in a pissing match. You and the PSA have done a lot of good thing for the sportsmen and I appreciate that. You are right I do not understand the entire north of falcon process I do know some of it, I have a long history at Westport and know the all about the politics that drive these decisions. My grandfather father started fishing Westport in 1951 they rented kickers from the old boathouse at alki point he would haul them down on his flat bed truck and launch them in the sand. They fished for their limits in front of what is now the islander. My dad started started kelping in the early 60s then went to trolling when the kelpers were push out because they were the smallest fishing group at the time. He lives lives down here. I was washing those charter boats every afternoon before I was old enough to fish everyday with my dad. I started trolling with my own boat and license in 1982.I have some close friend that are members of both the WCBA and the Wa. Trollers Ass.So as you can see I have some back ground down here at Westport too. I agree these people count to I never said they didn’t. What I did say was that the WCBA should not be able to go to the WDFW and get the seasons changed for their benefit. They are making a living off of the sportsmen’s seasons. One of the reason the WCBA pushes for the late openings is because at one time there membership included a large number of school teachers running the boats and wanted the seasons to start after school got out. I don’t know there how many of those are still there at this time.{ I have nothing against school teachers my wife is one, that’s not to bad of a way to spend your summer.} That is why there is a late June start, it’s not because of science or the trollers would not be fishing during that time period. The majority of the fishers will go when the seasons are open and the charters are providing their service. This was proved two years ago when we did have a May opening. I also agree with smalma the man objective is the longest seasons possible. But this trade has nothing to do with keeping the season open till September 19 this is about charter boats wanting easy limits and not losing customers. The season will close early so were is the benefit. The only thing you need to know about the north of falcon process pertaining to this trade is that it allows the trade to happen It however doesn’t change the facts that a special interest group the WCBA went to the WDFW for the second time this season to have the rules changed for there benefit. Like I said before the WDFW didn’t go to them. This is a dangerous road to go down, we the sportsmen will lose some of our quota in the future if this keeps up, and this is now the second year in a row we have given fish up. I can go back to trolling and fish the time periods I want the average sportsman cant.

I also do not think any body was asking mike for a complete break down of the north of falcon process but for some one who wants are money to support the RFA he could have done a little better explain what happen and who benefited. His posting.

best answer I can give you is that you are not going to get an answer. It is not that anyone is trying to hide anything or dupe anyone. The reason is that the management is much more complex than you seem to be aware of at this time.
This sounds like something you would read on the WDFW site, do you trust them.

I fished Westport yesterday on the first day of the new regulation allowing retention of Coho with adipose fins. We fished in deep water and saw most of the charters eventually show up out there. Limits were easy and most boats were heading in to the dock by 10am. I heard the charters talk about a ratio of 60% hatchery which the reverse of what it has been. My ration was about 50/50. We did keep a 16# hatchery Coho. Great fishing.

Grandpa. I did not get to go, because of the weather report, everyone bailed on me. I had a friend who went out and did get one large king in the 40's and a smaller one in the twenties, as well as some nice coho. I will be there on Labor Day, hopefully Sunday and Monday for a last hurrah.

Steve

Salmon Troller,

you said...
“We all know that the management of the fisheries is much more complex than it needs to be there is either enough fish to fish them or there is not.”

I can not disagree more with that statement. It is complex exactly because it needs to be for conservation reasons and to satisfy legal requirements. I can not believe that any sane person would choose to manage fisheries this way if it was not absolutely necessary.

you said....
"I am a curious if you were at these meetings or if some one from the RFA was and if so witch group of sportsmen do you represent, the ones who go out on charter boats or their own boats, or do you represent the charter boats and guides who make a living on the sportsmen’s seasons. There is a big difference between the two."

No representative from RFA is currently playing a role in the in-season management of coastal salmon quotas. I personally try to keep track of what is going on through contacts. As for the representation, the charter owners represent themselves on the local stuff. On national issues, the big picture stuff, sometimes charters are having us represent them, issue by issue. I am not hearing a lot of complaints from the private boats fishing on the coast, certainly not enough to be involved in it. The customers on the charter boats provide the most participation in that fishery and the WCBA is pretty good at advocating for what their customers want..

you said....
"THE WCBA DOSNT REPRESENT THE SPORTSMAN THEY USE THE SPORTSMANS QUOTA FOR THERE GAIN"

They may not represent all sport fisherman, but as I said, they are good at advocating for what the sport fisherman on their boats want.

you said...
"To expect us to believe there will be a surplus of these wild fish at this time of the season will not fly, especially on a year where they have so far this season missed the fish counts by 200,000 springers and lake Washington sockeye by 85,000 fish. The don’t have a clue whats out there this year. A portion of those kings they just gave away where Grays Harbor fish why not increase opportunity in the river."

They fish on paper fish. There is no way to predict if the forecasts are accurate or not at this point. Besides, they are not saying that their is a surpluss of wild fish. They are expecting the same number to be killed through retention with the smaller quota as they did with release mortality for the larger quota. If they were talking about raising a bag limit I may agree with you about switching those fish for more river opportunity. I don’t think it is reasonable to expect ocean quota to be given up or not traded when they need to make moves to maximize the fisheries

Sit back and think about that statement for just a second.... the charter fleet a commercial fishery?

You bet!

Any commercial entity that makes its profits directly from the fish resource is a commercial fishery in its most fundamental sense. Economically speaking, the only difference between a charter and a commercial troller/netter is that the charter puts you the angler to work ( under the guise of "fun") to harvest the fish for them, and then sells the fish directly back to you all in one simple pre-paid transaction. Speaking strictly from the standpoint of tangible value for the fish actually harvested (discounting the non-tangible value of the charter putting the angler on the fish), the per unit value of their catch goes up whenever their catch goes down. Even if you catch nothing, they still get paid! Boy, have these guys got us sports duped! We're paying them to have us do the work of hauling the catch aboard, and buying the catch all in one fell swoop. How convenient.

The poor commercial trollers/netters are still doing the work of harvesting the fish for themselves and then have to go out and find a market for their catch. They don't get paid if they don't catch fish, and they are at the mercy of buyers for the ultimate value of their catch. Hardly seems fair, don't you think?

Any commercial entity that makes its profits directly from the fish resource is a commercial fishery in its most fundamental sense.

I guess that makes Bob Ball the owner of this site a commercial fisherman then doesn't it?

Grab your chest waders folks it's getting deep!!!!!

I take the soap box stuff with a grain of salt but when I say charters are commercial "per se" I meant exactly that....The charters get paid the same way a guide does but on a larger scale. They provide an obvious valuable service to the non-boat owning public that wants to fish. They provide a chance for those with boats who don't want to brave the high seas to have a chance at some of the best fishing we have to offer as well.

Sometimes FPn I think you are either playing around or , if you're serious, you must be so excited about your theories that you lose all common sense. This fishing business is not as full of conspiracies as you seem to think. And don't feel so sorry for the trollers. They are doing well and as individuals get a much bigger share than any of us sports fishers get. Personally I am excited by the idea that the charter fleet in Westport is making a go of it. And hats off to Mark Cedargreen for his promotion of same.