Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 100

Thread: KRSA urges a more precautionary approach

  1. #1
    Member fishNphysician's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Aberdeen WA
    Posts
    4,516

    Default KRSA urges a more precautionary approach


    Manage Kenai kings cautiously in face of uncertainty

    April 29th, 2013

    As the hours of daylight ascend and temperatures rise, Alaska’s rivers are opening back up to welcome home returning salmon. After the long winter, sport and personal-use anglers are getting their gear ready in anticipation of the summer fishing season. While the preseason forecast for sockeye salmon is robust for the Kenai River, projections for Kenai kings are one of the lowest on record for both the early and late runs.


    Preseason projections for king salmon returns elsewhere are also tracking poorly, in line with the recent years of historic low abundances across the state. To deal with the state’s continuing crisis in king salmon management, the Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADFG) has pronounced a wide ranging series of preseason, precautionary restrictions and closures for king salmon fisheries across the state.


    On the Yukon River, the projection for Chinook continues to be poor to below average, with expected necessary harvest reductions in the subsistence fishery and no commercial fishery anticipated to be opened.


    In Southeast Alaska, the abundance index this year for Southeast Alaska Chinook salmon decreased 20 percent from 2012, triggering reductions in all user and gear groups that harvest kings.


    On the Copper River, the preseason forecast for Chinook salmon is 33 percent below the 14-year average (1999-2012) and if realized will be the fifth smallest return since 1980.


    In Bristol Bay, because of limited information and low abundance of king salmon over the past five years, commercial fishing restrictions have been implemented for 2013, which include gear and fishing time for each district.


    In Kodiak, recent years of poor productivity warrant conservative management approaches, with non-retention in the Karluk River and reduced bag, possession and annual limits in the Ayakulik River king sport fisheries.


    In Lower Cook Inlet, gear, time, bag, possession and annual limit restrictions have been announced for the king salmon sport fisheries on the Anchor, Deep Creek, and Ninilchik rivers and for the marine recreational fishery from Ninilchik south to Bluff Point.


    In the northern district of Upper Cook Inlet, king salmon fishery restrictions for the sport fisheries have been put in place for the Little Su and Susitna River drainage, while in the commercial fisheries time (50 percent reduction) and area restrictions were announced.


    In the central district of Upper Cook Inlet, bag and possession limits for king salmon on the Kasilof River are closed to retention of wild fish and reduced to one hatchery-produced king.


    While the forecast for Kenai River king salmon (early and late runs) is projected to be at historic low abundances, ADFG has not yet made any announcement on how it plans to manage either fishery this year. The early run Kenai king fishery starts with single hook and no bait allowed, then can step up or down depending on fish abundance during the season. The late-run Kenai king fishery has no mandatory restrictions to start the season July 1, and it starts later in the year than many of the other king salmon fisheries in Cook Inlet.


    As a fishery conservation organization, Kenai River Sportfishing Association (KRSA) believes fish come first and we support the proactive, preseason and precautionary actions taken by ADFG for king salmon fisheries across the state during these times of statewide low abundance of king salmon. When it comes to fishery management strategies to deal with low abundance of Kenai kings, we have repeatedly advocated for similar proactive, precautionary measures, as have been announced for other watersheds across the state.


    KRSA believes the best approach is to start the fishing season for Kenai kings in a conservation harvest mode and then, if in-season returns show a harvestable surplus is available, liberalize the fishery. Such an approach can be considered a step-up approach, in contrast to a step-down approach, which starts the season with liberal harvest strategies and puts on the brakes if low escapement projections persist into the run. The problem we see with the step-down approach during times of low abundance of king salmon is that a liberalized start will more often lead to closure of the fishery earlier in the season than a more conservative approach. Fish saved early in the run often can be the difference between finishing the season with harvest restrictions and having it closed prematurely. KRSA believes there is more value to be gained by having a full season with harvest restrictions than one in which too many fish harvested early in the return leaves nothing for escapement, forcing early closures to the season for all gear groups.


    For early-run Kenai king salmon management, the average mid-point of the return is June 7-10. By that time, ADFG has a fairly good sense to be able to project whether the lower end of the optimal escapement goal (OEG) of 5,300 early run Kenai kings will be met. With a 2013 preseason forecast lower than the midpoint of the escapement goal range, it does not look like there will be many fish available for harvest. Last year, mandatory catch and release went into effect June 15. And by June 22, the fishery was closed. It will be interesting to see how ADFG approaches the 2013 season for early-run Kenai king salmon management, and we will be watching closely.


    For the late-run Kenai king salmon management, the average mid-point of the return is about the third week in July. In 2013, there is a new lowered escapement threshold for late-run Kenai kings, set at 11,700 fish (Didson sonar counts). Last season, the lower threshold for king escapement was closer to 18,000 fish (Didson sonar counts). In 2012, ADFG could not project an in-season escapement above that number until the very end of July, at which time they were able to reopen the commercial set net fishery in August; by that time, the season for the in-river sport fishery for kings had ended and ADFG rescinded an in-river no-bait restriction for the silver salmon sport fishery.


    How ADFG chooses to manage late-run Kenai king salmon this season will be one of the most scrutinized and watched issues in 2013. How will a new lowered goal for late-run Kenai king salmon impact ADFG management actions? Will the lowered bar for king escapements spur ADFG to liberalize the commercial, sport and personal-use fisheries with no preseason precautionary measures and only rely on step-down measures to meet escapement goals?


    Or will ADFG enter the season with a suite of more conservative approaches that pairs restrictions in all user groups to reduce harvests of kings until a more accurate understanding of the run strength emerges later in July? If the earlier king returns throughout Cook Inlet and the state remain poor as projected, will it influence ADFG management decisions?

    ADFG is in the unenviable position of having to pick winners and losers, not just among user groups, but also for the fish. The lowest escapement on record for late-run Kenai kings is 16,000 in 2010. With no return data yet from that brood year, ADFG is left with no biological data to know whether just squeaking above the new minimum goal is wise or not. The lowest escapement ever for which there is brood year data is 26,000 fish in 1989, more than two decades ago when ocean productivity was altogether different than it is today.

    KRSA believes the most prudent approach for fisheries management of Kenai kings in 2013 is to act in a conservative manner in both the early and late runs, as ADFG has chosen to do in the face of low abundance of king salmon throughout the state. We believe a conservative start with harvest restrictions in place for all user groups is most likely to be successful in providing more fishing opportunity over the course of the season. Then as the escapement data comes in during the late-run in July, maintain a precautionary zone of paired restrictions for all users group if escapements in real fish are projected less than 20,000 fish, and a step-up strategy to liberalize harvests when escapement projections rise above 20,000.
    "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

  2. #2
    New member
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Soldotna
    Posts
    5,639

    Wink

    Quote Originally Posted by fishNphysician View Post

    . . As a fishery conservation organization, Kenai River Sportfishing Association (KRSA) . .

    . . . . . . . .

  3. #3
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    1,959

    Default

    looks like a great year! Out of Homer I know of more spawner kings killed this year then last year if that helps! That number is 4 as of now

  4. #4
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    1,293

    Default ok then

    I have an idea for a restriction. How about no directed fishing for Kings above a certain cut off. Say river mile 3. If they get past that area, they are free to breed. Get them seabright or not at all. The Kenai isn't the Yukon. This is a practical idea, and well past it's time. Want to save the fish? Then do it. In river effects are the most direct, and easily controlled. the smaller area will still allow for the 'extended time" that allows KRSA to keep guides making money dependably all season. Gear restrictions/times/limits managed for the area as normal. I'm all for it as a recreational angler who is chosing to do what in my power without demanding others do so too. I believe setnetters/drifters are limited and have a much better system than we recreational anglers. That's just the truth. We could improve it, but we don't. We as a group would rather whine, and blame other user groups. I mean c'mon. I'm sure some are just going to say I'm being pro-commercial with this post. I'd just say I'm being factual, and straightup. This thread is just a diversion (shhhhh don't read the Bushrat thread on the unbelievable KRSA letters.)

  5. #5

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Akbrownsfan View Post
    I have an idea for a restriction. How about no directed fishing for Kings above a certain cut off. Say river mile 3. If they get past that area, they are free to breed. Get them seabright or not at all. The Kenai isn't the Yukon. This is a practical idea, and well past it's time. Want to save the fish? Then do it. )
    Seems like a good idea. How about no King fishing below the pastures also? If they would put the resource first for a few years we might see the good old days again.

  6. #6

    Default

    The Kenai ER kings have been decreasing for a longer time than other places. We should know what didn't work there. Why is the state eyeing these other rivers? Are they planning on using the same failed management tools to "rescue" those runs?
    Mike
    Mike
    www.alaskaatvclub.org
    There is a faster way off the mountain, might hurt a little though.

  7. #7
    Member willphish4food's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Willow, AK
    Posts
    3,354

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mike Echo View Post
    The Kenai ER kings have been decreasing for a longer time than other places. We should know what didn't work there. Why is the state eyeing these other rivers? Are they planning on using the same failed management tools to "rescue" those runs?
    Mike
    How silly of you to claim there are failed management tools in Alaska fisheries. It is an accepted fact that Alaska's fisheries are the best managed in the world, and her managers are above reproach.

  8. #8
    Member ak_cowboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    1,196

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Akbrownsfan View Post
    I have an idea for a restriction. How about no directed fishing for Kings above a certain cut off. Say river mile 3. If they get past that area, they are free to breed. Get them seabright or not at all. The Kenai isn't the Yukon. This is a practical idea, and well past it's time.

    I'd just say I'm being factual, and straightup.
    You've never fished up river... I've seen chrome hens with sea lice above the moose river lots of times. Give anglers lodge or Big Sky a call and ask about all the chrome kings they catch up there.

    I'm not sure what the KRSA is going for with their letter....

    sent from my igloo

  9. #9
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    welfare state of Alaska
    Posts
    5,153

    Default totally different..

    Absolutely - the fisheries manangment in Alaska is the sole exception to the long worldwide history of commercial fishing destroying the resources. How silly of one to claim that we can't be the sole exception in the history of civilization.

    The shame, the shame!


    Quote Originally Posted by willphish4food View Post
    How silly of you to claim there are failed management tools in Alaska fisheries. It is an accepted fact that Alaska's fisheries are the best managed in the world, and her managers are above reproach.
    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

  10. #10
    New member
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Soldotna
    Posts
    5,639

    Unhappy Opportunity for whom?

    Quote Originally Posted by fishNphysician View Post
    . . We believe a conservative start with harvest restrictions in place for all user groups is most likely to be successful in providing more fishing opportunity . .

    If "harvest restrictions" means "catch-and-release," then "more fishing opportunity" is a joke.


    No "more fishing opportunity" for those who would like to eat what they catch or for those who object to the ethics of catch-and-release.


    This is exactly what the C&R, fishing-for-thrills folks don't get—for many anglers, C&R/fishing-for-thrills isn't fishing.

  11. #11

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Marcus View Post

    This is exactly what the C&R, fishing-for-thrills folks don't get—for many anglers, C&R/fishing-for-thrills isn't fishing.
    That's your personal opinion though. Millions of anglers down south fish a bunch, and never eat a fish. I know guys who pay big bucks for charters in Hawaii, and never keep a fish.

  12. #12
    Member Tearbear's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    1,986

    Default

    I'm in the C&E category...catch and eat. Though I don't consider it a 'sport'... just like I don't consider hunting a 'sport'...I think of it as a way to harvest some good natural food for the table.
    "Grin and Bear It"

  13. #13
    New member
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Soldotna
    Posts
    5,639

    Lightbulb

    Quote Originally Posted by 270ti View Post
    That's your personal opinion though. Millions of anglers down south fish a bunch, and never eat a fish. I know guys who pay big bucks for charters in Hawaii, and never keep a fish.

    Thanks, and that's very true, ti, but I'm not alone—I represent a user group.


    To make a fishery C&R only and say it provides "more opportunity" begs the question, "Opportunity for whom?"


    Not for me, not for those who want to eat what they catch, and not for those who object to C&R.


    We're all users, ti, and we all have personal opinions. I have mine, others have theirs, and they are welcome to them. My only point is, let's be fair and let's be honest. Pandering to one user group while denying another user group isn't fair, and it isn't honest.

  14. #14

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 270ti View Post
    That's your personal opinion though. Millions of anglers down south fish a bunch, and never eat a fish. I know guys who pay big bucks for charters in Hawaii, and never keep a fish.
    In Hawaii, charter clients don't keep the fish because the charter operators (who are limited entry I believe) typically sell the fish on the commercial market - often how the crew makes money if I'm not mistaken. While some let you keep what you can reasonably eat during your vacation, they make it very hard to ship seafood home - didn't see any insulated boxes or dry ice at Safeway. Don't know how many hook and release charter operators there are over there, but all of the ones I've been on kept every fish they legally could. Perhaps these practices have changed sice I was there or are unique to the island of Maui, as I haven't fished on the others, but it is a different setup for sure.

  15. #15
    Member Tearbear's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    1,986

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Marcus View Post
    —I represent a user group.

    Pandering to one user group while denying another user group isn't fair, and it isn't honest.
    Marcus, what user group is it that you represent?

    And no it's not fair or honest to pander one group & deny another...

    Also the continued bashing of commercial fishermen is getting old...and I have no ties whatsoever to the commercial fishery.
    "Grin and Bear It"

  16. #16
    Member Tearbear's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    1,986

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tearbear View Post
    Marcus, what user group is it that you represent?
    Guess I made it on your 'don't answer' list...whatever...I'll have to assume that you don't really represent 'any' user group. Maybe someone else could enlighten me...what user group does Marcus represent?
    "Grin and Bear It"

  17. #17
    New member
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Soldotna
    Posts
    5,639

    Wink Be patient . . it's a virtue . . .

    Quote Originally Posted by Tearbear View Post
    Guess I made it on your 'don't answer' list...whatever...I'll have to assume that you don't really represent 'any' user group. Maybe someone else could enlighten me...what user group does Marcus represent?

    Sorry, Tearbear, I wasn't able to get back to you quickly enough . . had to run down to SBS for some 2 X 4s for a honey-do project.


    But I'm back now,


    I am of that "user group" who fishes to eat.

  18. #18
    Member Tearbear's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    1,986

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Marcus View Post
    I am of that "user group" who fishes to eat.
    Thanks for your reply.
    "Grin and Bear It"

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

    Default

    We believe a conservative start with harvest restrictions in place for all user groups is most likely to be successful in providing more fishing opportunity over the course of the season.

    Many sense the rumblings that ADFG may be warming up to this approach. Things that make ya go ..... HMMMMMMMM?
    "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
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    1,293

    Default

    Hmmmmmmm, do you mean the conservative start were C&R gets to fish, but everyone else who has a different harvest method doesn't? I sure hope not.

    hmmmmmmmmmmmm

Page 1 of 5 123 ... 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
  •