Results 1 to 20 of 20

Thread: THEY'RE HERE.... sockeye storm the Kasilof

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

    Default THEY'RE HERE.... sockeye storm the Kasilof

    Kasilof sockeye have arrived in a big way!

    Opening day of netting on the beach took 59K.

    Then two days were EO'd over the weekend... 62K snared on Sat with another 42K on Sunday.

    http://csfish.adfg.state.ak.us/marin...catchxarea.php

    Today was another regular opener.... catch will be posted tomorrow.
    Thru Sunday, the river has seen 67K and we are barely over a week into the run. A whopping 15K shot up the river on opening day alone!

    http://csfish.adfg.state.ak.us/mariner/uci/uciesc.php

    At this rate, the OEG of 300K is threatened with "overescapement." Expect a ton of EO's on this run to minimize that "risk."

    Exploitation to date is conservatively over 70% of the run (163K out of 230K) and there's a very good chance it could still go over the goal.

    Where's the EO to double, triple or quadruple the daily bag and possesion limit in the sport fishery? How about liberalizing the PU limits while we're at it? My God... with the immiment danger of overescaping the goal, you'd think every avenue would be explored to keep that dreaded event from happening?

    Ya think?
    "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
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    376

    Default

    naw there gonna give it all to the commercial fleet and screw the dip netters and sport fisher's as usual seems as if every year it gets worse and worse and you end up spending more trips down just to get your fish

  3. #3
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    5,526

    Default why that does not happen

    Quote Originally Posted by fishNphysician View Post
    Kasilof sockeye have arrived in a big way!

    Opening day of netting on the beach took 59K.

    Then two days were EO'd over the weekend... 62K snared on Sat with another 42K on Sunday.

    http://csfish.adfg.state.ak.us/marin...catchxarea.php

    Today was another regular opener.... catch will be posted tomorrow.
    Thru Sunday, the river has seen 67K and we are barely over a week into the run. A whopping 15K shot up the river on opening day alone!

    http://csfish.adfg.state.ak.us/mariner/uci/uciesc.php

    At this rate, the OEG of 300K is threatened with "overescapement." Expect a ton of EO's on this run to minimize that "risk."

    Exploitation to date is conservatively over 70% of the run (163K out of 230K) and there's a very good chance it could still go over the goal.

    Where's the EO to double, triple or quadruple the daily bag and possesion limit in the sport fishery? How about liberalizing the PU limits while we're at it? My God... with the immiment danger of overescaping the goal, you'd think every avenue would be explored to keep that dreaded event from happening?

    Ya think?
    Doc, I think you know the answer but to refresh your memory. One does not want to create in a sport fishery an expectation that cannot be met. That creates more problems than it solves. So lets increase the sport fish bag limit to 12. People think they can catch that, they spend money to come to the Kasilof, they fish in very glacial silt waters, they catch 1 fish and then head home. Also, the commercial fishery is operating and what happens a fight develops between the user groups. The fact is that fishing for reds in the Kasilof is very hard and of limited area. So creating an expectation that cannot be realized is just a bad decision.

    The same applies to the PU fishery. The limits were set based on family need. That need does not change with the run size. So again, no real reason to do that. ADF&G could open up more area to dip netting but that creates problems for home owners along the river, most of it is in private ownership.

    So overall the best management tool for the Kasilof sockeye is the commercial fishery and one thing you should note - because of fuel prices the drift fleet has not been fishing ( just a handful of die hard fisherman). Most drift fisherman are not going to spend 500 dollars for fuel to catch 300 dollars worth of fish. So the beaches are seeing more fish as the drift harvest that is usually taken is coming to the beach. That will change this week as more of the fleet goes into the water.

    Just thought you might like to see another view.

  4. #4

    Default

    second-guessing, whining, and endless criticism of board of fisheries management decisions would be more credible coming from resident alaskans rather than from nonresidents who spend a week or two up here every year.

    fishnphysician: what do your comments accomplish except to incite envy and ill will as evidenced by the post directly following yours? who needs it?

    move up here, become a resident, and take your concerns to the board of fisheries where they belong. better yet, get a degree as a fisheries biologist and get a job with adf&g.

  5. #5
    Mark
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gretchen View Post
    second-guessing, whining, and endless criticism of board of fisheries management decisions would be more credible coming from resident alaskans rather than from nonresidents who spend a week or two up here every year.......
    Funny. That's not whats written when I second-guess, whine, and criticize.

    Then I'm the "Valley Trash" guy who doesn't know squat because I'm not a "local".

  6. #6

    Default A living...

    Lest you forget, the commercial fishermen are not bad guys, they're just trying to make a living like anyone else and they do it with fish. You wouldn't like it very much if someone just up and placed a phone call to you saying that you shouldn't bother coming into the office for the next month while we investigate why the paper flow from your copier has slowed down more than normal.

  7. #7
    Mark
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by wasillaguy View Post
    Lest you forget, the commercial fishermen are not bad guys, they're just trying to make a living like anyone else and they do it with fish. You wouldn't like it very much if someone just up and placed a phone call to you saying that you shouldn't bother coming into the office for the next month while we investigate why the paper flow from your copier has slowed down more than normal.
    Do you think commercial fishermen are the only folks on Earth subject to economic law and/or weather/climate?

    People get laid off all the time. Industries vanish completely. Government regulations kill off some industries. Weather screws up farming (hear what the lastest floods in the Midwest mean to farmers..........and your grocery bills?).

  8. #8

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gretchen View Post
    second-guessing, whining, and endless criticism of board of fisheries management decisions would be more credible coming from resident alaskans rather than from nonresidents who spend a week or two up here every year.

    fishnphysician: what do your comments accomplish except to incite envy and ill will as evidenced by the post directly following yours? who needs it?

    move up here, become a resident, and take your concerns to the board of fisheries where they belong. better yet, get a degree as a fisheries biologist and get a job with adf&g.
    Marcus... I mean Gretchen, not into reading your negative posts. However, this is a fishing forum designed for open discussion, and I can appreciate everyone's point of view. FishnPhysician and Nerka make some valid comments, and it appears both guys are a wealth of good information.
    Last edited by Steelieguy; 07-01-2008 at 12:31. Reason: spelling

  9. #9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Steelieguy View Post
    Marcus... I mean Gretchen, not into reading your negative posts. However, this is a fishing forum designed for open discussion, and I can appreciate everyone's point of view. FishnPhysician and Nerka make some valid comments, and it appears both guys are a wealth of good information.
    now that hardly seems fair.

    it,s okay for you to disparage my, according to you, negative post, but it's not okay for me to comment negatively on fishnphysician,s negative post?

    equal rights?

  10. #10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mark View Post
    Do you think commercial fishermen are the only folks on Earth subject to economic law and/or weather/climate?

    People get laid off all the time. Industries vanish completely. Government regulations kill off some industries. Weather screws up farming (hear what the lastest floods in the Midwest mean to farmers..........and your grocery bills?).
    Mark, I don't have an issue when they decide to close the fishing to commercial fishing due to their scientific reasons beit weather related, fish return counts or whatever. What frustrates me is when we hear the standard bs from sports fisherman (and I am a sports fisherman too), that want the commercial guys shut down while letting the sports fisherman continue on. There should never ever be a commercial closure without first (or at least at the same time) closing down the sports fishing. Never vice versa. Commercial should have priority on the grounds is my belief.

  11. #11
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    2,883

    Default

    It's amazing how some people bash the very fishery management stategy that is providing them more fish in the Kasilof than they can catch. And it's amazing that someone from Washington has already declared overescapement and the need for liberalized sport harvest this early, since the commercial guys have been EO'd. Really, there are a bunch of antagonizing, greedy, misinformed, idiots out there. It is a shame.

  12. #12
    Member bushrat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Now residing in Fairbanks from the bush
    Posts
    4,363

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gretchen
    fishnphysician: ...move up here, become a resident, and take your concerns to the board of fisheries where they belong. better yet, get a degree as a fisheries biologist and get a job with adf&g.
    Gretchen, just an fyi: Francis doesn't need to be a resident to submit proposals to the BOF, believe it or not, and has done so in the past. I seldom agree with him, but he is knowledgable about the system and about fisheries to the degree it completely biases his opinion <grin...sorry Doc, couldn't resist that!>.

  13. #13

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bushrat View Post
    Gretchen, just an fyi: Francis doesn't need to be a resident to submit proposals to the BOF, believe it or not, and has done so in the past. I seldom agree with him, but he is knowledgable about the system and about fisheries to the degree it completely biases his opinion <grin...sorry Doc, couldn't resist that!>.
    much appreciated, bushrat, but i already knew that.

    that,s why i noted that complaints about and abuse of adf&g are "more" credible coming from alaska residents. "more" credible implies that complaints from nonresidents, while allowable, are "less" credible.

    in either case, it,s a moot point. policy is set, not by adf&g, but by the state,s board of fisheries. if fishnphysician is as knowledgeable as you claim, he should know that and direct his biased second-guesses to that quarter.

    in the meantime, sarcastic criticism and snide remarks about how adf&g endeavors to fulfill its mandate from the board of fisheries accomplishes nothing except to create more discord between user groups.

    quite frankly, we don,t need it. take it to the board of fisheries.

  14. #14
    Member fishNphysician's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Aberdeen WA
    Posts
    4,516

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gretchen View Post
    but it's not okay for me to comment negatively on fishnphysician,s negative post?



    What was so negative in my lead post? Just providing data for the board to demonstrate that we've got a bumper crop of sockeye on the Kasilof that threatens to overescape the goal(s). That reality exists whether you pick the official BEG 150-250K, or whether you pick the OEG that allows another 50K of surplus escapement in order to help the Kenai meet it's goals if the need arises. I chose the 300K figure so as not to overstate the potential for another overescapement year.

    It's abundantly clear that the in-river escapement is off to a furious pace. We're a whopping 9 days into the season and we're virtually halfway to meeting the BEG. There's at least 40 more days of significant fish passage to go.

    Run through this hypothetical scenario with me.

    Suppose maximum EO's for the fleet could somehow miraculously fish the escapement down to an average of only 6K sockeye into the river per day, that's at least another 240K escapement on top of the 72K already in the river... that's conservatively 314K escapement as a best case scenario. The reality is that at sometime in the next 30 days, we will probably see a number of daily escapements exceeding 20-30K.

    Quote Originally Posted by nerka
    One does not want to create in a sport fishery an expectation that cannot be met. That creates more problems than it solves. So lets increase the sport fish bag limit to 12. People think they can catch that, they spend money to come to the Kasilof, they fish in very glacial silt waters, they catch 1 fish and then head home. Also, the commercial fishery is operating and what happens a fight develops between the user groups. The fact is that fishing for reds in the Kasilof is very hard and of limited area. So creating an expectation that cannot be realized is just a bad decision.
    If the sheer abundance of fish justifies that level of commercial EO's, in the name of fairness, why shouldn't the upriver user (I think he goes by the name of "Joe Fisherman") be given a bigger share of the bounty... even when that "bigger" share amounts to nothing more than scraps against the enormous magnitude of the commercial take? Nerka makes it sound like increasing the sport bag amounts to some deceitful scheme to lure unwitting fishers into a fishless desert. Kasilof reds can be flossed just as readly as Kenai fish.... silt or no silt... viz or no viz. The method of choice is not predicated on the fish seeing and striking the angler's hook. Truth be told, it actually works better when viz is impaired.

    Even when the Kenai bag goes to six (you've said it yourself, nerka) VERY few people actually take their 6 fish. That's fishing! But some "fortunate" folks do, and do so often... as in day after day after day. If some lucky Kasilof angler were to hook and land 6 or perhaps 12 fish in a day, shouldn't his good fortune be put to maximum utility in ADFG's quest to slow the escapement rate? Sounds like a win-win to me. More sockeye on the dinner plate for anglers, and less risk of overescapement for managers.

    The fact that relatively few sockeye are sport-harvested in the Kasilof flossery is a function of the maturity of the fishery (or in this case, lack thereof). Nobody flossed Kenai reds in moving water in the 70's. If locals wanted reds, they packed up their Lujons, jumped in their boats and hit the frogwater holes where the fish were stacked and rolling. Cast... rip... rip... rip.... rip.... rip. Repeat. A handful of guys caught a lot of snagged fish, but the cumulative take barely registered on the exploitation meter because participation was so small.

    Almost nobody fished over moving sockeye in shallow water... that simply wasn't "the way" it was done.... except of course at the Russian-Kenai confluence. As people finally figured out the real mechanism for the sockeye hookup in the fly-only zone during the early to mid 80's, the flossery rapidly expanded lower and lower into the mainstem Kenai, morphing into the efficient shore-based harvesting machine it is today.

    Remember that the Kenai flossery has at least a 20-year head start over Kasilof. The little river is barely budding in that regard, and the potential for significant harvests has hardly been scratched. A bigger bag would certainly serve as an incentive to grow that fishery.

    Unless of course a certain established user group doesn't want to see that happen.
    "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

  15. #15
    Mark
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by wasillaguy View Post
    .....There should never ever be a commercial closure without first (or at least at the same time) closing down the sports fishing. Never vice versa. Commercial should have priority on the grounds is my belief.
    Why should anybody have "priority" if returns are low? That is especially wondrous since the commercial industry catches so many fish?

  16. #16
    Mark
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gretchen View Post
    .....i noted that complaints about and abuse of adf&g are "more" credible coming from alaska residents. "more" credible implies that complaints from nonresidents, while allowable, are "less" credible.....
    Truth (or a lie, for that matter) has absolutely nothing to do with residency.

  17. #17
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    516

    Default Little Babies

    Just deal with all the stuff and go fishing. Some times you catch them some times you dont. Dont put the blame on someone else all the time. Whats it solve anyway.

    ADF&G does the best they can and I think they do a great job. Mabey we could all agree on a small tax to up the funds for their studies. Then we could get a more truthful idea ( answer) on whats going on!

    It's summer ENJOY it!
    Good judgment comes from experience, and a lot of that comes from bad judgment.

  18. #18
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    5,526

    Default missed the point

    Doc, you missed the point. The Kasilof is nothing like the Kenai. First the places to fish are very limited. So bringing more people down creates all types of issues with land owners. The Kasilof has less that 5 fishable miles of river for sockeye vs the Kenai with more than 50.

    Second, the volume of fish per day at Kasilof is much lower per day and below the level most feel creates a good fishery. Look at the daily counts and you will see few days with 20k or more fish. In contrast the Kenai has a number of 20k plus days, including those 50-100k days.

    Third, Kasilof sockeye move quickly into the lake and tend to hold their. In contrast, in the Kenai the sockeye hold and spawn at the outlet of Skilak Lake and between the lakes in the mainstem river - they are more available.

    Fourth. the average angler on the Kenai rarely catches one fish a day so creating a fishery that does not change that but creates a higher expectation ends up putting more people in an area that will not produce.

    So doc your analysis of increased harvest by sport fisherman being an effective tool for sockeye management is bogus and not worth the social and biological costs associated with trying to make Kasilof a Kenai River.

    Fishery management should take into consideration these other costs. That has been a problem for ADF&G sport fish division. In the race to create opportunity they forget that other factors should be considered. We only have to look at the Kenai to see that with the hydrocarbons, turbidity, bank erosion, crowding, noise, land ownership and development along the river, and a host of other issues. I do not think the Kenai is a good model of fishery management. I think it is well managed for escapements but the other factors have been poorly handled. ADF&G just has not matured to the level some other states have in this context.

  19. #19
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    2,883

    Default

    Yeah Doc, lets turn the banks of the Kasilof into another Rusian River sport fishery so we can better manage hundreds of thousands of fish. So what if there's lost yield. Who cares about parking and facilities...I'm sure the private land owners there would agree to it all. Then Billy Bob from Washington can take even more salmon home to barter with. After all, we need more opportunity....because catching 3 sockeye a day for the last three weeks on the Russian River isn't enough meat, at least not on top of the winter Kings, Kenai Kings, 25 P/U sockeye, Halibut, Trout, Clams, Rockfish, Shrimp, Crab, Coho, Pinks and Chum. Nope we need more. Never enough you know.

  20. #20
    Member chumstik's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    166

    Default

    Why not just completely shut down all commercial fishing in Cook Inlet? The State of Alaska can start a revolving loan money with all the excess oil revenue flowing in, and all the commercial fisher-folk on the Kenai can use the money to buy little coffee trailer shacks and make a "living" selling mochas and lattes to cruise ship tourists!

    Really, we just need more and more and more "opportunity" at the expense of everything else -- reminds me of the saying "growth for the sake of growth is the ideology of a cancer cell" ...

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
  •