It's official.... if it bites, it dies! All salmon are fair game effective Aug 29... including wild coho!

WDFW Westport salmon announcement

What are these clowns thinking? They are supposedly concerned about the lack of hatchery coho off Westport, enough to reduce the quota from 35,000 hatchery fish down to 10,000. How is allowing the retention of wild coho even remotely related to that harvest reduction? That's like saying blood is red because lead doesn't float. Can someone in-the-know tell the rest of us what the real motive is for this apparently non-sensical decision?

Or is it that the total coho quota (hatchery plus wild) is being reduced to 10,000. In that case, this change in limits is nothing but a wolf in sheep's clothing. By allowing the retention of wild coho (recall that most guys are sorting thru 10-15 wild coho to get a limit of hatchery fish), the only thing that's going to happen is that the quota will be met in just a few days, and the whole fishery will be shut down.

Yeah, you've got that right FNP, I just don't get it, how can one day these fish are endangered (in danger) and the next....kill them all. Could the Charters have something to do with this? Hope the season lasts, because I am still looking for the big one.
Actually this weekend at Westport, the silvers were thick and most of the ones we caught were marked. The biggest King on my boat was 20 pounds, but my buddy on the Relentless got one 38 pounds. Fishing was quite good in the afternoon and I was hard pressed to quit at 5:30 but had the drive home to contend with and had a couple guys with me that had that, "are we down to the last herring yet" look.
I'll be back next Sunday, weather permitting. Looks like you did okay on the bay too.

Steve

I would imagine the charters have something to do with it. $$$$

I with Robyns it's always about the money

Who at the WDFW are we supposed to contact for an explanation on something like this? If catch rates are low maybe at first glance lowering the quota isn't a bad idea, but I doubt it is based on good science. My opinion is that results to date are more driven by run timing and what the vast majority of people (charters) are targeting. But to open it up for wild coho seems idiotic.

My bet is that $$ rules this one.

I think that they figured the overall impact to wild fish would be reduced by reducing the quota and allowing people to keep anything. If they had kept the quota the same, it would have made no sense.

The logic would be... instead of 3 guys fishing during a day and catching 30 wild fish and killing 10 of them because of incidental mortality before they got their 6 hatchery fish, WDFW is allowing people to keep the first six, and maybe they will only kill 5 wild fish. Maybe???

I think the whole catch and release of wild coho is a debacle. I think they should've set the quota's and then said you get one or tow coho a day either wild or hatchery and your done. I would bet that as many or more wild coho have been killed from catch and release as would've been killed by keeping them. I have watched the vast majority of fishermen on the ocean and seen way too many floaters after the fish is released. And what about the charter boats. They bring the fish in the boat and then release it. I know a lot of people might disagree with this line of thinking since most of you here probably to know how to properly release a fish. But your outnumbered five to one when it comes to ocean and sound fishing.

Are they endangered or aren't they. When I was out at Westport it seemed to me that the hatchery fish were the endangered ones.

I was so excited to release 9 wild fish when we were there this year so that my wife and I could come home with 1 hatchery fish between the two of us.

Sure makes you wonder.

love2fish & Aunty

That is a very interesting perspective on it and may be justify WDFW decision

Thats right Aunty! The entire cnr thing preached by fishNphysician and the type is old. FAR more wild coho are being killed by this cnr rule than will die after its opened up. I've been on these charters and have seen how many fish are being killed and thrown back dead.

Sorry fishNphysician but you need a reality check!!

Makes sense to me. I wonder how that will affect us in the Sound. If that is their reasoning, then don't you think that it would apply throughout the state?

Fishing in rivers and fishing off a charter in the ocean are two different things... I think that telling fishNphysician he needs a reality check is way off base. I have also been out on charters for silvers ( some of the greatest puke fests of my life ) and had a hard time watching wild fish getting treated pretty bad before being thrown back... In light of this the rule makes sense to me.

However, this has nothing to do with fish in rivers... thats a whole different issue... as in, if thats the rule in the ocean then it should be statewide... I fully expect the Plunker types to somehow try and tie this into WSR

I guess I shouldn't have said statewide. What I was refering to was not the rivers, but actually puget sound. I don't see that as a different issue. If I CNR a wild silver off Possession doesn't that have just as much chance to die as if I CNR a wild silver in the ocean? Wouldn't you say probably the same amount of danger to that fish.

I'm pretty sure everyone is aware that Puget Sound, excluding area 13, is open for retention of "wild"(not marked) coho salmon. If not, now you do.

Maybe you need a reality check also! As you said it is different issues, maybe you should let your pal fishNphysician in on that news. Your the one trying to tie them together!

Okay, thanks for helping me pull my head out of ..... Well, anyway, it was dark in there.

I just e-mailed the WDFW to see what their explanation of thie rule change is. I'll post their response if I get one.

Appreciate that thoughtful post phishinman, but it is you who are way off base. I have not posted anything recently on my views about C&R coho on this or any other board, so how the **** do you know what my views are? Unless you have some magical ESP powers to read what is in my head, I suggest you keep your mean-spirited presumptious comments within your own narrow mind.

For the record, I have been trying very hard to work "behind the scenes" with the Westport Charterboat Association's director to help reduce the obscene release mortality on wild coho. By my own observations on a charter, I estimate the C&R mortality on those fish is at least 80%. On one trip in 2001, the boat had to sort thru well over 100 coho to put 40 clipped ones in the box. It doesn't take rocket science to figure out that far fewer wild coho would have perished had we just gone with a "keep the first two caught" fishery.

My purpose for starting this thread was not to advocate for a selective coho fishery, but instead to expose the hypocrisy of fish mangagers. If they are indeed making this move in the name of saving wild fish because "catch-the-first-two" saves more wild fish, then they ought to say that in their press release. The truth is they won't do that, and can't do that, because it would expose the flawed management of the "selective" fishery for the past 5 or 6 years to "save" wild coho. If you read the entire press release, you will see that the other major ports are still subject to wild coho release. That tells me saving wild coho is NOT the official rationale behind the decision.

We as a group must demand from WDFW the true rationale behind this idiotic ruling. Honestly, I don't know how these guys sleep at night.

For two years now I've stated this very argument about the releasing of non-clipped Kings in the strait and that it seemed better for the fish to just have a Neah Bay type, one fish limit, reg but everyone poo poos it. Westport Coho, however, is a much more important matter.

It's hard to follow your wishy washy posts fishNphysician. Anyone that follows your posts knows very well where you stand.

So what is it, are you mad about the retention of wild coho or are you upset and the quota reduction?

Behind the scenes?? yea..

My Regs say "RELEASE ALL WILD COHO"

AREA 13

AS always everyone thinks of pointing fingers before the facts are in, mean while the facts are all about catching the reason this is happening is to balance out the sports caught quota's so we don't get all up in arms before the commercials take a wack at them,can you here me now!!!PEACE????

You need to follow a little more closely phishinman, because you obviously missed the gist of everything I have ever published on selective fishing and the merits of C&R.

In any fishery, the basic principle I have always advocated is to conduct fisheries only upon designated target stocks that are capable of tolerating some level of harvest, without harming the health of that stock or the health of other non-target stocks that could potentially be impacted by the fishery. Whatever method is employed in prosecuting that fishery ( net, trap, hook and line), it must meet a basic standard that allows for the live capture and unharmed release of the vast majority of non-target stocks captured by that method.

A gillnet does not meet those criteria. Similarly, the current "selective" ocean fishery for hatchery coho, as currently prosecuted, also fails the test. As I said earlier, current practices by all fishery participants in aggregate probably results in release mortalities of 60-80% across the board for ocean coho. I thank AuntyM's acknowledgment of the special care I personally give to the fish I release, but I too must acknowledge that even with the best of care, a significant number of ocean coho will die after release. Coho are an exceedingly fragile species that is easily stressed, and extremely intolerant of de-sliming and de-scaling in ocean conditions. Far too many of these fish are gut- or gill-hooked, particularly while mooching, that the incidence of mortal bleeders is unacceptable when using the standard tandem salmon/octopus-hook style of rigging that dominates the fishery.

Mark Cedergren and I have been in discussions since last winter to jump start a pilot project to "test drive" circle hooks in the Westport charterboat fleet this year. At my urging, Gamakatsu was kind enough to donate a supply of hooks just for this purpose. However, because of logistics and health concerns, Mark was unable to devote much time to the project. Once the fishery was in full swing, it became apparent that fishing was less than stellar, and we could find no willing captains that would risk trying the unproven circle hooks on paying clients when they were already having such difficulty limiting their boats with salmon. In short, the project never really got off the ground.

WDFW's darling of selective fishing for ocean coho has become so politicized that it is unlikely to disappear. The charters like it because it helps to extend their season. If it were "keep-the-first-two-caught" they would quickly gobble up their allowable impact on wild coho and the season would be closed in just a few days.

What is sad is that WDFW bases the wild coho impact from selective fishing on a release mortality of only 10%. OK, maybe if all the fish were lip hooked, never put in an abrasive net, never touched by human hands, and all were released with a de-hooker without ever removing the fish from the water (valuable guidelines all anglers should strive to emulate). But anyone who has any on-the-water experience with this fishery knows damned well that just ain't the way it goes most of the time.

All too often, it goes more like this:

"Wow, that's a nice one... quick get the net!"

Thrash, thrash, roll, spin, tangle, tangle.

"Damn the hooks are all buggered up in there! Get him aboard."

Lift, thrash, thrash.... de-slime, de-scale in the net.... THUD..... flop, flop.... de-slime, de-scale all over the abrasive boat deck.

"Geez, wouldn't you know it, he's got too many damned fins. Get the pliers.... damned that trailer is in there good.... did you mash that barb?"

Flop, head bang, more slime and scales on the deck

"Damn, now he's bleedin'.... ain't that a shame we gotta throw him back?"

Five minutes later.... belly SMACK as the fish is thrown overboard..... rollover.... belly up.... blood pumping with every stroke of the gill plates

We've all seen it..... WAY too often!

If selective fishing is to become a viable practice, more education needs to happen. Californians mandate the use of circle hooks for mooching to virtually eliminate the incidence of gut- or gill-hooking. Everyone needs to have a de-hooker on board to be able to release wild coho with a "no-touch" technique. If charters must net a fish to release it, they must use a soft knot-free mesh that is much less likely to de-slime and de-scale the fish. There is no need to bring a fish aboard to remove a hook.... ask any rookie who has knocked a fish off, and he'll tell you a landing net is potentially one of the best de-hooking devices ever created!

Until these things come to pass, the current fishery needs to be exposed for what it is.... wanton waste of the very wild coho WDFW is purportedly trying to conserve.

If this August 29 decision is truly based on the realization of that simple truth, then WDFW should be frank enough to disclose it.

FPN....I usually read all your long posts all the way through and find a common "thread" which is a passionate pleading of your cases. The problems I see in this thread are that your contentions are not 100% on target and you tend to belittle or insult those who don't agree with your conclusions.. Good rabble rousing to fire up the troops against WDFW but not necessarily a factual thesis.

The current change in regs allowing harvest of "wild" Coho after August 29th is a trade off. Sports fishers give up 5,000 Chinook from their quota to the trollers. In return the sports fleet including the charters will get part of the commercial quota of Coho. A simple trade off. Mark Cedargreen helped negotiate this deal which certainly helps his constituancy which is the chareter boat fleet. It also helps the rest of the sports fishers who want to harvest a nice ocean Coho and take it home.
As hard as we try we cannot catch the Chinook we are offered before the end of the season sometime in September around the 19th or so. We had the same situation last year. As hard as Steve Ng, Fishnut and I try we cannot get enough Chinook. So we give up something we are demonstrably unable to harvest in return for the opportunity to harvest some of the unclipped Coho that are in such abundance.

Before this weekend when more hatchery Coho were available , the ratio was about 65% wild to 35% clippped at best. If you are so close to Mark he has certainly told you that each passing year since the release of wild coho was mandated brings a higher and higher percentage of wild fish. In fact, Coho hatchery releases has been going down due to the increase in wild stocks. So I'm sure Mark would tell you that at some point the wild stocks can and should be harvested. Not just mortality during CNR but actual retention of wild Coho is overdue. So there is now a debate as to how long wild release needs to continue.

Now to mortality. I think the 80% mortality is riduculous and has no basis in science . That kind of claim is what comes out when passion shifts gears into fanaticism. Sorry but it just doesn't wash. As AuntyM so aptly pointed out, the ocean coho seem more fragile than river coho. I have explored this question after releasing so many large wild Coho as carefully as anyone could possibly do last year. I am still not convinced why so many seemed to float away last year. I have watched carefully and most if not all swim away eventually. This year I have released ocean Coho and none floated at all but all immediately swam away. No double mooching leaders with tiny hooks to land in the gills. Some purists who only mooch probably do kill a larger percentage of Coho to gill hooking. I usually am using a single barbless Gamakatsu and release with the stick without removing any fish from the water. More people are doing this than you give credit for. The WDFW folks have given away thousands of the release sticks and spend alot of time with education. To say they are lame in that dept is , again. off the mark. It is a cheap shot to automatically blame WDFW all the time. It just isn't that black and white.
And the charters I have watched this year seem to leave the net in the water with that 10' handle while they determine whether the fish is wild or clipped. Not one of the charters I watched tossed any fish overboard nor did I see any mishandling. Sure a bunch of mishandling still takes place in all fisheries but peer pressure is slowly working to turn that around.

I , too, have talked to Mark about the circle hooks and if I am not mistaken he is not impressed with the supposed benefits and neither are his charter captains. My guess is that using these with rookies may alienate more customers than they are willing to risk. Not saying it isn't a good idea but maybe not now.

One last thought...It is important to remember that most of us here on this board are not amateurs and probably pay more attention to things like CNR and such...The vast majority out there want to take a fish home...especially those on a charter boat. Those are the folks who have no boat and don't fish much but they sure enjoy the experience. Releasing most of the fish brought to the boat is not what they had in mind when they dropped the $80+ to go out for the day. If you are one who releases most of their fish like me then you have your way of doing things and these other folks have theirs. They are not idiots or rapists of the resource or whatever derrogatory adjective some toss their way. They are just average people who want to catch a fish and take it home to the barbecue.

If we revive a run to health do we continue the emergency measures? that is the debate.

Right on Fishn'Phisic. !!! You're so on point! Unfortunately, not all are born with a brain that thinks logically. Keep up the good work, it matters to so many...even though they don't/won't see the light.

It is my understanding that the ocean Coho fisheries in Washington are selective to protect sensitive Oregon coastal runs of Coho, some of which are close to extinction. My guess is that a relaxing of the rulings put in place to protect those runs has something to do with this. I don't think WDFW would make this decision without regard or council for the protection of those stocks. That would be silly, wouldnt it?
:rolleyes:

Grandpa, I respectfully disagree with some of your assertions. Let's start with mortality. As someone posted earlier, the conscientious C&R guys like you, me, and Steve who strive to take the utmost care of released fish are outnumbered by a factor of at least 5:1 by the guy out there just lookin' for meat..... most of those guys aren't looking for a fin until the fish is in the boat, flopping on the deck. Once that fish is heaved out of the water with its full weight thrashing against abrasive mesh, half the slime and scales are gone. The abrasive boat deck takes care of much of what remains. Those fish are 100% dead even if they swim away with vigor. That magnitude of slime and scale loss virtually guarantees that fish will succumb to overwhelming infection long before it ever sees a spawning bed! Do the math, and weight the average of 5 guys with 100% release mortality and one guy with 10% release mortality.... you will get 85%. If anything, I am conservative with my estimate of 60-80%.

Even if I am wrong in overstating that mortality, do you honestly believe the "real" mortality is closer to WDFW's 10% than it is to my 60%.

And who was belittling who? As I recall, phishinman cast the first stone.... were you expecting me to let that personal attack go without a rebuttal?

I applaud your personal ethics in using one single point barbless hook in yout pursuit of these fish, but again, you are outnumbered by a factor of at least 100:1 in that department. For the overwhelming majority of bait fishers, tandem octopus/salmon hooks are still king out there. And there is still a small but obstinate coalition of guys out there who refuse to pinch their barbs.

I recall in my previous conversations with Mark that the status of Columbia River stocks is the main driving force in setting quotas for the ocean fishery off the WA Coast. Since the habitat for wild Lower Columbia coho has essentially been degraded to the point of no return, that stock is exceedingly unlikely to ever be declared as "recovered". In my mind, that makes it exceedingly unlikely that we will ever have a fishery purposely targeting Lower Columbia wild coho wherever that stock is expected to be present. The other thing that supports that conclusion is that WDFW has so heavily invested itself headlong into the concept of "selective" fishing to maximally utilize all exploitable stocks. Hey it keeps the license-buying public happy while WDFW pats themselves on the back for promoting "responsible" salmon recovery. Hell with the "reduced" sports impact, they can justify more openers for the commercials as well. Everybody wins.... that is, except the fish.

I've always believed that Coho are more susceptible to hooking mortality than Kings for example. Coho almost always roll on the line and once in the net always tangle themselves up horribly. Oregon fishing patrols this summer in the ocean have had a 50% incident rate of citations for fisherman not pinching their barbs. Grandpa, you cite education and improvements with releasing of fish. I don't really see that. I fish in many different locations and everywhere I go, I still see fisherman netting fish and then throwing them back overboard, messing with a fish trying to release it for 5 to 10 minutes at the side of the boat etc. Sure I see some fisherman releasing fish the right way but I see far more doing it the wrong way. Even with barbless hooks it's sometimes difficult to release a fish. And this goes way up when using treble hooks. If I can't immediately remove a hook with a de-hooker, then I just cut the leader close to the mouth. Most lures for trolling bait are pre-tied with trebles. I still say that if the law was you get two fish irregardless of wild or hatchery and your done that he mortality to wild stocks would be less.

Sure there are a tons of folks out there who are uneducated about alot of things, not the least of which would be proper releasing of fish. WDFW has done a good job in getting the word out but it is up to the rest of us to spread the education on how to properly release fish every chance we get. At PSA meetings and clinics we pass out brochures on selective fishing and demonstrate the techniques.

We made littering a crime many years ago but some folks still use the outdoors as their garbage can. We are moving forward with selective fisheries and while we do the general fishing public still wants to take home a fish.

In the time I've spent out on the ocean and in PS a good percentage of fish I've seen released have not been handled “properly”. This is especially true when I have fished aboard charters, but I even see it out fishing for winter blackmouth where someone wants to measure their fish to see if it's legal. Typically these guys are the more experienced fishermen but I can't count how many times I've seen nets fly and a few minutes later a fish gets plopped over the side. Whether it's a hatchery fish, manmade run, whatever, good release practices should always be employed, if not then why have selective fisheries at all? Why not just keep the first two fish caught and go home? Now I can understand how it may be difficult for a charter when you are on a 50' boat and are 6' off the water in big seas but it doesn't make it acceptable. Find a way, figure it out. A lot of these boats have a perfect opportunity to educate 20+ people per day.

Grandpa, I wish I agreed with you that everyone is getting better at CNR but I think you may be looking through some rose colored geriatric glasses.

I do agree with Doc though, I wish the WDFW would state their reasoning for this rule change. When they don't they can expect to get heat from a lot of different angles.

I did not say everyone is getting better at CNR. I said that WDFW is doing a good job of educating people and that other fishing groups are doing so as well. I am also pointing out we have a lot of work to do yet.

I agree that the WDFW is making an effort to educate people and on the whole, the word is spreading. You are right that we still have a lot of work to do.

Am I completely off base to question why any fish needs to be netted in or to be identified as legal? The charters I see net everything, then figure out what to do with it. On the whole I think the charters are in just as good if not a better position than the WDFW to educate people and show them how to properly handle and release fish.

Any response from the powers that be, Kramer?

The reason for the change is simple as I stated a few posts ago...The commercials want to harvest what appears to be a big surplus of Chinook....rmember that the fish out there are "mixed stock" no one specific origin at any one time. Anyway a deal was struck to "trade" the kings for more opportunity to harvest Coho for the sports fishery. By allowing the retention of all Coho the quota is also lowered so the original escapement goals are still met.

I think what should be stressed is that the 60-80% mortality figures being advanced here are not based on any scientific info I have ever seen but appear to be a slightly biased gut feeling.

There has been a similar effort up near Neah Bay to try to get the tribes up there to give up some of their Coho so we can extend sports fishing in the area mostly for Chinook. The whole game of allocations is about realigning the available pie and not making a bigger pie.

By the way the charters need to use a long net to reach their fish and I just this past weekend watched them hold the fish in the water while the fin was located..if wild it was lifted carefully and lowered back into the water . If hatchery no special treatment needed. In my case I use a custom made release stick...we have one on each side of the boat....fish stays in the water and the barbless single hook is easily removed . Some of the Coho still experience stress from a battle but swim away. If we could keep all fish , hatchery or wild, we would still be releasing undersized fish.

Still no response from the WDFW on this. If I do get on I'll post it immediately.

Gramps, I know you stated the reasoning earlier. I just wonder why they don't have a better explanation in their press release that explains what you did? Not that I'm doubting what you stated in your post, but I think they can expect even more controversy when they make decisions without giving reasons.

If their decision was based on some estimated high mortality factor then would it appear that the CNR of these fish all along has been a failure? If they say their decision was to try and even out the pie and share some of the unclipped fish with the sporties in return for a percentage of kings then the sporties may feel duped. After all they have been releasing these fish for years, only to find out that they have been releasing fish that are headed for commercials and legal for them to keep. I don't think sportfisherman as a whole realize that the fish they are releasing are being targeting by commercials.

I'm just spitballing here, I don't know all of the angles but these are a couple that I can think of offhand.

Now I think I'm *****ing just to ***** so I'll be done for now. Where's my coffee...???

Wow! They really have cut the quota for this year. Wasn't it around 70k hatchery coho? Then some numbers were juggled and they came up with the 35k quota? Now down to 10k???

If the ocean conditions are that bad(for survival), shouldn't we lay off the fish rather than hammer them?

There is not a shortage of coho.....cutting the quota is only a measure to take into account the allowing of all fish to be retained if legal sized. Pretty darned simple.The season out in the ocean will be over before you know it.

At least we know what its all about now, thanks Grandpa and all. Gonna be trying again this Sunday, not many left now. Biggest for me this year is a measly 26 pounds. Have to change that soon, or hit the rivers for a big one.

Steve

Don't despair Steve.... if that hawg doesn't come your way in the big blue, maybe we'll get you one on the inside next month. Have managed to get a 40+ to the boat every year since '99.... hoping this year is no exception.

I haven't got a chance to read through the whole thread, but while I wait for my car reservations page to load, I thought I'd bring something up to GP in FnP's defense.

Coho have a terrible mortality rate. Studies in the Susitna drainage have shown that bait caught fish do die roughly 80% of the time. Even 50% + of the fish that got caught in the fish wheel pens die ... most other species have no trouble.

C&R is a good thing, but not always. This is one of the reasons that even ol' BOb will not allow C&R'ing of a coho on our trips here in AK ... we sell short trips, run several a day, and harvest every fish that is landed. A different philosophy than we normally subscribe to, but a salt or estuarine coho is a different fish too

Now that we are clear that this whole revision of quotas is all about back-room wheeling and dealing between the trollers and the WCBA, it is clear that 20,000 coho to the sport fleet were traded for 5,000 chinook to the trollers.


Official quota explanation

There are a few lingering questions that are not so clear:

1) Are we sports getting 20,000 additional hatchery coho? Or are we getting 20,000 total coho? In either case, why did the original Westport sport quota of 74,900 get revised DOWN to 54,900? What am I missing here?

2) Where does the 10,000 number fit in to all this? Does that mean the counter starts over on Aug 29, and all coho (fin or no fin) will be counted as part of that 10,000? How did they arrive at the 10,000 coho that are now officially left to harvest before shutting the season down?

3) If you look at the Westport catch summary thru Aug 22, we have taken only 29% of the revised hatchery coho quota (15,633 out of 54,000) That should leave us with a residual of about 39,300 hatchery coho left to catch. Why would sports need an additional 20,000 coho from the trollers, if we can't even catch the ones that were already allocated to us?

This goes way beyond "fuzzy math".... anybody care to explain this? Or is everyone as lost as I am?


Here's my best shot at trying to figure out their warped rationale. Before the swap, we had 39,300 hatchery coho left to catch. The trollers "gave" us 20,000 more for 5,000 of our chinook. Now we have 59,300 hatchery coho in our pot. WDFW figures that the impact on wild coho in trying to harvest all those 59.300 hatchery coho would be equivalent to killing all coho (fin or no fin) but quitting at 10,000 fish? Does that mean they are figuring on us killing 5900 (roughly 10% of 59,300) wild fish and 4100 clipped fish? or am I just way off base with this analysis? This is all conjecture so please correct me if you know the answer. Anyone?

fishNphysician,

The best answer I can give you is that you are not going to get an answer. It is not that anyone is trying to hide anything or dupe anyone. The reason is that the management is much more complex than you seem to be aware of at this time.

There are trades going on between ports and between commercial/ recreational and they are not just 1/1 trades. There are Thompson coho impacts and OCN coho impacts and lower columbia coho impacts that are all factors in this. Which impact is the most critical is dependent on the location of the fishery and also varies from year to year.

The only people who can answer all the questions you have are the ones who volunteer or get paid to understand all of it. These same people don't have time to come online and spell out every intricate detail and the department cant be putting out press releases that are 6 pages long.

My suggestion is that if you (or anyone else) are so interested in how it works that you get involved in the up coming north of falcon process and learn it.

Fishingdoc, I often disagree with Grandpa, but he's right on here and has explained it as clearly and rationally as possible. The bottom line is that these are paper fish that were shuffled and there will be no impact on salmon stocks beyond what was anticipated in the season-setting process, while the change will allow for an improved fishery for anglers. There isn't a conspiracy behind every regulaton change...

thanks salmonbelly.....glad to see you add the caveat that you usually disagree with me....hopefully you disagree with my political alter ego who messes around alot....fishing issues are debatable too but easier to be civilized about.

I agree with Bob's assessment on Coho being way more fragile. That's why I like to troll spoons for them. Herring trolled with a double hook set up is more likely to grab a gill or two and so long coho. Being able to keep both types of Coho makes the most sense to me but would definitely shorten the charter season..

At the end of the season, when everything is reduced to pure numbers, the WDFW will be able to point to the improved catch numbers as a signal that their enhancement policies are truly working and boosting the sports fishery. Allowing the smaller Chinook to be kept and now the natives!! It is truly a sick feeling to have to watch bleeding native fish, which has fought so hard, drift off bleeding with virtually no chance for suvival. On the other hand it will become part of the food chain again, that's better than being tossed a year later with freezer burn?? It's also not as simple as bait vs. spoons when you see the single siwash hook of the spoon out throught the eyeball of the fish! Just my 2 cents.

I may have missed it somewhere in the thread but the coho in the salt have a high mortality rate. Does anybody know what the mortality rate of a fish in a river? For the past few years I have been C&R Coho in rivers but if the mortality rate is steep in the river also then I will stop I dont like to see fishies die when they dont deserve to.

Mike Gilchrist,

I find your response to fishnphysician interesting coming from some one who is involved with a group that is supposed to be representing sports fishermen. To not be able to get answers for why are seasons and quotas are drastically changed mid season is ridicules. We all know that the management of the fisheries is much more complex than it needs to be there is either enough fish to fish them or there is not. I also know for a fact that the WDFW didn’t go to the Trollers Association and or the Wa. Charter Boat Association and ask them if they wanted to make a trade. I am a curious if you were at these meetings or if some one from the RFA was and if so witch group of sportsmen do you represent, the ones who go out on charter boats or their own boats, or do you represent the charter boats and guides who make a living on the sportsmen’s seasons. There is a big difference between the two.

The facts are Mark Cedergreen who is a paid lobbyist by and president of the WCBA approached the WDFWfor the second time this season to change the rules because they were losing costumers. The first was to change the size limit of kings to down to 24” witch they had changed up to 26” several years ago when the fishing was getting better because the quota was being used to fast. Now they needed more fish. When that didn’t work and it was obvious the quota for the second year in a row would not be reached they went for the wild silvers because that’s all they could catch with any reliable numbers. Where was the sportsman represented in these trades? THE WCBA DOSNT REPRESENT THE SPORTSMAN THEY USE THE SPORTSMANS QUOTA FOR THERE GAIN.. To expect us to believe there will be a surplus of these wild fish at this time of the season will not fly, especially on a year where they have so far this season missed the fish counts by 200,000 springers and lake Washington sockeye by 85,000 fish. The don’t have a clue whats out there this year. A portion of those kings they just gave away where Grays Harbor fish why not increase opportunity in the river.

I also do not like this late end of June openings, and five days a week fisheries that the WCBA pushes for and gets. Historically mid may early June is when some of the best king fishing is here. And to have any where from 150 to 300 sports boats show up on a Sunday morning when these guys fill there boats and trucks with gas, food, and bait at home and then go back home that night does nothing for the town. I know they all don’t do that but the vast majority do I don’t blame them, I would to. If they can change the seasons to be more liberal during the season than they surly could let us start fishing June 1st with a seven days a week fishery and then later in the season start cuttings back if need be. Are quotas are to small and to hard to get now I just don’t think we should have to give the to another group because we can not fill them.

keep in mind that the charter boat fleet is not a commercial fishing fleet per se. There are large groups of sports fishers going out on those boats every day. I my opinion those folks count just like you and I. They can go out when you and I are stopped by the coast guard. Most of the effort is weighted towards the middle and end of the season so opening it in May and June wouldn't accomodate the majority of fishers. As Mike said earlier, it is a complex process and if you want to try to understand it and offer your 2 cents go to the North of Falcon meetings in advance of the season and see what it is all about.

Dreaming -
The hooking mortality on coho and other salmon varies considerably depending on the condition of the fish. Typical mortality in the salt is in the 10 to 20% range. When the returning adult fish first hit the rivers, especailly if their scales are loose the "handling" mortality can jump into the ranges that Bob was talking about. Once their scales become "set" (the fish darken up with their river/spawning colors) they become much tougher. At that stage the hooking mortality is typical of we normal associate with steelhead fisheries.

Mortalities can vary considerably dependent a number of variables - in the salt small shaker fish often have high mortality from the "gaffing" by hook sizes designed for larger adult fish and drowning from being drug around on, especially on downsriggers. Adult fish often have higher mortality when caught on bait, especailly in places like the ocean where they are still actively feeding. In rivers the mortality is typically higher with bait than lures, especially for fish caught while plunking, free drifting (long leaders or no weight), bait divers, etc. ; methods where the fish have a chance (time) to take the bait/hook deeply.

Tight lines
S malma

Smalma,

Your information on hooking mortality helps clear up some of the questions surrounding this issue. I am a bit confused about the actual numbers used to calculate the mortality in this situation though.

You said that, "Typical mortality in the salt is in the 10 to 20% range", and later that, "Adult fish often have higher mortality when caught on bait, especially in places like the ocean where they are still actively feeding."

Did you mean to imply that adult fish caught on bait where they are still actively feeding will likely experience a hooking mortality greater than the 10 to 20% average range?

If so, I then wonder "what is the actual rate used by the DFW" to calculate hooking and handling mortalities at ocean fisheries like Westport? What rate is utilized for fisheries at Neah Bay and for Sekiu?

Are mortalities, during the adult feeding phase, experienced with hooking and releasing coho higher than those normally experienced with chinook?

Thanks for any information you might provide.

Plunker-
Sorry - don't have those details at my fingertips. Since I'm one of those unfortunates that suffer greatly from sea-sickness I don't play close attention to those fisheries.

I had just posted some general information on hooking mortalities so that folks would have a general sense of the various factors than influence the mortality.

One fator in the issue like the "trading of allocations" such as occurred at Westport is what the value of the fishery is. Clearly in recreational fisheries the ultimate value is the number of angler days the fishery supports. As long as the fishing is good enough to keep anglers on the water the longer the season the more valuable it is to local economies. Just as clearly if one is a hardcore angler interested in catch large chinook then trading chinook for coho makes little sense while for the charter fleet it may make great sense.

As always fishing issues are hugely complex and I can only echo the previous suggestions that if folks have questions, concerns or wish to lobby for particular fisheries they or their representatives need to become involved in the salmon season setting process - North of Falcon. While this is a ways off (spring) it would not hurt those interested in these issues to begin working on collecting background data and concerns.

Tight lines
S malma

Grandpa,

I’m not trying to get in a pissing match. You and the PSA have done a lot of good thing for the sportsmen and I appreciate that. You are right I do not understand the entire north of falcon process I do know some of it, I have a long history at Westport and know the all about the politics that drive these decisions. My grandfather father started fishing Westport in 1951 they rented kickers from the old boathouse at alki point he would haul them down on his flat bed truck and launch them in the sand. They fished for their limits in front of what is now the islander. My dad started started kelping in the early 60s then went to trolling when the kelpers were push out because they were the smallest fishing group at the time. He lives lives down here. I was washing those charter boats every afternoon before I was old enough to fish everyday with my dad. I started trolling with my own boat and license in 1982.I have some close friend that are members of both the WCBA and the Wa. Trollers Ass.So as you can see I have some back ground down here at Westport too. I agree these people count to I never said they didn’t. What I did say was that the WCBA should not be able to go to the WDFW and get the seasons changed for their benefit. They are making a living off of the sportsmen’s seasons. One of the reason the WCBA pushes for the late openings is because at one time there membership included a large number of school teachers running the boats and wanted the seasons to start after school got out. I don’t know there how many of those are still there at this time.{ I have nothing against school teachers my wife is one, that’s not to bad of a way to spend your summer.} That is why there is a late June start, it’s not because of science or the trollers would not be fishing during that time period. The majority of the fishers will go when the seasons are open and the charters are providing their service. This was proved two years ago when we did have a May opening. I also agree with smalma the man objective is the longest seasons possible. But this trade has nothing to do with keeping the season open till September 19 this is about charter boats wanting easy limits and not losing customers. The season will close early so were is the benefit. The only thing you need to know about the north of falcon process pertaining to this trade is that it allows the trade to happen It however doesn’t change the facts that a special interest group the WCBA went to the WDFW for the second time this season to have the rules changed for there benefit. Like I said before the WDFW didn’t go to them. This is a dangerous road to go down, we the sportsmen will lose some of our quota in the future if this keeps up, and this is now the second year in a row we have given fish up. I can go back to trolling and fish the time periods I want the average sportsman cant.

I also do not think any body was asking mike for a complete break down of the north of falcon process but for some one who wants are money to support the RFA he could have done a little better explain what happen and who benefited. His posting.

best answer I can give you is that you are not going to get an answer. It is not that anyone is trying to hide anything or dupe anyone. The reason is that the management is much more complex than you seem to be aware of at this time.
This sounds like something you would read on the WDFW site, do you trust them.

I fished Westport yesterday on the first day of the new regulation allowing retention of Coho with adipose fins. We fished in deep water and saw most of the charters eventually show up out there. Limits were easy and most boats were heading in to the dock by 10am. I heard the charters talk about a ratio of 60% hatchery which the reverse of what it has been. My ration was about 50/50. We did keep a 16# hatchery Coho. Great fishing.

Grandpa. I did not get to go, because of the weather report, everyone bailed on me. I had a friend who went out and did get one large king in the 40's and a smaller one in the twenties, as well as some nice coho. I will be there on Labor Day, hopefully Sunday and Monday for a last hurrah.

Steve

Salmon Troller,

you said...
“We all know that the management of the fisheries is much more complex than it needs to be there is either enough fish to fish them or there is not.”

I can not disagree more with that statement. It is complex exactly because it needs to be for conservation reasons and to satisfy legal requirements. I can not believe that any sane person would choose to manage fisheries this way if it was not absolutely necessary.

you said....
"I am a curious if you were at these meetings or if some one from the RFA was and if so witch group of sportsmen do you represent, the ones who go out on charter boats or their own boats, or do you represent the charter boats and guides who make a living on the sportsmen’s seasons. There is a big difference between the two."

No representative from RFA is currently playing a role in the in-season management of coastal salmon quotas. I personally try to keep track of what is going on through contacts. As for the representation, the charter owners represent themselves on the local stuff. On national issues, the big picture stuff, sometimes charters are having us represent them, issue by issue. I am not hearing a lot of complaints from the private boats fishing on the coast, certainly not enough to be involved in it. The customers on the charter boats provide the most participation in that fishery and the WCBA is pretty good at advocating for what their customers want..

you said....
"THE WCBA DOSNT REPRESENT THE SPORTSMAN THEY USE THE SPORTSMANS QUOTA FOR THERE GAIN"

They may not represent all sport fisherman, but as I said, they are good at advocating for what the sport fisherman on their boats want.

you said...
"To expect us to believe there will be a surplus of these wild fish at this time of the season will not fly, especially on a year where they have so far this season missed the fish counts by 200,000 springers and lake Washington sockeye by 85,000 fish. The don’t have a clue whats out there this year. A portion of those kings they just gave away where Grays Harbor fish why not increase opportunity in the river."

They fish on paper fish. There is no way to predict if the forecasts are accurate or not at this point. Besides, they are not saying that their is a surpluss of wild fish. They are expecting the same number to be killed through retention with the smaller quota as they did with release mortality for the larger quota. If they were talking about raising a bag limit I may agree with you about switching those fish for more river opportunity. I don’t think it is reasonable to expect ocean quota to be given up or not traded when they need to make moves to maximize the fisheries

Sit back and think about that statement for just a second.... the charter fleet a commercial fishery?

You bet!

Any commercial entity that makes its profits directly from the fish resource is a commercial fishery in its most fundamental sense. Economically speaking, the only difference between a charter and a commercial troller/netter is that the charter puts you the angler to work ( under the guise of "fun") to harvest the fish for them, and then sells the fish directly back to you all in one simple pre-paid transaction. Speaking strictly from the standpoint of tangible value for the fish actually harvested (discounting the non-tangible value of the charter putting the angler on the fish), the per unit value of their catch goes up whenever their catch goes down. Even if you catch nothing, they still get paid! Boy, have these guys got us sports duped! We're paying them to have us do the work of hauling the catch aboard, and buying the catch all in one fell swoop. How convenient.

The poor commercial trollers/netters are still doing the work of harvesting the fish for themselves and then have to go out and find a market for their catch. They don't get paid if they don't catch fish, and they are at the mercy of buyers for the ultimate value of their catch. Hardly seems fair, don't you think?

Any commercial entity that makes its profits directly from the fish resource is a commercial fishery in its most fundamental sense.

I guess that makes Bob Ball the owner of this site a commercial fisherman then doesn't it?

Grab your chest waders folks it's getting deep!!!!!

I take the soap box stuff with a grain of salt but when I say charters are commercial "per se" I meant exactly that....The charters get paid the same way a guide does but on a larger scale. They provide an obvious valuable service to the non-boat owning public that wants to fish. They provide a chance for those with boats who don't want to brave the high seas to have a chance at some of the best fishing we have to offer as well.

Sometimes FPn I think you are either playing around or , if you're serious, you must be so excited about your theories that you lose all common sense. This fishing business is not as full of conspiracies as you seem to think. And don't feel so sorry for the trollers. They are doing well and as individuals get a much bigger share than any of us sports fishers get. Personally I am excited by the idea that the charter fleet in Westport is making a go of it. And hats off to Mark Cedargreen for his promotion of same.

Sorry you didn't make it out Steve....I was looking for you. The weather seems to err on the cautious side these days. Sunday was really nice. I'll be there this weekend again and it looks like the seas are even more calm so far.

There's a little bit of truth both ways, Grandpa.... part of the post was serious and part of it was playing around. You didn't really believe the sympathy part for the commercial trollers/netters did you? I guess that's what happens when I bring one too many Ambers to the keyboard.


I do however stand by my assertion that charters and guides are commercial ventures that profit from the harvest of our fish resources, and therefore constitute commercial fisheries by their very nature. They do provide a valuable service in putting anglers on the fish (which I acknowledged in my post), but that's an intangible commodity. The simple nuts and bolts of it is that they profit from the harvest of fish. I guess it would probably be better termed a "commercialized sport fishery". I never said what they are doing is bad, just calling a spade a spade. For the record, I have used the services of a guide and/or charter on numerous occasions without regret.

I think the one thing that we all forget in the polarization between sport fishing and commercial fishing (including the enigma of commercialized sport fishing) is that participants in all camps go fishing because they like to fish. As much as sports often like to portray the greed of the commies, those guys get as much of a rush from simply catching fish as we do. We may not like the ethics of their methods (we all seem to demonize the method used by someone else if it is more effective than our chosen method), but the truth is we're all killing fish for fun. Granted, some are also in it for a profit, but even when the fishing is marginal, the markets tough, and the prices barely worthwhile, you don't see the diehards giving it up... they just fish because they truly enjoy it... not unlike most of the guys on this board.

I parked my boat next to a commercial troller at LaPush this summer and spent some time tallking to him. He had come to Washington from California where his season was not really restricted. California has sports and commercial seasons like we used to have 20 years ago and they seem to have revitalized their fisheries for both user groups. I have no problem with trollers. That guy in LaPush was fishing by himself. My problem has always been with the nets. I have no problem with charters or guides. Without a guide I couldn't enjoy the great steelhead and salmon fishing on the Quinault. Without the charters alot of folks would never get a chance to go salmon fishing. So they both provide a valuable service.