Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

UCI Northern District EO

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Arcticwildman
    replied
    Originally posted by Funstastic View Post
    Except the harvest numbers don't reflect that. And the only thing we can put a finger on is production problems in-river.
    You are dead wrong there. Every single biologist I've spoken with has said it is NOT an in river production issue, with possibly the exception of Alexander Cr and it's pike problem, but even that river is showing signs of bouncing back per F&G. "In river" production problems are a problem in the L48, not up here as told to me by three different biologists.

    Leave a comment:


  • AaronP
    replied
    Originally posted by Nerka View Post
    Interesting computer issues. I posted what you referenced with the silly comment, thought it was not appropriate and edited it out. Must have posted it and edited it while it when out on the thread. So my post above is the one that I should have written first.

    But lets deal with your issues. The estimate of the number of chinook in the river is from techniques used by ADF&G and LGL and a valid method of estimating the numbers. There can be error but you cannot say it is smoke and mirrors. That is not technically correct.

    Second, not sure who quoted you the number of 1000 in ADF&G but they do not know what they are talking about. The total catch for the ND is 1100 fish with one opener to go. I must say there is more misinformation in the ND that anywhere else in the inlet. The anticipated catch for the next opener is 100 fish, not 1000. So the 1% harvest rate is good again for this year from all indications.

    I can tell from your post that you have not read the LGL report or any of the reports ADF&G have done on estimating salmon abundance in the Susitna River from the fishwheel program. You are way off base on how the estimates are made.

    Next, the management plans I guess are good for you when the Deshka is weak and the whole ND closes but not when the Deshka is strong and only part of the ND opens. Remember, the area from Wood chip dock to the Susitna has been closed the whole season.

    So if one stream is not making its goal in the Susitna then the commercial fishery should be restricted or closed. Does that apply to the sport fisheries at the mouth of the streams which are catching chinook headed upstream, even if it is only 1% of the run?
    1100 fish that WON'T spawn.

    Leave a comment:


  • Funstastic
    replied
    Originally posted by Arcticwildman View Post
    The problem with comm fishing is that it is too efficient. Catch the run with the right tide and you could catch thousands in one opening and potentially wipe out a smaller creek's run. That is an unacceptable risk.
    Except the harvest numbers don't reflect that. And the only thing we can put a finger on is production problems in-river.

    Leave a comment:


  • Funstastic
    replied
    Originally posted by Arcticwildman View Post
    Secondly, claiming that only 1% was taken of the total run is nothing but smoke and mirrors. There has never been a way to ACCURATELY count the run on the Susitna. The numbers thrown out there are nothing more than guesses based on fish wheel sampling and are heavily biased by the Deshka weir counts. The only river with a weir is the Deshka and it is not representative of the other streams on the Su drainage as evidenced by the missed escapement goals of a majority of Susitna streams in years past while the Deshka made it's escapement numbers.
    Couple of points...

    Even if you used the accurate weir numbers from the Deshka alone, and assumed they were the only Kings in the system, the commercial harvest would still be only be 8.5% of the run (1200 of 14,000)...not exactly the end of the world. Of course, in reality there are 300-some more streams and potentially 100,000-150,000 Kings in all, and the commercial harvest is not just Deshka fish.

    You say the Deshka is not representative of the other streams. In general I agree. However, the same can be said for the commercial fishery...it's harvest numbers do not represent those of any one stream, and that expanding commercial fishing time does not necessarily mean harvest will affect a stream with a missed escapement goal. So closing an entire downstream fishery in the salt water in order to conserve fish in one of 300 streams (or maybe a small group of streams), does not make as much sense as closing the sport fishery which is targeting just that stream's easily vulnerable fish.

    "Expanding" fishing time is a brainwash term. You can't call it expanding when it was reduced in the first place. In fact fishing time is far from being restored to what it was.

    Cheers.

    Leave a comment:


  • Arcticwildman
    replied
    Originally posted by Nerka View Post
    Interesting computer issues. I posted what you referenced with the silly comment, thought it was not appropriate and edited it out. Must have posted it and edited it while it when out on the thread. So my post above is the one that I should have written first.

    But lets deal with your issues. The estimate of the number of chinook in the river is from techniques used by ADF&G and LGL and a valid method of estimating the numbers. There can be error but you cannot say it is smoke and mirrors. That is not technically correct.

    Second, not sure who quoted you the number of 1000 in ADF&G but they do not know what they are talking about. The total catch for the ND is 1100 fish with one opener to go. I must say there is more misinformation in the ND that anywhere else in the inlet. The anticipated catch for the next opener is 100 fish, not 1000. So the 1% harvest rate is good again for this year from all indications.

    I can tell from your post that you have not read the LGL report or any of the reports ADF&G have done on estimating salmon abundance in the Susitna River from the fishwheel program. You are way off base on how the estimates are made.

    Next, the management plans I guess are good for you when the Deshka is weak and the whole ND closes but not when the Deshka is strong and only part of the ND opens. Remember, the area from Wood chip dock to the Susitna has been closed the whole season.

    So if one stream is not making its goal in the Susitna then the commercial fishery should be restricted or closed. Does that apply to the sport fisheries at the mouth of the streams which are catching chinook headed upstream, even if it is only 1% of the harvest?

    If we had only one stream NOT making it's numbers this entire discussion probably wouldn't be happening. Unfortunately with the exception of the Deshka, almost every other stream in the Su drainage has been having issues meeting minimum levels and everybody has been sacrificing because of it. But to answer your question...as long as any stream is in danger of having the run collapse, the comm fishery need to be adjusted accordingly. The problem with comm fishing is that it is too efficient. Catch the run with the right tide and you could catch thousands in one opening and potentially wipe out a smaller creek's run. That is an unacceptable risk.

    Leave a comment:


  • Nerka
    replied
    Originally posted by Arcticwildman View Post
    First off, I never said close the commercial fishery down all together. My big objection is EXPANDING the fishing time they had based on ONE river in the drainage.

    Secondly, claiming that only 1% was taken of the total run is nothing but smoke and mirrors. There has never been a way to ACCURATELY count the run on the Susitna. The numbers thrown out there are nothing more than guesses based on fish wheel sampling and are heavily biased by the Deshka weir counts. The only river with a weir is the Deshka and it is not representative of the other streams on the Su drainage as evidenced by the missed escapement goals of a majority of Susitna streams in years past while the Deshka made it's escapement numbers.

    Third, when lower escapement goals are in the hundreds for most Susitna streams and they haven't made that number in 4 or more years I don't see how you can't manage via weak stock management. That extra 1000 fish the extended openings will probably produce, (number quoted to me by F&G), could very well be the tipping point for several of those streams and make the runs disappear or become so small as to be meaningless.


    I applaud F&G for closing the Little Su. I knew it was coming last week as F&G told me they weren't getting the numbers through the counter. They are managing the run in river the best they can but they are also crossing their fingers and doing a lot of hoping as they have no idea how many fish are actually holding in the lower river. With this latest closure, I think it gives more strength to the argument that the commercial fishery needs to be scaled back to 6 hours for it's last opening (they already got one extended period this past week I think).
    Interesting computer issues. I posted what you referenced with the silly comment, thought it was not appropriate and edited it out. Must have posted it and edited it while it when out on the thread. So my post above is the one that I should have written first.

    But lets deal with your issues. The estimate of the number of chinook in the river is from techniques used by ADF&G and LGL and a valid method of estimating the numbers. There can be error but you cannot say it is smoke and mirrors. That is not technically correct.

    Second, not sure who quoted you the number of 1000 in ADF&G but they do not know what they are talking about. The total catch for the ND is 1100 fish with one opener to go. I must say there is more misinformation in the ND that anywhere else in the inlet. The anticipated catch for the next opener is 100 fish, not 1000. So the 1% harvest rate is good again for this year from all indications.

    I can tell from your post that you have not read the LGL report or any of the reports ADF&G have done on estimating salmon abundance in the Susitna River from the fishwheel program. You are way off base on how the estimates are made.

    Next, the management plans I guess are good for you when the Deshka is weak and the whole ND closes but not when the Deshka is strong and only part of the ND opens. Remember, the area from Wood chip dock to the Susitna has been closed the whole season.

    So if one stream is not making its goal in the Susitna then the commercial fishery should be restricted or closed. Does that apply to the sport fisheries at the mouth of the streams which are catching chinook headed upstream, even if it is only 1% of the run?

    Leave a comment:


  • Arcticwildman
    replied
    Originally posted by Nerka View Post
    Arcticwildman, if you want to take a shot go ahead, you just make yourself look silly. Last year the commercial set net fishery took less than 1% of the total return to the ND. Large areas of the fishery have been closed for the last few years and again this year. You can imply that weak stock management is the way to manage a fishery but that is not good fishery management. There would never be any harvest in-river or in the inlet. There is always a weaker stock. It is about balance and trends in escapement. Remember most goals are Maximum Sustained Yield Goals or Sustainable Escapement Goals which have high yields.

    As stated in the above post this is an in-river issue and ADF&G is handling it in-river as directed by the Board of Fisheries. If they decide to close the area around the Little Susitna then so be it. It all depends on what they think are in the river relative to the goal. But trying to say that closing the whole commercial fishery will make a significant impact is not reality or good fishery management.

    First off, I never said close the commercial fishery down all together. My big objection is EXPANDING the fishing time they had based on ONE river in the drainage.

    Secondly, claiming that only 1% was taken of the total run is nothing but smoke and mirrors. There has never been a way to ACCURATELY count the run on the Susitna. The numbers thrown out there are nothing more than guesses based on fish wheel sampling and are heavily biased by the Deshka weir counts. The only river with a weir is the Deshka and it is not representative of the other streams on the Su drainage as evidenced by the missed escapement goals of a majority of Susitna streams in years past while the Deshka made it's escapement numbers.

    Third, when lower escapement goals are in the hundreds for most Susitna streams and they haven't made that number in 4 or more years I don't see how you can't manage via weak stock management. That extra 1000 fish the extended openings will probably produce, (number quoted to me by F&G), could very well be the tipping point for several of those streams and make the runs disappear or become so small as to be meaningless.


    I applaud F&G for closing the Little Su. I knew it was coming last week as F&G told me they weren't getting the numbers through the counter. They are managing the run in river the best they can but they are also crossing their fingers and doing a lot of hoping as they have no idea how many fish are actually holding in the lower river. With this latest closure, I think it gives more strength to the argument that the commercial fishery needs to be scaled back to 6 hours for it's last opening (they already got one extended period this past week I think).

    Leave a comment:


  • Nerka
    replied
    Originally posted by Arcticwildman View Post
    Hmmm, I wonder if the person who stated this : is still going to justify the commercial opening extension? Somehow I doubt we will be disappointed ;-)
    Arcticwildman, you are off base on this.

    Just talked with staff. There are over 300 streams in the ND with chinook salmon rearing or spawning. The commercial harvest to date is 1100 fish and they estimate they reduce harvest rate by 70% this year with the actions to date. They estimate they will harvest 100 fish on Monday. The Little River Sport Fishery has taken 200 and the harvest reduction has been less than what the commercial fishery has done. So the Little Susitna contribution on Monday may be a fish or two.

    Last year the commercial set net fishery took less than 1% of the total return to the ND. Large areas of the fishery have been closed for the last few years and again this year. You can imply that weak stock management is the way to manage a fishery but that is not good fishery management. There would never be any harvest in-river or in the inlet. There is always a weaker stock. It is about balance and trends in escapement. Remember most goals are Maximum Sustained Yield Goals or Sustainable Escapement Goals which have high yields.

    As stated in the above post this is an in-river issue and ADF&G is handling it in-river as directed by the Board of Fisheries. If they decide to close the area around the Little Susitna then so be it. It all depends on what they think are in the river relative to the goal and what they can add by closing the commercial fishery. But trying to say that closing the whole commercial fishery will make a significant impact is not reality or good fishery management.

    Leave a comment:


  • Nerka
    replied
    Originally posted by willphish4food View Post
    Here ya go. And it is a counter; a weir. 19 fish. 900 minimum required. Just out of tidewater. But since another stream in the ND, Deshka, also has a weir, and is having a good return, making its threshold escapement, better grant the setnets full hours again.
    Coincidentally, because of the stock of concern status of Alexander Creek, Lewis, and Theodore, the net sites below the Big Su have been closed, and the only sites open are between the Little Su and Big Su to protect these stocks of concern. This move has caused fishing pressure to be concentrated closer to the mouth of the Little Su... which has 19 fish through the weir...
    As usual Willphish4food misdirects and leaves out important information - no ethics at all in the above statement. Will you ever tell the complete truth Willphish4food?

    Leave a comment:


  • Tearbear
    replied
    Though the Kings didn't get counted by a weir at the Little Su since 1995, they managed to count the silvers by weir each year since 1995...
    I remember when that little river used to boil with Kings, had to be careful one didn't knock you out of your boat.

    Leave a comment:


  • Arcticwildman
    replied
    Originally posted by Funstastic View Post
    It could also mean 500-600 Kings. Disorientated in a helicopter doing circles and turns, I often caught myself counting the same school more than once.

    Yeah, especially on the Little Su! That river goes all over the place.

    Leave a comment:


  • Funstastic
    replied
    Originally posted by Arcticwildman View Post
    900-1800 aerial counted kings could easily be 3000-4000 actual in river fish. The weir will allow them to hopefully get an ACCURATE fish count so future management can be less of a guessing game I hope.
    It could also mean 500-600 Kings. Disorientated in a helicopter doing circles and turns, I often caught myself counting the same school more than once.

    Leave a comment:


  • Arcticwildman
    replied
    One small flaw in the method they are using to manage the escapement....they are using aerial counts for a baseline number (which everybody admits are not very accurate and not indicative of a run's real numbers) and then turn around and base all future decisions off of actual hand counted fish. 900-1800 aerial counted kings could easily be 3000-4000 actual in river fish. The weir will allow them to hopefully get an ACCURATE fish count so future management can be less of a guessing game I hope.

    Leave a comment:


  • Funstastic
    replied
    Originally posted by willphish4food View Post
    Here ya go. And it is a counter; a weir. 19 fish. 900 minimum required. Just out of tidewater. But since another stream in the ND, Deshka, also has a weir, and is having a good return, making its threshold escapement, better grant the setnets full hours again. Coincidentally, because of the stock of concern status of Alexander Creek, Lewis, and Theodore, the net sites below the Big Su have been closed, and the only sites open are between the Little Su and Big Su to protect these stocks of concern. This move has caused fishing pressure to be concentrated closer to the mouth of the Little Su... which has 19 fish through the weir...
    Here we go again...life is so unfair for willphish4food and it's all the commercial fishermen's fault....

    willphish4food, this wear was put in last year, with virtually no idea of how many Kings were passing or being sport-caught since it was pulled in 1995. Last year it counted 71 Kings to the 18th of June. This year the counts shows 63. Not a lot of difference. Not sure why the EO shows 19.

    http://www.adfg.alaska.gov/sf/FishCo...displayResults

    The 900 number is based on areal survey...about as inaccurate as it gets (I've done them). It would be silly for anyone to hang their hat on it.

    Right now the water conditions at the Little Su are very low, and the Kings are congregated below the weir, waiting. That's why fishing pressure is at the mouth of the Little Su, where sport fishermen are hammering them. Thus the closure. In fact a survey showed sport fishermen have killed 200 Kings - however under reported that probably is.

    The set nets have not been granted "full hours". Their full fishing time was restricted years ago, and in fact they haven't harvested their allowable catch for decades. Obviously you have no clue about that set net fishery, and have probably never participated in it. See, fishing time doesn't necessarily mean the nets are actually fishing in water. It is greatly dependent on tides. A great deal of the time the nets are just laying in the mud waiting for tide to come up, especially on these big tides...tick-tock, tick-tock. Not to mention their harvest numbers don't add up to your blame. So that's just a taste of why your comments about set net hours is deceptive and dishonest.

    The Alexander, Lewis, and Theodore have serious in-river productivity problems. You can't seem to grasp that closing set netters won't, and hasn't, fixed that. Not sure why you think the commercial guys should sit it out watching the Deshka fill up with Kings, all for the sake of feeding pike in the Alexander, Lewis, and Theodore.

    Willphish4food, if I've told you once, I've told you a hundred times: You are not going to solve your ND problems by closing the commercial fishery. You are stuck in a myopic, anti-commercial fishing trance. And it does more harm than good.


    On edit: It seems I virtually repeated what smithtb said...too funny!

    Leave a comment:


  • smithtb
    replied
    Originally posted by willphish4food View Post
    Here ya go. And it is a counter; a weir. 19 fish. 900 minimum required. Just out of tidewater. But since another stream in the ND, Deshka, also has a weir, and is having a good return, making its threshold escapement, better grant the setnets full hours again.
    Coincidentally, because of the stock of concern status of Alexander Creek, Lewis, and Theodore, the net sites below the Big Su have been closed, and the only sites open are between the Little Su and Big Su to protect these stocks of concern. This move has caused fishing pressure to be concentrated closer to the mouth of the Little Su... which has 19 fish through the weir...

    Thanks for the link. A couple quotes from it and the ADFG fish count website:

    "2013 is the first time since 1995 that the weir has been in place to assess king salmon. Weir counts of king salmon will be used to assess run strength during the season in consideration of achieving the post season aerial goal."

    "To date, only 19 king salmon have passed the Little Susitna weir, which is located at approximately river mile 32.5 and four miles upstream of the Little Susitna Public Use Facility (LSPUF). The escapement goal for the Little Susitna is 900-1,800 king salmon based on a post season aerial survey. Over the past three weekends approximately 200 harvested king salmon have been reported in an exit survey conducted by the Division of Parks and Outdoor Recreation at the LSPUF. Staff surveys and angler reports indicate king salmon holding in the lower river under conditions of low water making them vulnerable to harvest. Staff surveys, harvest reports, and weir counts to date indicate the escapement goal is not likely to be achieved without further restrictions. At this time it is prudent to prohibit further harvest until the run can be more fully assessed and close the Little Susitna River to king salmon fishing."

    This EO pretty clearly describes this problem as an inriver harvest issue due to fish holding at the river mouth in a low water situation leaving them "vulnerable to harvest". Approximately 200 fish from this stream harvested inriver while only 19 had made the weir. I wonder what the total ND commercial king harvest is at this point, and how many of those fish are from the Little Sue given that they are such a small percentage of the total ND run? If they are holed up below the weir, they've cleared the "curtains of death" already.

    Also, last year's count was 2,383, well above the goal. And as of yesterday, 63 fish had passed the weir. Last year at this time, 71 fish had passed the weir. So we are currently 8 fish behind last year, when the total count EXCEEDED the upper end of the escapement goal by something like 30%.

    Did I miss something?

    Leave a comment:

Footer Adsense

Collapse
Working...
X