Loc: Somewhere on the planet,I hope
As the Grays Harbor Management Plan ( GHMP ) is being worked on I thought I would put up this E mail thread to help folks understand WHY it is important to get involved. This thread is about Chum and how Region - 6 District 17 manages the preseason forecast by lumping Chum in one number rather than manage by stock. ( individual streams ) Now if you were to break escapement down further by defining the Wynoochee and Wishkah at say equal to the Satsop, then very rough numbers ( close guess? ) for the mainstem Chehalis for Chum would be 7140. Keeping in mind the 7140 is just a working guess but likely in the ball park, doubts on why the up river Chum stocks are being exterminated by commercial harvest should be gone. Good lord has anyone seen Chum in numbers that are needed above the Satsop?
So one more time. WDF&W Region 6 District 17 staff get away with this because WE blindly accept information provided, do not stay involved, and FAIL TO RECOGNIZE IT IS THE COMMISSION THAT MUST REQUIRE THE NECESSARY REFORMS. The absolute mess the GHMP has become is because the local communities ( especially the inland communities ) have allowed it to happen. You add the fact that the Commission has blindly accepted the dribble out of R-6 D-17 you get what we see.
From: Hughes, Kirt M (DFW) To: Warren, Ron R (DFW); cc: Scharpf, Mike M (DFW); Holt, Curt L (DFW); Herring, Chad J (DFW); Subject: RE: Chum Date: Tuesday, March 19, 2013 1:31:00 PM
Although we do not have the forecast model developed in a manner to specifically forecast at a tributary specific level, we could do that but it will require a LOT of work and tie we do not currently have. That said, not that I recommend doing so, one could roughly allocate the Grays Harbor wide goal and forecast by the relative portions of spawner habitat at the level Dave is requesting. While there might be some argument for this being acceptable for the goal, there is no basis for doing this with the forecast but I guess we will do it anyway. The complexity of escapement, age composition, and productivity should really be brought to account.
Anyhow, available spawner habitat is approximately 22% in the Humptulips, and 78% in the Chehalis (of total GH habitat 22% is in the Satsop).
Following through on this as a way to split the forecast as David is interested in you get the following.
From: Warren, Ron R (DFW) Sent: Thursday, March 14, 2013 8:30 AM To: Hughes, Kirt M (DFW) Subject: FW: Chum
From: Sent: Thursday, March 14, 2013 7:58 AM To: Warren, Ron R (DFW) Subject: Fwd: Chum
Any idea on when your guys will provide the requested info below on Chum?
From: To: "Ron Warren" <email@example.com> Cc: "Jim Scott" <firstname.lastname@example.org> Sent: Thursday, March 7, 2013 6:24:28 AM Subject: Chum
After reviewing the Grays Harbor advisory meeting last night, ( March 6, 2013 ) I found the information provided to well short of what is needed to address Chum harvest for Grays Harbor as a whole or the Chehalis Basin. As a member of the Grays Harbor Advisory Group I am formally requesting to be provided the following information.
1. A 2013 Preseason Forecast for the number of returning Chum adults to the Humptulips River.
2. A 2013 Preseason Forecast for the number of returning Chum adults to the Chehalis River.
3. A 2013 Preseason Forecast for the number of returning Chum adults to the Satsop River.
Dazed and confused.............the fog is closing in