Which again, leaves open the question of why the commencement bay area bubble could not be open. I would be shocked if any sub legals would be hooked in that area during the fishery. It does not effect me, but I think the precedent of what they area doing should scare everyone. They are proving they can shut down a major fishery, with high popularity, for what ever reason they came up with. Does anyone really think that there are more sub legals hooked this year than any year in the past, unless there are more present. Yet, this is the first year ever that that rational was given. That new casino off I-5 must be making a lot of money.

Krijack, I agree. I have fished Commencement Bay for close to 50 years. I Know for a fact that the Puyallup Tribe is going to be increasing their chinook plants big time. Of course there are going to be more sublegal chinook in the future. I think I can remember that the Governor mandated WDFW to increase chinook plants to feed the killer whales. As for Area 11, WDFW seems try to get he sportfishermen off the water as soon as possible. In 2022, Area 11 had a total of 17 days of fishing (for chinook) from June -September. This year , Area 11 had 16 days of fishing for chinook from June-Sept. Will it be 15 days or less in 2024? This year, 76% of the harvestable chinook quota (about 2500 chinook) was left on the table (uncaught).

Those Chinook are still, or will be, available in the River and one will not have to deal with sub-legals.

To me the eating quality of salmon from the saltwater is much better than river caught fish. Plus I don't have to stand elbow to elbow with the combat fishermen on the river bank with crowded areas,tangled lines. snagging etc. Puyallup River is a zoo. And worse in a pink year. Fishing out in Commencement Bay is a much more enjoyable fishing experience. More room, negligible sublegal encounters etc..

Not sure when sub legals called "shakers" became an issue? Seems just recently over the last few years. Years ago we would encounter all kinds of them. Didn't seem to be a problem then? They were a bother, so we changed our gear to reduce catching them. It is, and has always been an issue. What's different now? Other than less fish period? Or, the co-managers influence? WDFW, show us the evidence that this new tool to manage the recs off the water is a viable tool for the fish? Or, a great tool for the tribes to increase there percentage of the catch? Especially with chinook plants increasing.

RnG, I heard one reason for the added concern with sublegal encounters is that the Feds are worried too many sublegal catches (and motality) will affect the number of adult chinook available to the Killer whales as the years go on. I am sure the tribes have input on the number of sublegals caught also.

Sublegal moratlity also affects allocation. Basically, by having the sub-legal mortality the NI side chooses to take "catch" as sub-legals.

I think it could be argued that the sub legal mortality is a consequence of our choice of fishing. Yes our take is larger, but then we are greatly limited by the wild component taken by the tribes due to their method of take. It likely could be argued that if the tribes used a selective fishing method, our take of sub-legals would not effect the total take. Our method of fishing has some drawbacks, but overall I believe it still has less of an impact as does the non-selective method of take.
Lets say there are 16000 hatchery fish available for take but only impacts for 500 wild fish. If we fished selectively, we may be able to get our 50% without taking over 250 of the wild fish. Since the tribes may need 800 to get their 50%, there is no way to get the mandated 50% for each side without some adjustments, The non-treaty take may be knocked down from the 8000 available to 4 or 5 thousand or less to get to the equal harvest. Now, it could easily be argued that the sub legal take should be treated the same way. If only so many sub legals are allowed, then the quotas of adult fish allowed to each side should be adjusted to allow us to get our 50%. If we are only allowed 3000 sub legals, the return on this number would be much lower. It is very likely that this number is still below the lost opportunity we face due to the tribes not fishing selectively. I would love to see how the numbers play out in real life. Anybody know?

Is Dolphin Pt. still a viable fishery? I used to moor at Blake Is and do well there early and late (dead during the day)

Would be nice to give a report but unfortunately Dolphin Pt. MA11 is closed to fishing from a floatation device. You can thank the tribes and WDFW for that. Or maybe just the Puyallup tribe? Or, you can feel free to gamble your $$$ away at the local casino to pass the the time away instead. That's what they would like you to do.

I can only report what happened back when I was in management. Every fish killed by I or NI counted. For Chinook, and maybe coho, the catch was acSo, the take was 25 adult equivalents. In that way, the N actually caught more fish but they were younger and smaller than the terminal net fishery.

OK, over the weekend I sent off an email to the department for a few details regarding numbers. It is a bit unclear, as they only sent over the encounter rates for the second half of the season, but it is clear they were including all in their calculations. So, based on the of the season, the were 1423 chinook left in the quota and 1697 left in the sub legal quota. The catch ratio was 44% legal to sub legal. They estimate a 20% mortality. They did not provide a sub legal to adult ratio for impacts and I think the person who answered was unclear as to how that works. In any case, only 24% (342) of the quota was taken when we hit 97% of the sub legal limit. This does not make sense as a 44/100 legal to sub-legal rate would be 1697 X .97 then times .44 and equal a catch of 724 adults.
Is there something I am missing. Here is the email I got.


****************
I received your email and would like to offer some insight, as you requested, regarding the Marine Area 11 fishery and estimates.
First, I would like to state that sublegal encounters (ratio) are only one of the fishery controls we use to monitor impacts in that fishery. We also must monitor impacts to unmarked Chinook salmon, as part of our obligation under the Endangered Species Act.

The Marine Area 11 summer Chinook fishery was scheduled to begin July 1 and was closed on July 15 due to high sublegal encounters (Chinook under the 22-inch minimum size limit). The fishery controls for Marine Area 11 were harvest quota (1,423 Chinook) and sublegal encounters (1,697 Chinook). At the time the fishery was closed, the fishery had reached 97% of sublegal encounters, even though only 24% of the harvest quota was caught. I have also attached a letter the department circulated recently with more information related to the Marine Area 10 and 11 fisheries.


To specifically answer your direct questions, here are the numbers and responses below:



What is the expected mortality of the sub legals caught? Our estimates apply a 20 percent release mortality to sublegal fish encountered and released.

What was the ratio of adult to sub legal? Based on the estimates we had in hand we estimated 44% adult/sublegal ratio.

and lastly,

What is the ratio given for sub legal fish to adult impacts - that is to say, how may sub-legals equal one adult fish impact.

We don’t use that as an indicator here, but is the mortality rate guidance we apply to our fisheries throughout Washington:

In Area 11 in June there was a wild chinook encounter number (quota ) of 901 fish. In July there a no wild encounter quota. Only a harvest quota and a sublegal quota.

Wow. Not sure where to start with that. I think it pretty much explains everything.

Yes,in Area 11 WDFW basically separates the summer chinook season into two seasons. There is a June chinook quota(s) and then separate chinook quota(s) from July-Sept. Each week (when fishing is open) you can fish 4 days on and three off. In June there is a harvest quota, a sublegal quota and a wild encounter quota.If any of those quotas are reached in June, fishing is closed until July. I think wild encounters closed the June this year. There was a total of eight days fishing in June before it closed. Chinook fishing opened again in July with a harvest quota and a sublegal quota but no wild encounter quota which seemed strange at the time. Reaching the sublegal quota(according to WDFW) closed the fishing in July. Again it closed after eight days of fishing in July. Neither of the harvest quotas were reached in either month. I know only 24% of the harvest quota was reached in the July-Sept "season". That left about 2500 unharvested hatchery chinook for July-Sept in Area 11. I can't remember what the harvest qouta catch was for June but there was a substantial amount of unharvested chinook left when it closed.

Are you speaking of "summer Chinook season" as calendar season of fish stock season? I would suspect that the June season would more likely have to deal with adult White River Spring Chinook and they would have different H/W ratios and different conservation concerns. The later season would be at the "Fall" Chinook with a stronger hatchery component. Also possible that there is concern for the Chinook released from hatcheries, especially any yearling production (primarily Springers) that might be a short-term issue with sub-legal encounters as the aggressively feed.

CM, you are probably right on why there is a split season in Area 11. June and then July-Sept. The White River springers are not fin clipped by the tribe and the Minter creek springers (originally from White River stock) are also not fin clipped by WDFW. I don't know the White River returns since that is tribal data but Minter seems to get back usually between 1000 and 2000 springers each year. Upwards of 2000 springers on a good year and 1200 to 1800 on an average year. I seem to remember when the State started the spring chinook run at Minter that they hoped to get the run big enough to allow a limited sport fishery for them in the South Sound but the run has never gotten large enough to allow that. I know some guys who fish Area 13 ( which is open year around) who catch some of those springers down there.

The program at Minter was started by WDF to save the wild White River fish. Run was down to, if memory serves, about 10 fish that came back to Mud Mountain. The return got large enough to use fish to repopulate the White. That was going fairly well but I din't know what has happened in the last decade.

It seems like the Minter run is pretty steady. No big variations from year to year. A friend of mine who is on the sport fishery advisory committee and knows some of the Puyallup tribal personnel said that some years the White River run is not bad. He told me a few years ago the run was somewhere around 8000-9000 fish. I don't know what the run has been the last few years.Anyone who is interested can read the spring chinook returns to Minter in the hatchery escapements reports on the WDFW webite.

I just looked at the WDFW website and saw that the return of adult spring chinook to Minter this (as of8/16 ) was 832 fish. Seems to be lower than normal (compared to past years).