We are not getting 50%

Got this little tidbit from Fish Passage Center regarding the Yakima Indian take on the Columbia River.
***********************************
""During the Treaty fall fishery that occurred between Bonneville and McNary dams (Zone 6), reports from harvest indicated that about 92,400 Chinook, 7,700 steelhead, and 2,200 coho were sold to the buyers this season.""
************************************
Then I went to the WDFW fish report section and compiled a total sport caught Chinook count (Ilwaco, Wesport, Neah Bay) of 39,300 Chinook.


What is this???? Only one tribe caught 2 1/2 times the number of chinook as the entire Wa state ocean fishery!!!!! What about the other 28 tribes with fishing rights (ie, Mucks, Makahs, Chehalis, Puyallups, etc, etc.)??

It is hard to believe that the non-Indian commercial fishing take could make up for these huge differences. A much more plausible explanation is that we are getting screwed big time.

I don't have the numbers, but I know that if you add in the non-tribal commercial take it is even uglier and we're not even considering the by-catch issues........

Barnettm -
If you are looking at the creel check reports you need to remember only a relatively small fraction of the sport catch is checked at the dock and the final catch numbers will not be available for sometime. We need to return our punch cards (next spring?) and the numbers processed.

While it still may be the case that the non-treaty (sport and commercial) may still be less than 50% I doubt they will be quite as bleak as they appear at first blush. With the Columbia River fish part of the problems lies with how the Federal courts have ruled on how the ESA fisihing impacts are allocated - the majority go to the tribal fisheries (Which I'm sure doesn't surprise you).

Tight lines
Curt

I was not looking at creel check reports. I was looking at the numbers that WDFW actually think were caught.

Barnettum -
I found it - hadn't noticed the report before
Thanks
Curt

Let me first say that I don't think we know for sure what the real total catch is. The 50% figure is indian vs non-indian...that would not be only sport but commercial non indian. Like BB says we are not even discussing bycatch or other mortality that occurs...those numbers would really put your undies in a knot. If you really want to pick on the tribes try to count the fish sold that do not get recorded. Ask BB about the sales up Port Angeles way....or the guys under the first ave South Bridge in Seattle. And the egg sales from fish that never get sold. And the males with no eggs that just get tossed over the side or onto the river bank...Should I go on or are you pissed off enough?

What got me going on this issue is the amount......92,000 mature chinook salmon is a big number....dam near a quarter of the entire run. And then the guys upstream at Hanford Reach will spend 10-20 rod hours just to catch one fish and the total take per week is less than 500 fish.

I see the same thing in the winter in the straits. The Makahs take thousands of winter chinook but the total sports catch in the same area is more like a few hundred.

I have no idea what the projected return numbers are for the Skagit Coho this year...but I do know the showing so far anywhere above mid-river (Sedro) is pi$$ poor.

Neighbor tells me today that he and his Mrs. were fishing down by Cocherham Isl. yesterday after driving back from Mt. Vernon., He said they counted 9 nets staggered across the river at the Hwy 9 bridge and another 5 nets near Cocherham Isl.

This MUST stop. At this point I don't expect much of a season here upriver, at all. If a few show up, great, but there will not be near the numbers due to the excessive netting by the NA's.

Grrrrrr....

Oregon will be our new home as soon as I can arrange it. Someone is going to get a great deal on this nice place we have on the river.

Mike

We never will get 50% either!