2017 adults are the progeny of the 2014 parental brood. That WAS a good coho escapement year throughout the PNW.

BUT.....

Freshwater juveniles emerging from the gravel had to endure the ultra warm and low flows of the 2015 summer heatwave. That wiped out a significant portion of the freshwater life stage. Only the toughest bad-ass fry could survive that first year in the river.

The very same fish then smolted in the spring of 2016 where they found a warm ocean devoid of lipid-rich copepods and a plethora of invasive predators expanding their reach into the warmer sea surface.... thanks to a warm phase PDO that has persisted for nearly the past 4 years.

So in the end, final adult recruitment from the mega-brood of 2014 was bound to be poor (whether hatchery or wild). The only bright spot? Fewer fish sharing the same limited pasture allowed the remaining bad-ass survivors to grow with less competition to a very nice size once they were large enough to chase bigger prey items like baitfish and squid.














That's my story, and I'm stickin' to it.

Hey! You just had to poke us in the "eye" with all that chrome! LOL!!

Good to see my friend, good to see!!!

After harvest the hatchery escapement was supposed to be around 16k. This includeds the 600k of late Coho released from Bingham and Skook so those adults are part of the 16k. This mirrors Willapa hatchery Chinook this year also but not sure on Coho but drastically lower than expected returns this year also.

Thing is the QIN had the returns well below the agencies numbers as they use a ocean driven model and WDF&W uses a more traditional data set. They compromised in the middle and it looks like the second year now that the QIN manner is better than the states. In Willapa the forecast was pure state and it appears they have some work to do.

Any chance we can convince WDFW to adopt the Tribe's predictilator? That would get us all marching to the beat of the same drum, if nothing else, and it seems like it will yield better forecasts.

That the Tribe's model focuses on ocean conditions makes a ton of sense, because that does seem to be, by far, the most important piece of the habitat puzzle. As eyeFISH points out, the 2014 brood was enormous, but even a huge escapement like that is nullified by poor ocean conditions, as we've seen this year. Honestly, while I frequently question how low our current escapement goals are set, I must admit that as low as they are, they can provide good fishing when the ocean cooperates. What's really great is when neither the Tribe nor WDFW predicts a huge return, but we end up getting one. That's what makes for the quality of fishing we all wish we could enjoy more often. It's more than a little frustrating to realize that when we have great fishing in the rivers, it's viewed as a missed opportunity for more commercial harvest.

The pre-season process is "supposed" to reach an agreed-upon forecast. Sometimes in the past the Tribes PSF was higher. It is a negotiated process.

If you take the lower PSF you get much less ocean fishing.

Got it. Does explain a thing or two....

WDFW and QIN gillnet landings for 2A/2D thru the end of October have been published. The EXPECTED combined net catches from both fleets was 9691 but ACTUAL catch fell considerably short (by about a quarter) at 7388 to date.

Assuming the fishery takes proportional bites out of the entire run during each stat week, and the return showed up with historic average run-timing, one can conclude that nearly a quarter of the coho run-size forecast is MIA.

If you scroll back to page 71 of this thread (yeah, it's that FRIGGIN' long!) some of you might recall the giant chasm between the QIN wild coho forecast (29K) and the WDFW wild coho forecast (109K). They settled the cavernous gap at a "technically agreed to" run-size of 41K wild coho.

If you remove the quarter of the PSF that failed to show up, the in-season run-size projection is much closer to 30K at this point in time.

In hindsight, it turns out the tribe coho forecast was just about SPOT ON. The state forecast not so much.

By catch stats, the Chehalis coho run came in slightly early with peak catches occurring in stat week 42 rather than week 43. (it was the only week that catches exceeded expectation). Those participating (and monitoring) were optimistic that the good catches would be a sign of a stronger than expected run, but the coming weeks made it clear there was NO STEAM behind the early returns.

By similar analysis of run-size projection based on in-season gillnet catches, the king run is pretty much on par with preseason expectations.

In contrast, nearly a third of the Chehalis chum run appears to be MIA. The early push of fish was tracking well, then the tribe numbers tanked in their third week of fishing... falling 70% short of expectation.

State nets were intentionally planted on the peak week of the chum run (Halloween) at which time they took over half again as many fish as expected.

Combined QIN/WDFW chum catches in aggregate are nearly one-third less than expected.

Even with last weeks surge in catch, there was no surge of chum in the tidal Chehalis where watchful eyes have been monitoring fish movement the past week. They ain't there.

But we got the fisheries in. That's Job 1.

I think Doc got it pretty close but there are a couple of interesting things still out and about. Chum are still moving up the last few days in numbers to. I say that because I can see then finning around at high slack at the house. Another change, they are dark in tidewater now and that is different. I doubt it fills the low numbers but they look to be improving.

The real oddball is hatchery Coho. The run was forecast at about 16k after harvest to the hatchery rack. Wishkaw numbers are not up but the rest add up to 5516 ( 1k for Wishkah added to the number ). The 600k of late smolt release is in the numbers but it only goes to Dec 1 and lates under perform normal timed so I do not see that gap being filled. So let us say that the backside of the normal timed picks up some lates and the remaining normals do as the early part of the run. So for the sake of discussion lets say the number is 2.5k and that will give you 8k plus change at the rack. The results are a hatchery return of around 50% of forecast.

So now take Doc's view with harvest and hatchery factor in the lower hatchery return ( wild Coho were forecast around 41k and 25k hatchery ). You get a the good chance that wild Coho are doing under expectations but better than harvest alone says they are. The flip side is hatchery Coho way under performed resulting in a higher proportion of wild in all catches.

So my bet is around escapement for everything but late Coho with the plus or minus around 10%.

What a beautiful day to be on the river.......finally had a good day, 2 very nice male silvers.....both 14 - 16 pounds, the wild Coho jumped 4 times, cleared the water on all jumps.

Then to top my day off, got home......found a bunch of cleaned razor clams on my front porch. I haven't cooked razor clams in 40+ years BUT the internet is full of recipes......I have flower, Panko, eggs, seasonings, and a cast iron pan to cook them in......EVERY recipe said "hot oil/butter, don't over cook".......I can do that

Thanks for the clams, whoever you are!!!!!!!!

4 days of NT netting...........grrrrrrrrrrrrr send them to Willapa Bay...

Willipa can't handle nets right now. There are NO coho showing up in the river. 10 trips 0 coho, no one I talk to catching coho...nothing.

(granted, I'm only fishing for 3 hours while my son is in therapy, but still, 10 trips is enough to figure it out).

Also, I don't suck at catching fish. Plenty of old kings and chum in there to keep a person occupied, had many "bobber downs" and managed to land a few this evening in fact. If people are catching kings and chums...then why aren't they catching any coho? Because they aren't showing up, or shot straight to forks creek with some of the rain.

Im not advocating for nets in GH either, far from it. They need to just shut down NT gill netting...period.

Hey Doc I remember a NOAA paper back some that said if one factored all Chinook mortalities in the % was around 84 to 86%. I lost the thing among 10k of stuff over time but if I recall correctly the non directed ( draggers ect. ) were a estimate.

Well as things wind down to a high water pause in the action I took a look at the numbers so far and a little strange to say the least. On the Chehalis side the hatchery rack reports ( all five Chehalis facilities Hump not included ) have 7463 so far. Combined NT & QIN harvest is 1678 Chin / 7160 Chum / 7388 Coho with this bit. The Chehalis tribe will add around 2000 Coho to harvest and a few Chinook & Chum.

So the forecast Coho rack return was 28895 & thus far 7463 which is not that hot to say the least. The harvest by NT & QIN was 7388 combined and the forecast was 11K and change which gives us a total of around 18K know handled fish. ( keep in mind the REC harvest still has to be counted ) The thing at this point is that the REC was modeled at around 5K harvest but that number is always questionable due to how things are reported. It does give one a peek at the landscape though. The Coho run failed at the hatcheries which in turn put a higher proportion of NOR ( wild ) in the catch. The Commercial harvest was well below expectation but that means the Commercial ( and REC ) had a much higher proportion of wild in the catch. As strange as it sounds that is good news as it will tilt the final spawner number to the fishes favor. The question is how much? No idea here.

Chinook look to be performing slightly above forecast in QIN / NT impacts but one must wait for redd counts as the REC C&R has one big hunk of impacts. Time will tell.

On the Willapa it plays out somewhat differently. Chinook were Forks 6733 / Naselle 3266 / Nemah 3120 at the rack for a total of 13199. Forecasted was 19460 after harvest. Commercial harvest was predicted to be 5903 for Chinook and landings show 2922 which is not good. 6733 at Forks Cr is better but under forecast of 9227. Nemah was forecast at 2322 but got 3120. Naselle forecast 7900 and at the rack 3266. The projected harvest was 5903 and ended up at 2922 so it is not a leap to say the hatchery rack numbers were as high as they were due to the fact the Commercials catch was way down from prediction. By the time all the numbers are imputed I imagine the hatchery Chinook are going to be close to 60% of forecast. I think I am going to owe somebody lunch as I stuck with 50% of forecast.

Coho numbers do not appear to be all that hot either. Predicted NOR 34425 & HOR 46239. The rack reports have HOR at 3559 and that is a total failure on the hatchery side. The Commercials were supposed to catch around 20K of both H&W but got around 3391 which pretty much puts a fork in the question of how much short we are. Way short and frankly guys it is all about redd counts now as harvest and rack reports are only two legs of the four legged stool with redds being number three and two years out the fourth when the run reconstruction is done with all impacts and escapement.

Bottom line is this year seriously sucked for the fish and us.

As of Nov 11 the commercial salmon harvest in Grays Harbor area 2A/2D is nearly over except for the late QIN schedule. When the total commercial harvest is compared to the model it would appear that the Chinook run size prediction was spot on and the actual chum and coho run sizes were only 75% of the plan.

If this estimate is correct then the Chinook, coho, and chum run sizes were only 5-10% above the escapement goal. The commercial harvest alone will likely cause all three to fail to make escapement. This would suggest that there should have been little or no harvest this year by any group. What a sad situation.

Plan, model, guess........This has been a year of "low water", "high water", then lots of water.....Gill nets had a chance to be in at scheduled times---NT and QIN chose not to fish at certain times, WHEN THEY COULD HAVE !!!

This is a year of "if you're not fishing, for whatever reason".....you probably missed out !!!!!

We'll not really ever know if the run size was, low, regular, or high. WDFW does monitor a few NT boats, for hatchery vs. wild but don't think the QIN does anything, record keeping wise, about hatchery and wild numbers.

We know what a joke sports numbers are....

1. Data takes a least a year to compile

2. Less than 50% of the punch cards are returned.

At some point, some report will be released but how accurate....that's anyone's guess.

One thing for sure....11/20/2017....Seahawks are on Monday night football......Go Hawks !!!!!!!!

The sport catch record system has gone significant reviews for at least 40 years. It is probably the best system possible, given how much money is available. Could it be better? Probably. At a significant increase in cost. You get what you pay for.

Another aspect is that we are all (rec, commercial, treaty) fishing to a number, regardless of the biological or ecological impact. The mindset is to get that number now. Caution and conservative management are not rewarded. If more fish show on the grounds or at the hatchery rack there is a cry "you should have given us more days, higher limits, etc.". Ultimately, we have created a system where each fish has the name of a harvester on it and they must be harvested.

Had to think on this one a bit. SB I used to feel the same way as you do, used to. Now not so much. The state and feds authorize harvest to the max in the marine then if things are short shut down terminal & river fisheries for conservation. What conservation? The land owners that foot the bill do not think screwing over their friends and neighbors is fair. The Rec who supports and pays the most bills does not get a fair shake. So SB not NO but Hell No because this will only allow to the managers to hide in anonymity. Everybody fishes or nobody fishes as the way things are done now to hide from view the actual decision process ( outside the PFMC / NOF dog and pony show ) so nobody is accountable. So nope, nada, not a chance it is time the prime time lights come on to force this BS out in the open.