"One of the most undermonitored" as compared to what?? As a beach property owner I know I have been checked more than enough times to take exception to both the undermonitored comment as well as the "cowboy" harvest assertion. Got any facts to back up that accusation? Oh, and when they aren't actually checking they are watching! Where do you think most of the endorsement money is being spent?

As to bycatch, again compared to what? Yes, there is bycatch but mortality is fairly low given the required escape mechanisms. Those features are checked when WDFW makes a contact on crabbers over which it has authority and WDFW LEO reports indicate a low rate of violation.

There is a plethora of data to back it up. The tribal Crab fisheries all report to a set location and are open for a very short duration of time. Our fishery is centered around CRC reporting.... I'd say at a minimum half of the people I see at the ticket counter buying a new licenses are hit with a 10$ fee for "Late reporting" and I bet many many of those didn't return a card at all....

Here's a WDFW statistic for you that was published some years back, over 80% of boats checked at the dock are guilty of at least one violation when crab fishing.

We fish 5 days a week for 3 months continuously, but get pissy when the tribes are out "carpet bombing" and area for a day?

I think the crab fishery and the states leniency with us sportsman is one tree I would not be barking up... Unless you want to see our crab seasons go the way of SHRIMP or HALIBUT.

Leave well enough alone. If you bark to loud somoene may actually listen and look into things and you probably won't like what they find. I'll take my 5 days a week for 3 months plus an ample winter season, thank you very much.

If you want to talk about waterfront property owners you yourself may not be guilty, but I can take you out any day of the week and find half a dozen "secret" pots with slightly submerged buoys, teeny tiny white "stealth" buoys, or clear plastic bottle buoys, they're all over.... spend some time boating the shoreline and tell me I'm off.

http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/putting-the-pinch-on-illegal-crabbers/

First, I am not the one who raised the issue of non-compliance by any user group! Well, other than pointing out the Nisqually debacle.

My observation was that the current reality is that tribal crabbers get first shot at the harvestable biomass which can and does result in the State (and particularly recreational crabbers) having a reduced opportunity to harvest its half of the actual harvestable poundage when the estimated harvestable numbers are far too high.

As to violations, the fact that 30% of P.S. endorsements are sold to new crabbers is problematic. That is why the Commission in passing the new P.S. Dungeness crab management policy tasked sport groups to take steps to help educate those new crabbers - something that is ongoing.

I noticed that your examples are fairly dated. A more current resource is the report to the Commission on 9 April 2016 for the 2015 season (report for the 2016 season has yet to be presented) in which there was a slide comparing violations found at the off-load sites. In 2010 the five violation types listed had a combined total of 26.0% and in 2015 it was 14.4%. In looking at those percentages it is important to recognize that one person could have been represented in each of the five categories; it does not mean that 14.4% of checked crabbers were in violation. In any case those numbers show a significant reduction in violations.

Now, if you have observed illegal pots or other activity I certainly hope that you reported them - no matter whether they were set by property owners or boaters.

Was hoping the above was not true. Just off the water in area 11 out of Tacoma. 6 pots soaked close to 8 hrs total in 2 spots I have generally done OK. Got 10 decent rock crab, and what concerns me is only 1 Dungeness the whole soak, a sub legal male. No females, no numerous youngsters. Generally lots of those would be present amongst a few keepers per pull. Very little participation, but did hear the same from another area but at least they had some females and smallies. Out again tomorrow in another area to try. Will report back.

I have seen the results from the recent WDFW crab test fishery for MA 13. It was worse than last year and their pots had the small crab escape closed off so that they could gain some insight on the overall population. Result? Abysmal! As I recall they set ten pots in each of 9 locations within the MA and only one location had more than one legal Dungy - some none. And potential recruitment into legal size was nil.

As I recall the MA 11 harvest last year was approximately 25% of the agreed upon number. If that decrease in harvestable biomass is progressing into MA 10 is it the result of something we may be able to mitigate? Or will it continue to move north into the historically more productive MAs (9, 8, 6 and 7)?

How do you get to see the results of the WDFW crab test fisheries?

In preparation for putting on a crabbing seminar last Saturday for Pt. Defiance Marina I contacted a WDFW employee and requested the info for MA 13.

4 pots overnight 0.0. Welcome back to the late 80's early 90's.
I did have probably 20/30 healthy females 6 decent rocks. No males of any size.

6 pots again today, one long 5hr soak. 8 rock and 2 dungeness keepers. Only one sub legal male and 2 female dungeness. At least some dungies around, but doesn't bode well for the future unless a bunch swim in from somewhere.

Don Velasquez spoke to our NOP PSA chapter last Thursday about shrimping and crabbing opportunities this year. He works out of the Mill Creek office for the Puget Sound shellfish program.

He said the test fisheries indicated a 30% drop in the crab population in the central and S Sound. Lots of females were found, but not many males. Supposition is the warmer waters the past couple of years might have impacted the spawning success.

If you have a fishing club/organization, if Don is available, you'd enjoy his presentation.

Interesting? Should have gone to the Columbia this weekend. Dammit!

Tribal Crab are very tasty straight from their pots, that's what I've heard.

Especially when they are literally crabbing in the SuperFund site known as Creosote Point in Eagle Harbor...

Or just outside the entrance to the Thea Foss Waterway - which is closed to shellfish harvesting due to contamination.

I'd say that is similar or perhaps what I've seen this past spring is worse then that.
I do a lot of beach fishing in the sound.
Last year, there were lots of mated up pairs in the eel grass flats. This year, hardly any.
Only one beach I fished had a decent number of crabs, but I'd say it was about half of what I saw there last year.

Where I fish on the canal, I haven't seen a legal crab in a good five years.
SF

about ten years ago, i was at the launch in MA7 waiting for the morning opener in the fog. when it was time, i paddled my canoe out to drop some gear just before legal time, and lo and behold, tribal pots every 100 feet. i pulled the first one i saw and got our 10 keepers. [Bleeeeep!] em.

The MA 13 Dungy population pretty much hit bottom a couple of years ago. The 2016 season in MA 11 resulted in a reported harvest of about 25% of the agreed upon number. And if that phenomenon is now pushing north into MA 10 will we see it continue throughout Puget Sound?

Edit: Keeping in mind that the WDFW Dungeness crab management plan has as a foundation the assumption that a healthy population can be maintained even if every legal (male, 6 1/4 inch min) is removed from the population assuming that males 5 3/4 inch are successful breeders. If the population is now not healthy in some MAs is it time to question that assumption? If there are few sub-legal males in the population do we need to simply stop crabbing to maximize potential recovery in those MAs? Of course, that would require cooperation from the tribes.....

Larry

Do the Tribes have/operate under the same minimum size for crab? It seems that, if the management paradigm was working, that crabbers would be releasing a lot of sub-legal males. If they aren't, then something is wrong with the paradigm. The model has to agree with reality, not vice-versa.

Have to? I don't think so. However, it is my understanding that they do mirror the same size/sex requirements as the WDFW regs - at least on paper.

Otherwise, what you have opined is exactly my perspective. Note that I wrote that the paradigm may work for a healthy (model) population but reality seems to be that the population in at least some MAs no longer exhibit those characteristics for whatever reason.

If there are few or no males less than 6-1/4 inches then the population of breeding males and smaller ones anticipated to grow into breeders before becoming legal are inadequate thus the paradigm is broken.

Do we have a localized problem or is this also a threat to northern MAs? Is it a natural phenomenon or a result of overharvest (as in, the basic paradigm is flawed) and/or has there been harvest of crab outside the paradigm's parameters?

Unless I missed it somewhere the Department's new Shellfish Manager has not yet made the required annual presentation on the status of the prior year's (2016) season. When that occurs there may be some serious questions pertaining to this issue.

At least I hope that one or more Commissioners recognize there may be a problem and are willing to engage.

My understanding of Dungeness crab biology is that the males mature several years prior to reach legal size. The minimum size limit is important in that female crabs tend not breed with males that are smaller than they are. While females tend to grow slower than the males as we all have seen here in Puget Sound some do reach 6 inches (sometimes larger) or so to assure that there are males larger enough to breed with those females there is a need for the larger minimum size.

Crabs have complicated and at times vulnerable behaviors between the time the eggs/larvae are released by the females until the young
"crabs" reach maturity. Having enough "breeders" is only part of the equation to having a strong population. The crab larvae and newly settled juveniles survival is strong influenced by a wide range of water quality and other factors which naturally result in variable year classes. Just like the survival factors align in recent years to produce exceptionally strong populations those same factors can align to produce weaker populations. As much as we all would like to see record abundances of our salmon and crabs to be the norm the harsh biologically reality is that is not in the cards. In recent years we have seen environmental conditions in the sound/ocean that have affected the survival of salmon, recruitment of central Puget Sound ling cod, etc. can we be surprised that crab also might be impacted?

There are indications that changing marine conditions associated with climate change (acidification of the ocean) in the next decades may lead to significant reductions (as much as 70%) of critters like Dungeness crabs.

Curt