Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 34

Thread: ADFG Making allocative recommendations?

  1. #1

    Default ADFG Making allocative recommendations?

    So I'm reading the new draft report put out by ADFG on Kenai King escapements. From what I read it basically recommends a new escapement goal of 15,000-30,000, and states that we see optimum yield at around 20,000. I believe it also converts old escapements to this new goal and shows that we exceeded this goal many past years since the mid-80's, but would love for someone else to read it and make sure I'm understanding it correctly.

    One paragraph really jumped out at me:

    "An additional consideration is that Kenai River Chinook salmon support a large sport fishery, and catch rates in that fishery depend on abundance. Run abundance (N) depends on return (R), which is maximized at higher escapements (SMAXR = 31,080; Figure 10) than is yield (maximized near SMSY = 19,930; Figure 9). Thus, between 20,000 and 30,000 spawners there is a tradeoff between yield and run size. Sacrifices in yield performance arising from raising the goal are counterbalanced by increased run abundance, and vice versa. A partial set of the values used to produce Figures 6 and 9 is provided in Appendix C to facilitate further exploration of these tradeoffs."

    If I understand that correctly, it says "despite the fact that allowing more fish to escape won't produce maximum sustained yield, it will provide better fishing in the sport fishery when we do this, so it should be considered." Isn't it ADFG's job to worry about the science when making these recommendations, and the BOF's job to do the allocating and bring the economic and social aspects of these goals into consideration?

    Could the fact that sportfish division, who produced the report I believe, is funded by liscense sales have anything to do with that recommendation?

  2. #2
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    215

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by smithtb View Post
    So I'm reading the new draft report put out by ADFG on Kenai King escapements. From what I read it basically recommends a new escapement goal of 15,000-30,000, and states that we see optimum yield at around 20,000. I believe it also converts old escapements to this new goal and shows that we exceeded this goal many past years since the mid-80's, but would love for someone else to read it and make sure I'm understanding it correctly.

    One paragraph really jumped out at me:

    "An additional consideration is that Kenai River Chinook salmon support a large sport fishery, and catch rates in that fishery depend on abundance. Run abundance (N) depends on return (R), which is maximized at higher escapements (SMAXR = 31,080; Figure 10) than is yield (maximized near SMSY = 19,930; Figure 9). Thus, between 20,000 and 30,000 spawners there is a tradeoff between yield and run size. Sacrifices in yield performance arising from raising the goal are counterbalanced by increased run abundance, and vice versa. A partial set of the values used to produce Figures 6 and 9 is provided in Appendix C to facilitate further exploration of these tradeoffs."

    If I understand that correctly, it says "despite the fact that allowing more fish to escape won't produce maximum sustained yield, it will provide better fishing in the sport fishery when we do this, so it should be considered." Isn't it ADFG's job to worry about the science when making these recommendations, and the BOF's job to do the allocating and bring the economic and social aspects of these goals into consideration?

    Could the fact that sportfish division, who produced the report I believe, is funded by liscense sales have anything to do with that recommendation?
    What I find interesting is the paragraph you noticed was discussed between staff just hours ago. What a coincidence that out of 68 pages, that one paragraph jumped out at you.

  3. #3
    Member fishNphysician's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Aberdeen WA
    Posts
    4,516

    Default

    I think it's a great paragraph to have in there.

    It clearly explains the trade-offs between managing to maximize sustained harvest (MSY emphasis optimizes dead fish) versus managing to maximize sustained abundance (MSR emphasis optimizes live fish).



    The number of dead fish isn't that far off either way, but abundance is SIGNIFCANTLY higher when managing for MSR.

    Bottom line, you don't have to give up much yield to maximize recruitment.
    "Let every angler who loves to fish think what it would mean to him to find the fish were gone." Zane Grey
    http://www.piscatorialpursuits.com/uploads/UP12710.jpg
    The KeenEye MD

  4. #4
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Sterling
    Posts
    421

    Default

    If we assume an Agency is srictly devoted to science. um, ahh, it would actually be prudent for that agency to spell out in simple words what their findings mean for various policy decisions. Policy makers are not generally conversant with the lingo and have no concept of science or Math.

    The Agency knows this and knows that how they phrase their explanations will likely determine policy. Bureaucratic Capture, I believe it is called.

    No specific accusation here, just a general comment on "The Process".

  5. #5

    Default ADFG Making allocative recommendations?

    Aktally,


    If you must know, I read as much of the report as I could on lunch break at work. As I have been waiting for this data for months and only had a few minutes, I read the table of contents and found the two sections that I wanted to read - the figures on previous escapements, and the big section in caps - 'ESCAPEMENT GOAL RECOMMENDATIONS'. That paragraph stuck out, as it suggested policies that it seems favors one specific user group. Seems it was a better topic of discussion than dipnetters getting their panties wet.

    Not quite sure what you're getting at, but I promise I don't have the ADFG office tapped.

  6. #6
    Member fishNphysician's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Aberdeen WA
    Posts
    4,516

    Default

    Smith, tally....

    Could either of you post a link to that document. I tried to google it and came up empty.

    Thanks!
    "Let every angler who loves to fish think what it would mean to him to find the fish were gone." Zane Grey
    http://www.piscatorialpursuits.com/uploads/UP12710.jpg
    The KeenEye MD

  7. #7

    Default ADFG Making allocative recommendations?


  8. #8
    Member fishNphysician's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Aberdeen WA
    Posts
    4,516

    Default

    Thx!

    Ok gonna get technical here.... but the answers to these questions will put the trade-offs into a very tangible numeric perspective.

    Based on the aggregate Ricker curve in Fig 7....

    1) what is the numeric yield (R- S) at Smsy?
    2) what is the numeric yield (R - S) at Smax?
    3) what is the numeric S on the left side of Smsy that has the equivalent yield of Smax

    tally?
    "Let every angler who loves to fish think what it would mean to him to find the fish were gone." Zane Grey
    http://www.piscatorialpursuits.com/uploads/UP12710.jpg
    The KeenEye MD

  9. #9
    Member fishNphysician's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Aberdeen WA
    Posts
    4,516

    Default

    Essentially I am asking....

    1) what is the yield at MSY?
    2) what is the yield at max recruitment?
    3) what is the sub-MSY escapement that produces the same yield as 2) above
    "Let every angler who loves to fish think what it would mean to him to find the fish were gone." Zane Grey
    http://www.piscatorialpursuits.com/uploads/UP12710.jpg
    The KeenEye MD

  10. #10

    Default ADFG Making allocative recommendations?

    FnP,

    I understand the argument, and also understand that, like the report also mentions, state policy determines that we manage off the sustained yield principle. An escapement goal report produced by ADFG is not the place to discuss different management strategies that seem to contradict state policy.

    This forum is a great place to have that discussion, however. Like I said, I understand the principle, and I understand why you would like the King runs to be managed that way. If one's primary concern is to have the best possible fishing in the river for their summer vacation, or for their inriver commercial business, managing for abundance makes sense.

    Many Alaskans view our salmon as a valuable natural resource that both individuals and industry can sustainably harvest. As this resource, by state constitution, belongs to Alaskans, we should manage it in a way that benefits Alaskans the most. Maximizing yield does that.

    I'll leave the math to someone more qualified, but I just don't like the obvious tipping of the hat to the KRSA strategy in the report.

  11. #11
    New member
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Soldotna
    Posts
    5,639

    Red face Fishin' obsession . . .

    Quote Originally Posted by smithtb View Post
    FnP, . . I understand why you would like the King runs to be managed that way. If one's primary concern is to have the best possible fishing in the river for their summer vacation, . . managing for abundance makes sense. . .


    “Angling for large trophy gamefish has become the obsession of many sportfishermen. The thrill of hooking and landing that fish of a lifetime . . is a rush . . One is rewarded with a sense of conquest . . The sheer elation must be experienced...”

    —Salmon-Trout-Steelheader, April/May, 2002, “Giant Kenai River Kings” by Francis Estalilla, MD:

    . . . . . . who knew?

  12. #12
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    welfare state of Alaska
    Posts
    5,153

    Default a lot more complicated..

    It is a lot more complicated than simply "maximizing yield".

    Does commercial catch by out-of-state permit holders, and then shipping the fish out of state provide the maximum benefit to the largest number of Alaskans? Is a fish caught by a set netter worth more than one caught by a drift netter - or a set netter - or a guy with a rod and reel? Is $10 in the pocket of one commercial guy worth more than $10 in the pocket of another? And how do you put a value one the recreational value to Alaskan residents? How much value do we place on tradition - should a set netter breaking even financially be allocated fish because he has been fishing for generations?

    From a socialist point of view we could simply look at what management provides the most income to the state coffers to be re-distributed to all Alaskans- not just those in South Central. Right or wrong- that method is basically what we do with much of the oil money from the North Slope. Half the fisheries taxes, however, are allocated to local communities - they aren't spread evenly throughout the state so oil money is in effect subsidizing comm fishermen while they are bad mouthing the oil guys.

    Then many of us pay federal taxes a portion of which gets returned as part of the fisheries disaster funds courtesy of our pork barrel senators in Washington. So by working rather than fishing I get to help those who did -or could have been fishing.

    All too dang complicated! Is it noon yet so I can start drinking my favorite adult beverage


    Quote Originally Posted by smithtb View Post
    FnP,

    I understand the argument, and also understand that, like the report also mentions, state policy determines that we manage off the sustained yield principle. An escapement goal report produced by ADFG is not the place to discuss different management strategies that seem to contradict state policy.

    This forum is a great place to have that discussion, however. Like I said, I understand the principle, and I understand why you would like the King runs to be managed that way. If one's primary concern is to have the best possible fishing in the river for their summer vacation, or for their inriver commercial business, managing for abundance makes sense.

    Many Alaskans view our salmon as a valuable natural resource that both individuals and industry can sustainably harvest. As this resource, by state constitution, belongs to Alaskans, we should manage it in a way that benefits Alaskans the most. Maximizing yield does that.

    I'll leave the math to someone more qualified, but I just don't like the obvious tipping of the hat to the KRSA strategy in the report.
    Living the urban lifestyle so I can pay my way and for my family's needs, and support my country. And you?
    ".. ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country" JFK

  13. #13
    Member MRFISH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    1,315

    Default Keep BEG's and SEG's pure, let the Board handle the rest

    It is quite ironic that the Department, who tries very hard to puclicly stay out of the allocative issues when it comes to proposals, lets the same thing creep into their escapement goals. I’ve always felt, and I think the policies back this up, that the Department’s BEG’s and SEG’s should be purely science based.

    The Sustainable Salmon Policy (5 AAC 39.222) says BEG’s are intended to aim for MSY within a range to allow for stock productivity and data uncertainty. It also says A SEG shall be used when thy either don’t have the date for a BEG or the ability ot manage for one…further, it states a SEG “will be developed from the best available biological information” (my emphasis).

    The points raised by the Department about inriver abundance and fishing success are totally valid, but that has no place in a SEG. They should be flagging it with those concerns for the Board to consider as an OEG, but leave their BEG/SEG’s free of these considerations.

    When the Department allows this to creep into their escapement goals, it gives the public reason to doubt the basis for other goals and this is something the Department should go to great lengths to avoid.

    I have never been able to understand the Department’s aversion to OEG’s. Perhaps they simply feel it’s a second-guessing of their science (fueled by their own actions?), or maybe it’s a mistrust of the Board and its sausage making-like process. But, I think the policies are fairly clear on this one (the escapement goal policy, 5 AAC 39.223, in addition).
    Art.
    "Fishing relaxes me. It's like yoga, except I still get to kill something." --Ron Swanson

  14. #14

    Default ADFG Making allocative recommendations?

    TV,

    In 2011, The Port of Kenai ranked #28 in the United States for value of commercial fisheries landings. This is not a small-time, no value fishery. Both the sport and commercial fisheries are very valuable, and many of the states residents depend on them.

    http://www.st.nmfs.noaa.gov/Assets/c...ercial2011.pdf

  15. #15

    Default ADFG Making allocative recommendations?

    Quote Originally Posted by fishNphysician View Post
    Essentially I am asking....

    1) what is the yield at MSY?
    2) what is the yield at max recruitment?
    3) what is the sub-MSY escapement that produces the same yield as 2) above
    1) 33,800
    2) 28,600 @ 30,000
    3) about 11,000

  16. #16
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    welfare state of Alaska
    Posts
    5,153

    Default one big factor..

    One big factor to consider is that while the Port of Kenai is important, it is relatively small commercially compared to the rest of the state, it supports the majority of Alaska residents with fish for sport and food. It is a matter of simple geography - the majority of the states residents live withing driving distance of the Kenai River. In contrast, Bristol Bay provides a tremendous yield of reds, yet it has almost no private take since it is so far removed from the population masses.

    I don't know how many would participate, but as I've mentioned before, I'll gladly buy most of my fish at a reasonable price rather than go through the zoo of dip netting and the long drive and expense etc. Right now there no means most of us have to fill our freezers rather than paying outrageous retail prices, so the zoo at the mouth and upstream continues. Might be something to consider for future years as the population continues to grow.


    Quote Originally Posted by smithtb View Post
    TV,

    In 2011, The Port of Kenai ranked #28 in the United States for value of commercial fisheries landings. This is not a small-time, no value fishery. Both the sport and commercial fisheries are very valuable, and many of the states residents depend on them.

    http://www.st.nmfs.noaa.gov/Assets/c...ercial2011.pdf
    Living the urban lifestyle so I can pay my way and for my family's needs, and support my country. And you?
    ".. ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country" JFK

  17. #17

    Default ADFG Making allocative recommendations?

    Bfish,

    Thanks for the math.

    Given that the Kenai is also managed for sockeye as well, (which involves yield tradeoff discussions) an objective report might explain the tradeoffs associated with going both above and below these newly recommended goals. Seems we only got one side of the story in the report. Bummer.

  18. #18
    New member
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Soldotna
    Posts
    5,639

    Question

    Quote Originally Posted by MRFISH View Post
    It is quite ironic that the Department, who tries very hard to puclicly stay out of the allocative issues . . .

    "To borrow a concept from the business community, the Department is in the business of providing 'product lines' for different 'markets' of recreational use."

    —From ADF&G Meeting Report, Region III Public Meeting Strategic Planning Issues, Solution & Vision, Princess Lodge, Fairbanks, 10/27/2001
    *****************


    "[Catch and Release] is a tool which enables managers to continue maximizing the opportunity to participate in recreational fisheries while reducing mortality to what can be termed 'catch-and-release mortality.' In this way, the economic value of recreational fishing is not jeopardized as the opportunity to participate is not reduced."

    — Doug Vincent-Lang, et al, "Mortality of coho salmon caught and released using sport tackle in the Little Susitna River, Alaska, 1992"
    *****************




  19. #19
    Member fishNphysician's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Aberdeen WA
    Posts
    4,516

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bfish View Post
    1) 33,800
    2) 28,600 @ 30,000
    3) about 11,000
    OK I found Appdx D1 in the document, pertinent excerpt below. Emphasis added at key S/R/Y points.

    Spawners/Recruits/Yield

    10000....... 40,890..... 30,220
    12000....... 45,820..... 33,180
    13000 > ---> ---> ---> ---> Yield roughly equivalent to R-max
    14000....... 49,940..... 35,320
    16000....... 53,150..... 36,750
    18000....... 55,790..... 37,470
    20000....... 57,820..... 37,630 MSY
    22000....... 59,240..... 37,260
    24000....... 60,280..... 36,400
    26000....... 60,930..... 35,190
    28000....... 61,370..... 33,610 R-max
    30000....... 61,210..... 31,760

    In the range from 15-30K spawners, paper recruitment ratios range from 2:1 to a bit over 3:1. Based on this Ricker data, the escapement recommendation for 15-30K seems very appropriate.
    "Let every angler who loves to fish think what it would mean to him to find the fish were gone." Zane Grey
    http://www.piscatorialpursuits.com/uploads/UP12710.jpg
    The KeenEye MD

  20. #20
    Member fishNphysician's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Aberdeen WA
    Posts
    4,516

    Default Observations...

    The total variation in yield between any two escapements within the proposed SEG is going to be about 10% or less. The notion that there will be significant forgone yield at the higher SEG escapements is essentially a NON-issue.

    Between MSY and R-max the exploitation rate can be safely managed for 55-65%.
    "Let every angler who loves to fish think what it would mean to him to find the fish were gone." Zane Grey
    http://www.piscatorialpursuits.com/uploads/UP12710.jpg
    The KeenEye MD

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

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
  •