Worst Sockeye return in 100 years

[Clint r]

Copied from Castanets news service:

Mike Youds - Aug 24 5:54 am
From an initial estimate of 2.3 million, the projected run size for Fraser River sockeye this season has sunk to 853,000, which would make it the poorest return since record keeping began, 113 years ago.

The rockbottom return - which has already led to closure of the Lower Fraser to recreational fishing and cancellation of this season's Secwepemc inland fishery on Kamloops Lake - is forecast in the latest report from the Pacific Salmon Commission. Based on escapement in 2012, the commission was expecting a below-average return. Now it looks to be less than half of what was originally forecast.

Although this year's sockeye return is the low point in the four-year migratory cycle, warm ocean and river temperatures are believed to be increasing mortality, further depressing the stocks.

"The exact reasons why the return fell at the lower end of the forecast range are unknown at this time, but poorer than average marine survival is a leading candidate," the commission report states with its final in-season estimates.

River temperature on Aug. 18 was measured at 20.6 C, which was 2.5 C higher than average for that date. Counted salmon have been in good shape, though.

The Department of Fisheries and Ocean's Environmental Watch program projects that river temperature will decrease slightly but still remain at levels near daily historic maximums.

- NewsKamloops.com

 

[UkeeDreamin]

"On a year like this, every one counts" - I'd tend to agree with that statement, Shuswap, except for DFO's inconsistent application of the principal. Their sockeye bias isn't the least bit subtle. When it comes to the depressed Thompson Steelhead and Interior Fraser Coho stocks the "every one counts" principle is a lot more relevant than for sockeye stocks that may be having a bad year on a bad recruitment but still number in the thousands for the weakest populations and the tens and hundreds of thousands for the stronger pop's. Yet, just two years ago when there was an abundance of sockeye, the DFO managers had no problem throwing the coho protection management out the window to extend seine, gill net and the snag rec fishery well into the coho and steelhead migration timing. DFO's "there are sox to be caught so screw the other stocks" mentality is disgusting in its own right but for it to be contradicted just two years later by the closure of selective fisheries with no known sockeye impacts rationalized by the "every one counts"/"conservation first" mantra is too much to stomach!

Cheers!

Ukee

 

[agentaqua]

"On a year like this, every one counts" - I'd tend to agree with that statement, Shuswap, except for DFO's inconsistent application of the principal. Their sockeye bias isn't the least bit subtle. When it comes to the depressed Thompson Steelhead and Interior Fraser Coho stocks the "every one counts" principle is a lot more relevant than for sockeye stocks that may be having a bad year on a bad recruitment but still number in the thousands for the weakest populations and the tens and hundreds of thousands for the stronger pop's. Yet, just two years ago when there was an abundance of sockeye, the DFO managers had no problem throwing the coho protection management out the window to extend seine, gill net and the snag rec fishery well into the coho and steelhead migration timing. DFO's "there are sox to be caught so screw the other stocks" mentality is disgusting in its own right but for it to be contradicted just two years later by the closure of selective fisheries with no known sockeye impacts rationalized by the "every one counts"/"conservation first" mantra is too much to stomach! Cheers! Ukee

Wow Ukee! Great post Bang-on..

Another related issue is that DFO stock assessment has been cut to the bone over the past 15 years or so - with even more cuts on the North and Central Coasts this year - just before the stock assessment activities were about to begin. Many programs have been abruptly curtailed. This has not yet hit the news - that I have seen.

Associated with those cut backs are reductions in numbers of creeks walked and length of season. Associated with that reality - is the fact that for many - if not most coho creeks - we don't know escapement levels and stock trajectories since coho are the rear-end charlies of the salmon in-migration timing - often spawning in October through December - long after the creek walks are now stopped.

So not only do we not know if they are "at risk" - due to lack of stock assessment - associated with creek walks is usually the collection of DNA.

For many creeks and CUs - we still don't have enough DNA to differentiate between watersheds and CUs when troll, gill-net, sport, and seine fisheries are capturing mixed stocks of coho. We can't match any DNA generated through those fisheries back to an appropriate level of scale for watershed management.

So not only we can't tell which stocks are "at risk" - but we can't tell which weak stocks are being fished...

 

[bones]

If it is warm water in the Fraser as the writer suggests where are all the dead sockeye floating back down the river?

that's what i was going to say? where are the millions of dead fish??? the ocean is only 68* why is it the cant swim all the way to osoyoos lake but cant get past mission bridge?

 

[Bent-Tip]

that's what i was going to say? where are the millions of dead fish??? the ocean is only 68* why is it the cant swim all the way to osoyoos lake but cant get past mission bridge?

Maybe cause Osoyoos Lake fish migrate up the Columbia.........

 

[bones]

Maybe cause Osoyoos Lake fish migrate up the Columbia.........

exactly my point!!!! why is the columbia any different?

 

[shuswap]

"On a year like this, every one counts" - I'd tend to agree with that statement, Shuswap, except for DFO's inconsistent application of the principal. Their sockeye bias isn't the least bit subtle. When it comes to the depressed Thompson Steelhead and Interior Fraser Coho stocks the "every one counts" principle is a lot more relevant than for sockeye stocks that may be having a bad year on a bad recruitment but still number in the thousands for the weakest populations and the tens and hundreds of thousands for the stronger pop's. Yet, just two years ago when there was an abundance of sockeye, the DFO managers had no problem throwing the coho protection management out the window to extend seine, gill net and the snag rec fishery well into the coho and steelhead migration timing. DFO's "there are sox to be caught so screw the other stocks" mentality is disgusting in its own right but for it to be contradicted just two years later by the closure of selective fisheries with no known sockeye impacts rationalized by the "every one counts"/"conservation first" mantra is too much to stomach!

Cheers!

Ukee

I agree with your concerns regarding what happen a few years back when Sockeye openings extended into Coho and Steelhead migration. However, this is where I agree with Stormtropper to some degree.....I don't necessarily believe stakeholders get a free pass here. They are lobbying hard for there piece of the pie. It also happened during a time of a different Federal government where there was more emphasis on supporting those commercial openings to keep people working. Some Federal politicians still thought the season wasn't long enough.

I certainly don't envy the job of fisheries managers though. It would be especially difficult to have recreational openings (even though they have made improvements in reducing by-catch) and have First Nations FSC fisheries closed. I hear what you are saying, but I don't think you would want to be the person in that room with a bunch of angry First Nations trying to justify a recreational opening while they are told the river is closed to them. It's a very contentious issue which has very real ramifications to the general public and the folks doing spawning ground surveys now.

Although not popular amongst many sport anglers, I support the full closure. It's not a nice thing to do and it creates a lot of hardship and anger, but I don't think the department had much choice. If you look at the Mission numbers per day you will see why. If you only open it for some it's going to be a power keg ready to blow. It's not just a biological hot potato, but a political hot potato also. In addition, although higher water temperatures might not equate to the pre-spawn and enroute mortality we would predict from the literature I still think we need to respect it especially on a year with so few fish. Fraser Chinook is not looking great either and I imagine Coho won't be any different. This won't reduce the pressure on the department for an opening so this is where stakeholders need to be held accountable also.

 

[shuswap]

that's what i was going to say? where are the millions of dead fish??? the ocean is only 68* why is it the cant swim all the way to osoyoos lake but cant get past mission bridge?

Dams ironically help with providing cooler water I was told by a colleague. However last year the Columbia was very warm and it wasn't a good scene. I wouldn't say that Fraser Sockeye are not getting past the Mission bridge though. So far evidence of significant migratory stress and enroute loss is not apparent.

 

[UkeeDreamin]

My issue, Shuswap, is that not all rec fisheries that by catch Fraser sockeye are closed, just some, and with the exception of the snag fishery Mission to Hope, the fisheries that are closed have a lower incidence of sockeye by catch than fisheries that remain open. Also, FN aren't closed to fishing salmon in the Fraser, they are not allowed to harvest sockeye and they must target chinook with selective fishing techniques - dip net for the most part.

I don't deny the DFO fish managers job isn't easy, but they don't make it easier by making bone-headed, biased and inconsistent decisions. That's why they should have a framework for management decisions that is openly, consistently and fairly applied. When FN are fishing the river for chinook, rec fisheries that are known to intercept sockeye remain open and yet select fisheries are closed, including some with no incidence of sockeye by catch I call BS. I don't think I should be the only one calling BS - the SFAB/C should be calling BS when the same rules aren't applied to all fishers in all locations, at least if they are going to accept the closure of fisheries that are unlikely to have any impact.

Regarding Dams and downstream water temps, only some dams are designed to provide cool water via deep water intakes or other infrastructure. The vast majority of dams release only surface water, which is usually much warmer than the receiving river due to the larger surface area and longer retention time compared to a flowing, undammed river.

Cheers!

Ukee

 

[Clint r]

I call BS. I don't think I should be the only one calling BS - the SFAB/Cshould be calling BS when the samerules aren't applied to all fishers inall locations,

Yes. We need to make it clear. Rules apply to all or none. Not just salmon either. Halibut too. Again DFO is the problem.

 

[Cuba Libre]

Better check out our Constitution Clint....

 

[agentaqua]

Dams ironically help with providing cooler water I was told by a colleague. However last year the Columbia was very warm and it wasn't a good scene. I wouldn't say that Fraser Sockeye are not getting past the Mission bridge though. So far evidence of significant migratory stress and enroute loss is not apparent.

Maybe - but only if they can get by them - and not get chewed-up by the turbines. That hasn't worked so well on the Columbia. There is also a loss of spawning gravel downstream as the dam interrupts the downstream movement of substrate, and the dams water quality effects can liberate methy-mercury into the environment and the fish. Guess you colleague told you that too, eh Shuswap?

 

[The Jackel]

If it is warm water in the Fraser as the writer suggests where are all the dead sockeye floating back down the river?

Ah maybe they are getting caught up in the nets!!

 

[terrin]

Ah maybe they are getting caught up in the nets!!

Well since they would already be dead don't think there would be much interest for eating but you never know.

 

[Whitebuck]

There has to be sockeye that actually reach upriver to be able to float downstream....lol

 

[shuswap]

Maybe - but only if they can get by them - and not get chewed-up by the turbines. That hasn't worked so well on the Columbia. There is also a loss of spawning gravel downstream as the dam interrupts the downstream movement of substrate, and the dams water quality effects can liberate methy-mercury into the environment and the fish. Guess you colleague told you that too, eh Shuswap?

No need for the sarcasm. My post was not meant to support dams on the Columbia. It was an observation from an individual who has a great deal of experience with salmon. No, he nor I may be an chemical toxicologists, but I suspect neither are you. Not working well? I'm not sure how familiar you are with the success of the Okanagan Sockeye and efforts by the Okanagan Nation Alliance, DFO, MOE, and Bonneville Power Administration to help rebuild that run. When you are finished Googling the water quality effects of dams you might want to look into this success story which is looking good this year.

 

[shuswap]

My issue, Shuswap, is that not all rec fisheries that by catch Fraser sockeye are closed, just some, and with the exception of the snag fishery Mission to Hope, the fisheries that are closed have a lower incidence of sockeye by catch than fisheries that remain open. Also, FN aren't closed to fishing salmon in the Fraser, they are not allowed to harvest sockeye and they must target chinook with selective fishing techniques - dip net for the most part.

Are you talking about this year or previous years? Might be some surprises this season that's why I wouldn't want to be a fisheries manager in that room.

 

[agentaqua]

No need for the sarcasm. My post was not meant to support dams on the Columbia. It was an observation from an individual who has a great deal of experience with salmon. No, he nor I may be an chemical toxicologists, but I suspect neither are you. Not working well? I'm not sure how familiar you are with the success of the Okanagan Sockeye and efforts by the Okanagan Nation Alliance, DFO, MOE, and Bonneville Power Administration to help rebuild that run. When you are finished Googling the water quality effects of dams you might want to look into this success story which is looking good this year.

The only reason the Bonneville Power exists - is because of the dams, and the major reason they are involved is because of their effects on the fish - so lets not get too carried away by ecowashing the effects of the dams. Dams are not "friends" of our fishy brothers.

having said that - we need power, too. So, some form of hydro combined with both wind and solar is the likely future combos for generating power needs.

 

[shuswap]

The only reason the Bonneville Power exists - is because of the dams, and the major reason they are involved is because of their effects on the fish - so lets not get too carried away by ecowashing the effects of the dams. Dams are not "friends" of our fishy brothers.

having said that - we need power, too. So, some form of hydro combined with both wind and solar is the likely future combos for generating power needs.

Again, my post was not meant to support dams. However, in this day and age, it is nice to see all involved groups work together to make things better, especially for groups like the ONA, even if the Columbia won't be like it once was. Doesn't mean that dams are great, but nowadays all parties whether you like them or not need to work together at some point. This situation is a good example of that positive collaboration.

 

[UkeeDreamin]

Shuswap, I'm talking this year and there have already been surprises - Like I said, the Department had no interest in protecting stocks that are actually at endangered levels just two years ago because there were lots of there money fish around. This year, those money fish are depressed, but still not at endangered levels and yet select fisheries are still open. Selective FN chinook fisheries are still open throughout the Fraser and Thompson despite dipping being exponentially more successful for sockeye than springs, the Georgia Straight rec fishery is still open despite known high incidence of sockeye by catch and yet the lazy DFO managers blanketed the entire Fraser and Thompson with a closure because of the Mission to Hope snag fishery.

Lazy, inconsistent, biased and generally incompetent management decisions.

Cheers!

Ukee