Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 77

Thread: Late run Kenai kings at an all time low?

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

    Unhappy Late run Kenai kings at an all time low?

    Counts are absolutely dismal.

    To date the counter shows only 23.5K. Not at my home computer to know for sure, but this will probably go down as one of the all-time worst chinook runs in the history of the sonar.

    Lower river harvest is 5600+ to date.
    Upriver harvest is not known til the SWHS, but let's conservatively call it 1000.
    Throw in another 400+ for H/R mortalities.
    That's 7000+ dead kings.

    That leaves an escapement to date of only 16.5K tops.

    Couple more days of fishing to go, then the rest of the fish entering in August get a free pass.

    We will probably make BEG at 17.8, but by the slimmest of margins.

    Who'da'thunk the mighty Kenai would ever come to this.
    "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 TWB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Wasilla
    Posts
    3,573

    Default

    Guesses...Overfished or bad return cycle?
    We do not go to the green woods and crystal waters to rough it, we go to smooth it. We get it rough enough at home; in towns and cities; in shops, offices, stores, banks anywhere that we may be placed

  3. #3
    Member TYNMON's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Corvallis, Oregon, United States
    Posts
    918

    Default Funny the failure of ceartain things..

    Just sat in on a meeting down here on the N Coast in Oregon and explained that AK is having catastophic (my opinion) run failures through out the state, so the Pacific NW is not alone w/ the collapse of kings runs not seen in 50+ years...

    I am sure that overharvest, inriver environmental, and various habitata issue contrubuted to the decline... But, the overwheliming concensus is that in 2005-2006 ocean conditions where EXTREMELY poor for chinook throughout their range and has led to fishery closure due to very very dismal returns from Central California to the Yukon....

    Funny the press is not giving any attention to AK statewide king closures and vice versa... The dramatic switch that occured in 2004-06 was a SIGNIFICANT ocean change... I think likely we are due to see very different weather patterns for the next 25-40 years... Hopefully in 2-3 years kings bouce rigth back and actually might be more robust then they have been in 25+ years.

    Here is an interesting study that anyone who cares about kings populations dynamics should read:
    Chinook Salmon Trends in Abundance and Biological Characteristics
    http://www.npafc.org/new/publication...7-091Heard.pdf

  4. #4
    Member willphish4food's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Willow, AK
    Posts
    3,367

    Default interesting result

    It is interesting to me that the dramatic switch in ocean conditions also included a doubled bycatch of chinook by the pollock fishery. Much ado is being made over chinook bycatch by this fleet- but what about the unsung masses? 700,000+ chum salmon were harvested in 2005 as bycatch- concerns are being raised in the valley about lowered chum returns; I don't know how they are faring statewide.

    I don't doubt the ocean currents may be shifting, and the rearing environment getting either better or worse. That is part of the natural course of things. The BIG question is this: will we be able to recognize and acknowledge the changes if and when they happen, and will we be willing to change our management strategies to adjust to lowered production if it happens, while at the same time working to restore and protect habitat that its in our power to do?

  5. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Soldonta, Alaska
    Posts
    315

    Default King salmon

    I think it is time to say no more King salmon fishing above the Moose river. I also think we should lower the limit to one King a year. Are there going to be any Kenai hogs for our grandkids to catch?? Nowadays a 60 lber is kinda rare. I hope next year is better.

  6. #6
    Member TYNMON's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Corvallis, Oregon, United States
    Posts
    918

    Default What good would that do?

    Quote Originally Posted by chinookee2004 View Post
    I think it is time to say no more King salmon fishing above the Moose river. I also think we should lower the limit to one King a year. Are there going to be any Kenai hogs for our grandkids to catch?? Nowadays a 60 lber is kinda rare. I hope next year is better.
    70% of the late run spawns below the Soldotna bridge.

  7. #7
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    2,883

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by willphish4food
    but what about the unsung masses? 700,000+ chum salmon were harvested in 2005 as bycatch- concerns are being raised in the valley about lowered chum returns
    The Valley might want to direct their concerns to a study conducted by The National Marine Fisheries Services of bycatch samples of chum salmon from the 1994-1995 eastern Bering Sea pollock trawl fishery using genetic stock identification methodology. In 1994, 39-55 percent of samples were identified as Asian, 20-35 percent were western Alaska stocks and 21-29 percent were from the combined Southeastern Alaska, British Columbia and Washington stocks. The 1995 samples indicated a range of 13-51 percent Asian, 33-53 percent western Alaska and 9-46 percent Southeastern Alaska, British Colombia or Washington stocks.

    FYI, in 2006 only 309,000 chum were harvested. In 2007 only 93,000. 15,400 last year.

  8. #8
    Member TYNMON's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Corvallis, Oregon, United States
    Posts
    918

    Default One would assume....

    Quote Originally Posted by Grampyfishes View Post
    The Valley might want to direct their concerns to a study conducted by The National Marine Fisheries Services of bycatch samples of chum salmon from the 1994-1995 eastern Bering Sea pollock trawl fishery using genetic stock identification methodology. In 1994, 39-55 percent of samples were identified as Asian, 20-35 percent were western Alaska stocks and 21-29 percent were from the combined Southeastern Alaska, British Columbia and Washington stocks. The 1995 samples indicated a range of 13-51 percent Asian, 33-53 percent western Alaska and 9-46 percent Southeastern Alaska, British Colombia or Washington stocks.

    FYI, in 2006 only 309,000 chum were harvested. In 2007 only 93,000. 15,400 last year.
    By catch stock souces are likely HIGHLY variable year to year... The fish would be somewhat randomly caught due to variations in ocean currents and temperatures from year to year.

  9. #9
    Member TYNMON's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Corvallis, Oregon, United States
    Posts
    918

    Default Some very relavent CWT info...







    Think these are very self explainatory....

  10. #10

    Default Current Uper Cook Inlet Chum and Coho Studies

    THe current harvest of chum and cohos are well be the histroical averges. Chum harvest have dropped from over 1 million in 1986 to less than 100k in the last 10 years on numerous occansions. ADFG staff are suppose to of started a multi year program to study chums and cohos in upper Cook Inlet. The purpose of these studies is to determine overall distribution and identity these stocks. It appears that the chum harvest may not exceed 100K this year.

    BigFisherman

  11. #11
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    5,530

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bigfisherman View Post
    THe current harvest of chum and cohos are well be the histroical averges. Chum harvest have dropped from over 1 million in 1986 to less than 100k in the last 10 years on numerous occansions. ADFG staff are suppose to of started a multi year program to study chums and cohos in upper Cook Inlet. The purpose of these studies is to determine overall distribution and identity these stocks. It appears that the chum harvest may not exceed 100K this year.

    BigFisherman
    Just to keep the record straight - the drop in chum salmon harvest in the commercial fleet is in large part due to regulations that keep them from fishing them. However, chum stocks are down statewide so there is something going on.

    Ty posted that 70% of late run chinook spawn below the Soldotna bridge. I do not believe that is correct. I believe it is the other way around but will check. If you have a reference Ty please post it.

  12. #12
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    3,079

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nerka View Post

    Ty posted that 70% of late run chinook spawn below the Soldotna bridge. I do not believe that is correct. I believe it is the other way around but will check. If you have a reference Ty please post it.

    I believe Ty is right. The majority of the second run spawn in the lower river, below the bridge and the few miles above it. If you are fishing from Eagle Rock on up you are fishing spawning beds.

  13. #13
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    5,530

    Default that may be

    Yukon and Ty - you are probably correct. I have not followed that for a few years. I tried to check today but ADF&G was on a holiday - just kidding. They were out of the office in the field -

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

    Default Just for the record....

    Quote Originally Posted by TYNMON View Post
    70% of the late run spawns below the Soldotna bridge.


    Pooled Bendock data from 1989-1991...

    n = 111 identifiable spawners radio-tagged after June 30.

    45 spawned in the lower mainstem (below Soldotna bridge) 40.5%

    37 spawned in the middle mainstem (below Moose) 33.3%

    19 spawned in the upper mainstem (below Skilak) 13.5%

    4 in tribs

    ***

    Quote Originally Posted by chinookee2004 View Post
    I think it is time to say no more King salmon fishing above the Moose river.
    Roughly 3 out every 4 KRLRKS spawn below the Moose.

    Like yukon said, you fish in July and you are fishing over spawners.
    "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
    Member moose-head's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    @ Seminary, Dubuque Ia
    Posts
    839

    Default

    Does the current high water/flood help or hurt the mainstem spawners? Re. Lower pressure vs. spawning bed erosion issues.
    If you board the wrong train, it is no use running along the corridor in the other direction.
    Dietrich Bonhoeffer

  16. #16
    Member fishNphysician's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Aberdeen WA
    Posts
    4,516

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fishNphysician View Post
    Not at my home computer to know for sure, but this will probably go down as one of the all-time worst chinook runs in the history of the sonar.
    OK had a chance o review the historic data.

    2009 is poised for one of the WORST late runs on record. Right now it is perched at the third worst return in recorded history.

    You'll have to go back as far as 1998 to find another year even close. 1998 = 22805 on July 29.

    For comparison, 2009 = 24002 thru July 29.

    The only other year that was worse is 1992 = 21823 on July 29.

    BTW both 1992 and 1998 went to C/R based on the prevailing MINIMUM point escapement goal of 23800.
    "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
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    5,530

    Default thanks doc

    Quote Originally Posted by fishNphysician View Post
    Pooled Bendock data from 1989-1991...

    n = 111 identifiable spawners radio-tagged after June 30.

    45 spawned in the lower mainstem (below Soldotna bridge) 40.5%

    37 spawned in the middle mainstem (below Moose) 33.3%

    19 spawned in the upper mainstem (below Skilak) 13.5%

    4 in tribs

    ***



    Roughly 3 out every 4 KRLRKS spawn below the Moose.

    Like yukon said, you fish in July and you are fishing over spawners.
    Thanks doc. I figured the 70 was off but the Moose is not that far upstream so the point is well made.

  18. #18
    Member TYNMON's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Corvallis, Oregon, United States
    Posts
    918

    Default Nerka.... ADFG presented the data at the guide acadamy..

    Quote Originally Posted by Nerka View Post
    Thanks doc. I figured the 70 was off but the Moose is not that far upstream so the point is well made.
    Since you wanted the source, it was from Robert B via Kenai Guide acadamy... It is on the tests they say 70% early run spawn above the Soldotna Bridge and 70% late run below the bridge... If you have a problem with the info take it up w/ the College and ADFG...
    Last edited by Brian M; 08-01-2009 at 00:48.

  19. #19
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Soldotna
    Posts
    151

    Default Dipp'in Kings Why????

    Can anyone answer??? Why are dipnetters still being allowed to harvest kings. Honestly, do they realy need to keep kings? F&G should start by closing that fishery. Much more fun on a rod and reel!

  20. #20
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    5,530

    Default not at all

    Quote Originally Posted by TYNMON View Post
    Since you wanted the source, it was from Robert B via Kenai Guide acadamy... It is on the tests they say 70% early run spawn above the Soldotna Bridge and 70% late run below the bridge... If you have a problem with the info take it up w/ the College and ADFG...
    The only data on spawning fish distribution is from Bendock which Doc posted. Those are the data not what someone says. If what you heard and posted is wrong then we should know. I had a feeling it was incorrect and doc showed that to be the case.
    Last edited by Brian M; 08-01-2009 at 00:49.

Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast

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
  •