Ocean Salmon Meeting

Chum King · 02-27-2004, 08:16 AM

Just so as to make sure this didn't slip by:

The Oregon Coastal Zone Management Association and the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife will host their annual "Ocean Salmon Industry Group" meeting from 9:30 am to 3:30 pm on March 4, 2004 at the Hallmark Resort Hotel, 744 SW Elizabeth St., Newport. This meeting will review the 2003 season, provide 2004 forecasts of abundance of salmon stocks, review current issues related to salmon management, and be used to develop a set of ocean salmon regulation proposals for ODFW staff to take forward to the Pacific Fishery Management Council. Ocean anglers, commercial salmon troll fishers, and others interested in participating in the development of ocean salmon fishery regulations for the 2004 season are encouraged to attend this meeting.

This and other inseason updates are available at: Oregon Ocean Salmon Management

Capt. Rich · 02-27-2004, 01:11 PM

Chum King,

Please promise you that you will have good news to bring to the meeting. Last nights meeting on groundfish was no surprize given the state of the fisheries. Don, Mark and Patty did their best to put a happy face on news that we all knew was coming.

Salty Walty · 03-03-2004, 07:21 PM

Anyone coming over for this?

corrirod · 03-03-2004, 07:36 PM

Hey Walter, I'll be coming and I think Skein will be there too.

Born to be Wild · 03-04-2004, 10:02 PM

So fill us in.
What happened? What happened?

What were the options presented?
First one of these I have missed in a long time.

Dano

Chilly one · 03-05-2004, 07:39 AM

Captn. Rich, What was your conclusions on the groundfish "stuff"? Thanks.

Chillyone..

"Happiness is a Bent Rod!"

Chilly one · 03-05-2004, 07:45 AM

I attended the meeting for a while yesterday and it sounds like the Jack return on OPI coho (hatchery) was down on the Columbia which means the returning adult numbers for 2004 fall returns is down. Probably a good chance the Coho ocean quota will be reduced like to 50,00 ish+-.
However King numbers are good to great and we will be fishing for them as we all predicted. More meetings on the options soon. Gotta go, got a Fish On!

"Happiness ia a Bent Rod!"

:tongue: Chillyone.....

corrirod · 03-05-2004, 07:46 AM

Well, I'm hoping Chum King will be able to paste the options on this thread as I ran out of space to take notes. Nothing too outrageous though.

<<< This post was edited. Please see the posts following this one for accurate information>>>>

Chinook numbers should be good. Not 2003 numbers but still good all along the central and northern coast. Coho numbers will be down though, fairly substantially.

Most people voted to open the coho season early again, June 20th'ish or so, with an ending date of August 31st if the quota is not met. The other option to these dates was, if the quota is substantially lowered due to the Snake River fish, then the fishermen would like the start date pushed back proportionately so larger fish are taken vs. the little fellas in June. There was talk of pushing the season back even later than August 31st however that would result in a lower quota also because of the returning OCN's coming into the Columbia. We aren't talking about a "slight" reduction either, we're talking about more than half the farther we push that date back so it was unanimous that we not go that route.

There were some interesting graphs on the commercial side that showed the number of troll permits issued vs. ones being used. As it stands right now, there are only 1200 permits in issuance and only 500 are being "used" right now.

There was talk of a Non-selective fishery however when told that the quota would be dropped to practically non-existance the subject went dead. If we went to a non-selective fishery our quota would probably be hit in just a matter of days, thus creating a derby fishery and not allowing recreational fishers a good opportunity for harvest. However, if coho numbers continue to improve it is likely there will be a non-selective fishery in future years.

There were lots of other issues discussed but I don't have my notes in front of me so everything I just wrote is off-the-cuff and is probably completely inaccurate so hopefully Eric will chime in here with the "real" truth!

[ 03-05-2004, 04:36 PM: Message edited by: corrirod ]

corrirod · 03-05-2004, 07:49 AM

Quote:

Happiness is a Bent "ROD"!

I would agree with that! Half a bottle of cactus juice and a few barley pops and as a matter of fact........ I am HAPPY! [img]graemlins/dork.gif[/img] :tongue:

corrirod · 03-05-2004, 01:34 PM

Ok. As usual I got everything all screwed up so please see the attached edits in regards to my post above! I tell you what, they were using so many acronyms in that meeting I thought maybe it was a Chinese language class! I'm still sorting it all out but I'm learning!

<ul type="square">[*]With regards to fall Snake River chinook harvest. The "they" that I was referencing is primarily the Canadian ocean fisheries. Roughly 90% of the Snake fall chinook head to the North on ocean entrance, and the Canadians plan to fish up to their limitation under the Pacific Salmon Treaty. In recent years, they had been restricting their fisheries on chinook due to problems with their own stocks of fish. In the interim, we have benefitted, but now they are planning on getting back to full fisheries, and it will limit our fisheries (primarily North of Cape Falcon).[*]Pushing the starting date on coho fishery back to July vs. June was not based on Snake River chinook. It will be a result of whether how big the coho quota is. If the coho quota is large then with a June opening, the fishery could probably make it at least into early August. If the coho quota is reduced significantly i.e. 30,000-40,000 then it would probably make more sense to go for a July 1 opening. Obviously, one goal is to not leave fish on the quota whatever the scheduled ending date.[*]The reason for the end of August ending date does have to do with OCN (wild coho) and the Columbia River, but really it is about the exact opposite of the way I phrased it. What happens is that the Columbia River hatchery coho are scattered out along the Oregon and Washington Coasts in June and July (along with OCN and other hatchery and wild coho stocks). During August, the Columbia hatchery coho begin to move back towards the Columbia River, and by mid-August good numbers of those hatchery coho are moving into the lower Columbia with the vast majority of the hatchery coho back into the Columbia by mid-September. That means that by the end of August, you are primarily going to be catching Oregon Coastal hatchery and wild coho off the Oregon Coast. Since the Oregon Coastal Hatcheries only produce about 3% of the hatchery coho in the area the majority of the coho you would handle in September are wild OCN stock. On the flip side, in the Columbia River i.e. the Buoy 10 fishery almost every coho is a hatchery coho which allows for increased bag limits to try and harvest as many as possible before they get back to the hatchery. In the ocean, we will be limited to <15% OCN impacts from all fisheries, and that is what drives the coho quota for South of Cape Falcon.[/list]

Sorry about any confusion!

skein · 03-05-2004, 02:16 PM

Good job on the edits, Rod. I thought we had gone to different meetings.

:grin:

Just kidding. I was kinda lost on some of the acronyms myself, along with keeping track of exactly what zone and who's fish were who's. That's why I didn't jump right in and start giving my perception of the meeting.

Kudos to Chumking, though, for running just about the whole shebang and working so hard to make sure everyone's voice was heard and that he had it worded right for the final proposals.

Skein

corrirod · 03-05-2004, 04:03 PM

In addition, below are the proposed options that were discussed. These are simply guiding principles that were made to help influence ODFW and PFMC in their decisions and should not be taken as written in stone. I am also reluctant to post these as they are only partial notes and may be misconstrued by anyone who was not actually at the meeting. Those disclaimers being made, here are the notes:

Recreational
<ul type="square">[*]Coho Selective/Non-selective? � Concensus to stay with selective fishery as it provides the largest quota and most time on the water.[*]---Concern remains over the waste fish lost to hooking mortality[*]---Others expressed concern about using the term waste, and feel that fishers can handle fish with a minimum of mortality. Note that education of the fleet is important to minimize hooking mortality.[*]South of Falcon selective coho starting date -[*]---June 19 if larger quota adopted[*]---July 1 if smaller quota adopted[*]Coho Ending date - August 31 or quota[*]Till Head - Falcon August Closure i.e. Fishing North and coming back to port South[*]---What is reason for closure? Enforcement, management concerns, other rationale? With extended SOF coho, line does little.[*]Rough estimate of allowable coho SOF - less than 88,000 (probably substantially less, but start at 88,000 and work down)[*]KMZ - Welter - have coho allowance in KMZ -OR side only-[*]---CA would not be allowed to fish for coho[*]---Same as 2003 for starting date and run as long as possible - 2 fish per day[*]Dampeners? No. Concensus to go 7 days per week and manage based on starting and ending dates only.[*]Point brought up to group regarding non-retention of groundfish on a trip that entered the 40 fathom RCA for salmon or other species between June and Sept.[*]North of Falcon?[*]---Chinook/day - 1 and increasing size limit[*]---7 days/week after August 1st[*]---About same as 2003 - Open ~June 29[*]---Early chinook directed fishery - consider if possible. Noted issues of 2002 - early closure on retention of chinook in the all species fishery was not popular.[*]---May be trades between Troll and Sport in the works.[/list]

Chum King · 03-05-2004, 10:31 PM

I think that Rod has covered most of the main decision points from the meeting. Nice to see some of the Salty Dogs in attendance at the meeting. I counted at least six Ifishers in attendance.

This was one of the better attended Ocean Salmon Industry Group meetings in my memory, and a very productive one at that. Lots of commercial trollers and charter operators, a few private boat anglers, and a mix of others with concerns and interest in the fishery who mostly managed to stick it out for the whole meeting. We had a few tough issues to try and resolve, and I think that we got the needed feedback to get things done in 2004.

The ODFW staff and Oregon industry representatives who will be heading to the Pacific Fishery Management Council received lots of good guidance on which direction to head in the development of the ocean fishery options. I hope that the ODFW staff were also able to convey the status of the fishery and stocks of concern with a minimum of confusion.

Thanks to all of you that came and put your $0.02 into the preliminary option development. I have always found that this is the best meeting to make a difference in how the ocean salmon seasons are shaped off Oregon.