New Puget Sound Chinook Resource Management Plan

jasmillo

Active Member
Those sea lions singlehandedly wiped out the Cedar steelhead at the Ballard locks, for one example. They even took Herschel to Sanfransisco and he was back a week later if i remember right.
That is not a true statement. I have read about Herschel but there were a ton of other factors that led to the current state of that river. That situation certainly did not help. However, that is also a human caused issue....not a sea lion driven one.

Thanks for the link. I would love to read the studies they reference and not ajudt a summary article like that. If I get motivated, I’ll do so. Compelling numbers cited in the article though.
 

bk paige

Wishin I was on the Sauk
Sure there was other factors but those sea lions put the last 20 nails in the coffin. Rember Bob Rivers from KISW had a fake orca made to see if it would scare them off, that was some funny stuff.
 

Dipnet

The wanted posters say Tim Hartman
Here's the latest missive from CCA pertaining to the Puget Sound Chinook Harvest Mis-Management (emphasis mine) Plan:




General Information

Hello,

Below are a few updates on the Puget Sound Chinook Harvest Management Plan (PSCHMP).


  1. CCA Washington sent a letter to Director Unsworth and the Commission regarding our concerns with the PSCHMP as currently written. We remain optimistic that meaningful changes can be made to this important document over the coming months.
  2. This past weekend the Commission heard testimony from dozens of concerned citizens about the PSCHMP. In addition to testimony from CCA Washington’s Executive Director, Nello Picinich, were several other concerned conservationists and anglers, many of whom are also CCA members. The Commission also heard testimony from various business owners who are concerned about their livelihoods and the livelihoods of their employees. Among those providing powerful testimony on behalf of the business owners were Jeff LaLone from Bayside Marine along with Dave Johnson from Kitsap Marina. Thank you to everyone who took time out of their busy schedules to testify this past weekend!
  3. The PSCHMP was submitted to NOAA on December 1, 2017. NOAA has recently informed the state and co-manager treaty tribes that the plan is inadequate. Several important salmon stocks would not meet new federal conservation objectives.
  4. Lastly, the Commission is meeting tomorrow, January 23, via conference call to discuss the PSCHMP. An audio transcript of the conference call will be posted on the WDFW website, likely as early as tomorrow afternoon.

We anticipate this PSCHMP will be a key item of concern over the coming months and we plan to keep you all updated.

Thank you,
CCA Washington


Please continue to keep up the pressure on the Commission, the WDFW and any and all pertinent agencies, employees and legislators.

Our future Puget Sound fisheries are at stake here folks. That's an issue too important to ignore!
 

Dipnet

The wanted posters say Tim Hartman
Brian, you're welcome.

OTOH, I'm a little concerned about the skew in this thread where folks are getting too concerned about the impacts of marine mammal predation and the like.

Granted, those are valid concerns and very much a part of the bigger problem but right now we need to be worried about the management side. Those management decisions result in the regulations and laws that determine the future of stocks and where, when and if we can fish.

Currently, let's concentrate on the primary drivers of this issue: the WDFW, the Commission, NMFS and all the other players who make decisions that determine that future of fish and fisheries.

Let's make those "decision makers" use logic, reason and scientific rationale in their decision making. If reason prevails, we can then address the other issues impacting our fisheries.

We need to pick our battles and triage the issues! :)
 

Smalma

Active Member
Dipnet -
Thanks for the CCA update!

Folks need to realize that the situation with PS Chinook is critical and allowed fishing impacts are going to go down from we have seen the last few years. For those that are interested in this topic I would suggest that Phil Anderson's update on the Pacific salmon treaty to the commission would help understand some of the foundation of the this issue

https://wdfw.wa.gov/commission/meetings/2018/01/audio_jan1818.html

It is pretty clear that the smoke will not clear about the full extend of the decrease in allowable impacts of various PS Chinook stocks and the ultimate changes in potential fisheries until 2019. It looks to be a near certainty that exploitation rates in both northern and southern United States fisheries will go down and we will have less fishing opportunities. The degree of those reductions are unknown and will depend on NMFS determination of allowable impacts by stocks, the mix of northern and southern fisheries using those impacts, and how those impacts are divided between non-treaty (including commercial and recreational) and tribal fisheries.

It is important that we find ourselves in this fix due continuing decline of most of the ESA listed PS Chinook stocks. The recent ocean conditions and more importantly the continuing decline in the habitats supporting those stocks. Since we as a society were unable or unwilling to invest in adequately restoring that critical habitats over the last 20 years we are going see the NMFS turning down the harvest dial; really the only immediate action they have available.

Dipnet is correct that orca situation is only part of the equation but the need to response to their status will involve and complicate the harvest management side of the equation.

Further down in the above link there are other commission audios that help fill in some of the blanks in this PS Chinook management plan.

Curt
 

Stonefish

Triploid, Humpy & Seaplane Hater
FYI
Kudos to the commission.
SF


Commission action on Chinook plan
98501-1091
http://wdfw.wa.gov/commission/

January 23, 2018

Contact: Commission Office, 360-902-2267

Commission advises WDFW on chinook plan
that would guide Puget Sound salmon fisheries

OLYMPIA – The Washington Fish and Wildlife Commission advised state fishery managers to strike a better balance between conservation and harvest opportunities as they work with tribal co-managers to revise a proposed plan for managing chinook harvest in Puget Sound.

During a conference call Tuesday, the commission – a citizen panel appointed by the governor to set policy for the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) – instructed state fishery managers to explore a variety of options as they revisit catch rates and other pieces of the updated Puget Sound Chinook Harvest Management Plan.

The plan defines conservation goals for state and tribal fisheries that have an impact on wild Puget Sound chinook salmon, which are listed for protection under the federal Endangered Species Act (ESA). Under that law, no fisheries affecting Puget Sound chinook can occur without a conservation plan approved by NOAA Fisheries.

"Ultimately, we would all like to see salmon runs restored in Puget Sound, but severely restricting fisheries isn't the only path to achieving that goal," said Brad Smith, chair of the commission. "For that reason, we advised WDFW staff to explore other salmon recovery options, including improvements to habitat and hatchery operations."

State and treaty tribal co-managers initially submitted the proposed plan to NOAA Fisheries on Dec. 1, 2017. The plan would reduce state and tribal fisheries in Washington, especially in years with expected low salmon returns. For example, increased protections for wild chinook salmon returning to the Stillaguamish and Snohomish rivers would likely restrict numerous fisheries because those fish are caught in many areas of Puget Sound.

Despite the restrictive nature of the plan, NOAA has already informed the state and treaty tribes that the plan is insufficient, noting that several key salmon stocks would not meet new — more restrictive — federal conservation objectives.

"Over the last few weeks, we've heard from many people who are concerned this plan could result in the closure of all Puget Sound sport fisheries, but that's not the case," Smith said. "Yes, the plan does call for reductions to some fisheries, especially in years of low salmon abundance. But we have an opportunity – given the need to revise the plan – to use various mitigation tools to offset impacts from fisheries when and where appropriate."

Mitigation tools the commission asked WDFW to explore include:

Increasing habitat restoration efforts.
Improving hatchery operations, including increasing production to support salmon recovery efforts.
Reducing populations of predators, such as seals and sea lions.
NOAA has indicated its review process will take 18 months once the federal agency deems the plan is sufficient for a full review, making it likely the 10-year plan won't be in place until the 2020-2021 fishing season. There will be opportunities for public comment during that review process.

State fishery managers believe that a long-term management plan will reduce uncertainty in the annual salmon season-setting process, providing more stability for recreational and commercial fisheries.

In the meantime, state and tribal co-managers are working on conservation objectives to guide this year's salmon season-setting process. During its call Tuesday, the commission asked state fishery managers to continue to discuss the possibility of using the 2017 conservation objectives for this year's upcoming planning efforts.

The commission directed state fishery managers to provide regular updates as the negotiations of this year's objectives and the 10-year plan continue. State fishery managers will also provide updates throughout the process to citizen advisors during open public meetings.

The plan, along with feedback from NOAA, is available on WDFW's website at https://wdfw.wa.gov/conservation/fisheries/chinook/.


 

JayB

Active Member
"It is important that we find ourselves in this fix due continuing decline of most of the ESA listed PS Chinook stocks. The recent ocean conditions and more importantly the continuing decline in the habitats supporting those stocks. Since we as a society were unable or unwilling to invest in adequately restoring that critical habitats over the last 20 years we are going see the NMFS turning down the harvest dial; really the only immediate action they have available."

In your opinion are we at a situation where the primary problem is that we are essentially habitat-limited with regards to chinook production in every Puget Sound river system? Is this true for every species or is this primarily a problem with chinook production due to the degradation of main-stem spawning habitat? If you had to identify a river system with the best habitat for Chinook production, what would it be? Do you have any sense of how the fish are faring in that system? Are those runs also essentially habitat limited (if not in the river then perhaps in the Sound) or are there cases where it's clear that the lack of adult spawners is the problem?

Thanks as always for sharing your insights.
 

gt

Active Member
it is clearly the predator/prey issue here. even the NOAA response to the state pointed out controlling the pinnipeds has to be a part of any future plan. they have exploded in numbers since the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1983/4 and that is the basic problem right now. you can do all you can for habitat but when the fish are being eaten at record numbers, none of this 'feel good' stuff will make a damn bit of difference. that is exactly why the billions that have already been spent have created not a single recovered stock of fish anywhere in the PNW.
 
gt is spot on. I am tired of saying the same thing over and over. The current limiting factors are the predation of out-migrating juvenile Chinook by seals, sea lions, cormorants and northern commercial fisheries in Alaska and BC. Period. Yes we need to keep improving and protecting habitat but that is not why Puget Sound chinook salmon runs are failing.
 
gt is spot on. I am tired of saying the same thing over and over. The current limiting factors are the predation of out-migrating juvenile Chinook by seals, sea lions, cormorants and northern commercial fisheries in Alaska and BC. Period. Yes we need to keep improving and protecting habitat but that is not why Puget Sound chinook salmon runs are failing.
There are many factors but those are the big ones. Habitat is a excuse word used by all sides.
“Can’t improve runs because of poor habitat”. If there are not enough fish hitting the gravel every year in perpetuity, how can you blame habitat? There is habitat all over Puget Sound with Zero fish using it. Lack of abundance due to constant harvest has never given the fish a chance to recover. We harvest the down runs, we over harvest the good years.
Many want to use revisionist history about the size of our fish and historical abundance. If we fall for it, we won’t be getting our Salmon runs back.
 
FYI
Kudos to the commission.
SF


Commission action on Chinook plan
98501-1091
http://wdfw.wa.gov/commission/

January 23, 2018

Contact: Commission Office, 360-902-2267

Commission advises WDFW on chinook plan
that would guide Puget Sound salmon fisheries

OLYMPIA – The Washington Fish and Wildlife Commission advised state fishery managers to strike a better balance between conservation and harvest opportunities as they work with tribal co-managers to revise a proposed plan for managing chinook harvest in Puget Sound.

During a conference call Tuesday, the commission – a citizen panel appointed by the governor to set policy for the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) – instructed state fishery managers to explore a variety of options as they revisit catch rates and other pieces of the updated Puget Sound Chinook Harvest Management Plan.

The plan defines conservation goals for state and tribal fisheries that have an impact on wild Puget Sound chinook salmon, which are listed for protection under the federal Endangered Species Act (ESA). Under that law, no fisheries affecting Puget Sound chinook can occur without a conservation plan approved by NOAA Fisheries.

"Ultimately, we would all like to see salmon runs restored in Puget Sound, but severely restricting fisheries isn't the only path to achieving that goal," said Brad Smith, chair of the commission. "For that reason, we advised WDFW staff to explore other salmon recovery options, including improvements to habitat and hatchery operations."

State and treaty tribal co-managers initially submitted the proposed plan to NOAA Fisheries on Dec. 1, 2017. The plan would reduce state and tribal fisheries in Washington, especially in years with expected low salmon returns. For example, increased protections for wild chinook salmon returning to the Stillaguamish and Snohomish rivers would likely restrict numerous fisheries because those fish are caught in many areas of Puget Sound.

Despite the restrictive nature of the plan, NOAA has already informed the state and treaty tribes that the plan is insufficient, noting that several key salmon stocks would not meet new — more restrictive — federal conservation objectives.

"Over the last few weeks, we've heard from many people who are concerned this plan could result in the closure of all Puget Sound sport fisheries, but that's not the case," Smith said. "Yes, the plan does call for reductions to some fisheries, especially in years of low salmon abundance. But we have an opportunity – given the need to revise the plan – to use various mitigation tools to offset impacts from fisheries when and where appropriate."

Mitigation tools the commission asked WDFW to explore include:

Increasing habitat restoration efforts.
Improving hatchery operations, including increasing production to support salmon recovery efforts.
Reducing populations of predators, such as seals and sea lions.
NOAA has indicated its review process will take 18 months once the federal agency deems the plan is sufficient for a full review, making it likely the 10-year plan won't be in place until the 2020-2021 fishing season. There will be opportunities for public comment during that review process.

State fishery managers believe that a long-term management plan will reduce uncertainty in the annual salmon season-setting process, providing more stability for recreational and commercial fisheries.

In the meantime, state and tribal co-managers are working on conservation objectives to guide this year's salmon season-setting process. During its call Tuesday, the commission asked state fishery managers to continue to discuss the possibility of using the 2017 conservation objectives for this year's upcoming planning efforts.

The commission directed state fishery managers to provide regular updates as the negotiations of this year's objectives and the 10-year plan continue. State fishery managers will also provide updates throughout the process to citizen advisors during open public meetings.

The plan, along with feedback from NOAA, is available on WDFW's website at https://wdfw.wa.gov/conservation/fisheries/chinook/.


 
I read all the posts on the 10 year plan then emailed my views to the commission. I thought Tim's discussion about the problem with harvest of fish in Canadian waters made a lot of sense to me. I was happy to see Stonefish let us know where we are with the plan - glad to see we are on hold now. Thank you for all the posts on this important issue.
Mike
 

Latest posts