DFO estimates are terrible. So sad.

[IronNoggin]

"Chinook salmon

The total chinook escapement is estimated at 45,774 adults and 5148 jacks through the Stamp
Falls Fishway to October 23, and 199 adults and 6 jacks through the Sproat Falls Fishway to
October 13, 2016.
Adults Observed Total 45,973

Chinook salmon
Over the last week, daily counts ranged between 288 and 793 adult chinook through the Stamp Falls fishway."

......................................................................................................

Must have been rather heavy on the high side of "observed" this week.
If the numbers run true, 773.4 springs per day had to make that leap - every single day since the last estimate...

Cheers,
Nog

 

[triplenickel]

Here 's some good news for fish for a change.

http://www.campbellrivermirror.com/news/398534091.html

 

[fish brain]

My neighbors son did fish counts on the north Island for about five years. He quit in disgust last year after having been asked repeatedly to inflate return numbers. I always thought he might be exaggerating the story, but perhaps not

I saw my neighbour tonight and asked more about his sons situation.
The area was Rivers Inlet, and it was the index he was using that was the problem. His superiors were not happy with the index he was applying. He went so far as to invite his superiors and their bosses to come and count fish with him and evaluate his decisions on site. Not one of them took him up on his request.

 

[shuswap]

Been reading this particular thread with some interest. Good topic. Interests me more than talking about fish farms...lol. Some good, informative comments here, but there are some that miss the mark. I am not as familiar with the example from this region in question here; however, the enumeration program that I am involved in is much larger than what has been mentioned in this thread - involving visual, fence, hydroacoustics and mark-recapture methods. As someone who is very much involved in this, I do not believe there is purposeful, unprofessional manipulation of the data which is being dictated by managers to inflate numbers for some sinister purpose. I totally agree with the comment that at the regional level things are on the up n' up and that those at the regional level are some of the most professional, dedicated people out there. As mentioned already, escapement estimation of salmon is not an easy task. It has to take in consideration many variables and factors which necessitate the need for a proper understanding of what species you are enumerating, the physical conditions where the enumeration is taking place and the level of precision and accuracy required for management.

The comment was made that estimates are usually index based and that they are not true escapement estimates. My response is that it depends on what species you are enumerating, where you are enumerating (including environmental and physical conditions) and level of precision and accuracy required. While many may be index-based (or expansion factor), they may in some cases only account for a very small amount of the overall escapement of a particular species with the majority of the species are enumerated using higher precision methods (e.g. hydroacoustics, fence or mark-recapture). Whether they are "true" escapement estimates would depend if there was calibration done (i.e. paired low precision method with high precision method) to generate indices. Some enumeration is effort based expansion where the number of carcasses recovered and the number of surveys (i.e. lakes) conducted is used to generate an estimate which is essentially an index. They are all essentially escapement estimates, some better than others, but "true" in this case I presume is being equated to an absolute count, like a fence. When things work out right, fences can provide that absolute count, but there are cons to fences. When high water conditions during rain events create breaches in fence then it's not such an absolute count anymore. When debris and carcasses collect on a fence and it comes tumbling down it's not such an absolute count anymore. Fences are not applicable in every situation. Salmon don't necessarily enjoy having a fence in front of them - it can disrupt their behaviour. Fences require daily maintenance and are notoriously expensive to operate especially if its a 24 hour operation. Another thing that is important are that methods and protocols are done as consistently as possible over the years so you can make reasonable comparisons from year to year. If you are constantly changing what you are doing within a season or year to year it's more difficult to make comparisons. It's like comparing apples to oranges. Even if something is not totally accurate or precise it goes a long way to have consistent methodology.

It would be great to have high precision methods on every stream and lake, but that is unrealistic. Budgets would be totally busted. But it's not just a function of money either. It's an important point. While I agree that more funding would help in many circumstances as mentioned, you will still have the inherent limitations on a certain methodology in a particular situation that money cannot overcome. For instance, mark-recapture would be a poor method to use if you were dealing with a relatively small population of fish because the number of tags you could reasonably expect to get back on recovery will likely be few, and that could be one of many cons in that circumstance.

Secondly, it was mentioned that a manager in fisheries may want his/her area to appear to be on target for escapement forecasts and that with budget cuts being how they are this manager doesn't want to have his department seen as under performing. This assumes that fisheries is like retail sales which they are not. It also assumes that a manager in fisheries is responsible for stock assessment and resource management which they are not. Stock assessment is a different sector/division than resource management. Both have different objectives, responsibilities, staff and managers. In a nutshell, stock assessment is the long term monitoring that collects the information on the species (e.g. escapement enumeration of adults, juvenile assessment, spawn success, fish distribution, etc.) and provides this information as well as advice to resource management. Resource management uses this information and advice to deal with stakeholders, agreements, allocation and openings. Forecasts are done by stock assessment. Managers with stock assessment and resource management are not fixated on escapement forecasts like a retail sales manager may be on their particular forecast in order to not under perform. In regards to stock assessment, today's manager is more concerned with fulfilling enumeration objectives and doing the best job possible to ensure the least amount of data gaps given the current and past budget conditions. They are increasingly overburdened with ever changing and increasing staffing and administration procedures which have little to do with fish biology. In some circumstances, projects would not be able to be pulled off without their creativity and determination. That's what they are up to.

Lastly, I do not subscribe to the view that run forecasting within the DFO has been notoriously poor for years. I have posted on this extensively already on this forum so I don't want to rehash it. In my opinion, many people do not understand the nature of these forecasts, the model limitations and the associated probabilities. The other problem is the reporting of this information which refers to the 50P but ignores the rest of the distribution. The 50P assumes average survival which may not be applicable as we have seen.

In my opinion, I believe some folks would benefit more with their knowledge of this by asking questions of those involved instead of leaning towards some sinister conspiracy where those involved are being pressured to purposely fudge data to achieve some result as an explanation. Before you say something is "terrible" take some time to understand it and if you don't know something then ask those who are doing it.

 

[agentaqua]

Generally agree w Shuswap's comments above.

I would however offer this caveat: the Fraser, and the associated stock assessment and fisheries management activities are somewhat unique – and not necessary indicative of stock assessment in other rivers across BC. It would be naive to suggest that the reality of stock assessment on the Fraser is standard across the province.

The reasons for this are:

1/ The Fraser is the largest watershed in BC,
2/ It is perhaps the most complicated wrt managing intercept fisheries along the way, including weak stock assessment and management,
3/ Not only does the Fraser support many different runs of the 5 salmon species, but due to the size/length of the watershed/river – weak stocks often intermingle with different species along the way,
4/ the Fraser empties into Vancouver and the Lower Mainland, where many people and impacts are,
5/ The population in the Lower Mainland has considerable political pressure, which is why we had the Cohen Commission,
6/ The Fraser and the associated management and stock assessment activities have considerable additional technical and financial capacity OUTSIDE of the “normal” core DFO Stock Assessment program. These organizations providing additional outside expertise, funding and capacity include the Pacific Salmon Commission Fraser River Panel (PSC), The Fraser River Aboriginal Fisheries Secretariat (FRARS), The Upper Fraser Fisheries Conservation Alliance (UFFCA), The Lower Fraser Fisheries Alliance (LFFA), The Fraser River Salmon Management Council, The Nicola Tribal Association, The Sto:lo Nation, The Sto:lo Tribal Council, The Burns Lake, Canim Lake, Canoe Creek, Esketemc, Lhtako Dene, Lheidli T'enneh, Nak'azdli Whut'en, Nazko, Soda Creek, Stellat’en, Tl’azt’en, Wet'suwet'en, Williams Lake, Yekooche, Adams Lake, Bonaparte, Coldwater, Cook's Ferry, High Bar, Little Shuswap, Neskonlith, Nicomen, Nooaitch, Okanagan IB, Osoyoos, Penticton, Seton Lake, Shackan, Shuswap IB, Simpcw, Siska, Skeetchestn, Splatsin, Tk'emlups, T'it'qet, Upper Nicola, Westbank, Whispering Pines/Clinton, Chawathil, Katzie, Kwantlen, Kwaw Kwaw Apilt, Seabird Island, Shxwa:y Village, Sumas, Skawahlook, Skowkale, Soowahlie, Tsawwassen, Tzeachten, Yale, Campbell River, Cape Mudge, Cowichan Tribes, Ditidaht, Ehattesaht Chinehkint, Lyackson, ‘Namgis, Halalt, Nuchatluht, Penelakut and Quatsino First Nations, various Aboriginal Aquatic Resource and Oceans Management (AAROM) technical groups such as The Island Marine Aquatic Working Group (IMAWG) and A-Tlegay Fisheries, and The First Nation Fisheries Council (FNFC); often through developed processes such as the Fraser Salmon Roadmap (Fraser Salmon Management Agreement) process, and the Pacific Integrated Commercial Fisheries Initiative (PICFI).

It is a very different reality in other parts of the province.

 

[Dave]

Jeez agent, how long did it take you to type all that in? How long was the Google search? To bad you missed few bands, they will be pissed but I suspect they don't really follow this forum, lol! ... but I question how much non DFO money these various bands put into this "technical and financial capacity". Any idea?
Are you agreeing/suggesting there may be data fudging in areas apart from the Fraser watershed?

 

[fogged in]

Jeez agent, how long did it take you to type all that in? How long was the Google search? To bad you missed few bands, they will be pissed but I suspect they don't really follow this forum, lol!

I would say the above is a personal attack and no place for it on this forum!

 

[agentaqua]

Interesting that you would phrase it as "DFO money", Dave.

DFO gets it's main operating money from the Federal Government - through Treasury Board allotments - the levels dictated by the government in power - and ultimately through taxes collected from the taxpayers. So - it's actually taxpayer money. In addition, DFO - like other agencies - has the opportunity to get partial funding - sometimes whole funding - for certain specific projects through funding sources like the Pacific Salmon Commission, and other Federal Funding Sources.

Sometimes, First Nations get their funding from Treasury Board too (AFS program) - or through monies that DFO gets to administer - often after taking a 20% admin fee off the top. Often, FN have other funding sources that DFO can't touch - like Tides Canada, etc - and other NGOs and private funding sources. They do it because realistically DFO doesn't have the money to perform many core activities as they did years ago - like stock assessment.

 

[Dave]

Agent, you didn't answer my last question.
Fogged in, how is this a personal attack?

 

[fogged in]

Agent, you didn't answer my last question.
Fogged in, how is this a personal attack?

"Jeez agent, how long did it take you to type all that in? How long was the Google search? To bad you missed few bands, they will be pissed but I suspect they don't really follow this forum, lol!"

 

[fogged in]

"Jeez agent, how long did it take you to type all that in? How long was the Google search? lol!"

opps...I zigged instead of zagged
to answer your question,
I think your comments are disrespectful and contribute nothing to the debate. I choose to call it a personal attack, perhaps the wrong choice of words.

 

[OldBlackDog]

1. TAMP/ROBERTSON CREEK HATCHERY CHINOOK
   •  The target chinook escapement for the Stamp River system and Robertson Creek hatchery is 39M eggs.
     
     
   •  The forecast terminal return of adult Stamp/RCH chinook to Barkley Sound and Alberni Inlet in 2016 is approximately 118,000 (range 87,000 to 148,000). This is a larger return than observed in recent years. The predicted adult age composition is 7%, 92% and 1% of 3, 4 and 5-year old fish, respectively. With this expected age composition, the escapement target is approximately 23,000.
     
     
   •  With an expected return of 118,000 adults, directed chinook fisheries are expected in the terminal Alberni Inlet area for all sectors. However, in-season information from escapement monitoring and fishery assessment programs may be used to modify run size expectations and adjust fishing plans.
     
     
   •  On August 25, 2016 the expected run size was re-classified into the ‘moderate’ zone and fishery planning for an expected run size of 60,000 was recommended.
     
     
   •  On September 13, 2016 a more precautionary in-season run size of 50,000 was recommended based on the total accounting to date and the tendency of recreational CPUE
   • 
     On September 22, 2016 it was determined that there is a strong likelihood the final terminal run size will be less than 50,000, perhaps more likely in the range of 40,000 to 45,000, based on the current total accounting and pattern of daily escapement.
     
     

 

[TheBigGuy]

Regarding the comments from Shuswap and Agent Aqua. Thanks for your insights into the departmental divisions and their separate areas of responsibility.

I think from all outside appearances the department is seriously broken. This years west coast forecasts for the Conuma and Stamp rivers both had to be severely downgraded from the pre season estimates.

Lodges were advertising heavily about how the best runs in 10 years were forecast. From the outside this would almost appear as though the DFO would rather err on the high side with their estimates because that is good for business. Lots of fish forecast gave the commercial sector raised quotas for fish that were nowhere near the numbers in actuality. This could have seriously harmed this years returns. The abundance index they dream up determines how many fish the commercial sector gets to take before the sportsfisherman ever get a crack at those fish.

Maybe there is no coordinated conspiracy to inflate numbers, but all the business interests sure benefitted from the high run forecasts this year. Lodges were doing great business because of the forecasts, and the commercial sector got a big increase in quota because of the abundance index.

Coincidence, maybe, but it sure makes the DFO look like they are pandering to business interests again. They seem far more consistent with that, than their ability to forecast returns accurately.

 

[ericl]

Columbia river "upriver brights" run is now estimated at 70% of the pre-run forecast. They recently closed the fishery because of this. As BigGuy says, this is months after the commies got theirs. Even worse, the CR run is a major component of the abundance index used in determining run sizes & commercial quotas.
I would not doubt that if you were to trace the basis of DFO estimates that data from the international Pacific Salmon organization & their abundance index is the root of the problem.

 

[agentaqua]

...I would not doubt that if you were to trace the basis of DFO estimates that data from the international Pacific Salmon organization & their abundance index is the root of the problem.

BINGO! eric.

 

[Derby]

Regarding the comments from Shuswap and Agent Aqua. Thanks for your insights into the departmental divisions and their separate areas of responsibility.

I think from all outside appearances the department is seriously broken. This years west coast forecasts for the Conuma and Stamp rivers both had to be severely downgraded from the pre season estimates.

Lodges were advertising heavily about how the best runs in 10 years were forecast. From the outside this would almost appear as though the DFO would rather err on the high side with their estimates because that is good for business. Lots of fish forecast gave the commercial sector raised quotas for fish that were nowhere near the numbers in actuality. This could have seriously harmed this years returns. The abundance index they dream up determines how many fish the commercial sector gets to take before the sportsfisherman ever get a crack at those fish.

Maybe there is no coordinated conspiracy to inflate numbers, but all the business interests sure benefitted from the high run forecasts this year. Lodges were doing great business because of the forecasts, and the commercial sector got a big increase in quota because of the abundance index.

Coincidence, maybe, but it sure makes the DFO look like they are pandering to business interests again. They seem far more consistent with that, than their ability to forecast returns accurately.[/QUOTE




The lodges for the most part were already booked up before the increase in the forecast.. its the return the year before usually dictates the up coming season for a big chunk of the industry... of course depending on lodge size and location..... Guiding on the island in the most part seemed to be down and that I would suggest was the really felt because of the lack of Alberta money not being spend in BC this year... tough fishing didn't help that out ...

 

[OldBlackDog]

New post on The Ardent Angler

Red hot fishing for Chum salmon!
by Jeremy Maynard
There’s no question about it, the fishing story this fall around northeast Vancouver Island has been the strength of the chum salmon run through Johnstone Strait and Discovery Passage to the inner south coast. Who can figure out salmon? After generally low returns of pink salmon to southern BC rivers and the record low return of Fraser sockeye the chum run through the straits this year has been the largest since 1998, perhaps even exceeding it. Final assessment will be months away.

To give a sense of how unexpected this year’s chum return is, copied below is the text by DFO describing the 2016 outlook for SBC chum salmon:
“While the main contributing brood years (2011-2013) showed improved parental brood abundances, recent early marine conditions have been variable. Indications of improved early marine survival conditions in 2013 (strong pink and coho returns in 2014) were followed by poor early marine survival conditions in 2014 (poor pink and coho returns in 2015). With an expectation of continued poor marine conditions and the high variability in chum returns, expectations are for average to below average fall chum returns.”

So much for the outlook, although given all the adverse news in recent years from the open ocean where chum salmon spend the majority of their lives - the warm blob followed by an El Nino event - prior to early October it seemed an entirely appropriate statement. Then came the results by the two seine boats conducting the daily test fishing in upper Johnstone Straits – there was a healthy spike on October 5/6th that exceeded anything seen over the past half dozen years but then the counts tapered off back down to more usual levels. However immediately after the Thanksgiving weekend a huge slug of chums must have come out of the ocean and entered the straits because the test fishing results went through the roof, with one boat making a set that caught an estimate of nearly 30,000 fish, an almost unprecedented number. This pulse too slowed down but there was another large spike in the results around October 20-22nd, showing the run is ongoing.

Likely there’s never a more apt phrase than “timing is everything” and in terms of catch this applied to this year’s Chum Derby put on by the Browns Bay marina. More than a few aficionados of this annual event – the 14th - wondered about the earlier than usual timing this year but it couldn’t have been better as it coincided with the transit of the very large pulse of chums through the straits and all participants had fishing of the kind dreams are made of. Well perhaps not quite as the weather was lousy, strong southeast winds and intermittent heavy rain. Although the reality wasn’t quite as bad as the weather forecast conditions undoubtedly depressed effort. Even so more than 800 chums were weighed-in with an aggregate weight of about 11,000 pounds! Congratulations to everyone who braved the elements and supported this event that raises money for local salmon and stream enhancement projects.

And the timing worked perfectly for the seiners, which gear type had their second opening for chums on the following Monday and Tuesday morning. The weather had moderated and they encountered the same pulse of chums in the straits. By the time the proverbial dust had settled their catch totaled about 877,000 fish, thought to be some kind of record. Such was the glut of fish into the processing facilities that they ran short of totes and some of the seine boats weren’t unloaded until the Saturday. And such was the abundance of chums that a friend, who was out on the water for other purposes, went sport fishing close to some seiners at the very end of their opening, in order to show his guest the net fishing process, and they still caught 6, loosing as many or more.

Since then the sport fishing has been very productive more often than not and even on the day of writing this (28/10) there are reliable reports of hot fishing for those anglers still going out. Astonishing really considering all the rain in recent weeks to attract chums out of the ocean and into their rivers of origin.

As of the final week of October the aggregate chum catch by all three commercial gear types (seine, gillnet and troll) in Johnstone Strait has been assessed at 1.268 million fish. The gillnet boats have just completed their final opening and a few trollers will be finishing their season by the 31st so there will be a few more chums to add to the total. Apart from knowing the commercial catch total the number should, in theory, provide a guide as to how large the run-size through the straits was in total. The management regime is supposed to cap the catch at a maximum 20% harvest rate, of which a quarter is allocated to First Nations food fisheries, test fishing and the recreational fishery while the remainder (15%) is shared amongst the commercial gear-types. Assuming the management regime wasn’t breached the commercial catch would imply a run-size in the range of 7 – 8.5 million chums.

Now the focus shifts to assessing returns to the rivers, no easy task in high coloured water. Updates will continue for weeks but already the Fraser River return is estimated at 2 million fish or twice the spawning escapement target, and could quite possibly be double that when the run is finished. Once again the rivers on southeast Vancouver Island (Nanaimo south, including the Cowichan, Chemainus and Goldstream) appear to be doing better than the mid-island rivers such as the Puntledge, and both Qualicum’s. There’s lots of time for fish to arrive at these rivers and many of the small systems are showing healthy chum returns as well. Look for them in your local creek, in this year of abundance chums could show up almost anywhere, including in those watersheds that don’t usually host them.

So all in all it has been quite a finish to the 2016 extended summer season along the northeast Vancouver Island shore, as a fishing community we could use more good news stories like this one!

 

[TheBigGuy]

Wow, they hit that nail right on the head again.

 

[Whitebuck]

Yep, pretty sweet for the comm fisherman, very very ****** for the future of the endangered wild coho and steelhead migrating with these chum. But hey the overseas market is worth more than our Fraser river interior steelhead and coho. Disgusting and sad that we are going to watch these species become extinct.....
Keep it open for comm trolling,**** the non selective netting!!!!

 

[bigbruce]

Then there's the so-called "stewards of the resource" who pillaged and essentially killed the chinook run at Goldstream this year.