Too little too late?? S.E. Alaska Chinook closure

Just saw this on one of the B.C. forums.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
CONTACT: Charles O. Swanton, Deputy Commissioner, (907) 465-4115
ADF&G Announces Non-retention of Chinook Salmon for Commercial and Recreational Fisheries Throughout Southeast Alaska

August 7, 2017, JUNEAU – Due to poor ocean survival conditions for Chinook (king) salmon, which are persisting in Southeast Alaska and British Columbia, extreme management measures are necessary to restrict harvest in coast wide fisheries that are directed at stocks originating in Southeast Alaska, Northern British Columbia, the Fraser River, and the Washington Coast.


Inseason information from ADF&G, the Canadian Department of Fisheries and Oceans, and NOAA surveys off the coast of Oregon, Washington, and the Gulf of Alaska all indicate that poor production conditions are currently occurring and will persist through at least 2018. In particular, Southeast Alaska and British Columbia stocks are experiencing historically low production; many of the affected stocks will not meet escapement goals or management objectives in 2017.


The inseason data and stock specific information cannot be ignored when conservation of wild stocks is the foundation of the Alaska Sustainable Salmon Fisheries Policy and the Pacific Salmon Treaty. Therefore, it is imperative that Alaska offer relief now for these stocks, with a focus on protecting future production.


Although it is a very difficult decision to make, retention of Chinook salmon will cease at 12:01am, Thursday, August 10, 2017, in the Southeast Alaska recreational and commercial fisheries and non-retention will continue through September. Information on the status of stocks is still being collected and will inform management decisions beyond the September time frame.


Related Division of Sport Fish News Release:

http://www.adfg.alaska.gov/sf/EONR/index.cfm?ADFG=Region.R1&Year=2017


Related Division of Commercial Fisheries News Release:

http://www.adfg.alaska.gov/index.cfm?adfg=commercialbyareasoutheast.salmon

notice the picture...



http://aksportingjournal.com/retention-king-salmon-prohibited-southeast-alaska/

Sad but just one more warning as to where so many species and not just fish are headed.

Salmon are cyclical but each time there's less it seems. I'm glad they're doing something and I don't think next year will be different. The gooyblob in the N.P doesn't help.

Now that all of the Wa fish have moved thru they can go ahead and shut it down.

My thought exactly,exploit everyone else's and protect their own.

I don't think that the trollers in SE expect much of anything in 2018. I'd not be surprised to see it shut down for winter and spring.

For the WIN ! ! ! !

Glad to see that AK is finally acknowledging the downturn in PNW chinook productivity that happened 2 years ago.

The ocean turned for the worse in 2014. Even as we were seeing modern day record returns of CR kings in 2014 and 2015, the outbound smolts were swimming into a very hostile ocean.

In terms of diminished ocean productivity for chinook, 42 straight months of positive PDO is really coming home to roost. And it shows no signs of letting up anytime soon.

http://research.jisao.washington.edu/pdo/PDO.latest.txt

Now the $64 question......Should Washington State, at this time, restrict or cut back the Chinook fishery in this State?????

Humptulips 2017, cut back to "hatchery Chinook only".

Ocean fishery which started as a 1 Chinook, went to 2 Chinook....in my opinion the 2nd Chinook should not have been allowed.

Time for all fisheries in this State to feel the pain....why wait and then say "the model was wrong, we need to make adjustments", sorry in-river but you have to be restricted, AGAIN!!!!!!

The conventional wisdom is that when ocean conditions are bad for the Norte, down here in WA/OR/CA do well. The PDO has, in the past, lead to these swings.

So, in the short term the southern managers will refer back to "history". Also, if AK and BC get off our fish we have more to catch here.

I would prefer that fisheries were built from the inside (escapement, river, bay, ocean) out but there is likely too much money that will still push outside in.

What I don't understand is how PDO is blamed when both AK and the South coast are in a down turn at the same time. I did see BRistol Bay was good but that looks like a isolated example.

This is the future. Why catch your own fish when you can catch them from another State/Country.

AK is curtailing the low-holing of PNW chinook which are in a definite downtrend.

Many AK-origin stocks are on the upswing again

I've been hearing about low return forecasts to S.E. for a few months now but really just going by what the article says:

In particular, Southeast Alaska and British Columbia stocks are experiencing historically low production; many of the affected stocks will not meet escapement goals or management objectives in 2017

Why would AK curtail low-holing?

AK, actually Jeff Koenings when he worked there, made the claim that they owned/deserved the fish that reared off of AK because their laws protected the ocean habitat. This was in response to a BC claim against AK low-holing that said since we protect the freshwater habitat we should get the fish.

It was actually part of the US/Canada Treaty (at least the first iteration) that whoever takes an action that increases escapement/improves habitat reaps all the benefits of the increased production.

We had one really good example of how it worked. One of the Fraser sockeye stocks came in stronger. There was the opportunity to add 100K or so to the escapement and still have the fisheries that had been planned and then some. Canada proposed that both sides put 50K on the grounds. The US, lead by a WDFW Panel Member, was opposed . The US technical staff finally convinced the US Panel to think first, but it took an additional week to hold the day-long meeting and make them see the value of not killing 50K now and take a 100K or more in 4 years. Back at the bi-lateral meeting the US we would agree and Canada said that "Thanks, but we'll put them on the grounds from our share and take the benefits ourselves".

That concept of if you pay for enhancement/habitat protection, habitat restoration you should reap the benefits should be put in place in WA.

Why not negotiate a treaty that keeps AK and BC commercials off the "Ocean Freeway" where all the stocks are mixed? Confine them to the bays and estuary areas where most of their own stocks congregate. That would guarantee them their "owned/deserved" fish, minimizing impacts on southern stocks.

And King5 News this morning was hyping Alaska Wild Salmon Days featuring a chef and his fancy recipe for Chinook: http://www.king5.com/news/local/heres-how-to-celebrate-alaska-wild-salmon-day/463350337.

From the link: "Here's a fun fact, Alaska shares 90 percent of its wild salmon with the world."

No mention of how much of that 90% are lower 48 origin fish nor how many are ESA-listed Puget Sound Chinook.

More garbage "journalism," painting the commercial fishing industry's wanton rape of 90% of the entire wild, Pacific salmon resource as a "fun" fact. Here's another "fun" fact: only about 10% of our population (the 10% that fish or have fished for salmon recreationally) has any clue about the realities of the commercial salmon industry, which explains how 90% of "Alaska's wild salmon" being "shared with the world" is widely thought to be a good thing. It all adds up to 100% bull$hit.

Obvious commercial propaganda right there. I truly believe the warm, fuzzy portrayal of commercial fishing as "feeding the world" is the biggest reason the status quo remains, year after year, despite outcry from those who know the truth.

Looks like the commercial fishing video contest advertised in the article is going to be a bit of a bust, in light of the news that prompted this thread....

To get AK and BC off of the southern stocks you would have to get WA off of the BC stocks. Simply put, I doubt the Tribes will give up Fraser and all the by catch that goes with it.

What would AK get for getting off of others fish? They get all theirs, because nobody else does. BC at least could trade US fish for Canadian. AK would be forced to cut back and live only on what they could produce in their own systems, which apparently isn't enough.