#1048962 - 03/20/21 09:50 AM
Re: FISHINGTHECHEHALIS.NET
[Re: Rivrguy]
|
Dah Rivah Stinkah Pink Mastah
Registered: 08/23/06
Posts: 6209
Loc: zipper
|
how many times has the chinook escapement goal been lowered in the last twenty years?
_________________________
... Propping up an obsolete fishing industry at the expense of sound fisheries management is irresponsible. -Sg
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#1048964 - 03/20/21 10:06 AM
Re: FISHINGTHECHEHALIS.NET
[Re: fish4brains]
|
River Nutrients
Registered: 03/03/09
Posts: 4510
Loc: Somewhere on the planet,I hope
|
once that I am aware of
_________________________
Dazed and confused.............the fog is closing in
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#1048966 - 03/20/21 11:53 AM
Re: FISHINGTHECHEHALIS.NET
[Re: eyeFISH]
|
River Nutrients
Registered: 11/21/07
Posts: 7637
Loc: Olema,California,Planet Earth
|
The treaties allow the tribes 50% of the harvestable fish that enter WA waters. So, all the NI and I catch of Quinault fish counts against the two sides. QIN does not get 50% of the fish produced in their U&A; Treaty Indians do. The general exception would be steelhead that are harvest only in rivers. Conceptually, the Makah (for example) in their troll and set net fisheries would take the whole tribal share of a stock, leaving nothing for the "home waters" tribe.
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#1048976 - 03/21/21 06:18 AM
Re: FISHINGTHECHEHALIS.NET
[Re: Carcassman]
|
River Nutrients
Registered: 03/03/09
Posts: 4510
Loc: Somewhere on the planet,I hope
|
Question: Why can’t they target Chinook? There are a few available and we are out of the 3/5 box?
Yes we are out of the 3/5 box on Chinook but only have 550 wild impacts available and modeled impacts to a similar season to last year is 346 with C&R. It is the wild returns that govern everything so if we did a kill fishery on Chinook we would eat up 550 impacts so fast and could fish ourselves to limiting Coho more than it will be. Doubt if we would make escapement also.
I posted up the numbers on the marine intercept fisheries and that is where our Chinook go.
_________________________
Dazed and confused.............the fog is closing in
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#1048977 - 03/21/21 07:53 AM
Re: FISHINGTHECHEHALIS.NET
[Re: Rivrguy]
|
River Nutrients
Registered: 03/03/09
Posts: 4510
Loc: Somewhere on the planet,I hope
|
Question: Why in the h--- are we having trouble with Coho escapement now because we did not in the past. Why are river fishers paying the bill with shortened seasons?
Well yes and no. The lowest wild escapement that I found with a quick look was 1991 and it was driven by excessive harvest. Simply put the difference now is we are short about a million or more Coho hatchery smolt ( much more if you go back to the 70's ) than are produced presently. This is a big deal because in down years of natural production returns the hatchery adults provided the opportunity. Now the Chehalis is primarily a natural return fishery and the hatchery adults are more or less a bonus.
Additionally the growth in rec inriver fishers in the last ten years is huge. Every time Puget Sound or other streams are restricted we get more fishers in the Chehalis. Also in the 90's the rec bay fisheries were added which increased the fishing impacts of the rec fishers substantially. This simply means that we have many more rec fishers directing harvest at natural production and drastically reduced hatchery production. In fact I do not know how staff can even model rec impacts because they base the impacts on past years. As rec fishers loose opportunities in other parts of the state the Grays Harbor rec fishers continue to increase dramatically!
In years of good returns we do OK but when the we are in a down cycle on natural production as we are now it does not allow much. It would not surprise me if in 10 years we are completely C&R on wild everything. To many people chasing to few fish.
_________________________
Dazed and confused.............the fog is closing in
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#1048979 - 03/21/21 08:44 AM
Re: FISHINGTHECHEHALIS.NET
[Re: Rivrguy]
|
River Nutrients
Registered: 03/03/09
Posts: 4510
Loc: Somewhere on the planet,I hope
|
Question: Will rec fishers be allowed to target Coho? It is hard to believe anyone would pretend to troll for chum.
I doubt it as the numbers do not support it. Keeping in mind that the harvest planning model is last years reduced season ( two week Sept shut down ) with 2021 run forecast and will change but things look really tight. NT share for 2021 is 5809 for wild Coho and as modeled with last years season harvest would be 4657. Then this if we failed to make escapement in 2020 we are in the GH Policy 3/5 box ( failed to make escapement 3 out of 5 years ) and are limited to an wild impact of 5% of the run forecast which is 2006 harvestable adults. In the preseason electronic meeting staff said they are still working on the 2020 returns so that is an unknown.
To protect my poor computer from a e mail melt down NO I do not know why it is taking so long to get the 2020 numbers into the season setting process.
_________________________
Dazed and confused.............the fog is closing in
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#1048982 - 03/21/21 11:40 AM
Re: FISHINGTHECHEHALIS.NET
[Re: Rivrguy]
|
River Nutrients
Registered: 03/03/09
Posts: 4510
Loc: Somewhere on the planet,I hope
|
Question: Why can't we do one and done as some have suggested in other years?
Well conceptually it sounds ok but in reality it is full of problems. First it is usually a bay fisher who puts this idea in play as they fish the boat as in marine fisheries. In river you one rod one fisher so how it impacts your fishing is different. Next is few people would comply and it almost unenforceable. Think of it this way, your fishing and at about two in the afternoon you get a Coho to the boat, your likely to keep it. Now your fishing with your two kids and you get a modest sized Coho to the boat at 7:30 in the morning and what will you do? 99% of us will turn it loose!
Another example is one and done does not reduce by much ( it will some ) the total impacts because of 100 fish caught the % of fishers that would catch two or three decreases substantially. So the reduction in catch numbers is not nearly as great as one would think and coupled with the almost complete inability to enforce the rule makes a poor tool to limit impacts. Got to admit it sounds good or not depending on the fisher / location.
_________________________
Dazed and confused.............the fog is closing in
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#1048987 - 03/21/21 02:19 PM
Re: FISHINGTHECHEHALIS.NET
[Re: eyeFISH]
|
Carcass
Registered: 03/08/99
Posts: 2385
Loc: Valencia, Negros Oriental, Phi...
|
https://www.chronline.com/stories/our-views-skookumchuck-dam-has-attention-of-the-chehalis-basin-board,261708
_________________________
"You're not a g*dda*n looney Martini, you're a fisherman"
R.P. McMurphy - One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#1048990 - 03/22/21 05:43 AM
Re: FISHINGTHECHEHALIS.NET
[Re: eddie]
|
River Nutrients
Registered: 03/03/09
Posts: 4510
Loc: Somewhere on the planet,I hope
|
Good article!
Question : Just what are the stinking high and low years Grays Harbor Coho hatchery Coho releases?
5,309,620 in 1984 was the highest release year I could find ( similar from 1979 to 1984 ) and the 10 yr average ending 2017 is 1,375,730 and the five year average ending 2017 is 1,286,580.
_________________________
Dazed and confused.............the fog is closing in
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#1048991 - 03/22/21 06:48 AM
Re: FISHINGTHECHEHALIS.NET
[Re: Rivrguy]
|
River Nutrients
Registered: 03/03/09
Posts: 4510
Loc: Somewhere on the planet,I hope
|
Question ( cleaned the verbiage a bit / whole lot ) : How accurate is the preseason Coho forecast over the years?
Several asked this in.. ah ..little more colorful manner so here is what I could find. The forecast evaluation tab in the forecast model has not been updated for a bit but from 2001 to 2012 it varied substantially by years but seemed to run in several year trends. 01 to 03 underestimated the returns, 04 to 07 over estimated the returns, 08 nailed right on the money, 09 & 10 underestimated the return but just some, 11 overestimated again but just some, and 2012 blew it big time and were short around 50,000 of the forecast. I imagine the years since will have the same pattern.
A quick compilation of thoughts on this years forecast. 2020 Coho jack returns to the hatchery were X4 previous year, and in 2020 the guys fishing jacks got more wild than hatchery. In 2020 the jacks and adults returning were down right fat indicating they ate well in the ocean. The PDO for this years return is favorable which the large Columbia returns seem to indicate came out well. Two guys who track this type thing thought the Grays Harbor Coho would perform similar to the Columbia hatchery returns.
So what gives, no idea. For myself it is if both WDFW and the QIN staff agree to a forecast then that is it. It does not matter that I have the questions outlined it is a done deal but something just does not feel right about the forecast. That is the difference between a citizen and the co managers as they manage by what the math says not by their gut or feelings.
Still something just does not feel right.
_________________________
Dazed and confused.............the fog is closing in
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#1048996 - 03/22/21 10:27 AM
Re: FISHINGTHECHEHALIS.NET
[Re: eyeFISH]
|
River Nutrients
Registered: 11/21/07
Posts: 7637
Loc: Olema,California,Planet Earth
|
Understand that forecasts are based pn past performance. You get the first few years of a good PDO and you'll underestimate as conditions are better than historic. Then, was conditions decline you overestimate. Couple this with occasional blob...
Further, the impact of the AK pink situation adds an even-odd component (which actually may have affected survival somewhat back when there were on wild pinks). Also note the steep decline in hatchery fish which places more pressure on the wild fish in either consumptive or release fisheries.
I harp back to a model developed in the OPI that very accurately accounted for ocean survival and estimated return to the coast. Vet accurate. It used 4 separate ocean metrics. There were two problems. The first was that the last metric was available just before the fish hit the coast; too late for the ocean mixed-stock fishery. The second, but which we should all remember, is that any one of the metrics could drive overall returns. If #4 was good it would compensate for poor 1-3 with the opposite just as possible.
Fish terminally on known (ie updated) numbers or develop and implement oceanic in-season updates and modify accordingly.
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#1049042 - 03/23/21 06:24 AM
Re: FISHINGTHECHEHALIS.NET
[Re: Carcassman]
|
River Nutrients
Registered: 03/03/09
Posts: 4510
Loc: Somewhere on the planet,I hope
|
So to finish up just what are our options? To be honest they are few but it is possible to craft a season be it a rather diminished one. If we missed Coho escapement in 2020 ( we are still waiting on numbers ) then we are in the GHP 3/5 box outlined previously and the entire NT fisheries will be limited to around 2000 wild impacts. Last years reduced season with this forecast would be 4657 and as you can see it don't work.
If Coho are in 3/5 then logic says we do a full catch and release on wild. I think the hooking mortality numbers would permit the normal Sept 15th start to Nov 31 if we release all wild. I have been advocating a change in how we use closures also. Rather than take out two weeks as was done last year we simply loose days of a week. If we need to reduce 20% then we fish Wen through Sunday and off the water Monday & Tuesday. This would let folks fish and not one group of fishers shoulder the whole load. Jack season stays the same.
If not in the 3/5 box with Coho the NT share 5809 we have some wiggle room . I think a fair solution would be a one fish bag limit Sept 15 to Nov 31, normal Jack fishery. Then if the numbers do not fit we loose days of the week be it one, two whatever it takes.
Chinook numbers have the total wild impacts at 550 and with last years season being C&R looking at this years forecast our impact would be 254 wild. Ain't no wiggle room here guys. Where our Chinook are taken is AK & BC and those numbers are in a previous post. We are in a permeant C&R for Chinook unless something is done about marine fisheries.
Chum numbers are 10624 harvestable are OK and rec impact is modeled at 650 and frankly it is the commercial adjustment if required.
The bay fishery would also be C&R as in recent times and any down time be days of the week ( as outlined prior ) through the season rather a late start or loose two or three weeks in a block as we do now.
Edited by Rivrguy (03/23/21 06:28 AM)
_________________________
Dazed and confused.............the fog is closing in
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#1049065 - 03/23/21 10:08 AM
Re: FISHINGTHECHEHALIS.NET
[Re: Rivrguy]
|
River Nutrients
Registered: 03/03/09
Posts: 4510
Loc: Somewhere on the planet,I hope
|
As I was getting information out to folks I also submitted my suggestions posted up for folks to staff. Mike took the time to get back with a 2020 update to share with folks as it is rather important. So unless something really turns our way it looks like the 3/5 box will kick in and the NT fisheries will be around 2000 impacts on wild Coho. Oh ouch!
FROM MIKE SCHARPF:
Just letting you know, we don’t have a final 2020 GH coho escapement at this point and probably won’t by the end of April. But what we have are index redd counts in the Chehalis basin to date from many of the main areas and what we are seeing is about 30 to 40% of the average over the last 15 years or so. The attached file Curt and I put together to track progress in-season. We can also use this to give us an idea what the return is looking like. In none of the expansions does the predicted escapement exceed the goal, all indications are that escapement will be 2,000 to 6,000 below the goal this year. However, these are just the index counts from Curt’s crew’s surveys and doesn’t account for QIN work or the supplemental surveys (QIN surveys don’t account for much of the work in the Chehalis basin). If spawner distribution varied from historical distributions, or flows altered where coho decided to spawn, than this wouldn’t be the best indicator. I don’t think this was the case this year, but that is why we don’t use just the indexes in estimating escapements. Bottom line for me is, based on information on hand, the Chehalis coho escapement for 2020 will be below the goal. We will continue to work on completing the escapement estimate and keep some options in the pocket in case of good news.
_________________________
Dazed and confused.............the fog is closing in
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#1049085 - 03/23/21 03:05 PM
Re: FISHINGTHECHEHALIS.NET
[Re: eyeFISH]
|
River Nutrients
Registered: 11/21/07
Posts: 7637
Loc: Olema,California,Planet Earth
|
I really hate to keep beating a very dead and decomposed horse but it never used to take this long to get a useable escapement estimate, at least in PS. Hell, we had run reconstructions for the past season by this time.
Of course, back then, we did not have the powerful computers available now.
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#1049086 - 03/23/21 03:23 PM
Re: FISHINGTHECHEHALIS.NET
[Re: eyeFISH]
|
Three Time Spawner
Registered: 02/24/00
Posts: 1516
|
like i said before cooking the books
_________________________
Where Destroying Fishing in Washington..
mainly region 6
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#1049396 - 03/26/21 01:26 PM
Re: FISHINGTHECHEHALIS.NET
[Re: eyeFISH]
|
Three Time Spawner
Registered: 02/24/00
Posts: 1516
|
so what happen ?? what's there plan for fall fishing?
_________________________
Where Destroying Fishing in Washington..
mainly region 6
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#1049401 - 03/26/21 03:00 PM
Re: FISHINGTHECHEHALIS.NET
[Re: eyeFISH]
|
River Nutrients
Registered: 04/25/00
Posts: 5006
Loc: East of Aberdeen, West of Mont...
|
3/26/2021
Chehalis side.......1 Coho, H or W, Jacks Coho, I asked that the limit be raised to 12, time will tell on that, reason I asked was the simple fact that so many are being "surplused" if they do make it to the hatchery.
Humptulips side...Chinook, yes......Coho are still in the shitter, so don't count on that fishery.
Only 2 people played the "call in game" Rivrguy and myself.
Also talked about was instead of a complete 2 week closing, in September, or a shorter season was fishing days restricted during the week. It was also mentioned that NO WEEKEND days be part of the shut down, to help the "working people" who normally only get the weekend to fish.
Nothing, at this point is "cast in stone", there is another viral meeting coming up.
_________________________
"Worse day sport fishing, still better than the best day working"
"I thought growing older, would take longer"
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#1049403 - 03/26/21 03:01 PM
Re: FISHINGTHECHEHALIS.NET
[Re: steely slammer]
|
River Nutrients
Registered: 03/03/09
Posts: 4510
Loc: Somewhere on the planet,I hope
|
Well not much. Staff put forth the forecast and took about any question asked. The problem was that only myself and DW asked questions but I did ask for others also. Some folks texted my cell and email with questions that I asked for them. Seems some folks just do not the this video format thing at all!
Bottom line the numbers say that it will be a very very restricted season. We have another video meeting in April and I think staff will be better able to give everyone a look at some options.
_________________________
Dazed and confused.............the fog is closing in
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
0 registered (),
1007
Guests and
49
Spiders online. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
11499 Members
17 Forums
72934 Topics
825134 Posts
Max Online: 3937 @ 07/19/24 03:28 AM
|
|
|