More insanity...........

Cuba Libre

Well-Known Member
Gulf Chinook bycatch hits record levels
Article published on Friday, October 22nd, 2010
By SAM FRIEDMAN
Mirror Writer
Fishermen in the Gulf of Alaska have accidentally caught an estimated 58,336 king salmon this year, an unprecedented level of bycatch that could lead to new fishing restrictions.

In recent years the Gulf of Alaska’s bycatch numbers have hovered around 20,000 fish. This year’s numbers surprised both the industry and regulators.

“By far this is the largest (bycatch) we have ever seen,” said Josh Keaton, a fisheries manager with the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). “Hopefully it means a lot of kings are out there to be caught and they ran into a big pack of them.”

Most of the bycatch came from the trawl pollock fishery in the last month, especially in the western Gulf.

About 20 boats from King Cove and Sand Point averaged 3.4 king salmon per metric ton of polluck, picking up an estimated 24,878 fish in 12 days of fishing between Oct. 1 and Oct. 17.

Pollock boats in two regions around Kodiak took in 11,896 kings this October.

Julie Bonney, director of the groundfish industry group Groundfish Data Bank, said this is the highest bycatch she has seen as well.

Unlike 2007 — the last time a high level of king bycatch was reported — the bycatch data is considered accurate this year, both Keaton and Bonney said.

Bycatch numbers are estimated using data collected by fisheries observers. Bycatch for non-observed boats is generalized using observed data.

This year’s bycatch numbers could lead to new restrictions or regulations designed to lower bycatch, but not in the immediate future.

Chinook (king salmon) bycatch was already on the agenda for the North Pacific Fishery Management Council agenda this December. The council is not scheduled to take any final action, but will consider a new paper on the subject.

The Gulf of Alaska’s king salmon bycatch this year was also large enough to attract the attention of fishery managers in the Lower 48 because kings accidentally caught in the Gulf of Alaska may be endangered stocks from the Lower 48.

Because this year’s Chinook bycatch exceeded a limit of 40,000 kings, it triggered conversations about the problem with fishery managers in the Lower 48, NMFS manager Melanie Brown said.

King salmon tagged from endangered stocks like the Upper Willamette and lower Columbia rivers have been found in the Gulf of Alaska before.

Salmon bycatch is difficult to control because the fish are always moving around, but the trawl industry does have technologies to reduce it, Bonney said.

One option is salmon excluder devices, openings in trawl nets which let salmon escape. Some devices are used by larger boats.

Another approach is avoiding salmon hot spots, but detecting salmon and avoiding them during a derby-style fishery opening is difficult, Bonney said.

Mirror writer Sam Friedman can be reached via e-mail sfriedman@kodiakdailymirror.com.

[ printable version ]
 
You gotta remember this the BYCATCH only! 58,000 chinook! The rec sector only took 83,000 for all of WCVI in 2010 according to DFO statistics. Yet we're considered a threat to chinook fisheries and need to be heavily regulated.
 
Oh-- you mean this????

:Originally posted by Derby-- reply by Charlie

Sat in a meeting this week-the number of BC chinooks caught as bye catch in this fishery is around 60% of which 40% of that number is WCVI fish.Haven't got my hands on the papers to back it up but the people saying these number are in the know.
Is that what you really meant to say? I am not sure I understand those numbers? Bycatch 60%? WCVI 40% I probably actually have that paper "they" in the know, are refrring to and am not sure anyone from DFO is that stupid? I believe that information would be what was being discussed and addressed in Agenda Item D-3(b)(1), APRIL 2010. The Staff Discussion Paper is:

Chinook Salmon Bycatch in
Gulf of Alaska Groundfish Fisheries
March 2009
Staff Discussion Paper

The actual statement made in that paper was the following, and I included the information left out which might help put their comments and numbers in proper prospective. They in the know as of April 2010 have "NO" sampling study records of the Gulf of Alaska bycatch from anyone to back any statement of that nature - as in, it hasn't been done by anyone, yet!

5.5 Impacts of bycatch: river of origin of GOA Chinook

The direct effects of GOA groundfish bycatch of Chinook salmon on the sustainability of salmon populations are difficult to interpret without specific information on the river of origin of each bycaught salmon. No bycatch sampling studies have been conducted in the GOA trawl fisheries to look at the origin of salmon bycatch, although some studies have been undertaken in the Bering Sea pollock trawl fishery. Limited information is available from other studies into the river of origin of salmon species.

The High Seas Salmon Research Program of the University of Washington routinely tags and monitors Pacific salmon species. It should be noted that Coded Wire Tag (CWT) information may not accurately represent the true distribution of hatchery-released salmon. Much of the CWT tagging occurs within the British Columbia hatcheries and thus, most of the tags that are recovered also come from those same hatcheries. CWT tagging does occur in some Alaskan hatcheries, specifically in Cook Inlet, Prince William Sound, other Kenai region hatcheries, as well as in hatcheries in Southeast Alaska (Johnson, 2004).

Chinook salmon tags have been recovered in the area around Kodiak through recovery projects in 1994, 1997, and 1999. The contribution of hatchery-produced Chinook salmon to the sampled harvested in the Kodiak commercial fishery ranged from 16% in 1999 to 34% in 1998; hatchery fish from British Colombia made up the majority of these fish. The study concluded that there was only a low incidental harvest of Cook Inlet Chinook salmon in the Kodiak area (Clark and Nelson 2001, Dinnocenzo and Caldentey 2008).

Other CWT studies have tagged Washington and Oregon salmon, and many of these tagged salmon have been recovered in the GOA (Myers et al. 2004). In 2006, 63 tags were recovered in the eastern Bering Sea and GOA (Celewycz et al. 2006). Of these, 8 CWT Chinook salmon were recovered from the Gulf of Alaska trawl fishery in 2006 and 2007, 8 CWT Chinook salmon were recovered from the Bering Sea-Aleutian Islands trawl fishery in 2006 and 2007, 44 CWT Chinook salmon were recovered from the Pacific hake trawl fishery in the North Pacific Ocean off WA/OR/CA in 2006, and 3 CWT steelhead were recovered from Japanese gillnet research in the central North Pacific Ocean.

Overall, tagging results in the GOA showed the presence of Columbia River Basin Chinook and Oregon Chinook salmon tag recoveries (from 1982–2003). Some CWT recovered by research vessels in this time period also showed the recoveries of coho salmon from the Cook Inlet region and southeast Alaska coho salmon tag recoveries along the southeastern and central GOA (Myers et al 2004).

Additional research on stock discrimination for Chinook salmon is being conducted by evaluating DNA variation, specifically single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs). A baseline has been developed that identifies the DNA composition of many BSAI and GOA salmon stocks. Until GOA trawl bycatch samples can be collected and analyzed, however, there is no information to determine what proportion of GOA Chinook bycatch is attributable to rivers of origin in the GOA or elsewhere. The Alaska Fishery Science Center has developed a research plan for sampling Chinook bycatch, with the primary focus on the Bering Sea pollock fishery. In October 2009, the Council wrote a letter to the AFSC asking that the agency also apply the new sampling protocol (scheduled to begin in 2011) to Chinook caught as bycatch in GOA groundfish fisheries.
http://alaskafisheries.noaa.gov/npfm...bycatch410.pdf

It is no secret that our Chinook migrate up to and around Kodiak Island. They catch them there all the time! However, think about those numbers… Check out some of POST estimates on salmon survival. There are estimates up to 40% of the salmon don’t survive the first 30 days in the ocean (for various reasons). So, if 40% don’t even make it to Alaska and the Pollock fishery bycatch is 60%, that leaves NOTHING! Rest assured whoever made that statement won’t be able to provide you any ‘Peer Reviewed’ studies to back that one up!

And FYI, if you read the above paper you will see in 2006 Russia released 0.78 million, Canada released 41.3 million, U.S. released 181.2 million (mostly from Washington), for a total of 223.3 million Chinook; with a bycatch of .019. Now, if you read the following and look at the total Alaska commercial Chinook catch of 359,000 compared to SEAK Chinook catch of 267,000 I believe you will see where “OUR” salmon are getting hammered and those are mostly “OUR” fish… and also mostly Washington Chinook, and there ain’t no bycatch to it!
http://www.cf.adfg.state.ak.us/genin...t/09exvesl.pdf



So-- if a couple of months is "old" does it mean its not worth repeating?? Just asking...
 
There is no “accidentally caught” to it, but you also have to remember there is NO salmon PSC in the GOA, yet! There is not much validity in that “estimated 58,336,” either. That is only an estimate and I quote from their own words from a ”problematic” reporting system and formula. They are working on that system and formula as we speak.

As previously stated in the other post, it isn’t that much more “doom and gloom”, as lead to believe in that article. I certainly can choose numbers to get headlines and sell newspapers, also. If you compare the “ACTUAL” numbers of “reported” Chinook bycatch, verified in the Gulf of Alaska. You might question the information written in that particular article, also… here you go, decide what you want to believe or not? Please note these are only the Pollock trawl fishery (there is some small amount of other bycatch). GOA bycatch is still below historical average; however I quess that depends on which historical average you use. Just pointing out! J


13-Nov-10 11,707
31-Dec-09 7,898
31-Dec-08 15,939
31-Dec-07 40,356
31-Dec-06 19,003
31-Dec-05 31,270
31-Dec-04 17,745
31-Dec-03 15,396
31-Dec-03 15,396
31-Dec-02 12,920
31=Dec-01 15,104
12/31/2000 26,705
12/31/1999 30,600
12/26/1998 16,984
12/31/1997 15,119
12/31/1996 15,761
1995 14,647
1994 13,613
1993 24,465

Average 18,980
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Back
Top