Results 1 to 19 of 19

Thread: Is Deshka Chinook SEG too low?

  1. #1
    Member willphish4food's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Willow, AK
    Posts
    3,612

    Default Is Deshka Chinook SEG too low?

    This is the 3rd year now that Deshka has fallen well below the minimum SEG threshold, even with a complete closure of all setnet and sport fish activity this year. Yet all parent years from 2010 through 2016 were within SEG. If meeting the SEG does not yield the result of sustaining escapements, shouldn't that mean that the SEG needs adjustment?

  2. #2
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Vancouver, Washington
    Posts
    1,274

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by willphish4food View Post
    This is the 3rd year now that Deshka has fallen well below the minimum SEG threshold, even with a complete closure of all setnet and sport fish activity this year. Yet all parent years from 2010 through 2016 were within SEG. If meeting the SEG does not yield the result of sustaining escapements, shouldn't that mean that the SEG needs adjustment?
    Maybe.

    Escapement goals are established with a recognition that ocean conditions are variable, and are a known source of uncertainty. Further, future predictions on juvenile/sub-adult/adult survival in the salt are difficult and sometimes baffling. We might know what the ocean conditions are this year (good, bad, ugly), but next year may be very different. And we don't have a good way of predicting what they might be. Setting the goals is based on incomplete knowledge, so they have to assume ‘average’ ocean survival.

    If ocean survival is really poor, that might call for a change in the goals. But only if you assume the poor ocean conditions will persist. If you think the poor ocean conditions are transitory, and will be replaced by more ‘normal’ conditions, the current goals may be just fine.

    But it never hurts the fish to set the goals higher, thereby restricting harvest (from whatever source) so that more adults make it onto the spawning grounds. I recognize that restricting harvest isn’t the most popular option among the folks who depend on harvesting those stocks to ‘make ends meet’. But it never hurts the fish.

    (I recognize that the above three sentences usually provokes a robust, and sometimes heated, discussion on this forum......)

  3. #3
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    252

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by willphish4food View Post
    This is the 3rd year now that Deshka has fallen well below the minimum SEG threshold, even with a complete closure of all setnet and sport fish activity this year. Yet all parent years from 2010 through 2016 were within SEG. If meeting the SEG does not yield the result of sustaining escapements, shouldn't that mean that the SEG needs adjustment?
    If you talk to people it is more than goals and variable conditions. There are king salmon rivers in Alaska that had great fishing great runs I fished them remote places now last 10 years pretty much not much fishing. It is time to realize some other runs will also be going the same way unless things like our environment the climate get back to normal that's what I have been told. If you talk to people on the river at deshka not only are numbers small the fish have also been small. It will be hard to set goals to get out of the problem because from what I have heard it is not the problem and won't solve it but I do hope there are some good years left along the way in the future. I have not been up there this year might go for coho but I heard the deshka river temps were in the 80 degrees this summer.

  4. #4
    Member willphish4food's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Willow, AK
    Posts
    3,612

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kidfromgarcia View Post
    If you talk to people it is more than goals and variable conditions. There are king salmon rivers in Alaska that had great fishing great runs I fished them remote places now last 10 years pretty much not much fishing. It is time to realize some other runs will also be going the same way unless things like our environment the climate get back to normal that's what I have been told. If you talk to people on the river at deshka not only are numbers small the fish have also been small. It will be hard to set goals to get out of the problem because from what I have heard it is not the problem and won't solve it but I do hope there are some good years left along the way in the future. I have not been up there this year might go for coho but I heard the deshka river temps were in the 80 degrees this summer.
    River temps did get very high. Fortunately they have cooled down a bunch, and most kings should still be able to spawn successfully. The Deshka SEG is a very big deal, because it heavily affects fishing regs for both the commercial fishery and sport fishery for the entire Susitna and Yentna. It is the only inseason weir in the system. Deshka runs have been stronger than many others in the system, but now the changes that have caused the collapse of other runs may be showing in the Deshka. IF the SEG is too low, what does that mean to Deshka? Well, it could easily get overfished, because on good years, managers push to not exceed the top end, and on poor years, will continue to fish until it is apparent there aren't enough fish. The mixed stock fisheries at the mouth of the Big Su and mouth of the Deshka will take a higher number of fish from streams other than the Deshka. Finally, if the top end is too low, strong year returns won't be able to cover for weak years as well as they would otherwise.

  5. #5
    Member fishNphysician's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Aberdeen WA
    Posts
    4,781

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by willphish4food View Post
    If meeting the SEG does not yield the result of sustaining escapements, shouldn't that mean that the SEG needs adjustment?
    Careful what you ask for wp4f. The think tank at ADFG will tell you that if the current SEG is incapable of replacing itself, it is butting up against carrying capacity. That means the "appropriate" MSY escapement lives somewhere to the left on the Ricker curve... in other words, the goal will need to be LOWERED to best achieve MSY.

    And no... I'm NOT making that $h!t up.
    "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

  6. #6
    Member willphish4food's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Willow, AK
    Posts
    3,612

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fishNphysician View Post
    Careful what you ask for wp4f. The think tank at ADFG will tell you that if the current SEG is incapable of replacing itself, it is butting up against carrying capacity. That means the "appropriate" MSY escapement lives somewhere to the left on the Ricker curve... in other words, the goal will need to be LOWERED to best achieve MSY.

    And no... I'm NOT making that $h!t up.
    The craziness continues.

  7. #7
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    252

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fishNphysician View Post
    Careful what you ask for wp4f. The think tank at ADFG will tell you that if the current SEG is incapable of replacing itself, it is butting up against carrying capacity. That means the "appropriate" MSY escapement lives somewhere to the left on the Ricker curve... in other words, the goal will need to be LOWERED to best achieve MSY.

    And no... I'm NOT making that $h!t up.
    It meaning the deshka is going down. was talking about the deal with friends of king spawner goals going down while fish numbers sink and red spawning going up when spawner reds are going up. I did not believe it and he sent the link below. believe it because it is true.

    http://www.adfg.alaska.gov/static/re...CI_EG_memo.pdf

  8. #8
    Member fishNphysician's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Aberdeen WA
    Posts
    4,781

    Default

    There ya go, guys.... current goal 13-28K.

    ADFG now promoting 9-18K in it's latest stock recruitment analysis.

    This is the ESSENCE of the sham that is MSY!

    Regardless of how depleted the population becomes, there is always at seat at the table for HARVEST HARVEST HARVEST!

    The chinook stock can be run into the ground, but there is ALWAYS a theoretic MSY escapement that the fishery managers will say it's safe to sustainably harvest the run down to.

    I've been watching chinook pawner goal analyses in 3 states for the past 4 decades. And they only go ONE way... DOWN!

    What I have yet to see in those same 4 decades is a SINGLE stock of chinook salmon that has been successfully harvested to recovery. My guess is I NEVER will.
    "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
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    5,807

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fishNphysician View Post
    There ya go, guys.... current goal 13-28K.

    ADFG now promoting 9-18K in it's latest stock recruitment analysis.

    This is the ESSENCE of the sham that is MSY!

    Regardless of how depleted the population becomes, there is always at seat at the table for HARVEST HARVEST HARVEST!

    The chinook stock can be run into the ground, but there is ALWAYS a theoretic MSY escapement that the fishery managers will say it's safe to sustainably harvest the run down to.

    I've been watching chinook pawner goal analyses in 3 states for the past 4 decades. And they only go ONE way... DOWN!

    What I have yet to see in those same 4 decades is a SINGLE stock of chinook salmon that has been successfully harvested to recovery. My guess is I NEVER will.
    Not sure what species you are following but sockeye msy goals in UCI have gone up over 4 decades

  10. #10
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Vancouver, Washington
    Posts
    1,274

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nerka View Post
    Not sure what species you are following but sockeye msy goals in UCI have gone up over 4 decades

    I believe Fish Doc is discussing Chinook salmon......

    Density-dependent mortality at high spawner levels among sockeye salmon is well documented, and is easily observed. Ditto for pink and chum salmon. Not so for Chinook. In fact, I've never seen or heard of an over-escapement of wild Chinook, to the point where density dependent mortality among the eggs/juveniles is significant. I'm sure it has happened somewhere but it ain't common. And certainly not common enough for anyone to jump to a conclusion that more harvest is needed when escapement is low. Most folks would come to the opposite conclusion. That is, when spawner abundance is low, more spawners are needed. So harvest should be reduced, not increased. Not sure how ADF&G can come to a different conclusion, although it appears they have.

    My sense is that the spawner-recruitment curve for Chinook is likely closer to a Beverton-Holt curve than a Ricker curve. The right side of the Ricker curve doesn't seem to match with Chinook salmon biology.

  11. #11

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cohoangler View Post
    I believe Fish Doc is discussing Chinook salmon......

    Density-dependent mortality at high spawner levels among sockeye salmon is well documented, and is easily observed. Ditto for pink and chum salmon. Not so for Chinook. In fact, I've never seen or heard of an over-escapement of wild Chinook, to the point where density dependent mortality among the eggs/juveniles is significant. I'm sure it has happened somewhere but it ain't common. And certainly not common enough for anyone to jump to a conclusion that more harvest is needed when escapement is low. Most folks would come to the opposite conclusion. That is, when spawner abundance is low, more spawners are needed. So harvest should be reduced, not increased. Not sure how ADF&G can come to a different conclusion, although it appears they have.

    My sense is that the spawner-recruitment curve for Chinook is likely closer to a Beverton-Holt curve than a Ricker curve. The right side of the Ricker curve doesn't seem to match with Chinook salmon biology.
    Interesting. I was under the impression that Juvenile Chinook were pretty territorial and need their personal space. I also remember reading a Kuskokwim report where they document large escapements bringing smaller returns and smaller escapement bringing larger returns. I should be careful not to draw conclusions from one report, but I assumed there were more elsewhere. Perhaps not.

  12. #12
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Vancouver, Washington
    Posts
    1,274

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by smithtb View Post
    Interesting. I was under the impression that Juvenile Chinook were pretty territorial and need their personal space. I also remember reading a Kuskokwim report where they document large escapements bringing smaller returns and smaller escapement bringing larger returns. I should be careful not to draw conclusions from one report, but I assumed there were more elsewhere. Perhaps not.
    Depends on whether the Chinook stocks are stream-type or ocean-type. Many stocks of Chinook are an ocean-type life history, which means the juveniles spend very little time in the river. They emerge from the gravel in the spring, and migrate directly to the ocean within a few weeks (late spring or early summer) as a sub-yearling (3-4 inches). Conversely, stream-type Chinook spend over a year in the river before migrating to the salt as a yearling (7 to 8 inches).

    It is certainly possible that for stream-type Chinook density dependent competition in the tribs could reduce future adult returns. But I’m not sure how common that is. It is not well documented in the literature, and it’s not as obvious as density-dependence in sockeye, pink, and chum salmon.

    For the Columbia River, spring Chinook are stream-type while summer Chinook and fall Chinook are ocean-type. Not sure about stocks on the Deshka. However, on the Kenai River, it would not surprise me if the ER has a stream-type life history while the LR has an ocean-type life history.

  13. #13
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    5,807

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cohoangler View Post
    I believe Fish Doc is discussing Chinook salmon......

    Density-dependent mortality at high spawner levels among sockeye salmon is well documented, and is easily observed. Ditto for pink and chum salmon. Not so for Chinook. In fact, I've never seen or heard of an over-escapement of wild Chinook, to the point where density dependent mortality among the eggs/juveniles is significant. I'm sure it has happened somewhere but it ain't common. And certainly not common enough for anyone to jump to a conclusion that more harvest is needed when escapement is low. Most folks would come to the opposite conclusion. That is, when spawner abundance is low, more spawners are needed. So harvest should be reduced, not increased. Not sure how ADF&G can come to a different conclusion, although it appears they have.

    My sense is that the spawner-recruitment curve for Chinook is likely closer to a Beverton-Holt curve than a Ricker curve. The right side of the Ricker curve doesn't seem to match with Chinook salmon biology.
    The Deska River chinook have density dependent impacts from too many fish in fresh water. ADFG reports note that this took place when escapements were very high. Goals are always going to change to some degree. The production curves will look different as more data is collected. Recent low returns will lower the SEG range and the public has a right to ask for conservative management as long as it is sustainable. But the team who wrote the report was charged with using existing data and to recommend the SEG based on model outputs. They may be correct that lower goals will produce better spawner/return ratios. Time will tell. Cohoangler the ADFG staff has run the BH curves and my understanding is the Ricker fits better which I found interesting because chinook usually follow a BH curve.

  14. #14
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    2,494

    Default

    Well you know F&G has strict limits on Dollys in most rivers. I don't know why. Those are some egg eating machines. Let's eat Dollys.
    Hunt Ethically. Respect the Environment.

  15. #15
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    252

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nerka View Post
    The Deska River chinook have density dependent impacts from too many fish in fresh water. ADFG reports note that this took place when escapements were very high. Goals are always going to change to some degree. The production curves will look different as more data is collected. Recent low returns will lower the SEG range and the public has a right to ask for conservative management as long as it is sustainable. But the team who wrote the report was charged with using existing data and to recommend the SEG based on model outputs. They may be correct that lower goals will produce better spawner/return ratios. Time will tell. Cohoangler the ADFG staff has run the BH curves and my understanding is the Ricker fits better which I found interesting because chinook usually follow a BH curve.
    Deshka kings were not real big to begin with now they have a lot more small fish than they use to. Less fish needed to the spawner goal and more in that goal will be smaller. So I do not understand making it less.

  16. #16
    Member fishNphysician's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Aberdeen WA
    Posts
    4,781

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cohoangler View Post
    However, on the Kenai River, it would not surprise me if the ER has a stream-type life history while the LR has an ocean-type life history.
    The overwhelming majority of Kenai kings smolt as yearlings (destined for 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, and 1.5 phenotypes)... in BOTH the trib and the mainstem stocks. Very few ocean-type subyearling smolts (0.*) , and even fewer spend a second winter in the river (2.*)
    "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

  17. #17
    Member willphish4food's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Willow, AK
    Posts
    3,612

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nerka View Post
    They may be correct that lower goals will produce better spawner/return ratios. Time will tell.
    While ratios are good, sheer numbers are also good. This is the subject of hot debate. Is it better to strive for a 100 fish return that produces 10:1, or a 500 fish return that produces 2:1? My contention is that as you lower the goal, striving to make the best ratios, you open yourself up more to collapse. The fewer fish coming back, the less room for variables such as fishing success, predation, stream and ocean conditions, etc. The more salmon that return, the more available for all user groups and the environmental needs. A big kicker to increased run sizes is when we have extreme heat and drought conditions as we did this year, when water temperatures, flow, and oxygen levels only support a very small number of adult fish, and anything over that number will just die off, overcrowd the stream, and make the oxygen situation worse.

  18. #18
    Member fishNphysician's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Aberdeen WA
    Posts
    4,781

    Default

    I'll take MSA over MSY any day... Maximum Sustained Abundance.
    "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

  19. #19
    Member willphish4food's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Willow, AK
    Posts
    3,612

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fishNphysician View Post
    I'll take MSA over MSY any day... Maximum Sustained Abundance.
    Amen. I wish there were a way to adjust goals a bit according to conditions. When water is very hot and low, the maximum sustained abundance is lower than when conditions are normal. Yet current goal management doesn't make allowances for extreme weather events. After a year or two of very low recruitment, if conditions are ideal, the rivers could benefit from "over" escapement the next year.

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
  •