Suspect what we are seeing is the first dramatic effects of the acidification of oceans. Recent studies have shown that the most dramatic changes in Washington coast waters have occurred in southern Hood Canal. Most studies also mention that the list of the animals most likely to impacted include Dungeness crabs.


We are seeing the results of poisoning our environment with recent policy changes all but guaranteeing that things will get worst and not better. Remember one study that predicted that by 2040 the numbers of Dungeness crab in Puget Sound will be less than 25% of what we have seen in recent years.

Curt

Interesting (and alarming) but I wonder what the difference is between Dungeness (struggling) and red rock (apparently flourishing)?

Are we simply accelerating the process through the heavy harvest of Dungeness?

There are lots of reasons why one species may not react the same as another. Coho get hammered by road runoff in urban/suburban areas while chum there at the same time are not bothered.

But, the heavy harvest of Dungeness certainly accelerates any problems caused by the environment.

Puget Sound acidification has been a topic in several NOAA and other studies with various reports are available.

In addition to impacts on Dungeness crabs and oysters (all ready see as much as a 25% decline) other critters such as pteropods being affected.Pteropods are a small floating snail that is a major component of the marine food web for various species including salmon.

It appears that west coast of north America and especially Puget Sound will be a region where the impacts from acidification will hit early.

Curt

I should be recognized for doing the right thing too. . .I stopped crabbing 2-3 years ago when it got too lame for the effort and resource I put in. I think the expense and income lines probably just intersected on the Nisqually tribe's P & L report, and they got all naturalistically conservationalized and such.

fb

I have a hard time believing this is based off climate. If it was, I would first wonder why warmer areas, such as California and Oregon have seasons that are so much more liberal and an apparent higher abundance of crab. To the North, the Vancouver area has a smaller limit, but is left open all year in their in land waters, again pointing to higher numbers. If there is an environmental component, I would lean to the something being washed in to the water, as both the far south Puget Sound and far end of Hood Canal could have problems with this. The theory is that you can never over harvest the crabs as long as the females and undersized males are left alone. In fact, that is why Oregon allows the size of males down to 5 3/4 inches, as they argue that there should always be a large enough population of breeding male crabs under this size to not effect the population. So far, they seem to be correct as they seem to have adequate numbers to justify the larger bag limits.

Are there any studies showing that there is a significant water quality difference in South Puget Sound as compared to other areas, not just in Washington but in Califorina, Oregon and Vancouver?

Great questions. Science suggests that the influence of ocean acidification will likely impact northern puget sound long before it reaches the southern extent. So before people blame habitat and climate based habitat change, lets see some data to support that conclusion. It is pretty obvious that aggressive harvest coupled with natural fluctuations in crab population recruitment can explain 100% of why we have no crab left to target.

Lets see tribal and non-tribal harvest data for the past several years along with whatever recruitment information is available specifically for these southern crab management areas. Seems to be pretty well-accepted that the tribal fisheries have been very aggressive and incompletely reported. Is that true? I would like to see responsible co- management of this fishery so that everyone gets to participate.

For those might be interested in recent understanding of acidification within Puget Sound almost any search of Acidification of Puget Sound will produce information.

Curt

The speculation by the bios was heavily toward temperature impacts on the larval stage. Note the use of the word speculation.

Krijack - I have wondered for years about how WDFW and ODFW have resolved the issue of minimum size in concurrent management waters of the lower CR. WDFW's position is that the 6 1/4 minimum allows one to two spawning opportunities for sexually mature male Dungeness crab before they become legal to harvest in Puget Sound. The 5 3/4 minimum would seem to barely allow a male crab one opportunity - if that.

Then there is the issue of exactly how much meat one gets from a 5 3/4 inch crab versus 6 1/2. There was actually an idea floated around several years ago by former shellfish manager Childers to increase the minimum in P.S. to 7 inches. Obviously that didn't go anywhere.

To think this is based on anything other than over harvest is ridiculous.

Crabbing in Puget Sound got mega popular a few years back because of the size of the crab. Washingtonians and the sovereign nationals both over fished the hell out of them.
An endless sea of pots.

Q- Who is managing our resources?????
A- No one!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

WDFW's management model is reactionary.
There is zero prevention until it's too late.

Once again our state sets the ignorance bar.

Does this mean we MIGHT have overharvested salmon, too? Nah. That was all habitat destruction....

In other words, I agree. It really is simple.

Along the same lines of how they were recently blaming the Lake Sammamish kokanee crash on global warming rather than rampant over-development.

WE are never, ever, responsible. It is always THEM.

WDFW might as well let a Ouija Board set future regulations.

Or maybe Evo

I agree aggressive harvest on a declining population is not what should occur. Models certainly over predict on a lesser resource.

see the following -

https://www.pmel.noaa.gov/co2/files/wa_state_blue_ribbon_panel_oa_11-27-2012.pdf

See Chapter 2

This article as well as others that I have read mention that the water with the lowest ph (most acidic) has been found in Southern Hood Canal and that value has dropped significantly recently.

Curt

Succinct!

Total harvest (lbs), Crab area 2W (Pt Townsend to Kingston) (Numbers appx):

2007 194,000
2012 504,000
2015 821,600
2017 727,800

Total harvest (lbs). Crab area (Kingston to N. tip ofVashon):

2007 139,890
2012 365,700
2016 486,800
2017 312,000

Greed assures quotas will continue to increase, and commercial harvest assures Puget Sound will continue to feed the world. I wish that all catch would stay in-state, as a resource of the residents who live here. The pressure of the global economy is winning the war against our natural resources: Salmon, crab, geoduck, etc.

Why can't "they" put together a "win-win", like Chicken of the Sea "Stellar in Lite Olive Oil", or "Cormorant a L'orange". Wait, how about rebranding...they could call Chum something fancy, like "Keta".

Sorry, got off track...my thought is that the WA population will continue to skyrocket, while local and global demand will continue to exterminate our natural resources. The powers that be will continue to play Musical Chairs, hoping to get retirement, or the price per pound to max out, so they can get off the train without fault before it crashes.

As long as the demand remains high financially, over harvest will occur. Whether tribal or white commercial. When financial gain takes over, all natural resources suffer. I say ban all commercial sales of PS crab period. None for casinos, none for over seas markets. All take and seasons are for recreation, personal use, or tribal ceremonial.
You have to take the financial gain out of the equation. It's the only way to give the crab a fighting chance.