But my point is as soon as they have the brood year run size they can forecast the return in 2/3/4 years. They can update the forecast when more information comes in or a new model is developed.

They can have forecasts years in advance and be continuously working on at least general options. The pencil sharpening can occur the last winter, but there is no reason why a rather accurate fishing plan is not developed further in advance.

This came in my email from a friend and is a comment on a subject in Steelhead Voices. Food for thought as the coming forecast will be driven by survival for hatchery releases.




matt k commented on Serious Business.
in response to rshooton:

Disquieting news from rivers within sight of some of our own. The question to ponder – are the current winter returns a predictor of the summer to follow or are they a reflection of the summer past? No clear answer but I’m leaning more to the former based on what we can see of distressingly […]

Looking at the Info that is coming from the international salmon survey, It seems this winter has been particular hard on fish.
“Last night we caught 7 sockeye at 52N, 147W, following a catch of three sockeye in the morning at 53N, 147W. Many of these fish again had enlarged, green gall bladders indicating poor feeding conditions,”
“The chum salmon looked thin, and had empty stomachs and enlarged gall bladders, suggesting they were struggling to find enough food”

It didn't seem like there was much interest in the Year of the Salmon winter ecosystem survey when it was mentioned earlier. The info you mentioned is from the Bell M. Shimada, a NOAA vessel, and not optimal for salmon surveys. They are using a trawl and are probably not towing fast. A more interesting vessel to follow is the Raw Spirit from Canada, a large commercial fishing vessel. They are using a Japanese research driftnet and floating longline gear which they deploy at night.They recently started their survey and are making interesting catches. Below are quotes from there online posts which might be of particular interest to steelhead fishers.

From March 2 after 2 stations talking about steelhead;

" Only one steelhead has been captured by the trawl in the previous two surveys in 2019 and 2020 when one was caught by the Pacific Legacy in 2020. The gillnet, which is floating right on the surface, is possibly more effective at capturing this surface-oriented species. Another first for the three years of the expedition is the catch six Oncorhynchus species in one set! Sockeye, coho, chum, pink, chinook and steelhead!!! "

"Total catch to date: 30 sockeye, 12 chum, 6 steelhead, 4 coho, 2 pink, 1 chinook plus black rockfish (several), squid and a dogfish. "

How much of what was discussed today actual gets presented to the co-managers? Seems like they should of already thought of seasons that the public presented today before today and had models ready. People requested in writing last week to have some sort of July opportunity in Area 7.

The trouble with the public NOF process is that are more than willing to ask for more than is possible given the constraints of ESA listed Chinook.

Even though the modeled fisheries were approximately 12% above the non-treaty share of allowable impacts all folks wanted to talk about was what more was wanted

Were the folks in MA 7 willing to give up the February winter blackmouth season to provide for some July opportunity? Seemed like the expectation is that some other fisheries would be cut.

curt

I think the question becomes what actually is the non-treaty share? Surely its quite a bit less than 50% of the harvest. What is our allowable impact on Stilly wild fish? It should be 4.5% but if you work the WDFW tools backwards we are really being allowed MAYBE 3%. The real numbers for chinook harvest are kept obscured just enough to pull the wool over everyone's eyes.

Look at the WDFW supplied coho impact model spreadsheet. If the Snohomish coho are such a concern what are treaty fishers allowed over 16,000 fish and reducing river escapement to 40,000, well below the 55,000 rebuilding plan goal? Meanwhile non-treaty fishers get a 2,500 fish impact. Hardly a 50/50 split. This same story repeats to a similar extent on every river.

We are constantly told we need to cut our fisheries to reduce impact when our impact is only 20-35% of the SUS harvest. The whole NOF show is just insulting and it's all just spit in our face every year.

I could go on and on but it's just tiring and infuriating. Its so obvious we get what the tribes allow us, the state has ZERO leverage and they know it.

I totally agree with the above.

And now that this realization has set in, try this organization on for size. The Wa. state political class has selected this group to help direct us all towards a new age progressive vision of our hunting future.

https://wawildlifefirst.org/


This will take care of the hunting side of the WDFW organization.

Thanks for the link 20ga; quite impressive HP there at the wolf huggers society! I agree, as hunters..we’re phucked in the long run with Dimslee and such progressives running the show.

Just read on another forum that NOF is totally stalled. The PS tribes won't negotiate until the coastal tribes are set, and that hasn't happened yet. Only a few days left, supposedly.

Does this surprise anyone?

Not surprising. Just another way to get WDFW to do the Tribe's wishes because they need to finalize in the last minute or two.

Exactly.

At some point it is the state is going to have to go back to the courts and get the tribes held in contempt. They are required by Boldt to negotiate. If they are present but acting in bad faith, the state could appeal to the courts to intervene. If they are refusing to even negotiate at all, then they should be in trouble. Boldt is an active case, with on going requirements. I think of it the same as if someone had a divorce case with custody or alimony and one side just decided to ignore the agreement and do as they pleased. Obviously the injured party would have the right to recourse.

4/14/2022

Time to open up the "meetings on NOF" between Tribes and WDFW to the general public.

Zoom is used nation wide, as a live media source....time to move the meetings into the 21 century. I understand that in the "old days", some individuals caused problems and meetings weren't able to be completed.

Zoom has the ability to allow just viewing only.......but could allow questions if the tribes and WDFW wanted to allow.

Really.....it is time to move on with this process

...at least the WDFW had the decency to inform us beforehand that the summer salmon season would only last three days in MA7...