Loc: Somewhere on the planet,I hope
Thought I would post up this e mail thread obtained in a Public Document Request (PDR) as it offers a glimpse at two things. First up the relationship between the QIN & WDF&W staff. Amazingly enough documents obtained in the PDR's show at the technical level it is professional other than every now and then it gets a little off track as in one document obtained where a QIN staffer called a WDFW Bio a SWAG Bio. Swag is "Scientific Wild Ass Guess"
This particular e mail concerns the release mortality for commercial nets and Coho. It is my understanding that Fish Program intentionally left out Coho in the ISP panel mandated by the court settlement in Willapa. The importance? Well the agency continues to try and work around the Humptulips Coho situation with the failure to make natural spawner escapement and the Willapa Chinook. It is a issue in the sense that if WDF&W attempts circumvent HSRG or a management plan on one thing one can rather safely assume they will do it in another.
I highlighted the portion on release mortality below and the QIN's Mr. Jacobson's thoughts are pretty much on the mark from what I have learned broodstocking over the years.
-----Original Message----- From: Thiesfeld, Steven L (DFW) Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2014 10:55 AM To: Jorgensen, Jim Cc: Scharpf, Mike M (DFW) Subject: RE: web link for net mort rate and question about determing Hump hatchery coho strays
Your email below has been forwarded to the IFSP.
Thanks for the assist.
-----Original Message----- From: Scharpf, Mike M (DFW) Sent: Monday, March 10, 2014 4:35 PM To: Jorgensen, Jim Cc: Thiesfeld, Steven L (DFW) Subject: RE: web link for net mort rate and question about determing Hump hatchery coho strays
Good afternoon Jim,
Attached is the most up to date version of the Grays Harbor Planning Model. We haven't discussed schedules at this time. We've been worked for find and correct computation and cell reference error. We appreciate any input you provide.
I will make sure that your comments of the net release mortality issues are sent forward.
-----Original Message----- From: Jorgensen, Jim [mailto:JJORGENSEN@quinault.org] Sent: Monday, March 10, 2014 1:32 PM To: Scharpf, Mike M (DFW) Subject: RE: web link for net mort rate and question about determing Hump hatchery coho strays
Is there a planning model for GH that you could provide me to review and offer QIN proposed changes.
Also on the commercial net release mortality that the Mobrand group is working, Steve suggested I should relay our technical information or issues through you.
I wouuld propose that the wild coho brood stocking information from 1986 on for the Hoh River is probably available through Roger Mosely.
The main point of this was that Roger and we found out that female coho taken from the lower Hoh and earlier in the season did not survive well at all.
I think the lower and earlier ones all died, even though a good number looked alive and well right up to before their eggs were to mature.
When checking them up to that time at a certain point we would find them dead and their eggs having not separate from the skeins. Males seemed to do fine.
Therefore I would recommend that any release mortality be assessed from the female survival perspective. Coastal wild escapement estimates are based on the number of reeds dug by females.
Any time/area situation in the lower freshwater area that had a similar impact on female salmon, may render an overall survival rate of 50%, which would be meaningless as far as achieving
escapement objectives. One of the presenters in Olympia before the Mobrand group also cited their similar experiences brood stocking for what I believe was the Wishkah group.
Jim Jorgensen ________________________________________ From: Scharpf, Mike M (DFW) [Raymond.Scharpf@dfw.wa.gov] Sent: Thursday, February 27, 2014 1:30 PM To: Jorgensen, Jim Cc: Jurasin, Tyler; Hughes, Kirt M (DFW); Thiesfeld, Steven L (DFW) Subject: RE: web link for net mort rate and question about determing Hump hatchery coho strays
Good question Jim,
I'll leave that up to Kirt or Steve to answer.
From: Jorgensen, Jim [mailto:JJORGENSEN@quinault.org] Sent: Thursday, February 27, 2014 1:28 PM To: Scharpf, Mike M (DFW) Cc: Jurasin, Tyler Subject: RE: web link for net mort rate and question about determing Hump hatchery coho strays
Regarding the forum yesterday and the charge to Lars Mobrand and the other panel members, are there avenues where QIN would be able to provide technical information or recommendations to the panel?
From: Scharpf, Mike M (DFW) [mailto:Raymond.Scharpf@dfw.wa.gov] Sent: Thursday, February 27, 2014 1:04 PM To: Jorgensen, Jim; Jurasin, Tyler Cc: Gilbertson, Larry; Thiesfeld, Steven L (DFW) Subject: web link for net mort rate and question about determing Hump hatchery coho strays
Below is the web link to all of the materials that have been presented to the scientific panel that is evaluated the net release mortality rate. Please enjoy.
I have a question. Do you know the origin of the estimated Humptulips hatchery stray estimate? In the GH coho forecast model in the run reconstruction tab within the column labelled "Humptulips Hatchery Strays" (column AQ) there is a comment that says "0.8 is applied to total escapement est. for Humptulips, this calculation assumes that 20% of fish on spawning grounds are of hatchery origin. Cannot calculate w/o spawner surv. Data" . First, this column multiplies the Humptulips escapement estimate by 0.8. This produce is then used in the total HATCHERY escapement. Seems that multiplying by 0.8 is assuming that 80% of the spawners are hatchery origin. I recall a discussion with Kirt about some CWT analysis that determined the stray rate. Do you have any recollection? I'm trying to update all documentation associated with forecasts.
Thanks for any help you can provide. [/i]
Edited by Rivrguy (02/01/1508:06 AM)
Dazed and confused.............the fog is closing in