Lower Kenai Closes for Reds...
I just saw this on the main fishing forum and thought I would post it here.
Kenai closed to all sockeye fishing below the counter:
OKay, it looks like sockeye fishing is still open above the sonar counter @ River Mile 19 and that the limit remains at three fish per person. Is this correct?
That is what I read. Interesting management, I am not sure what to think.
That's my interpretation, too...and I agree with Yukon. "interesting"...to say the least.
Originally Posted by iceblue
Its a clear signal
IMHO that sport fish is too focused on opportunity to the detriment of conservation. Usually this devolving philosophy manifests itself in the form of habitat degradation in the name of opportunity; in this case its opportunity over future stocks. Flossing doesn't put that big a dent in the stock, but only above the counter so we can get a number?
I don't get it, maybe I'm missing something?
What people are missing is the difference between the inriver goal and the optimum escapement goal. The sport fishery above the sonar has an allocation of 250,000 to 450,000 in runs between 2-4 million Kenai late-run sockeye. Therefore, if the inriver goal will be achieved, the sport fishery can continue to fish as long as they feel the optimum escapement goal of 500,000 to 1,000,000 will be met. As the news release stated, if fish passage numbers don't increase soon, restrictions above the sonar may occur.
love this but something is missing
Akkona, here is the problem. The goal of 750-950k is only if the Kenai sockeye return is between 2-4 million. Sport Fish Division may feel this but Commercial Fisheries Division models indicate a run of less than 2 million. The commercial fisheries staff makes the projections on sockeye from past practice so not sure what is going on. I talked to the commercial fishing staff today and they are managing for 650-850k-- what gives?
Originally Posted by akkona
Second, if the run is less than 2 million and the goal is 650,000 that leaves only 150,000 fish on the bottom end for the sport fishery above the sonar counter. What has the sport fishery harvested to date or at least what is sport fish division estimating the harvest is to date.
Third, if the goal is 750,000 then that leaves 350,000 Kenai fish to come to meet the goal. Relative to the remaining fish it looks like this run is over. The test fish boat is flat, the sonar is relatively flat given no commercial fishing for a week now, and the date would indicate that if fish were coming they would be in the district right now. It looks like the run is less than 2 million to me.
If it is less than 2 million then sport fish division needs to curtail the harvest above the sonar site. Saying you are watching it is somewhat odd since the sport fishery will be over in a week or two. How many fish can you save if you wait much longer?
I would have curtailed the sport fishery given the data set - one fish bag limit. Sport Fish Divison appears to be betting on the come to keep opportunity to harvest sockeye going strong -
We will see what happens and part of me says a few less spawners in the system may be needed given the lake conditions. However, rules are rules and the management plans are clear relative to run strength. What is not clear is the run strength and how the two divisions are working -- to the general public it looks terrible when one Department cannot take a unified approach. Again, I base my comments on what commercial fisheire is telling the public and the fact your area management biologist is in the paper today saying they will not make the goals.
You comments would be appreciated to help clear this up.
I've searched high and lo on ADF&G's website and cannot find ANY announcement/News Release by ADF&G, Comm Fish Division that the Kenai Run is now projected to be less than 2 million. Without that piece, ADF&G, Division of Sport Fish is correct in their News Releases on managing for a Kenai in-river goal of 750 - 950.
Can anyone post a link as I obviously missed it somewhere. As lunch wagers seem popular here, Id wager a lunch none exists yet.
Until such a written statement from ADF&G is found, ANY criticism of ADF&G Sport Fish is simply an unnecessary cheap shot.
Here is the answer. In the Wedensday staff meeting the Commercial Fisheries Dvision presented the estimate the run was below 2 million and stated such. They also are telling people if they called on Wedensday.
Originally Posted by 375JDJ
ADF&G did not release any information on this because of the conflict between the divisions as I stated. It is not a cheap shot but a statement of fact. One division is not in sink with the other division.
Also, the area biologist for sport fish division is quoted in the paper as saying the goal will not be met. How is that a cheap shot?
So 375 if I can get the estimates of run strength for the Weds. staff meeting that show they are below 2 million - will you buy me lunch?
Also, just for the record the research project leader was asked how much the OTF indexs needed to increase to change the estimate and the answeer was over 300 a day. That on a day they got less than 20.
What has happened here is a failure of leadership. The public is being told different things by different staff. The Director of Commercial Fisheries was in the meeting on Weds. and he should have insisted on a unified number. He never said a word according to those present.
I talked with the area sport fish biologist today and heard his recollection of what happened. He is looking for something more officical than a report in the daily staff meeting. That is unusual since the daily staff meeting is where these data are presented. Again, I think this points out a problem of leadership when staff leaves a meeting with two different numbers.
I am not taking a shot at the local staff. I am taking a shot at the Directors, the regional supervisors, and the management co-ordinators who have this ongoing issue and cannot resolve it. Today there is still no firm number to work from. Why not? The message is still the same from each division - two numbers two goals and a confused public.
Thanks Nerka. I was hoping there was something in writing and cannot understand why there isn't. I'll even agree that upper leadership should be taken to task.....but for a different reason than yours.
Wouldn't the E.O. and associated News Release closing today's period have been a perfect place to inform the public?
That said, it is just fish. They were fished hard on the front end banking on the tail pulling...well.... everyone's tails out. Sometimes that works, sometimes it bites you.
And nice try, but no lunch. It would be nice to sit down and have one with you again....been a long time.
So nerka is it fair to say that the Sport fishing side may get the stick up the butt because the management failed to estimate a closer number and the management let the commercial side get more fish thinking there was going to be almost double the size of run than there really is? Maybe management needs some reconditioning on how to predict numbers that aren't there and hold them to a lower allocation until the fish show strong enough numbers in the district to raise the number for them so the people of alaska don't get screwed because they failed.
375 - anytime for lunch - I may even buy. Call me
Originally Posted by 06tributeman
The management of this fishery is very difficult because of a complex host of factors as this forum as pointed out. The hardest run to manage is one that is early and weak because it can look strong and late. If you wait and the run is strong and late you go over the goal and if weak you get into this situation. I still feel that the goal of 650 will be met or at least very close to it. That allows a sport fish harvest above the sonar counter of 150,000 fish.
I assume that if the projection is below 2 million then the sport fishery above the bridge will have to be scaled back - to say 1 fish bag limit. We will see how it plays out. I personally do not care if it under or over 2 million. I suspect it is around 2 million and that makes a call difficult. What I do not like is a staff not together for whatever reason.
There we go........in writing.
And I also abhor staff not together for whatever reason.