Here’s a question for everyone who’s reading the UCI reports that have been coming out. (The Department’s comments on the proposals have also come out recently).
The reports can be found here: http://www.boards.adfg.state.ak.us/f...nfo/deprep.php
What new information have you seen that is significant, and how should the Board of Fisheries be viewing/using that data?
Depending on people’s perspectives and user group status, you may be latching onto different parts of each of the reports…parts that may help you make and/or reinforce your argument(s).
While I haven’t read and re-read each of these reports in depth, here’s one of the tidbits I’ve gleaned from the reports:
(from “Inriver Abundance and Spawner Distribution of Susitna River Sockeye”): Escapements into the Yentna River may be significantly higher than what the escapement project has been counting (perhaps 2 to 8 times more fish). This, obviously, raises more questions , many of which will need to be addressed by more mark/recapture study in the upcoming years. One question I have is “how does this relate to the SEG and harvestable surplus(es)?” The fact that the escapement monitoring project isn’t counting all the fish isn’t necessarily a problem, as long as the counted/uncounted proportion is understood and is consistent from year to year. For instance, many rivers elsewhere have counting towers that only count half or less of the fish actually swimming upriver. ADFG knows this and also knows the proportion of the fish that are being counted to those that go uncounted. Aerial surveys are also just “indexes” of total escapement, and this is taken into consideration. What this may or may not mean to the BOF is anyone’s guess. Nerka, help me out here… isn’t that SEG a spawner-recruit relationship?
So, what else has everone seen as “new” information? Surely, the “Overescapement” report and the “Genetics” report have provided some fodder…