Several of us have been comparing notes ( rumors ) on what the 2022 salmon seasons are going to be and we have no idea at this minute. I have seen ocean abundance for Coho at 1.5 million and higher, maybe much higher. This time 2021 the Columbian was reporting that it was 1.7 million for 2021. I will post up that article later. Keep in mind the coastal streams that have been struggling with wild Coho escapement are likely going to limit marine fisheries at different locations / times as in recent years but marine fisheries are likely to be far more liberal for Recs than terminal fisheries by a mile.

So what about Grays Harbor? We know that Region 6 manager Mike Scharpf shared with everyone that he thought the the Coho forecast would be "robust". That is good news now the bad comes right along with it. We will be limited by a provision in the Grays Harbor Policy that if we fail to make escapement 3 out of 5 years non treaty harvest is limited to an impact of 5% of the returning run. ( known as the Penalty Box ) To make matters worse the tide water tributary streams have been way below escapement with the upper basin streams over performing thus supporting the aggregate for the entire Chehalis.

Next we have the fact that our Chinook and Coho are present at the same time so Chinook can limit our Coho fisheries. With the massive Alaska and British Columbia marine fisheries there are seldom enough returning adults to support a Chinook fishery but what if ? With an Chinook escapement goal of 9753 I think we would need a Chehalis forecast for Chinook in the range 14000 giving tribal and non tribal 4247 harvestable resulting in 2123 harvestable Chinook for each of their fisheries. I am not holding my breath but one can hope.

Back to Coho, the hatchery abundance for the Chehalis should be up but how much is hard to say. Hatchery releases are normally governed by the ocean conditions and in 2021 Bingham / Satsop Springs had a combined return of 11955 normal timed Coho. So all things being equal if ocean abundance was 150% of last years return it would be near 18000 normal timed Coho and the bigger the increase in marine survival the bigger the Coho returns increase. The brood year for 2022 normal WILD Coho was just a bit under escapement so if we had a descant fresh water survival ( which I think we did ) then it will all be about just how much and increase the marine survival gives us. So as one can see a whole bunch of factors are in play. What is not in doubt is that we are in the Grays Harbor Policy 3/5 Penalty Box limited to 5% of the Coho run forecast.

So bottom line? No idea on Chinook and one can only hope. Coho seasons I think it will be similar to last year with hopefully and increase. 2021 harvestable NT share was W5904 / H10187 so lets say the run is doubled up our Coho impact number would still be 5% of the return be it 1000 or 100000. What it would do is provide a bit better maneuvering room to allow for more opportunity but as Mike Scharpf told us all in an e mail posted previously 2022 NOF will be interesting!

This is an article from the Columbian on the 2021 ocean forecast with zip changes so don't let the formatting get to ya! It is relevant to many because of how a big number is sliced and diced by harvest.

Numbers won’t be as big in river as in ocean
By Terry Otto, for The Columbian
Published: February 17, 2021, 5:10pm
Share:

4 PhotosKaren Trandum of Sandy, Ore., fights an ocean coho during one of the last really good years. Returns have suffered recently, but this year's ocean return of coho to the Oregon and Washington coast is expected to be an astounding 1.7 million adults.
Karen Trandum of Sandy, Ore., fights an ocean coho during one of the last really good years. Returns have suffered recently, but this year's ocean return of coho to the Oregon and Washington coast is expected to be an astounding 1.7 million adults. (Terry Otto/for The Columbian) Photo Gallery

There’s a big number being floated around on websites and among local fishermen’s circles, and that number is 1.7 million. That figure is the ocean abundance projection for this year’s adult coho salmon return to the Washington-Oregon coast in 2021. That big number is causing excitement, but it is deceiving in some ways.

John North, the Columbia River fisheries manager for the ODFW, recently expressed concern that many in the angler community may be mistaking that huge number for the Columbia River return.

“What this is pointing to is ocean abundance,” said North. “I would call it a predicted abundance prior to harvest in the ocean, but people often confuse it as a Columbia River mouth forecast.”

He is quick to point out that the river mouth forecast will be a substantial number, just not 1.7 million.

“Ocean harvest can be substantial, but either way it’s going to relate to a rather large forecast to the mouth of the Columbia, but people tend to tend to forget that is a starting point.”


Before the states can figure out how many coho are going to make it back to the river, managers will have to work in the amount of harvest allowed on the fish in the ocean. That won’t be hammered out until the North of Falcon Process is complete in April. That process decides how many fish the tribes, commercial fishermen and sport anglers can harvest.

And, all those stakeholders will want their cut of this big pie.

“As for the ocean harvest, they will all try to maximize that as much as they can,” said Buzz Ramsey, the iconic Northwest angler and founding member of the Northwest Sportfishing Industry Association (NSIA). “We won’t know what that is until the Pacific Fisheries Management Council (PFMC) does their thing.”

“After North of Falcon process, we’ll figure out exactly what the ocean fisheries are expected to remove, then break it out by stock, and then (we’ll) be able to figure out an actual Columbia River forecast,” said North.

“It will be large, but it might not look quite the same as that number.”

North also wants to make note that these are projections only, and even after figuring out ocean harvest, there will be other factors involved that may affect the actual number of returning fish. For instance, the projections in 2019 for coho ocean abundance were about 1 million, but after ocean harvest only 600,000 were predicted to make it to the river mouth. The actual return was much smaller, slightly over a third of the river projection.

The Columbian is becoming a rare example of a news organization with local, family ownership. Subscribe today to support local journalism and help us to build a stronger community.
Ocean conditions are certainly better than they were just a few years ago, but still can’t be categorized as “good”. That means some of those fish may not survive to return.

Another factor is that many of these fish, perhaps as many as 100,000, will be returning to coastal rivers, not the Columbia.

The high projection is driven by last fall’s jack counts, which are returns of precocious males that return a year early. That gives managers an indicator as to how many juvenile coho were able to survive.

“It was a tremendous number of jacks,” said North.

The projection does bode well for coastal anglers and charter boats. The ocean season looks bright if all the fish show.

The mark rate of the coho is expected to be about 80% according to official estimates. Mark rate refers to the number of fish that are of hatchery origin, and are adipose-fin clipped. Those fish can be kept, but unmarked wild coho can’t be retained and must be released.


Ramsey isn’t sure about that mark rate. He fished the river last year for coho and had a difficult time finding any that he could keep.

“I did not get a single keeper coho last year at Buoy Ten,” he said. “It was dismal.”

The main takeaway from this is that anglers are possibly looking at a really good fall run of coho. But, with the ocean projection bouncing around, many anglers may think it’s going to be even better than it will be. Still, after so many poor years, this is news worth celebrating. That is, if the fish actually show.

Spring Chinook numbers will allow lower Columbia fishery
Another piece of good news for anglers is that the spring Chinook projections, which are not high, will still be good enough to allow anglers a chance to fish for springers in the lower Columbia, after being locked out for the last two years.

“The Cowlitz spring Chinook return will be strong enough to support an opening throughout the lower river,” said North. “We will have a surplus if don’t have a fishery in the Cowlitz itself.”


For the last two years returns to the Cowlitz River were too low to allow fishing on those stocks in the lower Columbia. But, other than a possible fishing closure bubble at the mouth of the Cowlitz, as well as the closure of the Cowlitz itself, the lower Columbia will stay open.

That is especially good news for bank anglers that fish off the lower river beaches. While boat anglers had the option of hauling their boats upriver to fish, there simply isn’t enough beach access in the upper sections of the Columbia to accommodate all the lower river bank anglers. Those anglers were pretty much shut out of the action for the last two years.

Southwest Washington Fishing Report: Terry Otto’s fishing update and forecast can be found as part of Bob Rees’ “The Guides Forecast” at: https://www.theguidesforecast.com/

By way of comparison, in the mid-80s South Puget Sound ALONE had over a million coho returning to the mouth of the Straits AFTER ocean and all recreational harvest had been accounted for.

We are now giddy over crumbs.

The first NOF ZOOM meeting for Grays Harbor was last night so what do we know? Well 2021 we made Coho and Chum escapement but wild Chinook did not. 2022 the wild Coho forecast is 107,000 and with hatchery adding up to 150,994. Chinook W 12810 and H 2147. Grays Harbor Chum are 34999. The presentation materials are available at https://wdfw.wa.gov/get-involved/calenda...-public-meeting .

With the GH Policy limiting Coho harvest for failing to make escapement 3 out of 5 years I guarantee pressure will build to do something that violates the policy. The other side of the coin is the GH Policy was about conservation and equitable sharing of harvest in the Chehalis Basin. One could make the case that this year is an outlier that should be addressed that way, so the big show is on the road.

Now this, in the Steelhead ZOOM two friends of mine said they hit the raised hand button to speak but were not called with time left. So I pushed a little last night to see what would happen. Well the second time I did the hand request I was not recognized, and they still had 15 minutes left. So my thought right now is the days where you could propose an option and staff would work with citizens and put it in the model are gone. Several of us were texting back and forth on our cell phones during the meeting and one made the comment that this was a dog and pony show. Frankly I think that is a bit harsh at this time but I must admit one could draw that conclusion.

So these ZOOM meetings are going to be scripted if you press hard they will lock you out. They do not show all participants but do tell them who has the question of the moment. Who are the participants and who is doing the lock outs I have no idea? It is WDFW's process to be sure but if they are going to screen out folks they should say that is the process. So be forewarned these meetings are not a solid discussion of the issue but a rather tightly controlled distribution of information and absolutely nothing else. If you have been locked out of a ZOOM discussion let me know will ya as I have a friend who wants to track this thing.

Little edit: I do believe the question's were typed in, my bad but they chose not answer.

This is another's response.

I got on yesterday and was laying it on hard about “ Chinook recreational priority” in Willapa not being honored. I was the only one cut off fm Willapa. They loved destroying bay rec fishing, are now shrinking fresh water fishing. Toward end I got on again, was less assertive but same message and did not get cut off. Last year I got in a discussion with Baltzel and when he could not come up with good response, HE cut me off. There is no question that we are being censored, and while they allow begging, Facts are why our Advisor Groups were cancelled. They seem to enjoy public begging, they will not tolerate valid criticism. I have fished in Alaska once, and they do honest in season management. They meter fish into streams, start and stop fishing, with natural spawners goals getting priority. It works. Here our desk biologists refuse to do that. Not just biologists fault, management wants it this way. They made it clear again yesterday, it is just more complicated than our little minds can understand.

There are many here who would disagree that AK is doing a very good job with Chinook. Kenai has kinda crapped out, along with most of the other Chinook runs.

In the short time since the ZOOM NOF Grays Harbor I and others have been in a rather substantial debate via email. It has always been my preference that these conversations remain private but a couple of the guys disagreed so I agreed to post up some of their thoughts.

WDFW does not have Grays Harbor Advisers which simply means and actual in-depth discussion of a harvest issue is not possible. You should think of public input as like submitting comments in APA process. Your thoughts are on the record but little else. How one could have a real discussion of a season proposal several of us are not sure. You could email staff directly and try that as Mike Scharpf at Mike.Scharpf@dfw.wa.gov has always tried to communicate and be accessible.

I personally do not feel that we are returning to the days that the agency set the seasons with APA (setting a WAC) before the public even had input or really had any idea what is going on. I do think it is going to look like we are back in the days when groups or individuals with connections lobbied for their seasons out of public view. The ZOOM process being used is scripted and controlled to put forth the view the agency wants and it is definitely not intended for a real discussion of any part of the NOF process.

The issue of Mr. Losee being upset about a participant calling staff lazy for not doing something had some bolt upright in their chairs! So guys this, Mr. Losee is not Steve Thiesfeld who could go toe to toe with anyone, not blink, he listened and required that we also listen to what he had to say! Steve was one of the best WDFW staffers GH ever had and we lost a good friend and our best manager ever with his passing. Mr. Losee is new and will develop his own style and processes but he is not Steve so as I put it to the guys “get over it.“

This comment I am not sure about as the individual is an agency employee but I was asked to let fly so here goes. At present WDFW as a whole is operating in a bunker mentality mode. It is reacting to issues and processes in a defensive manner not proactive manner. The virus has restricted interaction in a one-to-one manner and had the unintentional effect of reinforcing the tendency of WDFW to isolate itself from the public. To add to the public’s misery staff does not even realize just how far down the isolation slope they have gone or if they do have little desire to reverse the process. I have been around WDFW in one form or another for over 40 years and I find that statement from an employee so very sad.

I will put some more of the guys thoughts up later but I think this is enough for now.

Email fire time! No I do not know why the GH Advisers and the public access to the meetings were cancelled. Last I looked at the WDFW website it said GH still had Advisers but had not been updated for sometime and to my knowledge the Advisers or public were not given an reason for the Director's actions.

https://wdfw.wa.gov/about/advisory/ghsag

I seem to remember that some shellfish (crab?) advisory groups were disbanded and possibly reformed with acceptable members. The GH Advisors simply weren't compliant enough, asked all the wrong questions, and ao on.

Not sure, given the many problems with many resources, that they want advisors who ask questions.

I think they already have advisors and strictly follow their guidance. No need for a second group.

I don't think that group is "advisors" as much as "in charge".

03/10/2022

I watched the GH advisors, both on the sports and NT side, for many years.

I'm thinking that it was just easier for WDFW to put the "advisors on a shelf", than to have to put up with that knowledgeable group of individuals in 2022 during the "dog and pony show", called NOF.

Thanks GH advisors for the many years and LOTS of hours fighting for a share of the returning Chinook, Coho, Chum and yes even the lowly jack salmon.

Melanie and I miss those meetings, thanks to all advisors trying to make the state run a level playing field all those years.

Since it is NOF season, any idea where Larry Phillips moved off to? And, for R6, who you will now get to replace him.

He's moving to the American Sportfishing Association .

I happened to get Larry's new e mail address and sent him a note wishing well and this was his response.

I have accepted a position as the Fisheries Policy Dir. for the American Sport Fishing Association. Lots to learn but excited to join the team. I am not leaving the issues just wearing a different hat. Lots of work to do.

Best wishes to Larry in his new endeavor.

Glad he is now in a job where he doesn't have to hand us a line of shi*

Every year I request the four preseason forecast models and did so this year and received them from Kim yesterday. For those who would like the models and are not on my mailing list just e mail me and I will get them to ya. The preseason models have a lot of information and data but do not confuse them with the 2022 harvest model which Mike is working on.

I also inquired about the new R6 regional Director position and you can read the response below.

From Kim:

Attached are the Grays Harbor salmon forecasts for 2022. Mike is actively working on the planning model with this year’s forecast and last year’s fisheries. He will try and get a draft out to you this week.
Currently the department will be advertising for the Region 6 manager position soon.

Please let us know if you have any questions regarding the forecasts.

Have a great week,

Kim Figlar-Barnes
WDFW – Fish Management
Grays Harbor Area F & W Biologist
360-249-4628 Ext. 235
Region 6 Office
48 Devonshire, Rd. Montesano, WA 98563
Kim.Figlar-Barnes@dfw.wa.gov

Still developing an understanding of this process, so forgive me if there is an obvious answer. Going over the spreadsheet and looking at escapement goal versus actual escapement, is it safe to assume we’ll have similar seasons to last, given that we haven’t met escapement in at least 3 of the last 5 years?