Results 1 to 4 of 4

Thread: ADFG's DRAFT Chinook salmon gap analysis -- comments due FRIDAY, Nov 9

  1. #1
    Member MRFISH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    1,315

    Default ADFG's DRAFT Chinook salmon gap analysis -- comments due FRIDAY, Nov 9

    Who else has taken a look at the State's draft gap analysis for Chinook salmon? This was the document they prepared to start the discussions for the symposium and public comments on the document are due FRIDAY.

    Overall, it's a good document as a starting point. I've been looking more at the parts discussing the western Alaska rivers and developing my comments around those, but I'm curious what others may be thinking about what they suggest for other parts of the State.

    To whet you appetites, here are a few bits of what they have in their recommendations for southcentral, particularly the Kenai: they suggest a project that could/would lead to moving the Chinook sonar upriver to a site at which they claim can ensonify a "majority" of the river. They also suggest a project to estimate Kenai Chinook smolt abundance utilizing coded wire tags (CWT) and genetics, particularly to identify abundance by run (trib versus mainstem). Can they already (genetically) tell those run segments apart?


    LINK TO draft GAP ANALYSIS DOCUMENT:
    http://www.adfg.alaska.gov/static/ho...p_analysis.pdf

    Cover page for gap analysis (includes info about where to submit comments):
    http://www.adfg.alaska.gov/static/ho...overletter.pdf

  2. #2
    Member ak_cowboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    1,196

    Default

    Contact Tim McKinley at fish and game. He ran a project taking King genetic samples to determine the number of fish returning to the tribs. They've had the genetic database for some time.

  3. #3
    Member FishGod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Fishing your hole before you get there
    Posts
    1,948

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MRFISH View Post
    Can they already (genetically) tell those run segments apart?

    They have baseline data for the majority of the tribs, but they are still collecting samples for a few of them.
    Your bait stinks and your boat is ugly

  4. #4
    Member bushrat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Now residing in Fairbanks from the bush
    Posts
    4,363

    Default

    Thanks for getting this info out there Art! I have mostly delved into the Yukon aspect. As I've mentioned in the past, we've been contributing to the genetic baseline information ADFG has been compiling, I'd say it's a good idea to do that across the state for all runs, so we can use that to gauge run components and more effectively and fairly manage (e.g. if the beginning of run is an upriver spawning component, might not be good to allow fishing until it goes by <grin>).

    The CWT stuff is pretty spendy already. I sure don't want to see Whitehorse hatchery trying to pump out more chinooks to meet needs or goals for the Yukon. It would be good if ADFG didn't have to wait 24 hours min. on the Lower Yukon for the dna results to come back from Anchorage from the test fishery...not sure what kind of lab equipment it would take to do it there along the river, but from I hear weather sometimes delays results even longer...they need answers asap. And with some of the aerial surveys, have seen when those are either cancelled or delayed due to bad weather, both in Yukon and around here when they want to survey upper tribs to gauge what spawning may occur and spawning numbers.

    Looking at some of the catch #s, I also think that we could not be seeing reality as in so many cases with subsistence it's an honor system in filling out your daily catches. On top of all that, for the Yukon fishery the draft says that only 15% of folks are turning in their "voluntary" harvest calendars in areas off the road system, I'll have to ask about that, I thought those were mandatory (?), otherwise you don't get a permit the next season.This is all a part of the LTK and ADFG needs some better local knowledge on this I think.

    We'll never know everything of course. The more we know though, the more facts we have, the better we can manage. I do think education efforts need to be a large part of all this in order to get everyone on the same page that the resource is the #1 priority and at times it may be necessary that we have closures in order to conserve these runs so we will see them return in the future in better numbers.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •