Check

 

Defiance Boats!

LURECHARGE!

THE PP OUTDOOR FORUMS

Kast Gear!

Power Pro Shimano Reels G Loomis Rods

  Willie boats! Puffballs!

 

Three Rivers Marine

 

 
Page 3 of 3 < 1 2 3
Topic Options
Rate This Topic
#981564 - 11/13/17 01:07 PM Re: Is PFMC a cancer or cure for our state salmon [Re: eyeFISH]
eyeFISH Offline
Ornamental Rice Bowl

Registered: 11/24/03
Posts: 12766
Originally Posted By: eyeFISH
NOR goal for the entire basin is 4350 (WDFW) and 3393 (PFMC).


It's very frustrating that the federal and state conservation benchmarks are NOT the same. The fish are basically f'd whenever the policy folks can't agree to play from the same sheet of music.

It's even worse in Grays Harbor where the QIN, WDFW and PFMC all have DIFFERENT conservation metrics for what constitutes when the run is "officially" in trouble.
_________________________
"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
#981565 - 11/13/17 01:23 PM Re: Is PFMC a cancer or cure for our state salmon [Re: Lucky Louie]
Carcassman Online   content
River Nutrients

Registered: 11/21/07
Posts: 7413
Loc: Olema,California,Planet Earth
It is an even bigger problem when they can't agree on what is a "healthy" run. Goals based on the needs of the ecosystem are in the neighborhood of 1-2 kg per square metre. Rivrguy has a spreadsheet with these goals applied to GH, based on the EDT estimates of summer low flow habitat. The escapements in the early 2000s for GH were similar to everywhere else. That is 5% or so of the ecosystem goals.

That means 20X what was allowed then. That would put WB at more than 80,000 Chinook and probably should exceed 100K. I should note that the situations where there have been escapements in the 1-2kg range that there were still some pretty good fisheries occurring.

Top
#981567 - 11/13/17 01:33 PM Re: Is PFMC a cancer or cure for our state salmon [Re: Lucky Louie]
eyeFISH Offline
Ornamental Rice Bowl

Registered: 11/24/03
Posts: 12766
Originally Posted By: eyeFISH


It's even worse in Grays Harbor where the QIN, WDFW and PFMC all have DIFFERENT conservation metrics for what constitutes when the run is "officially" in trouble.


Example... Grays Harbor Chinook

WDFW uses segregated sub-basin habitat-based goals of 9753 for Chehalis and 3573 for Humptulips

QIN uses the aggregate goal of 13326 for the entire GH basin... regardless of whether either of the sub-basins fails to meet goal.

PFMC uses strictly an MSY goal of 11388, and does NOT consider Grays Harbor to be "overfished" until the 3 yr geometric mean is HALF of the MSY goal (5694).... all the while allowing fishery exploitation rates of up to 78% before they think the fish are in trouble.

YOU heard it right! The feds believe that 78% exploitation is 100% A-OK until the spawner escapement falls BELOW 5694 basinwide.

J F C!
_________________________
"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
#981568 - 11/13/17 01:47 PM Re: Is PFMC a cancer or cure for our state salmon [Re: Lucky Louie]
Carcassman Online   content
River Nutrients

Registered: 11/21/07
Posts: 7413
Loc: Olema,California,Planet Earth
As the Twin Harbors Advocacy has shown, nobody at the table gives a rats ass about anything but dividing up catch. There are no advocates for the ecosystem as a whole. We piecemeal (silo) the whole process. Each stock of fish is independent of every other stock, each species is independent of every other species.

The Killer Whales are starving, aborting because of starvation, and the suggested management is to control boats and sound in the water. So they can starve in peace??

Top
#981569 - 11/13/17 02:34 PM Re: Is PFMC a cancer or cure for our state salmon [Re: Lucky Louie]
eyeFISH Offline
Ornamental Rice Bowl

Registered: 11/24/03
Posts: 12766
It's pretty sad that 90%-plus of salmon management resources is spent on gearing up for NOF.

That process has NOTHING to do about conservation. The conservation happens thru habitat protection and setting appropriate escapement goals.... NONE of which happens at NOF. It's all about who gets to do the killing, where, when, how many... and what gear type will be used to get the killing done in the appointed times and places.

As an advisor, I've yearned to have the serious conservation meetings about habitat and re-assessing e-goals... annual meetings about recovering/sustaining GH salmon that should occur LONG BEFORE the NOF discussions ever get started. Such discussions are SORELY missing... perhaps casually mentioned in passing at best.

Instead everything revolves around NOF... the perennial discussion on how we go about divvying up the kill!
_________________________
"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
#981572 - 11/13/17 03:11 PM Re: Is PFMC a cancer or cure for our state salmon [Re: Lucky Louie]
Carcassman Online   content
River Nutrients

Registered: 11/21/07
Posts: 7413
Loc: Olema,California,Planet Earth
Serious conservation of salmon has to look at the whole food chain, too. Just so sad. And the information is out there. "The truth is out there".

Besides, the oceans are getting screwed and we concentrate on FW habitat. I guess part of the problem is that there are so many pieces that few are willing to try and deal with all of them. Mo betta to just keep my eyes focused on the one little piece in front of me.


Keep hammerin' Doc, it is the only way change has a snowflake's chance in hell.

Top
#981573 - 11/13/17 03:14 PM Re: Is PFMC a cancer or cure for our state salmon [Re: eyeFISH]
Bay wolf Offline
Repeat Spawner

Registered: 10/26/12
Posts: 1075
Loc: Graham, WA
Originally Posted By: eyeFISH
It's pretty sad that 90%-plus of salmon management resources is spent on gearing up for NOF.

That process has NOTHING to do about conservation. The conservation happens thru habitat protection and setting appropriate escapement goals.... NONE of which happens at NOF. It's all about who gets to do the killing, where, when, how many... and what gear type will be used to get the killing done in the appointed times and places.

As an advisor, I've yearned to have the serious conservation meetings about habitat and re-assessing e-goals... annual meetings about recovering/sustaining GH salmon that should occur LONG BEFORE the NOF discussions ever get started. Such discussions are SORELY missing... perhaps casually mentioned in passing at best.

Instead everything revolves around NOF... the perennial discussion on how we go about divvying up the kill!


OH MY FREAKING DOG! EYE, You have finally pulled back the curtain and told the whole GD world that the King is Naked!!!!

Your post sums up exactly why we are pushing so hard to get the NOF Negotiations live streamed AND WHY THEY ARE FIGHTING SO HARD TO KEEP IT SECRET!, They don't want the truth of what CO-management REALLY IS TO BE SEEN!!! IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH CONSERVATION OR RECOVERY!!

I OWE YOU A DRINK, HELL, I'LL OPEN A TAB FOR YOU!!
_________________________
"Forgiveness is between them and God. My job is to arrange the meeting."

1Sgt U.S. Army (Ret)

Top
#981575 - 11/13/17 04:34 PM Re: Is PFMC a cancer or cure for our state salmon [Re: Lucky Louie]
Great Bender Offline
Juvenile at Sea

Registered: 01/03/17
Posts: 155
Loc: Hood Canal
NOW we are finally getting somewhere!! In brief, Doc has his hand on the pulse of this convoluted mess, and put forward the most accurate and comprehensive assessment of where we are, and where we need to go... For God's sake! Aren't the fish themselves more important than Tribal, NT Commercial and Rec catch totals? When the Wolf taps out--I will keep the refreshments flowing. Hats off to you, Doc!

Top
#981576 - 11/13/17 05:30 PM Re: Is PFMC a cancer or cure for our state salmon [Re: eyeFISH]
_WW_ Offline
Juvenile at Sea

Registered: 01/30/13
Posts: 233
Loc: Skagit
Originally Posted By: eyeFISH


As an advisor, I've yearned to have the serious conservation meetings about habitat and re-assessing e-goals... annual meetings about recovering/sustaining GH salmon that should occur LONG BEFORE the NOF discussions ever get started. Such discussions are SORELY missing... perhaps casually mentioned in passing at best.


Just a crazy idea...but serious.
YOU should start holding these meetings you are talking about. Invite all the players and do it all very publiclyby also inviting newspaper,TV,ETC. When the meeting/s are done, very publicly, get the word out as to who was there, and more importantly, who was not there.

Shine the harsh light of publicity and public criticism on these folks and you'll find it goes a lot further than hoping some of them will do the right thing. You need to publicly shame them into it!

Stick with it. It'll be hard because few will come at first. But when they see their name in the media listed as among those who apparently don't care, they'll start showing up.
_________________________
Catch & Release Is Not A Crime

Top
#981577 - 11/13/17 05:55 PM Re: Is PFMC a cancer or cure for our state salmon [Re: eyeFISH]
eyeFISH Offline
Ornamental Rice Bowl

Registered: 11/24/03
Posts: 12766
Originally Posted By: eyeFISH


Example... Grays Harbor Chinook

WDFW uses segregated sub-basin habitat-based goals of 9753 for Chehalis and 3573 for Humptulips

QIN uses the aggregate goal of 13326 for the entire GH basin... regardless of whether either of the sub-basins fails to meet goal.

PFMC uses strictly an MSY goal of 11388, and does NOT consider Grays Harbor to be "overfished" until the 3 yr geometric mean is HALF of the MSY goal (5694).... all the while allowing fishery exploitation rates of up to 78% before they think the fish are in trouble.

YOU heard it right! The feds believe that 78% exploitation is 100% A-OK until the spawner escapement falls BELOW 5694 basinwide.

J F C!


This lies at the very heart of RESPONSIBLE salmon management. ALL of the managers MUST subscribe to the same benchmarks.... the GOLD STANDARD by which success or failure is ultimately measured. As it stands now, each agency effectively manages in isolation, undermining the success of the other... and this virtually GUARANTEES the demise of our wild salmon populations.

Former WFWC Chair Miranda Wecker invited WDFW staff to deliver a high level commission briefing to explain the various conservation metrics used by all of the different managing authorities. Prudent action absolutely relies upon having a common indicator of when the fish are in trouble and how to avoid letting things get that bad in the first place anyway! It was a timely request as most of the Commission is completely clueless on this issue.

At that heart of the matter is this. It's the same dam critter with the same basic biological needs to sustain its population. Why are the conservation metrics all so different from one agency to the next? Why can't they all get on the same page? And what can we do to eventually get there.


"Department staff will provide the Commission a briefing on NOAA’s determining factors for considering a stock as overfished, and the interface between federal agencies and state fisheries management relative to conservation objectives."
http://wdfw.wa.gov/commission/meetings/2017/09/audio/20170908_05.m3u

Listen for yourself, but I believe the presentation delivered by Michelle Culver was horribly fragmented and convoluted.... and never once addressed the issue of the agencies cooperatively working toward cohesive conservation goals.


_________________________
"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
#981578 - 11/13/17 06:31 PM Re: Is PFMC a cancer or cure for our state salmon [Re: _WW_]
Bay wolf Offline
Repeat Spawner

Registered: 10/26/12
Posts: 1075
Loc: Graham, WA
Originally Posted By: _WW_
Originally Posted By: eyeFISH


As an advisor, I've yearned to have the serious conservation meetings about habitat and re-assessing e-goals... annual meetings about recovering/sustaining GH salmon that should occur LONG BEFORE the NOF discussions ever get started. Such discussions are SORELY missing... perhaps casually mentioned in passing at best.


Just a crazy idea...but serious.
YOU should start holding these meetings you are talking about. Invite all the players and do it all very publiclyby also inviting newspaper,TV,ETC. When the meeting/s are done, very publicly, get the word out as to who was there, and more importantly, who was not there.

Shine the harsh light of publicity and public criticism on these folks and you'll find it goes a lot further than hoping some of them will do the right thing. You need to publicly shame them into it!

Stick with it. It'll be hard because few will come at first. But when they see their name in the media listed as among those who apparently don't care, they'll start showing up.


If I might address this although it quoted EyeFish's post;

The truth and frustration is the principles involved won't respond, collectively. The institution is so insulated they have no need to worry. Believe me when I say, we have reached out to all the major news agencies. We have for the most part been answered by silence. Off the record we are told that there is:

1. Way to much advertising money from the Tribes to ever consider anything more than a 30 sec. spot about an issue, and it will always be slanted toward all the good work the tribes do.

2. The top executives of the local media agency most assuredly are receiving "privileges" with Tribal influence.

This train wreck appears to be heading full bore to the full collapse of many of our fisheries. Regardless of the finger pointing, it is a collective result of politics and greed. The result will be, once the collapse causes the Feds to finally step in and shut down the harvest, the Tribes and the Cowboys will sue the State for it's failure to properly manage the resources and for loss of income and violation of treaty rights. And who will PAY??? Yup,,,US!
_________________________
"Forgiveness is between them and God. My job is to arrange the meeting."

1Sgt U.S. Army (Ret)

Top
#981586 - 11/14/17 05:44 AM Re: Is PFMC a cancer or cure for our state salmon [Re: Lucky Louie]
_WW_ Offline
Juvenile at Sea

Registered: 01/30/13
Posts: 233
Loc: Skagit
We have for the most part been answered by silence. Off the record we are told that there is:

1. Way to much advertising money from the Tribes to ever consider anything more than a 30 sec. spot about an issue, and it will always be slanted toward all the good work the tribes do.

2. The top executives of the local media agency most assuredly are receiving "privileges" with Tribal influence.


Obviously the bright light of shame will have to originate outside the circle of the tribe's influence. With what you say about the local media, there is a pulitzer prize here waiting for somebody.
_________________________
Catch & Release Is Not A Crime

Top
#981587 - 11/14/17 07:31 AM Re: Is PFMC a cancer or cure for our state salmon [Re: eyeFISH]
FleaFlickr02 Offline
River Nutrients

Registered: 10/28/09
Posts: 3314
Originally Posted By: eyeFISH
Originally Posted By: eyeFISH


Example... Grays Harbor Chinook

WDFW uses segregated sub-basin habitat-based goals of 9753 for Chehalis and 3573 for Humptulips

QIN uses the aggregate goal of 13326 for the entire GH basin... regardless of whether either of the sub-basins fails to meet goal.

PFMC uses strictly an MSY goal of 11388, and does NOT consider Grays Harbor to be "overfished" until the 3 yr geometric mean is HALF of the MSY goal (5694).... all the while allowing fishery exploitation rates of up to 78% before they think the fish are in trouble.

YOU heard it right! The feds believe that 78% exploitation is 100% A-OK until the spawner escapement falls BELOW 5694 basinwide.

J F C!


This lies at the very heart of RESPONSIBLE salmon management. ALL of the managers MUST subscribe to the same benchmarks.... the GOLD STANDARD by which success or failure is ultimately measured. As it stands now, each agency effectively manages in isolation, undermining the success of the other... and this virtually GUARANTEES the demise of our wild salmon populations.

Former WFWC Chair Miranda Wecker invited WDFW staff to deliver a high level commission briefing to explain the various conservation metrics used by all of the different managing authorities. Prudent action absolutely relies upon having a common indicator of when the fish are in trouble and how to avoid letting things get that bad in the first place anyway! It was a timely request as most of the Commission is completely clueless on this issue.

At that heart of the matter is this. It's the same dam critter with the same basic biological needs to sustain its population. Why are the conservation metrics all so different from one agency to the next? Why can't they all get on the same page? And what can we do to eventually get there.


"Department staff will provide the Commission a briefing on NOAA’s determining factors for considering a stock as overfished, and the interface between federal agencies and state fisheries management relative to conservation objectives."
http://wdfw.wa.gov/commission/meetings/2017/09/audio/20170908_05.m3u

Listen for yourself, but I believe the presentation delivered by Michelle Culver was horribly fragmented and convoluted.... and never once addressed the issue of the agencies cooperatively working toward cohesive conservation goals.



I heard it the same way, Doc. I'm not so jaded as to suspect that Co-Management was designed with the intent of eliminating management accountability for the resource, but I do believe that's what it's done. Without accountability, nobody gets penalized when the rules get violated or the fish get overfished. Absent any repercussion, we can just shrug and blame ocean conditions, then get back to the business of planning next year's slaughter.

Top
#981589 - 11/14/17 08:38 AM Re: Is PFMC a cancer or cure for our state salmon [Re: FleaFlickr02]
Bay wolf Offline
Repeat Spawner

Registered: 10/26/12
Posts: 1075
Loc: Graham, WA
Originally Posted By: FleaFlickr02

I heard it the same way, Doc. I'm not so jaded as to suspect that Co-Management was designed with the intent of eliminating management accountability for the resource, but I do believe that's what it's done. Without accountability, nobody gets penalized when the rules get violated or the fish get overfished. Absent any repercussion, we can just shrug and blame ocean conditions, then get back to the business of planning next year's slaughter.


And doing the business of agreeing to next years slaughter and making laws which impact ALL citizens are done in secret meetings, behind locked doors so WE cannot object, since we have no idea what the laws will be until the deals are done!

We believe cracking that secrecy is the first and most vital step in getting all the ugly crap of our fisheries out in the open. Only then can we, in mass, start working to fix some of these problems.
_________________________
"Forgiveness is between them and God. My job is to arrange the meeting."

1Sgt U.S. Army (Ret)

Top
#981636 - 11/15/17 05:42 PM Re: Is PFMC a cancer or cure for our state salmon [Re: Lucky Louie]
Carcassman Online   content
River Nutrients

Registered: 11/21/07
Posts: 7413
Loc: Olema,California,Planet Earth
Something to remember about the number of fish passed above the rack is that generally, escapement is determined through spawner surveys. In my experience, surveyors will find maybe a third, or less, of the fish actually there.

On the Cedar, years ago, the escapement estimate for the river was less than the number passed above the rack.

I don't know how WB escapements are done, but I suspect that the number passed above the rack is not used. Meaning that there still may be an issue with the 3-year mean.

Top
#981637 - 11/15/17 06:32 PM Re: Is PFMC a cancer or cure for our state salmon [Re: Carcassman]
eyeFISH Offline
Ornamental Rice Bowl

Registered: 11/24/03
Posts: 12766
Originally Posted By: Carcassman



I don't know how WB escapements are done, but I suspect that the number passed above the rack is not used. Meaning that there still may be an issue with the 3-year mean.


The spawning (gravel) survey is THE backbone of enumerating WB escapements. Just understand that some wild spawning takes place BELOW the hatchery weirs and these fish are added back to the total

An estimate of pre-spawn mortalities is also figured into reconstructing the run.
_________________________
"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
#981640 - 11/15/17 07:12 PM Re: Is PFMC a cancer or cure for our state salmon [Re: Lucky Louie]
Carcassman Online   content
River Nutrients

Registered: 11/21/07
Posts: 7413
Loc: Olema,California,Planet Earth
Not sure if they add the number passed because then it does not agree with years with only surveys.


Edited by Carcassman (11/15/17 07:12 PM)

Top
Page 3 of 3 < 1 2 3

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 (), 939 Guests and 1 Spider 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 |