#916695 - 12/25/14 05:55 AM
Re: FISHINGTHECHEHALIS.NET
[Re: Rivrguy]
|
River Nutrients
Registered: 03/03/09
Posts: 4491
Loc: Somewhere on the planet,I hope
|
Round two on Willapa is about to start. So before I get to watch my computer screen melt with fire breathing e mails ........ no I do not know the location. No I do not know where staff intends to engage the public ( outside another dog & pony show ) in a real manner. No I do not expect much out of the AD HOC folks as only maybe four even put in the effort to stay with the process. The so called Willapa Advisers truly representing Willapa citizens? Nah most do not even live in Pacific County ( other than some of the commercials ) and that is the most uninformed group I have ever seen.
So the dance goes on and as soon as I get the information I will post it.
Hi Everyone,
We are soliciting feedback from the ad-hoc committee about another meeting. Please mark your calendars for these potential dates.
Merry Christmas all!
From: Thiesfeld, Steven L (DFW) Sent: Wednesday, December 24, 2014 11:49 AM Subject: Potential Meeting
Hi Everyone,
I am wondering what your availability is for another meeting on December 29th, 30th, and January 5th or 6th. Please let me know if you are available during the day, or evening, or both.
To catch you up, we have spent quite a bit of time recalibrating the Chinook model. We noticed that the spawning escapement in North River wasn’t responding to various harvest rates, even a zero harvest rate. The recalibration has breathed some life into Willapa as a potential for primary. We are currently turning the various dials with harvest rates and hatchery production to see the effect.
If I don’t hear from you before tomorrow, please have a very Merry Christmas!
Cheers
Steve Thiesfeld Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Region 6 Fish Program Manager 48 Devonshire Road, Montesano, WA 98563 Steven.Thiesfeld@dfw.wa.gov 360-249-1201
Edited by Rivrguy (12/25/14 06:15 AM)
_________________________
Dazed and confused.............the fog is closing in
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#916699 - 12/25/14 09:26 AM
Re: FISHINGTHECHEHALIS.NET
[Re: eyeFISH]
|
Spawner
Registered: 01/22/06
Posts: 917
Loc: tacoma
|
Dont like what the model is saying? Tweak the model so it says what you want it to say! Then call it recallibration so it sounds like a technical adjustment.
Believe these models at your own peril.
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#916707 - 12/25/14 11:58 AM
Re: FISHINGTHECHEHALIS.NET
[Re: eyeFISH]
|
River Nutrients
Registered: 11/21/07
Posts: 7580
Loc: Olema,California,Planet Earth
|
To the thinking biologist, all models are wrong but some are useful.
Part of the development process is ensuring that the model at least appears to function as intended. If escapement never changes, that should be a clue that there is a problem.
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#916747 - 12/26/14 09:02 AM
Re: FISHINGTHECHEHALIS.NET
[Re: Rivrguy]
|
River Nutrients
Registered: 10/28/09
Posts: 3339
|
At the December 13 Commission meeting several Gillnetters testified in the open public input portion of the meeting on how badly the Grays Harbor Management Plan ( GHMP ) had failed. Their rational was that many fish had been allowed to go up stream unharvested by the Commercial fleet. I mean like those darn pesky inriver Recs actually got fish to catch! Other than the rains just how did this happen?
One of the elements of the Grays Harbor Management Plan is 4/3 which simply means three consecutive days in a calendar week net free in the fall salmon fisheries. This does not apply to the Quinault Nations fisheries if they choose to go five days but to the Non Treaty side. The tribe seldom run fall fisheries that exceed four days.
It was a question as to just how well this would work in getting fish up river for the inriver Rec and a safety net for Natural Origin Spawners. Frankly I think it worked well and addressed the issue in November to the Commission and my rational is outlined in the letter.
Commissioners,
I am writing to update the Commission regarding another success of the recently implemented Grays Harbor Management Plan. ( GHMP ) It resides in the Wishkah River sub basin and some history is required to fully explain the success.
The Wishkah River is a Southern Olympic stream that flows into the Chehalis at Aberdeen near the 101 Bridge or downtown Aberdeen. With a long history usage dating back to the time of pioneers it had declined to such a state of affairs that by the 1990's the local community and then Senator Brad Owen ( our current Lt. Governor ) was able convince the former Northwest Renewable Resource Center to use it for a pilot program to restore Chinook & Coho. The pilot project became Long Live the Kings ( LLTK ) located at what is the Mayr Hatchery. While the LLTK project did have some success it struggled do to a very high exploitation rate by both Tribal and non tribal nets. It was a victim of its location as tribal and non treaty commercial fishers pretty much corked off the river for years.
With the GHMP requiring 3 net free days ( 4/3 ) myself and others wondered just how the Wishkah would perform. Would the window of non net time be enough to overcome the ravages of the past and neglect by WDF&W? My bet was on yes / maybe but the answer appears to be resounding yes, which came as a somewhat of a surprise. Just as its location worked against the river for years it reversed with 4/3. How one can ask and the answer again is location. In the Chehalis tidewater reach all three species of salmon stage going into a holding pattern after transitioning from salt to fresh water waiting for the fall rains. The river staging reach primarily runs from the 101 bridge to what is known as Pump House ( former water intake for the unfinished Satsop Nuclear Plant ) about 15 miles upstream. In this reach the Quinault Nation has its commercial fishers as well as the NT Commercial at the lower end of tidewater. The combination of the two commercial fisheries and WDF&W's steadfast refusal to modify the Non Treaty harvest to allow protection of the Wishkah needed due to its unique location was most devastating to the fish and Recreational fishers.
So what does this have to do with 4/3 and the Wishkah? Well frankly everything. Wishkah fish do not stage in the Chehalis as the fish from most the Chehalis tributary streams do but rather in the tidewater reach of the Wishkah itself. Simply put they are able avoid the harvest levels applied on the other Chehalis tributaries because of the location of the mouth of the Wishkah River on the Chehalis main stem as 4/3 allows fish into the Wishkah tidal staging reaches. The difference this makes can be seen in the 2014 hatchery returns as of October 30, 2014. Bingham and Satsop Springs on the East Fork Satsop have had a combined return of approximately 11,893 Coho as of October 30th while Mayr Hatchery on the Wishkah has had returns of 9,729 Coho. Commissioners the production of Mayr Coho is fraction of that of the two facilities on the Satsop and the difference in returns is simply the exploitation rate applied by the QIN and WDF&W managed NT commercial fisheries on the mainstream Chehalis River. The benefit of restricting NT Commercial harvest to the Wishkah River has been dramatic and undeniable with the hatchery returns. Additionally the number of Wild Coho reaching the spawning reaches will benefit just as much or more. I am sure the NT commercial gillnetters will complain and call this a waste but frankly Commissioners the NT Commercial concept of the only good fish is a dead fish, in a gillnet, in a tote, being sold ended with the new GHMP.
In closing Commissioners the tide water reach of the Wishkah was once the best " Mom & Pop " recreational fishery in the Chehalis Basin. If a boat floated folks put it in the river and trolled the tidewater. Not much skill needed just a rod, spinner and something that floated with a motor! I believe the Wishkah will continue to rebuild with 4/3 and return substantial benefits to the local recreational community. Just as importantly Commissioners 4/3 has emerged as the safety net for the Wishkah Wild Salmon stocks that have been brutalized by the Chehalis Basin combined Maximum Sustained Yield ( MSY ) harvest modeling that resulted in overharvest of the Wishkah and several Chehalis tributary streams for so many years.
I am not sure what one can or should say to the Commission at this point except thank you. Your courage and vision of implementing the GHMP and 4/3 is paying dividends far beyond expectations.
Sincerely
I wanted to comment on this earlier but hadn't found time.... I've followed Rivrguy's lead and emailed the Commission to sing the praises of the 4/3 management change. We'd be severely remiss not to credit the tremendous coho returns this season as the primary reason for the great fishing we've enjoyed, but the example of the Wishkah seems to be an indication that the 4/3 policy not only has merit, but may prove to be the best win for sportfishing and conservation advocacy in our region in recent memory. We must remain diligent in our defense of this policy in the coming years, as the view that the "excess" hatchery fish are a waste will be a popular one with the commercials (and likely the Legislature as well). Perhaps what we need is a good counter argument, and I think we may have at least a couple. First, improved fishing leads to more angler effort, which means more $ injected into local economies (we'll need to prove this by actually fishing more, but I'm willing to do that . Next, I don't think it's a big stretch to suggest that the stream nutrients the additional carcasses provide effectively represent habitat improvement for wild fish (without additional budgeting), which actually suggests efficiency more than waste.
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#916748 - 12/26/14 09:41 AM
Re: FISHINGTHECHEHALIS.NET
[Re: milt roe]
|
Dah Rivah Stinkah Pink Mastah
Registered: 08/23/06
Posts: 6206
Loc: zipper
|
Dont like what the model is saying? Tweak the model so it says what you want it to say!
Like when they entered a multiplier of 0 somewhere buried in the spreadsheets to give the commercials more days a few years ago?
_________________________
... Propping up an obsolete fishing industry at the expense of sound fisheries management is irresponsible. -Sg
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#916752 - 12/26/14 11:29 AM
Re: FISHINGTHECHEHALIS.NET
[Re: eyeFISH]
|
River Nutrients
Registered: 04/25/00
Posts: 5001
Loc: East of Aberdeen, West of Mont...
|
August to December 2015...observations.......GH Region
1. Many more fisherpersons.....If WDFW would have more checkers at all the launch sites, this would have been very evident. Its almost like WDFW doesn't want to know the success rate of the new plan.
2. Areas in the upper tide water reach, Chehalis......people were there on the August 16th opening.....jack fishermen were in all the usual places, only more fishermen....... lots of jacks and many of the early Silvers were caught......for those that toughed it out, fish were available, in the Chehalis.....until middle of December.
3. Upper reaches of Chehalis....lets say above Fuller Bridge....good fishing, September - December.
4. Tribs-----lots more fishermen this year, everywhere.....spinners, plugs, twitching...all did very well.
5. What worked????? You name it, fish were caught using whatever.
Did 4/3 work?????? I'd say it worked very well, excapement and in-river people, were the direct benefit of this addition to the model.
IMO....the sports community need to let the Commission and Region 6 management know your opinions on 4/3.
I'm sure the "NT gill netters", are gearing up to let the Commission and WDFW know their side of 4/3.
Happy New Year.....
_________________________
"Worse day sport fishing, still better than the best day working"
"I thought growing older, would take longer"
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#916943 - 12/29/14 08:25 AM
Re: FISHINGTHECHEHALIS.NET
[Re: DrifterWA]
|
River Nutrients
Registered: 03/03/09
Posts: 4491
Loc: Somewhere on the planet,I hope
|
As one can see in the e mail below nothing on Willapa Monday ( tonight ) evening and I am sure as soon as Steve has things lined out he will let all know.
We will not be meeting tomorrow, Monday. I can’t say for sure on Tuesday at this point. I’m sorry we don’t have a better timeline set for everyone.
Steve Thiesfeld
So what are the issues that all will attempt to get their arms around? Well in a nut shell we have a North / South & long term / short term issues bumping into each other all over the place. N / S is all about stocks and facilities. Forks Creek Hatchery it is Chinook and the fact that does not have a weir that will stop the straying and about 20% of the returning adults stray. It is around 3 to 1 hatchery over wild in the gravel so the question is should one even produce Chinook at the facility. Coho seem to tend to return to the hatchery so Coho straying is not a issue. Add North River which is about the last stream with much of the natural order and needs protection and you have a thorny one to be sure.
In the South at Naselle the Chinook straying is even worse sometimes reaching 6.5 to 1 hatchery origin over wild spawning in the gravel. The weir is pulled around October 15 dependant on flows so again the issue of even producing Chinook at the facility is questionable. Add the fact that with the weir out Coho can run a muck it gets totally weird and again the question is should one produce Coho at the Naselle Hatchery. The Nemah does not have these issues.
Now long term it is what stream will be primary which requires a lower straying rate. Somehow production within the three facilities must be aligned to HSRG standards and what that will be is not known by anyone outside the agency.
Short term? WDF&W has used the commercial gillnets to harvest returning Chinook down to a level that does not totally overrun the natural spawners. Now by doing this they also pretty much nearly wipe out the natural origin fish. So for the next four years regardless of what the long term picture is just how do you achieve the removal of the hatchery adults without wiping out the natural run? Good question and this should be a bitch to deal with. Add to the mix is since the implementation of the current management plan which was never approved by the Commission but utilized as a draft, natural spawners took a dive right into the dumpster. So for the next four years Willapa will see even less natural origin adults and it could get really ugly even for Rec fishers. Oh by the way the Rec fishers did not create this problem but are certainly going shoulder a share of the burden. Interesting how that works.
So just how serous is the situation in Willapa? To say in the toilet is being kind and any solution is going to be painful. To get a picture of just what may happen one can look to the past four years. The harvest model operated on a 30% exploitation rate on the Naselle Chinook natural origin adults. Those who back mathed the years have identified the actual exploitation rate was running around 40% to 50%. T o bring the harvest model inline with reality it would have required a reduction from 30% to somewhere around 10% or 2/3 reduction in harvest of Chinook. Now the BUT, if you do that the hatchery straying overruns the gravel!
There are no easy answers to the problems in Willapa only pain for all.
_________________________
Dazed and confused.............the fog is closing in
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#916950 - 12/29/14 10:12 AM
Re: FISHINGTHECHEHALIS.NET
[Re: eyeFISH]
|
Spawner
Registered: 01/22/06
Posts: 917
Loc: tacoma
|
Does look like they have painted themselves into a corner alright.
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#916984 - 12/29/14 03:55 PM
Re: FISHINGTHECHEHALIS.NET
[Re: milt roe]
|
River Nutrients
Registered: 03/03/09
Posts: 4491
Loc: Somewhere on the planet,I hope
|
This came through. Hi Everyone, We need to get some information on the AHA model into your hands so you can provide some feedback on the Willapa Bay salmon management policy. To that end, I’m suggesting that folks that want to see where we are to date, which is mostly Chinook modeling, show up at the Montesano office around 4 pm tomorrow. I realize that all of you can’t make it, but most can.
I’ll put the AHA model on the screen and walk everyone through a couple of the options so you can see what the results look like (and how doggone cumbersome the model is). The purpose of the meeting is simply to share information/results, and therefore we will be very informal with the public and ad-hoc committee members participating or asking questions at the same time. You probably should not anticipate a lot of on the fly modeling. We can probably do some small tweaks, but anything substantial takes a lot of work. I think this information sharing will helps us be better prepared for a more formal meeting next week. I am also trying to get the model and options onto the WDFW website ( http://wdfw.wa.gov/conservation/fisheries/willapa_bay_salmon/) where folks can look at. If it’s not posted by COB this afternoon, I’ll email it out to those that want it. However, the model itself is 11mb and your email may reject it. Cheers Steve Thiesfeld Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Region 6 Fish Program Manager 48 Devonshire Road, Montesano, WA 98563 Steven.Thiesfeld@dfw.wa.gov 360-249-1201
Edited by Rivrguy (12/29/14 06:09 PM)
_________________________
Dazed and confused.............the fog is closing in
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#916988 - 12/29/14 04:19 PM
Re: FISHINGTHECHEHALIS.NET
[Re: eyeFISH]
|
Spawner
Registered: 01/22/06
Posts: 917
Loc: tacoma
|
Been looking into the AHA model a little more, and not liking what I am seeing. Generally you dont want to use model estimates from one model as if they were data in another model. In the AHA model, they use EDT model estimates to populate the habitat attributes of the AHA model. That is likely to compound the error of both models. Results are therefore very uncertain, and since EDT uses expert opinion where reliable data dont exist I just wouldnt put too much faith in the AHA model outputs. Someone can correct me if I am not understanding how this all works, there is little information I can find on line.
I see there was an independent technical review by the ISRP of the AHA model conducted, does anyone have a copy of that to share? Would be interesting to see what they had to say.
May not matter, since the WDFW is all wrapped around the axel with conflicting Policy objectives vs the fishery they have to manage.
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#917043 - 12/30/14 09:50 AM
Re: FISHINGTHECHEHALIS.NET
[Re: milt roe]
|
River Nutrients
Registered: 03/03/09
Posts: 4491
Loc: Somewhere on the planet,I hope
|
Steve Thiesfeld sent out three graphs for Willapa Chinook exploitation rates ( harvest ) and all will find them interesting. If you would like them hit me with a PM and I will forward them. The 30% Naselle exploitation rate looks to be a thing of the past.
_________________________
Dazed and confused.............the fog is closing in
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#917062 - 12/30/14 01:34 PM
Re: FISHINGTHECHEHALIS.NET
[Re: Rivrguy]
|
River Nutrients
Registered: 03/03/09
Posts: 4491
Loc: Somewhere on the planet,I hope
|
Coming up in the second week of January is the Commission meeting and two items of interest to many are on the Agenda Saturday. Action on the selection of a new Director and the Willapa Management Plan. It should be interesting for those that attend. SATURDAY, JANUARY 10, 2015 PLEASE NOTE LOCATION CHANGE Comfort Inn Hotel and Conference Center 1620 74th Avenue SW Tumwater, WA 98501 – Evergreen Room http://www.comfortinn.com/hotel-tumwater-washington-WA126/Hotel-Map7:00 AM 12. Executive Session Pursuant to RCW 42.30.110(1)(g), the Commission will meet in executive session to evaluate the qualifications of an applicant for public employment or to review the performance of a public employee. No action will be taken in executive session, and the public is not permitted to listen to the executive session. 60 min 8:00 AM 13. Department Director Selection – Decision The Commission will consider selection of a final candidate, who will be offered the position of Department Director. 60 min9:00 AM 14. Open Public Input The Commission is a direct link between the citizens of Washington and the Department of Fish and Wildlife. Comments on Department programs and topics of concern are welcome during this portion of the meeting. NOTE: During this portion of the meeting, the public is encouraged to comment on issues that do not already have public input time on the agenda. 30 min 9:30 AM Break 15 min 9:45 AM 15. Willapa Bay Salmon Management Policy – Briefing and Public Hearing
The Department will brief the Commission on Willapa Bay Salmon Management challenges, describe the public process, and seek guidance on draft policy sideboards.
Staff Report: Steve Thiesfeld, Region 6 Fish Program Manager 120 min Public Input – This Item Only 11:45 AM 16. Election of Commission Chair and Vice Chair – Decision Pursuant to RCW 77.04.060, the Commission will elect a chair and vice chair, each to serve a term of two years or until a successor is elected. 30 min 12:15 PM 17. Miscellaneous and Meeting Debrief The Commission will discuss items that arise immediately before or during the meeting and after the preliminary agenda is published. 45 min 1:00 PM Adjourn
_________________________
Dazed and confused.............the fog is closing in
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#917174 - 12/31/14 08:52 AM
Re: FISHINGTHECHEHALIS.NET
[Re: Rivrguy]
|
River Nutrients
Registered: 03/03/09
Posts: 4491
Loc: Somewhere on the planet,I hope
|
So how did the meeting on Willapa go? Everywhere from good to bad just depends on your point of view. It did not take long to see that most attending had not done their basic research on the AHA model to be sure. In fact it was pretty much a dog & pony show for much of the meeting but ( you knew that was coming didn't you ) it was not due to staff but rather the public both commercial and recs. In fact Mr. Theisfeld actually asked how many had reviewed the model and few hands went up. For a meeting that was to help folks understand the AHA model one would think, well something.
Keeping in mind this is Chinook only. It is clear staff have been working rather hard with AHA and are finding it difficult, unforgiving, and cumbersome. It is slow going to be sure. Staff is still slogging out options but none are really based on reality just the so called aspirational objectives.
In the process of putting options up ( the few that did go up on the wall ) I picked up that the math did not make sense. Make Willapa primary which only allows for 20% hatchery influence ( pHOS ) of spawners on the gravel you get the production level of about 300k at Forks Creek hatchery. Switch to Naselle as primary and 30% pHOS for Willapa as a contributing stock with Forks Creek producing 1.3 million and it still meets HSRG pHOS standards on staying. Now on average 20% of the adults returning to Forks Creek stray all over the Willapa Basin and you have math that does not work. It took a bit but staff figured it out.
In the AHA model has Forks Creek Chinook as a segregated stock. Now segregated stocks do not have the same requirements in HSRG as they are not able to spawn with the natural spawners. It can be timing such as Summerrun & Winter Steelhead on the coast or a weir that stops the hatchery allowing for removal and passes natural spawners up. Neither of these apply to Forks Creek Chinook so it begs the question just what on earth are they doing? To compound it further HSRG requires a certain percentage of natural origin spawners ( pNOS ) be incorporated into the hatchery fish spawned and that does not happen at Forks Creek. ( and is not likely to be achievable ) So as one person said then it cannot be integrated either so just what should Forks Creek Chinook be modeled as? The answer is a bit of a bear but it is simple. To meet HSRG standards Forks Creek should not be producing Chinook except in small numbers. Already some are claiming somebody is trying to trick the model to allow Chinook production that should not be allowed. I do not know but I am sure of one thing this issue could get ugly as faith in WDF&W's modeling is so poor that nobody trust them. Both the Grays Harbor & Willapa harvest models have performed so dismally trust is low to nonexistent.
So my last thoughts are about the Willapa harvest model. When this came up it resulted in a rather pointed exchange between myself and two of the Willapa Advisers. ( both who I have great respect for ) The issue was just how bad the harvest model performed. Those helping me have said it ranged from 40 to 50 percent of the Naselle Chinook while modeled at 30%. No said one it is 36%. So who is correct? Both of us or neither as it is about how you are doing the math. If your simply doing 1+1=2 math then the error could be 36%. Now the other shoe drops and if you back up to the premise utilized since 2010 that a 30% harvest rate on Naselle Chinook will stabilize and slowly recover Willapa Estuary Chinook populations it is the higher numbers. Since the implementation of the current draft plan Willapa Chinook stocks have crashed. In fact the graft line for returning natural spawners goes down at about a 45 degree angle and it should up not down.
Now this does not happen in the math of 1+1=2 but rather in the assumptions built into the model. So what is a assumption? It is things like the C&R mortality for Recs, the mortality of selective fishing with a gill net, or the drop off / Pinniped take. In fact in a document obtained in a Public Document Request one WDF&W staffer noted that the seals got a fish out of the net for every one landed in the gillnet boat. So the simple fact is the math can be 100% correct or 100% wrong depending on the assumptions built into the model. Another way to say it is garbage in garbage out.
So we all move on to the next Commission meeting and wait until WDF&W's staff get something that one can do a complete review off.
_________________________
Dazed and confused.............the fog is closing in
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#917246 - 12/31/14 11:32 AM
Re: FISHINGTHECHEHALIS.NET
[Re: Rivrguy]
|
Juvenile at Sea
Registered: 07/18/08
Posts: 233
|
"Since the implementation of the current draft plan Willapa Chinook stocks have crashed."
It was only implemented in 2010, not even one full fall Chinook generation has returned! Talk about jumping to Massive conclusions...
Jeesh.
I'm referring here to the Chinook production regime in the current plan, not the harvest elements.
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#917257 - 12/31/14 12:09 PM
Re: FISHINGTHECHEHALIS.NET
[Re: JustBecause]
|
River Nutrients
Registered: 03/03/09
Posts: 4491
Loc: Somewhere on the planet,I hope
|
Ah no jump guy staff provided the info and all four years trended straight down. In fact the first of the four years was the best and each year the escapement dropped lower. The bug in the mix was the implementation of gillnet selective fishing which ended up not being selective. Hard to make a gillnet selective.
4350 is the escapement goal and the four years are below. The numbers for 2014 are not available yet but the Commercial harvest was way above what was modeled. Two to three times if I remember correctly.
3,395 3,119 2,158 1,462
Edited by Rivrguy (12/31/14 12:22 PM)
_________________________
Dazed and confused.............the fog is closing in
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#917264 - 12/31/14 01:10 PM
Re: FISHINGTHECHEHALIS.NET
[Re: Rivrguy]
|
Juvenile at Sea
Registered: 07/18/08
Posts: 233
|
Again, that (escapement trend) may have nothing to do with the changes to hatchery production. Also, total run size, which accounts for all harvest levels, in and out of the bay, would be much more informative, i.e., sure escapement is down, but that't because the fish were caught in or out of the bay, not because they didn't recruit.
If the issue is all related to the changes in the fishery since 2010, why are they revisiting the hatchery production?
Again, it's important to keep the apples in the apple basket and the oranges in the orange basket.
Otherwise, thanks for the updates!
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#917277 - 12/31/14 02:40 PM
Re: FISHINGTHECHEHALIS.NET
[Re: eyeFISH]
|
River Nutrients
Registered: 11/21/07
Posts: 7580
Loc: Olema,California,Planet Earth
|
The change was implemented, as I understand it, to increase escapement. That was supposed to be the target. The "models" showed what they planned would make escapement go up. Since it went the other way, either the assumptions or the model were wrong and needed changing. It is also my understanding that without the push from Rivrguy and others that WDFW would have kept on keeping on.
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#917317 - 12/31/14 10:30 PM
Re: FISHINGTHECHEHALIS.NET
[Re: eyeFISH]
|
Ornamental Rice Bowl
Registered: 11/24/03
Posts: 12616
|
"Wild" escapement for Naselle chinook was most assuredly projected to go down... not necessarily as a reflection of harvest abuses, but as a function of reduced hatchery production.
Just like the lower Columbia River tules, the principal source of wild-born Naselle chinook recruits are the offspring of hatchery strays. As less and less hatchery fish return to Naselle, so too diminish the "wild" fish they produce.
It should come as no surprise that "wild" escapements would tank as fewer and fewer hatchery-origin spawners are available to seed the gravel to produce those "wild" fish.
_________________________
"Let every angler who loves to fish think what it would mean to him to find the fish were gone." (Zane Grey) "If you don't kill them, they will spawn." (Carcassman) The Keen Eye MDLong Live the Kings!
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#917323 - 01/01/15 07:39 AM
Re: FISHINGTHECHEHALIS.NET
[Re: eyeFISH]
|
River Nutrients
Registered: 03/03/09
Posts: 4491
Loc: Somewhere on the planet,I hope
|
Well we beat that horse to death so on to something new but the link below is to the harvest rate impact and recovery times utilizing them that was provided by Steve Thiesfeld. It is a difficult issue for all. https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B2tWjgmgVy3ySWNEalpTYW1tcFU/editThe email below was forwarded to me so I checked with another mentioned in the e mail and verified that it went pretty much all over the fish / political world. That being the case here you go and this is a interesting perspective. To whom it may concern: While my preferred method of working with WDFW staff, the Ad-Hoc Committee and the public within the Willapa Bay management framework has been through collaboration and compromise recent events have prompted a different approach. Re: Willapa Hatchery Surplus Report (copy attached) a link for the doc I am adding https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B2tWjgmgVy3yQ3htRmFyNXVQa2M/editI am not a self ordained president of some publicly funded advocacy group which claims to represent recreational fishers in Willapa Bay nor a PhD, however, I do have sufficient knowledge to at least fact check any document that might profess my name particularly when it is intended to affect public policy. The Willapa Hatchery Surplus Report is just another example of the crap we have had to read or listen to for the past two years. The authors of that report and/or their constituents/supporters have burdened participants, staff and the Commission with falsehoods in commentary and writing in an apparent effort to influence the outcome of Willapa Bay management discussion. So what was the nexus that brought these two geniuses to the Ad-Hoc Committee? With the post on the Piscatorial Pursuits Forum on Friday December 12 by "Riverguy" and what occurred at the Saturday December 13 Commission Meeting has now verified in my mind what many of us have suspected since the Hamilton, et al. v. Wash. Dep't of Fish and Wildlife SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT which is, this is a rigged game with a predetermined outcome. Those that are clamoring for conservation, transparency, enhanced communication and open government are secretly manipulating the public meeting process from within the agency and they are in my view a quasi branch of WDFW. So were is their accountability for transparency and public disclosure and to what level do my assumptions rise to? As a taxpayer and resident of Pacific county I resent that they live outside the county and do not even fish and yet are dictating the bay management policy. There are resources within government which may shed some light on these concerns and I will pursue them. ****** ******** South Bay/Naselle Rec. Advisor
Edited by Rivrguy (01/01/15 10:47 AM)
_________________________
Dazed and confused.............the fog is closing in
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
2 registered (eddie, 1 invisible),
664
Guests and
1
Spider online. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
11498 Members
16 Forums
63825 Topics
646192 Posts
Max Online: 3937 @ 07/19/24 03:28 AM
|
|
|