Salmon numbers crash

Managers say there will be little or no commercial or recreational fishing  

By Susan Chambers, Staff Writer

March 12, 2008  

SACRAMENTO, Calif. — We in the fishing industry have a saying, said salmon fisherman Ben Platt of Fort Bragg , Calif.

“Crumbs are bread, too.”

That pretty much sums up the potential salmon fishing opportunity for both sport and commercial fishermen in California , Oregon and Washington for the 2008 season. State and federal fishery managers, along with sport and commercial fishermen, are meeting this week in Sacramento to work through the arduous process of developing three potential season options.

There will be little to no opportunity this year.

The fishing industry has known for a couple months the outlook was dire. Returns of Central Valley fall Chinook were below biologists’ expectations and below the threshold fishery managers have determined is necessary for the stock remain sustainable. The Central Valley stock, primarily those returning to the Sacramento River, is the primary run that keeps West Coast fishermen working and sports anglers with the ability to enjoy ocean and in-river salmon fishing.

Returns of Chinook and coho to many streams and rivers on the West Coast are down, too — a situation that will have a crushing effect fishermen from the Canada to Mexico border, fishermen found out at the Pacific Fishery Management Council meeting.

Fishermen came to California believing there may be as many as 100,000 Chinook available to share between California and Oregon fleets.

But as state and federal scientists began to crunch numbers Monday and report to the council on Tuesday, downright scary figures emerged.

The “floor” — or number of Chinook that must return to the Sacramento to keep the stock sustainable — is 122,000. It’s also called the conservation objective.

In the fall of 2007, only 88,000 fish returned. That’s compared with a recent range of 267,900 in 2006 to 775,500 in 2002.

Biologists say that in 2008, the preliminary number of spawners returning to the Sacramento could be as low as around 59,000 — roughly half of the conservation objective.

And that’s with no commercial season this year, no sport season this year and no in-river sport season this year.

“This is the big hammer,” Newport commercial fisherman Bob Kemp said.

If any in-river sport fishing takes place, that number could drop even lower, to around 50,000.

Kemp, like other Oregon and Northern California fishermen who made it through the 2005 and 2006 disastrous season in which fishing was constrained due to low returns on the Klamath, seems numb. How could it get worse than 2006?

Still, fishermen asked for any opportunity that might be available and worked all day Monday and part of Tuesday to put together three options to take to the public for review.

Council members warned scientists and the fishing industry that one option would have to include zero fishing.

But when the California industry group reported back to the council, there was no zero option proposed for recreational fishermen.

California Department of Fish and Game council representative Maria Voijkovich took one of the options off the table and zeroed it out to no fishing.

“Also, consider in-river fishing in Central Valley as no retention in the fall,” Voijkovich added.

Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife council representative Phil Anderson had some stern words for the whole West Coast industry.

“We all came here with various understandings,” Anderson said, “but it does not, in my view, represent a realistic range of alternatives. We need to do some more work. We have more cutting to do.”

Washington fishermen are facing constraints due primarily to the Columbia River tule Chinook stock; the Sacramento fish primarily provide opportunity for California and Oregon fleets.

Oregon commercial fleets hoped to have some fish available for ongoing genetic sampling studies. That, too, may be questionable.

But the week is still young.

“We do have some work to do here,” Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife representative Curt Melcher said.

The Salmon Technical Team — tribal, state and federal scientists — will continue to crunch numbers based on new season options such as decreased numbers of fishing days, lower bag limits or time and area closures — while fishermen and others involved in the industry will work on different options at Salmon Advisory Subpanel meetings. Both will bring those options back to the full council today.

Charleston troller Jeff Reeves traveled to the meeting as an Oregon Salmon Commission representative. He, like Kemp, was shaking his head in disbelief at the disaster that promises to be far worse than the one he just survived.

“This is a salmon collapse that’s unprecedented in my lifetime,” he said.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, any copyrighted
material  herein is distributed without profit or payment to those who have
expressed  a  prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit
research and  educational purposes only. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

Source:  http://www.theworldlink.com/articles/2008/03/12/news/doc47d7f4fa367ed531592954.txt