Ocean rules to relax.... AGAIN.

Any two salmon is fair game starting Labor Day!

http://wdfw.wa.gov/news/aug2814a/

Charter fleet makes it to Labor Day without consuming the entire quota/guideline... MISSION ACCOMPLISHED!

Not really, its a win in the end for wild fish. With a 50%+ mortality rate and a 2 to 1 wild to hatch ratio at best and way worse in other fisheries. Wilds will be better off.

If the management model was designed, based on the best data available, that the runsize forecast would result in a certain catch then what does not reaching that level say about the run?

i keep reading about this 50% mortality for ocean silvers. Does anyone have any data to back up this number? I have seen high mortality studies on fish right in the estuaries, but have not seen any studies for feeding fish offshore.

Da faq I just read?!!!

Topwater -

I believe it still is the case that for off shore fisheries that PFMC recommends a release mortality rate of 14% for coho. In addition there is a recommendation that an additional drop-off (fish lost) mortality rate of 5% be added.

Curt

Thanks Curt. In my years of participating in NOF I never heard such high numbers talked about even when selective fisheries on salmon were a new deal.

Seems like a 5:1 ratio is what we should be discussing, not 2:1, when it comes to changes in regulations like this.

Hmmm... I've often said I like this style of management for ocean Coho (get first two fish in the box and get off the water, rather than weeding through 10 or 20 wild fish, AT LEAST 20% of which will die, for two clipped fish), but I have reservations on this one.

First, I would encourage our managers to consider Carcassman's question, though I know they won't. Second, two wild Chinook? In waters holding a run of Chinook (Chehalis) that will not have an inside sport fishery on them due to escapement concerns? Finally, how about the NOR Humptulips Coho? How many of the already assumed to be underescaped fish from that run will be harvested in Areas 2, 3, and 4?

The charter boats I talk with, and I bank about 10, say that allowing retention of wild silvers will certainly save a lot of fish. Figure 10-25 rods fishing 8 hours on a single boat, releasing as many as 50 fish in a day. Multiply that by 20-30 charter boats on any given day. Multiply that by 120 days. That is a ton of silvers. Also, retaining the silvers lessens the impacts on the wild chinook, as the charters really don't play the catch and release game with wild fish.

Doesn't that mean it's ok to keep an unclipped chinook in Willapa? We feed a 30lb plus nate to a seal on the last set of good tides.

I don't think this rule change affects the harbors; just the open ocean areas. So, it's okay to kill North River and Chehalis River wild Chinook in the ocean, but not in the estuaries.

Is that right?

The potential impact in the ocean is a lot less than if the fishing took place at the mouth of those streams. Wild kings have been legal since July.

Dogfish -
Not sure that going to wild fish retention is saving wild fish.

Let's consider your example and assume is catching only coho that each charter is fishing 12 rods (you suggested 10 to 25 rods) and they are releasing 50 unclipped coho to catch their 24 clipped fish. As talked about earlier with a 20% release mortality 10 of those released would die.

However that boat would have caught 74 coho (24 clipped and 50 unclipped) yielding a clip rate of about 35%. During a fishery with wild retention the boat would land the same 24 coho of which 65% or 15.6 would be unclipped. Yielding a unclipped mortality in the wild retention fishery roughly 150% of that in the mark selective fishery/vessel. When expanded to the overall fleet over a period of time the numbers rapidly become a concern.

Something else to consider with much faster fishing to limit the boat it becomes easier to book a second trip increasing the impacts on the wild fish.

Curt

They would have less of an impact on the fishery as a whole, hatchery and wild fish. Fewer fish hooked overall, and minimal release mortality. There is no way to control whether a hatchery or wild fish bite.

None of the charter boats in Westport run second trips, even if they hit the dock early.

I think that's certainly true, but the question I'm asking is why it's somehow okay to kill endangered fish (North River stock, if any still exist), or fish that are chronically underescaped (Chehalis Chinook and Humptulips NOR Coho) ANYWHERE.

I suppose for wild Coho, as a whole, this rule change will have a net benefit. For underescaped or even endangered fish, it's another fin in the grave.

Of course, whatever dies in the WA coastal fisheries is a drop in the bucket compared to what gets harvested off Alaska and BC, but I'm not sure we should let that be justification for joining in on the blood bath.

I'm convinced that open ocean fisheries are the number one limiting factor in salmon conservation. Whether you're talking about harvest or habitat, or anything besides blocked fish passage, it all comes down to not enough fish on the gravel at some point. Ever notice the few places that still have decent runs of wild steelhead also have healthy runs of salmon? Maybe there's something to that....

Then give up fishing if you don't want to have any impact on the fishery.

I never said my impact was zero, but I'm confident it's negligible, especially as regards endangered species. If everyone fished the way I do, we wouldn't need to have these conversations. Not trying to sound superior. Just pointing out that not all fishing is as destructive to the resource as mixed stock, open ocean fisheries.

For the record, I don't hate on recreational charters. I just don't think they (or ANYONE else) should be allowed to draw from accounts that might be in the red.

FF - Good thoughts. Your argument points out the value of terminal fisheries in freshwater, as opposed to open ocean fisheries. When harvest occurs close to the natal stream, there is much better control over how many are harvested, and how many are allowed on the spawning grounds. Conversely, open ocean harvest results in taking fish that may be on the brink of extinction, but nobody will know since those fish cannot be identified by stock when they're in the ocean. Closing all ocean fisheries for salmon would solve this problem.

Whether that is a realistic outcome is a different question......

"Negligible" x 1000s of fishers = Not Negligible?

What I've been saying for years. Agree 100%.

Not to mention the basins that do the habitat work, protect wild stocks and raise fish would reap the benefits of their work directly………..not a distant fishery hundreds of miles north of us up the coast (Canada/Alaska) snaring 75-90% of some runs (Chehalis River anyone?).

I really struggle with these interception rates by our neighbors to the north. Begs the question of why do the work and commit millions, if not billions, of dollars to conservation if we only get the crumbs?

Anyone who believes only 1 in 5 coho die from a H&R encounter has not fished over enough coho to have a valid opinion.... or they're just in denial.

Tidewater coho have at least 70% mortality (all comers) and at least 50% with the best handling practices.

Handling mortality WITHOUT a hooking event is 40% alone.

What I harvest in a given year, x 1000s, would still amount to less than 10% of the combined impact of open ocean fisheries. Not negligible, but far from overwhelming for healthy stocks of salmon.

My very limited experience on the big, blue pond lands me in firm agreement with your assessment, which is why I like the "first two salmon" approach in principle, but when endangered stocks enter the picture, the practice gets a bit sticky.

Like I said, I still think this is good for Coho as a species, but I'm not sure it's good for all stocks.

Two wild Chinook, no matter how many Columbia fish are out there, seems hugely irresponsible to me, given that there aren't enough Chehalis Chinook to support any inside fisheries. In addition, release mortality on kings is generally accepted to be much lower than Coho in the ocean, so I don't think the argument that we're saving wild Chinook with this plan holds water. Willful overharvest, by all user groups, needs to stop if these fish are to stand a chance.

What does that mean?

ADFG researchers doing mark recapture studies on coho lost 40% of the cohort just touching them.

Imagine what the added physiologic stress of a hooking event and frantic struggle would do to those numbers.

COHO = HORRIBLE C&R species before their scales have set.

I believe we are talking about hook and release mortalities in the open ocean. The studies Dr. eyeFISH refer to are from Alaskan studies involving fish handled in the estuary. From a number of studies it is clear that before or once they move above the estuary (scales become set) the handling mortality is significantly lower.

For those that may have an interest here is a link to the summary upon which NMFC based its recommendations -

http://swfsc.noaa.gov/publications/FED/00080.pdf

I did find it interest in the 1993 WDFW et al study the tribes were co-authors. Does anyone think that tribes or other critic of selective fishing (most states) would buy into finds/rates that are not sufficiently supported by the data?

Curt

what does tidewater mortality have to do with ocean fisheries nowhere near tidewater?

imo, the biggest killer of coho mortality wise is the double hook rig. i can get more bleeders in one day of fishing a two hook rig than an entire season catching 20+ coho a day on single hook barbless flies. single hook and no netting would reduce mortality by a massive number.

Ocean coho don't fair much better than estuary fish.

Hard to ignore the string of floater coho along an ocean rip I fished off of Long Beach last week.

And they don't have to be bleeders to perish. Hell just looking at the dam things cross-ways is enough to make 'em die.

Undisputed whimp of the salmonid world when it comes to walking away intact from a fight.

funny that the research curt posted showed lower mortality for coho than chinook.

you can point to a string of floating coho and i can point to years of fishing neah bay and seeing a total of less than five floaters. the gear you fish is just as important, and i hope all of you so concerned with wild coho and mortality are fishing a single barbless hook, and not the common two hook, coho mangling rig.

of course i think having to release a gob of coho to get two hatchery fish gets a bit ridiculous when it takes 20-30 releases to get one hatchery fish. in those cases (which happen more frequently imo inside the strait) a move to wild kill may be appropriate.... except that many people would not just kill their first two coho and head in.

many anglers will still high grade their salmon, or release coho while chinook fishing, or just enjoy catching and releasing a bunch of salmon. thinking that everyone is gonna catch two and be done is a bit naive and basing management on a belief that anglers will kill their first two coho and come back to the docks by 8am is unrealistic.

of course, the further south the closer you get to that increased estuary mortality. catching fish ten miles off cape flattery in august is gonna be a bit closer to the low numbers mentioned in smalma's posted link (6-7%). the dropoff rate seems high since i have never lost a coho to a marine mammal in area 4. that may no longer be as accurate with the massive numbers of sea lions now friggin' everywhere but i lost none in a week of lackluster coho fishing this august with furbags everywhere.

Topwater -
I believe the drop off rate has more to do with the fish being injured and escaping than marine mammal predation though both factors contribute. Suspect it is an expansion of the idea of net drop out and drop-offs associated with the commercial troll fisheries.

I too thought that 5% seemed high though to be fair last year I lost a coho after a couple hard head shakes. Upon reeling in I found two gill arches on my hook - suspect that was a drop off mortality!

I don't fish the ocean so can't comment on the frequency of "floaters" in that fishery.

Curt

Problem is that the real time information suggests that they missed the forecast run size by a bunch. So the management response is to continue and expand fishing rather than back off on harvest to allow for the error. The result either way is fewer wild fish coming back whether it is wild fish release or kill the first two policy.

The charters out of Westport that I’ve taken over the years have shown deplorable skills when releasing salmon. Just this Wednesday the boat I was on, weeded through app. 12 wild Coho to get our limit of hatchery Coho. No Chinook caught for the boat, what I was hoping to catch, except 2 shakers. There was 4 floaters after release and by the (lack of) release skills--only 2 out of the 14 fish released had a remote chance of survival in my estimation.

IMO, deck hands and skippers should be required to go to a fish release class before yearly license renewal.

When I was in the pond at the UW I was amazed at the number of coho with head and jaw injuries that had healed. The worst was probably a long dig out of the head that took an eye. There were lots with jaw damage, including the lower jaw split in two at the tip. These were "supposed" to have been the result of being shaken off by trollers. And these were the survivors.

I remember some pretty bad injuries to fish in that pond, too. Had one that had a 6/0 SS siwash just behind the tongue. We see some pretty good wounds at the Dungeness Hatchery when working the coho spawning.

Most of the hatcheries use dto keep a collection of gear taken from sp.awned salmon. Lots of hooks and spinners. I don't recall any with hooks in the UW pond, though.

Fished around the fleet today. Crazy coho action, all wild for us. Lots of nets flying from the charters as well. The group of fish today all getting bigger to 12#. No kings for us but heard of a few. Done by 1000.

I saw that fish in the fall of 1969....The hook was just behind the tongue and had a short piece of mono attached.

Lots of good memories of wading in the pond and grabbing large fish. We had a couple of Hoh River Chinook. One fish was pushing 50 lbs. Had some folks with smaller hands who couldn't grab the tail. We'd grab it and pass it off and then the rodeo would start.