Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234
Results 61 to 65 of 65

Thread: KRSA out of bounds again with press release

  1. #61
    Member MaximumPenetration's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Soldotna
    Posts
    427

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nerka View Post
    I still think KRSA using chinook to try and close fisheries was wrong and the chinook forecast is saying the goal will be reached. Relative to sockeye closing PU one day was silly. One fish bag limit is more complex question to answer as it involves above and below counter issues. Above counter is allowed 200,000 fish to harvest if 900,000 reached. Not sure what they have harvested to date.

    ADFG is correct in what they are doing presently. They could open terminal area but that is questionable.
    They closed PU down 2 days early.
    An unarmed man is subject, an armed man is a citizen.

  2. #62
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    5,807

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MaximumPenetration View Post
    They closed PU down 2 days early.
    True, when I posted that the word was for Monday night not Sunday night. However, it was still silly given they left the sport fishery open with the one fish bag limit. Total fish harvested would not have made a difference in the final analysis and would not have created hard feelings between users.

    This is a good opportunity to talk about commercial vs sport vs pu and harvest potential. The drift fleet always yells for everyone to be shut down when they have a period restricted. Set net fisherman do the same but this year even North K-Beach set netters were saying leave the PU fishery alone. So some perspective here. It is not just about the number of fish harvested but the risk of overharvest when one restricts a fishery. The drift fleet last period had 360 boats fishing and they can take 40% of what is out in the inlet. So restricting them with the uncertainty in the run size makes sense along with the set nets. In contrast, the risk of the dip net fishery for overharvest the last two days of the season is next to zero. It is a simple risk analysis when making a management call. In contrast, if the call was made a week earlier the PU fishery could have taken enough fish to make a difference. So when I hear commercial fisherman yell for other groups to be shut down when they are restricted I try to explain to them why tit for tat is not appropriate. It usually falls on deaf ears but one can only try.

    Some drift fisherman (leader of UCIDA) thinks that the drift fleet should be allowed to go out in fish in the inlet for chums and coho as the catch of sockeye will be low ( a few thousand) and not make a difference in the big picture. That is speculation on his part but the point is that ADFG does not know how many fish would be caught at this point in the seasonand the drift fleet just has too much fishing power to take the risk. I suspect around August 10th if the run looks to be over the drift fleet will be back fishing silvers on the west side of the inlet.

  3. #63
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    2,465

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nerka View Post
    No offense but this is nuts for a number of reasons. First the estimates of run strength are weak at best, second saving chinnok over all other stock escapement goals is bad fishery management, third large fish goal is about the ability to count not some quality of escapement objective, fourth the 13,500 goal has 2000 fish buffet from actual SEG so everyfish does not count at this point, fifth what trade offs are being made by giving chinook salmon some bs priority, and finally with a C&E how many fish are really being saved? This is a lot more complex than we need every king bs.
    Nerka I have to say that saving the Kenai Kings would take priority but that's me. I think they are a true Alaskan and National Treasure that are disappearing. The big Kings are already gone and sad to say those genetics are gone for good. Just a question but what happens when they are declared a endangered specie? Then things will change in a hurry but like always it will be too late.

  4. #64
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    5,807

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kgpcr View Post
    Nerka I have to say that saving the Kenai Kings would take priority but that's me. I think they are a true Alaskan and National Treasure that are disappearing. The big Kings are already gone and sad to say those genetics are gone for good. Just a question but what happens when they are declared a endangered specie? Then things will change in a hurry but like always it will be too late.
    If one wants to restore genetic diversity with Kings major changes to in river fisheries are needed.

    However making a chinook beg goal a goal a priority over other goals in all situations is not good fishery management

  5. #65
    Member hoose35's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Soldotna, Alaska, United States
    Posts
    3,023

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kgpcr View Post
    Nerka I have to say that saving the Kenai Kings would take priority but that's me. I think they are a true Alaskan and National Treasure that are disappearing. The big Kings are already gone and sad to say those genetics are gone for good. Just a question but what happens when they are declared a endangered specie? Then things will change in a hurry but like always it will be too late.
    Are those genetics gone for good? How do you know this?. I know for a fact there's still some big ones around


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Responsible Conservation > Political Allocation

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234

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
  •