Check

 

Defiance Boats!

LURECHARGE!

THE PP OUTDOOR FORUMS

Kast Gear!

Power Pro Shimano Reels G Loomis Rods

  Willie boats! Puffballs!

 

Three Rivers Marine

 

 
Page 1 of 2 1 2 >
Topic Options
Rate This Topic
#971705 - 01/18/17 09:06 PM Should pinniped predation be included in harvest?
Soft bite Offline
Juvenile at Sea

Registered: 11/11/08
Posts: 147
Loc: Central Park
In my view the WDFW ignores pinniped predation by sea lions and seals. When I have asked if it is considered in harvest mortality or in run size estimates I get a vague answer. I do not think WDFW makes any effort to track it even when they have observers on the boats while it is occurring. My Grays Harbor observations of drift nets last fall and set nets recently indicates that from 10% to 50% of the fish that engage a net end up with a sea lion or seal. They do not show up in harvest numbers. Losses happen to recreational fishers as well but I have only lost one fish to a sea lion the past decade so in my view the percentage lost is low in the range of under 2%.

Harvest data in the models now includes 2-3% net drop out and 56% release mortality as part of the allocated harvest mortality. The models do not include pinniped losses which I think are a direct harvest mortality due to the gear type. If these mortalities were considered in the harvest calculations it would more fairly penalize set nets and drift nets for the loss they directly cause. I think there is a need for good loss data and that it should be part of the model harvest calculation for both treaty and non-treaty fishers.

Below is a picture of a typical race to a steelhead in a net. This time the sea lion won.



Edited by Soft bite (01/18/17 09:16 PM)

Top
#971710 - 01/18/17 09:52 PM Re: Should pinniped predation be included in harvest? [Re: Soft bite]
Carcassman Online   content
River Nutrients

Registered: 11/21/07
Posts: 7413
Loc: Olema,California,Planet Earth
There was a time when it was included in management. I don't think it is any more.

Top
#971724 - 01/19/17 05:48 AM Re: Should pinniped predation be included in harvest? [Re: Soft bite]
Krijack Offline
Three Time Spawner

Registered: 06/03/06
Posts: 1531
Loc: Tacoma
I believe according to the requirements I saw from previous court cases, the definition of drop out was written so as to include any fish that were in the net and likely died but did not end up in the boat. If I get a chance I will look to see if I can find the exact wording. If someone here has it, that would save me some time, though.

Top
#971725 - 01/19/17 05:59 AM Re: Should pinniped predation be included in harvest? [Re: Soft bite]
milt roe Offline
Spawner

Registered: 01/22/06
Posts: 925
Loc: tacoma
Wouldnt pinniped predation occurring during sport harvest also need to be counted too then? Fish lost to seals while hooked would count the same, right?

Top
#971727 - 01/19/17 06:27 AM Re: Should pinniped predation be included in harvest? [Re: Soft bite]
Krijack Offline
Three Time Spawner

Registered: 06/03/06
Posts: 1531
Loc: Tacoma
Actual wording...IT IS ORDERED that, for the purposes of equitable adjustment, the harvest of net fishermen should include an estimate of the number of fish which come in contact with the net and do not survive but are not actually taken by the fishermen. The net "drop-out" fish estimate for 1982 shall be negotiated by the parties. In order to reach a negotiated estimate, it may be necessary to present this issue to a Joint Technical Committee

Top
#971728 - 01/19/17 06:52 AM Re: Should pinniped predation be included in harvest? [Re: Soft bite]
Carcassman Online   content
River Nutrients

Registered: 11/21/07
Posts: 7413
Loc: Olema,California,Planet Earth
Post '82 a figure was added for net dropout (NDO) to all net fisheries. At least through 87. I know of salmon only, as the agencies were separate then. NDO was an add-on that was not included in the data bases. The data bases used at that time included the escapement and documented net catch (for salmon). Adding in NDO, then, provided a buffer that provided some protection for the escapement.

At that time, there was a file of studies (by other entities-including Russia) that had studied the size-selective nature of retention in a gill net and NDO.

From a political point of view, the impact of NDO fell more heavily soon the Tribes as they took essentially significantly more of their share in gill nets while the Cowboys used hook and line and seines.

Note that the order was pre Co-Management.

Top
#971729 - 01/19/17 07:41 AM Re: Should pinniped predation be included in harvest? [Re: Soft bite]
FleaFlickr02 Offline
River Nutrients

Registered: 10/28/09
Posts: 3314
I think Krijack is right about drop-out. I've heard that term thrown around in meetings about Willapa Bay. The commercials always argued the rates were estimated too high. Almost inconceivably (or predictably), the recs always argued they were too low. Polarizing factors like this, all too often, lead management to treat them as red herrings, for the sake of getting on with the business of dividing the pie.

Pinnipeds and other predators also make a nice scapegoat when escapement comes up short, so it may serve the co-managers better to consider their take AFTER the fact.

Either way, I think this is being considered in allocation, even if it's not being given sufficient impacts.

Top
#971733 - 01/19/17 08:26 AM Re: Should pinniped predation be included in harvest? [Re: Soft bite]
Krijack Offline
Three Time Spawner

Registered: 06/03/06
Posts: 1531
Loc: Tacoma
It should be noted that I have no idea if they are actually following the directive of the court, or, if given the increase in predators the DPO needs to be increased. My only input is that it was included in the original formulas and should be included now.

Top
#971739 - 01/19/17 09:44 AM Re: Should pinniped predation be included in harvest? [Re: Soft bite]
Carcassman Online   content
River Nutrients

Registered: 11/21/07
Posts: 7413
Loc: Olema,California,Planet Earth
I believe that it is not being included. Or, if anything is it is applied equally. I know a Tribe that was ordered to develop a seal impact and had, at least as far as folks have told me, never did.

Top
#971746 - 01/19/17 10:38 AM Re: Should pinniped predation be included in harvest? [Re: Carcassman]
Rivrguy Offline
River Nutrients

Registered: 03/03/09
Posts: 4394
Loc: Somewhere on the planet,I hope
In GH & Willapa the modeled mortality rate includes drop outs and if I recall the tribal % is 4% in the model and Recs are 16% ( ? ) been awhile not being on the model bit. Bottom line is mortalities are modeled in and the drop out is part of it. Now the QIN net actual is running somewhere between 20 and 25% not 4% and frankly you can set on the bank and count how many the sea lions get. The NT Nets with the recovery box bit is a absolute joke as having broodstocked Chinook for many years and damn near did back flips to keep the adults alive. From my experience it is between 50 and 100 % on NT nets releases. Hell the QIN claim 100% on NT releases.

Bottom line for me is the simple fact that mortality on releases be it net or pole are nothing less than a fabricated best guess.


Edited by Rivrguy (01/19/17 10:38 AM)
_________________________
Dazed and confused.............the fog is closing in

Top
#971758 - 01/19/17 01:01 PM Re: Should pinniped predation be included in harvest? [Re: Rivrguy]
Carcassman Online   content
River Nutrients

Registered: 11/21/07
Posts: 7413
Loc: Olema,California,Planet Earth
Ya think????

Top
#971769 - 01/19/17 01:28 PM Re: Should pinniped predation be included in harvest? [Re: Soft bite]
Soft bite Offline
Juvenile at Sea

Registered: 11/11/08
Posts: 147
Loc: Central Park
The point I was trying to make is that pinniped harvest from nets is significant now and is not considered in harvest allocation models. (Release mortality is a different subject.)

In my observation of gill nets there is often a problem with fish dropping out as the net leaves the water and rises into the boat. Some fishermen even hold a landing net under these fish for insurance. I assumed that this was what the 2-3% drop out referred to as it would be a reasonable estimate of those losses.

My understanding of the official run size is that it is the summation of harvested fish including NDO plus release mortality plus spawner counts. Net drop out was not accounted for in the models prior to the 2014 model year. In 2014 NDR was added as 2% for coho and 3% for chinook in both Grays Harbor and Willapa. This increased the harvest mortality and caused all the historical run sizes to increase. These values have been used for the past three years as well as a 5% drop off for sport catches. I doubt if any of these include pinniped mortality. When I look at the model for tribal harvest I cannot find any calculation for net drop out. It appears to me that only non-tribal harvests are charged with this loss reducing their allocation.

If I were a modeler trying to model harvest mortality (but not subject to politics) I would consider including pinniped losses to be critical for accurate run management. My first guess at numbers would be 40% of the fish that impact a manned set net are lost to pinnipeds. Unmanned set nets would be much higher. I would consider drift nets to lose 30% of the fish that engage the net and then request a research project be initiated to get better data.

Top
#971781 - 01/19/17 03:37 PM Re: Should pinniped predation be included in harvest? [Re: Rivrguy]
FleaFlickr02 Offline
River Nutrients

Registered: 10/28/09
Posts: 3314
Originally Posted By: Rivrguy
In GH & Willapa the modeled mortality rate includes drop outs and if I recall the tribal % is 4% in the model and Recs are 16% ( ? ) been awhile not being on the model bit. Bottom line is mortalities are modeled in and the drop out is part of it. Now the QIN net actual is running somewhere between 20 and 25% not 4% and frankly you can set on the bank and count how many the sea lions get. The NT Nets with the recovery box bit is a absolute joke as having broodstocked Chinook for many years and damn near did back flips to keep the adults alive. From my experience it is between 50 and 100 % on NT nets releases. Hell the QIN claim 100% on NT releases.

Bottom line for me is the simple fact that mortality on releases be it net or pole are nothing less than a fabricated best guess.

Thanks for the numbers, Rivrguy, which are probably pretty good for the rec dropout, but seem likely to be underestimated a hair on the Tribal dropout. Between predators and release mortality, that figure has GOT to be MUCH higher....

Top
#971790 - 01/19/17 05:07 PM Re: Should pinniped predation be included in harvest? [Re: Soft bite]
eyeFISH Offline
Ornamental Rice Bowl

Registered: 11/24/03
Posts: 12766
Originally Posted By: Soft bite
The point I was trying to make is that pinniped harvest from nets is significant now and is not considered in harvest allocation models. (Release mortality is a different subject.)

In my observation of gill nets there is often a problem with fish dropping out as the net leaves the water and rises into the boat. Some fishermen even hold a landing net under these fish for insurance. I assumed that this was what the 2-3% drop out referred to as it would be a reasonable estimate of those losses.

My understanding of the official run size is that it is the summation of harvested fish including NDO plus release mortality plus spawner counts. Net drop out was not accounted for in the models prior to the 2014 model year. In 2014 NDR was added as 2% for coho and 3% for chinook in both Grays Harbor and Willapa. This increased the harvest mortality and caused all the historical run sizes to increase. These values have been used for the past three years as well as a 5% drop off for sport catches. I doubt if any of these include pinniped mortality. When I look at the model for tribal harvest I cannot find any calculation for net drop out. It appears to me that only non-tribal harvests are charged with this loss reducing their allocation.

If I were a modeler trying to model harvest mortality (but not subject to politics) I would consider including pinniped losses to be critical for accurate run management. My first guess at numbers would be 40% of the fish that impact a manned set net are lost to pinnipeds. Unmanned set nets would be much higher. I would consider drift nets to lose 30% of the fish that engage the net and then request a research project be initiated to get better data.


As usual Soft Bite is 100% on the mark. This is WAY more than just simple dropout.

This is a BIG and underappreciated issue that NO ONE in the agency has been willing to tackle head on. Mebbe the new Fish Program Chief at Region 6 is willing to take a crack at it.
_________________________
"Let every angler who loves to fish think what it would mean to him to find the fish were gone." (Zane Grey)

"If you don't kill them, they will spawn." (Carcassman)


The Keen Eye MD
Long Live the Kings!

Top
#971818 - 01/20/17 08:01 AM Re: Should pinniped predation be included in harvest? [Re: eyeFISH]
Rivrguy Offline
River Nutrients

Registered: 03/03/09
Posts: 4394
Loc: Somewhere on the planet,I hope

We getting close. The drop out rate IS part of the mortality. Just as with a pole that you release with or one hits and gets away to the ones that look OK but in the end fail to spawn successfully. The release moralities and drop outs are part of the same number so in the model it is accounted for. SB the thing I think it is about is simply that the number be it what you call is way underestimating moralities and staff knows it as do the RECS and neters both QIN & NT. Nobody seems to care much outside a few people.
_________________________
Dazed and confused.............the fog is closing in

Top
#971832 - 01/20/17 12:42 PM Re: Should pinniped predation be included in harvest? [Re: Soft bite]
Carcassman Online   content
River Nutrients

Registered: 11/21/07
Posts: 7413
Loc: Olema,California,Planet Earth
The devil is how you account for them and manage. If all the added mortalities are basically for accounting purposes to figure the split then they don't help the resource.

Say the forecast says that 3,000 fish are coming back and it is divided 1,000 to Indians, 1,000 to non-Indians, and 1,000 to escapement. You do the modeling of the various fisheries and decide that the I's have 200 morts, the NIs have 300. What it should mean is that the I's now take 800, the NI's 700, and escapement gets its 1,000. I suspect that the 2,000 harvestable will all be taken, with adjustments to each share based on mortalities. And the escapement then suffers.

The mortalities have to come off of the forecasted run size in order to put the conservation burden on the fishermen and not the resource.

Top
#971834 - 01/20/17 01:04 PM Re: Should pinniped predation be included in harvest? [Re: Soft bite]
FleaFlickr02 Offline
River Nutrients

Registered: 10/28/09
Posts: 3314
While we all agree that the current estimates appear low, it's probably further complicated by run size and run timing, not only for the target stock, but also for the non-target (sometimes ESA-listed) stocks. If a run comes in "on schedule" and in something close to forecast numbers, a gillnet fishery can be very efficient and cause little dropout. Of course, if the run arrives early or late, or in smaller than forecast numbers, it requires more fishing time to capture a quota, which likely means more encounters with non-target stocks and, subsequently, higher dropout rates, in a year where the fish can ill afford them.

I don't think this is a reason not to factor dropout, at a standard rate, into quotas, but I imagine a commercial gillnetter might feel differently. Of course, if they went to more selective gear, it would reduce dropout and assure them maximum harvest for their time on the water, which seems like a win-win....

Top
#971838 - 01/20/17 01:26 PM Re: Should pinniped predation be included in harvest? [Re: Soft bite]
Carcassman Online   content
River Nutrients

Registered: 11/21/07
Posts: 7413
Loc: Olema,California,Planet Earth
I think one of the problems with at least some of the tangle nets was increased dropout in that fish encountered the gear and weren't retained.

Traps would probably be best, followed by fish wheels although dip netting can probably be selective. When I have seen seines (beach or purse used the problem arises when a modest number of fish are in the bag. Speed sorting is necessary and fish handling skills may give way to speed.

Top
#971843 - 01/20/17 02:35 PM Re: Should pinniped predation be included in harvest? [Re: Soft bite]
Soft bite Offline
Juvenile at Sea

Registered: 11/11/08
Posts: 147
Loc: Central Park
Recreational fishers should care a lot about this intentional oversight by WDFW modelers and managers because we are getting absolutely hosed. For purposes of this thread I am stipulating that pinniped mortality is both significant and unaccounted for in the model. If it was accounted for it would be added to the calculation of the actual run size estimate after the fact. These mortalities would also be counted as harvest by those responsible for the loss. With larger run sizes, each group would be allowed more mortalities. For nets the result would be fewer fish in the boat when they reach their mortality allocation. Pinniped losses to the recreational fisher are relatively small compared to the nets so our increased allocation would result in more actually harvested fish for our share. As the model stands now the tribal fishers are not charged with any drop out losses, the non-tribal commercial fishers are charged with 2% drop out for coho and 3% for chinook. Recreational fishers are charged with drop off losses of 5%. I do not think pinniped losses are any part of these numbers. Release mortalities are an entirely different subject not to be confused with drop out, drop off, and pinniped losses.

Top
#971844 - 01/20/17 03:10 PM Re: Should pinniped predation be included in harvest? [Re: Soft bite]
FleaFlickr02 Offline
River Nutrients

Registered: 10/28/09
Posts: 3314
Thanks for bringing this to the forefront, Soft bite. I'm curious... if release mortality doesn't factor into dropout, where on Earth are they coming up with sport dropout being higher than either commercial fishery's dropout? What constitutes dropout in a sport fishing context?

You know someone's cooking the books when sport angling accounts for a higher percentage of dropout than gillnets; I'm just wondering what's in the recipe.

Top
Page 1 of 2 1 2 >

Search

Site Links
Home
Our Washington Fishing
Our Alaska Fishing
Reports
Rates
Contact Us
About Us
Recipes
Photos / Videos
Visit us on Facebook
Today's Birthdays
CHUBS
Recent Gallery Pix
hatchery steelhead
Hatchery Releases into the Pacific and Harvest
Who's Online
0 registered (), 1074 Guests and 2 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Newest Members
John Boob, Lawrence, I'm Still RichG, feyt, Freezeout
11498 Registered Users
Top Posters
Todd 28170
Dan S. 17149
Sol Duc 16138
The Moderator 14486
Salmo g. 13521
eyeFISH 12766
STRIKE ZONE 12107
Dogfish 10979
ParaLeaks 10513
Jerry Garcia 9160
Forum Stats
11498 Members
16 Forums
63773 Topics
645302 Posts

Max Online: 3001 @ 01/28/20 02:48 PM

Join the PP forums.

It's quick, easy, and always free!

Working for the fish and our future fishing opportunities:

The Wild Steelhead Coalition

The Photo & Video Gallery. Nearly 1200 images from our fishing trips! Tips, techniques, live weight calculator & more in the Fishing Resource Center. The time is now to get prime dates for 2018 Olympic Peninsula Winter Steelhead , don't miss out!.

| HOME | ALASKA FISHING | WASHINGTON FISHING | RIVER REPORTS | FORUMS | FISHING RESOURCE CENTER | CHARTER RATES | CONTACT US | WHAT ABOUT BOB? | PHOTO & VIDEO GALLERY | LEARN ABOUT THE FISH | RECIPES | SITE HELP & FAQ |