Junk science?
Does anyone know what the formula WDFW uses to deduct from the catch quota?
This seems to be the new weapon of the tribes to get us off the water and WDFW seems to be cooperating 100% with the tribes.
Season cut short due to encounters, Season delayed due to encounters, etc.
First off when I troll I rarely kill shakers! I check my gear every 15 min. but usually I can see a shaker by watching my rod, also when I do release a salmon it 9 times out of 10 swims off. I also keep a recovery tank (Bucket of fresh salt water) on board if I do have a unresponsive shaker and it works very well.
It seems to me if we can get the ratio of encounters changed to a more accurate number we would take this weapon away......
Does anyone have any suggestions on how we get this number down and get this in the negotiations at NOF?
Also the test boats WDFW uses to help gather data, should these boats have cameras like most police officers now days?
It seems these test boats gather a lot of data and we should have that information. Do these test boats have a recovery tank? are they using small lures, etc.
Thoughts, ideas?

Wow, I mean seriously, wow.

For you commenting on the validity of "junk science" you're certainly throwing a lot of your own (real) junk science around..

Your idea of a "recovery tank" was particularly amusing.

priority2-

The following link may provide some insight in the creel methods including what information is collected by the test boats (see page 30).

http://www.wdfw.wa.gov/publications/01357/wdfw01357.pdf

Also very season WDFW produces both winter and summer creel reports that provides summaries of the information collected in the fisheries.

http://www.wdfw.wa.gov/publications/01741/wdfw01741.pdf

This is the summer mark selective report for 2014. An example of the test fishery information can be found in table 3.5 which is for MA 9.

Curt

ON THE SWING
How is my recovery tank amusing?
Do you think the way they count encounters is accurate?
I am curious why you would take a question about encounters
and get offended?
SMALMA
I know they have a formula they use but, what is the mortality ratio?
1 in 3 encounters, 1 in 4 encounters?
Is that ratio accurate? I know what my ratio is, that would be .5 to 10
Also details are not given on the specific gear.
Part of my comment/question was is there a way to cut down on the mortality of encounters. In my experience a bucket of fresh saltwater does work to recover a juvenile salmon in need of oxygen.

The fact that a fish actually swims away is close to meaningless. It has to survive much longer. Some of the studies have held fish in net pens for a few days. The best ones use survival to spawning. There is a pretty extensive literature on post-release survival.

Unless you have inflow/outflow tubing supplying new freshly oxygenated saltwater and draining away old oxygen-depleted / C02-rich saltwater, your shaker is gonna die of hypoxia and respiratory acidosis. You're far better off recovering that fish in the water from which it came... not stagnant bucket water.

Chinook impacts are 100% dependent on encounters. The only way to stop accruing impact is to get the gear out of the water. ZERO encounters means ZERO impact.

If there is gear in the water, then there will be encounters. If there are encounters, there are impacts.

Carcassman,
extensive literature by who? also a net pen is not the same as the open water.
I want to know what the mortality ratio that WDFW uses when dealing with encounters.
Survival to spawning? I don't see that being an accurate way to determine the mortality of an encounter.

[quote=eyeFISH]Unless you have inflow/outflow tubing supplying new freshly oxygenated saltwater and draining away old oxygen-depleted / C02-rich saltwater, your shaker is gonna die of hypoxia and respiratory acidosis. You're far better off recovering that fish in the water from which it came... not stagnant bucket water.

Maybe I did not make my self clear.
dip a 5 gal. bucket into the saltwater, place fish in bucket. I wouldn't use stagnant water, no need you have plenty of fresh oxygenated water at hand.


If there is gear in the water, then there will be encounters. If there are encounters, there are impacts.

Yes of course.... ok back to the question, what is the encounter mortality ratio?
what are the best practices to reduce those numbers?
If we can get those mortality numbers reduced will that be recognized?

Lots of agencies and universities and others have done encounter/survival studies. Canadians did, and are doing, a lot with steelhead now.

I agree that the use of a net pen is not all that good. I think survival to spawning is the appropriate measure for release of adults. For juveniles it needs to be some significant period of time. A week?

NOT ACCURATE!
If you release a healthy juvenile and he is swimming like a champ... He runs into Mr. Ling Cod and gets chomped that counts against the guy who released it?
I know that fish get stressed especially when caught on a hook, squeezed by Chubacka and dropped on the deck. I am not saying that by releasing juveniles there are no casualties, but I question the accuracy.
Why should we use a ratio that puts us off the water when it may not be accurate

I think its fair to say we are not talking about wild steal head!
I know they are occasionally caught while trolling but it is not the norm.
For this conversation we are talking about juvenile Salmon.

Accuracy? I would call WDFW's ability to establish an encounter rate ' best available science,' or as close to science as it can get. In marine areas, test boats fish primarily to provide staff and advisors with current in-season estimates used to determine the impacts and effectiveness of a rec fishery. The mature/immature fish encounter rate does play a role in the decision making on how to proceed with the conservation and user group share of a fishery (most recently in area 9).
The monitoring estimates consisting of mature immature, hatchery vs. wild, etc combined with VTR's and creel are the best way to get a good picture of whats happening and make adjustments if necessary. Can you think of a better way to do it?


The department allocates a large percentage of its annual budget to monitoring recreational fisheries these days... disproportionately so versus other user groups. That needs to change.

No one has answered his base question yet. Does anyone here know the answer?

Of the number of shakers assumed/calculated to be encountered, what percent of those are assumed to die from the encounter. Anyone?

Do they figure 10% die? 50%? and how does this assumed mortality rate on shakers figure into our allowable impact?

I doubt if encounters with juvenile fish would be counted towards impacts, but would instead be considered as part of the marine survival component. Allowable impacts are set for harvest of returning adults.

Considering juvenile (including smolts) impacts will have the effect of closing down the rivers. ARE YOU SURE YOU WANT TO GO THERE?

I find it funny that if you even ask a question or question a process or procedure by WDFW it takes about 30 minutes before someone wants to shut you down with ridicule. Why?
There are a lot of people with talking points but its funny nobody can answer the question asked.
I say the Tribes don't need to lift a finger just send these folks to NOF and they will negotiate the Tribes a favorable deal courtesy Piscatorial peanut gallery!

BTW I get it, if you come down on the side of conversation your the good guy, your the internet hero, even if it is junk science intended to keep the only selective fishing group off the water, your smart because you use the word salmonids and reference this study or that finding.

I know most sportsmen are great conservationist and care more about saving the fish and environment than the Tribes ever will.
Stop treating anyone who questions the processes or data as a criminal trying to get one over or acting underhandedly.

Priority2-

Have you read the links that posted earlier in this thread? I attempted to provide a link to the methodology of the creel census and another where you can find how the test boat fishery is incorporated into the catch estimate with an example (MA 9 summer in 2014)? The methodology has been used in a variety of fisheries and with extensive review has been determined to be a valid method that would produce reliable results.

If you want more details or have specific questions you may what to engage one of the several folks that post here that are members of the PS fishery advisory board -Sky-Guy, Bushbear, or TJN.

OceanSun-

Of the top of my head for Puget Sound recreational fisheries the release mortality is assumed to be 15% for adult fish encounters and 20% for "shaker" encounters. Those mortalities are used as part of the allowed ESA mortalities. Though it is important to remember for those ESA mortalities the calculation is for the number of adults that would not reach the spawning grounds because of those mortalities. In case of the "shaker" mortalities there are adjustments to determine the adult equivalence (AEQ) meaning what portion of the "shakers" mortality would have survived to reach adulthood; obviously there continues to be marine mortalities (your ling cod example) through out the fish's life. The smaller the fish the less likely it is that it would survive to adulthood.

Curt

Off topic, but a lot of us know those fisher people who conduct the test fisheries. Comparing the general recreational fleet to the test boats is about as accurate as comparing Barney Fife to Albert Einstein..... They spend more consecutive hours on the water than any rec fisherman, and have more fishing know-how than most recreational anglers have in their pinky toe.

10% catch 90%

While this is somewhat true, there is learning curve and the rate of their effectiveness while fishing doesn't vary greatly from what any decent fisherman knows. Same gear, same places, same times, will produce very similar results as you or I who know how to fish Possession in the summer, Midchannel for blackmouth, the good spots in 8.2, etc.

I grew up with Pete and have talked to him about this issue. They do make an effort to fish the same way everyone else **typically** does and not focus on where the hot spots/methods are while sampling.

As to one of your other questions Priority2, there is no way to "get the number down" and use that as some sort of bargaining chip @ NOF. It is what it is what it is, as they say. There are also much larger issues to focus our efforts on at NOF.

Places and times are key. Many many fisherman out there simply have no concept of the tides and their applicability to the various spots, and never will get it...

How often do you pull up to a favorite spot at prime time only to find two dudes in their 80,000$ boats rigged to the teeth trolling the WRONG DIRECTION? Almost every single spot!


My comment was more joking than anything. Carry on.