Area 9/10 chinook closing early

Monday aug 20.. WDFW... hooray...............

Gotta love the logic here:

Reason for action: Estimates indicate that encounters with wild (unmarked) chinook have exceeded the preseason expectations

Given the 2012 Sockeye run thru MA10 was projected to be 44,000 and was close to 150,000, and the King run is the best in years, and will very likely 'exceed preseason expectation' as well ....do ya think there might just be more wild Kings around this year to have "encounters" with

Listen for the outburst from the PB sector, it will be loud.  For us it's all in fun, but many charter services are making the majority of their yearly income during the month of August in MA 9/10.  Good luck to them.

And more encounters always equals higher mortality rates. DUH!

“Catch rates for hatchery chinook have been running two to three times higher than last year, and encounters with wild chinook are also way up,” said Pat Pattillo, WDFW salmon policy coordinator. “It’s a shame to close this fishery early, but we have a responsibility to protect wild chinook salmon in state waters.”

I perceive a real sense of compassion here. How lovely.

At least we can still fish for pinks. No, they really said this...pinks.

http://wdfw.wa.gov/news/aug1712a/

I wasn't supposed to tell you this, but Monday at 12:01am areas 9 and 10 are going to EXPLODE with a giant surprise run of pink salmon. That's why they had to close chinook. Make way for the pinks!!!!

To whom do we complain most effectively? 

Just got back from a family vacation back east to read this.  So much for my plans to try out some home made dowrigger action and some deep divers for kings.  WDFW, friend of few, including the fish.

So does the WDFW actually use HARD NUMBERS to determine its policy?  That's absurd.  No self-respecting scientist and/or statistician would do so.  It assumes your initial run size estimates are ALWAYS perfectly accurate. 

They should either use PERCENTAGES of catch/hatchery/native, or adjust their hard numbers according to the size of the catch.  If you are expecting 100,000 Chinook to return and set 'X' as the number of hatchery you will allow caught and 'Y' as number of natives, but as the run develops and you can project more accurate run estimates and find a new estimate of 200,000, then you simply double your numbers.

They should either use PERCENTAGES of catch/hatchery/native, or adjust their hard numbers according to the size of the catch.  If you are expecting 100,000 Chinook to return and set 'X' as the number of hatchery you will allow caught and 'Y' as number of natives, but as the run develops and you can project more accurate run estimates and find a new estimate of 200,000, then you simply double your numbers.

sounds simple, but how do you get a "harder" estimate on run sizes in mixed stock fisheries and before the fish hit the rivers?

the problem is not the size of the larger runs but the impacts on smaller runs.  the allowable impacts are what drives the huge north of falcon season setting process.

wdfw seems to be in a no win position.  manage conservatively and get attacked... manage too liberally and get attacked.

just remember, when it comes to puget sound salmon we washington fishermen are the last in line and get dinged the hardest when it comes to conservation.  there are wide open fisheries on puget sound chinook in alaska and bc.  being last in line sucks as the conservation burden is pushed onto us.

just remember, when it comes to puget sound salmon we washington fishermen are the last in line and get dinged the hardest when it comes to conservation.  there are wide open fisheries on puget sound chinook in alaska and bc.  being last in line sucks as the conservation burden is pushed onto us.

Actually, the Natives in the rivers are last in line and get dinged even more.   

-Allen

I know this really isn't the point, but do many on here hook up with kings from their kayaks in Marine area 9 and 10 anyway?  Not saying it doesn't happen. But those who do sure must not post much about it.

just remember, when it comes to puget sound salmon we washington fishermen are the last in line and get dinged the hardest when it comes to conservation.  there are wide open fisheries on puget sound chinook in alaska and bc.  being last in line sucks as the conservation burden is pushed onto us.

Actually, the Natives in the rivers are last in line and get dinged even more.   

-Allen

I'm calling BS on that.  Most rivers are netted 5 days a week, and several of them are netted 24/7 for months at a time.  Natives do NOT get dinged more than recreational fisherman.

man fuc% natives and fuc% the wdwf as theyre the reason and the response for the salmon laws that primarily affect sport fishers. my first season for salmon was cut short by "wdfw" to preserve mortal hookups of "native" fish.

I know this really isn't the point, but do many on here hook up with kings from their kayaks in Marine area 9 and 10 anyway?  Not saying it doesn't happen. But those who do sure must not post much about it.

We got a few a couple weeks back (see MA10 reports, in the members only section). In the big picture a kayak trying for a King is never going to land more than a well-equipped PB hauling 4 downriggers and a surface line. I proved that today, when I got nothing while the charter boats passed me hauling in several nice fish.  Funny, even though the closing was meant to stop the "encounters" with wild Kings it sure seems encounters are still happening at the same rate while the same number of fishermen fish for Coho...and those Pinks and Sockeye.  Can't take clipped Kings, but nothing else has changed.

just remember, when it comes to puget sound salmon we washington fishermen are the last in line and get dinged the hardest when it comes to conservation.  there are wide open fisheries on puget sound chinook in alaska and bc.  being last in line sucks as the conservation burden is pushed onto us.

Actually, the Natives in the rivers are last in line and get dinged even more.   

-Allen

I'm calling BS on that.  Most rivers are netted 5 days a week, and several of them are netted 24/7 for months at a time.  Natives do NOT get dinged more than recreational fisherman.

Ahh ... I see where the confusion may be.

The Natives get allocated a fixed percentage of the total.  Sometimes a run comes up short and after everyone else harvests their allocation, if there isn't enough left to meet their allocation, they come up short.  But where they really get dinged is in the public's perception of the problem.  They are harvesting the share allocated to them, yet everyone is always crying about how unfair it is.  All the while, like topwater points out, indiscriminate fisheries occur to the north, most of which are extremely difficult to manage.

-Allen

Aside from commercial crap outside our area, which also affects our fishing, the nets are allowed to keep natives, and low native returns is what generally closes a season early.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

Aside from commercial crap outside our area, which also affects our fishing, the nets are allowed to keep natives, and low native returns is what generally closes a season early.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

Do you think that the Natives share isn't also somehow limited by their impact on wild fish?

-Allen