Development and Implementation of a Monitoring Program for Mark-selective Chinook Salmon Fisheries in Puget Sound, Washington Washington Department of.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Evaluate recreational and commercial mark-selective fisheries. (35018) Geraldine Vander Haegen, WDFW Charmane Ashbrook, WDFW Chris Peery, U. Idaho Annette.
Advertisements

Workshop: Monitoring and Evaluation of Harvest on Columbia River Salmonids July 31- August 1, 2007.
Selective Fish Collection & Harvesting Gear P roposal #29042 Sponsored By: Colville Confederated Tribes Presented By: Stephen Smith.
Annual Stock Assessment – Coded Wire Tag Program (ODFW & WDFW) BPA Project Numbers: and
SELECT AREA FISHERY EVALUATION BPA Project # CEDC, ODFW, WDFW.
Lower Snake River Compensation Plan Hatchery Evaluations – Salmon River Project No Nez Perce Tribe Department of Fisheries Resources Management.
Assessment of Bull Trout Populations in the Yakima River Watershed.
U.S. Marine Fisheries Management Dr. Louis B. Daniel III Director N.C. Division of Marine Fisheries.
Stock Assessment for Central Southern Management Area (CSMA) Striped Bass Stocks Marine Fisheries Commission Business Meeting February 11, 2011.
1 First Nations Fisheries Monitoring – Mission to Sawmill Creek Area November 17 th, 2010 Rec & FN Catch Monitoring Workshop prepared by: Matthew Parslow.
CSMEP Goal: Improve the quality and consistency of fish monitoring data, and the methods used to evaluate these data, to answer key questions relevant.
  Multiple years of sampling to mark and recapture individuals completed between 2006 and 2008   Despite significant effort, population estimates were.
Genetic Stock Identification/Parental Based Tagging for Pacific Salmon Molecular Genetics Laboratory (MGL) Pacific Biological Station.
Adult Steelhead Monitoring Challenges in Cedar Creek, WA Josua Holowatz & Dan Rawding.
Management Strategies for Columbia River Recreational and Commercial Fisheries and Beyond Oregon and Washington Agency Analysis and Recommendations.
Assessing the use of PIT Tags as a Tool to Monitor Adult Chinook Salmon Returns to Idaho John Cassinelli Regional Fisheries Biologist Idaho Department.
Coordination of Tag and Mark Recovery Programs Dan Rawding WDFW.
Management strategies for balancing hatchery functions with natural fish protections Brad Cavallo.
CWTs and the Chinook Fishery Regulation Assessment Model (FRAM) Pete McHugh Washington Dept. of Fish & Wildlife 10 May 2012.
The current status of fisheries stock assessment Mark Maunder Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission (IATTC) Center for the Advancement of Population.
Using CWT’s to assess survival, ocean distribution and maturation for Chinook stocks across the Pacific Northwest: Are there any predictive capabilities.
History  Need to mark fish to get survival & exploitation rates for Treaty negotiations, to determine differential survival of various release strategies.
How to manage a sustainable small scale artisanal fishery Erik Maitz Boman – Data monitoring officer Department of Agriculture and Fisheries.
Variation in Straying Patterns and Rates of Snake River Hatchery Steelhead Stocks in the Deschutes River Basin, Oregon Richard W. Carmichael and Tim Hoffnagle.
New genetic technology for the management of Columbia River salmon and steelhead Proposal : Parentage Based Tagging Matthew Campbell Idaho Department.
Combining PIT Tags with Scale Reading to Better Understand the Life History of Snake River Fall Chinook Salmon Douglas Marsh and William Muir - NOAA Fisheries.
Marine fish stock enhancement: status, potential and constraints.
Integrated Status & Trend (ISTM) Project: An overview of establishing, evaluating and modifying monitoring priorities for LCR Steelhead Jeff Rodgers (ODFW)
Pacific Fishery Management Council Jurisdiction –3 miles to 200 miles –4 states (includes Idaho) Members -- appointed –State governments –Federal Agencies.
Alternative Gear Implementation Project Pat Frazier WDFW Region 5 Fish Program Manager Photo by Wild Fish Conservancy.
U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Evaluation of Alternative Commercial Fishing Gear in the Lower Columbia River, 2013: Behavior and.
Charmane Ashbrook, Michael Mizell, & Ken Warheit Tomelleri.
NON-NATIVE SALMOINDS IN LAKE SUPERIOR Don Schreiner, MNDNR Steve Schram, WIDNR Shawn Sitar, MIDNR Mike Petzold, OMNR.
May 10, 2012 Presented by Micki Varney Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife.
Washington State Steelhead Status Review PACIFIC COAST STEELHEAD MEETING JON ANDERSON WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF FISH & WILDLIFE MARCH 9-11, 2010.
Marine Recreational Information Program Update Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council April 9, 2013 Rob Andrews Office of Science and Technology.
Where does my data go? Preparation of files for the assessments of IOTC stocks and use of data for the assessments of IOTC species Mauritius, March.
1 Collaborative Systemwide Monitoring and Evaluation Project (CSMEP) June ??, 2007 DRAFT.
Lewis River Fish Passage Monitoring and Evaluation Plan (draft)
Pacific Coast Steelhead Management Meeting What Are Managers Required to Provide Their Constituents? March 9-11, 2004 Bob Leland.
IN PUGET SOUND & COASTAL WASHINGTON Hatchery Reform February 2003.
Mass Marking and Electronic Recovery of CWTs In the Pacific Northwest Ron Olson Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission Olympia Washington.
Kristen Ryding WA Department of Fish and Wildlife May 10, 2012.
STFA/SCCFA/CFMC Spiny Lobster Project David Olsen, STFA Josh Nowlis, Bridge Environment Daryl Bryan, STFA Funded by Caribbean Fishery Management Council.
Monitoring Challenges for VSP Parameters in the Oregon Portion of the Lower Columbia River Jamie Anthony Monitoring Coordinator.
SEDAR 42: US Gulf of Mexico Red grouper assessment Review Workshop Data inputs SEFSC July , 2015.
Summer Flounder Review of 2015 Management Measures August 13, 2014.
Washington’s Lower Snake River Compensation Plan Steelhead Program – A retrospective and program adaptive management overview Mark Schuck and Joe Bumgarner.
Is there evidence for stock segregation in Chinook salmon during ocean residence? Indicators of survival: reconstruction of juvenile size-at-emigration.
February 5, 2003 Integrating Fisheries Management Into Comprehensive Recovery Planning Jeff Koenings, Randy Kinley Mike Grayum, Curt Kraemer, Kit Rawson.
Effectiveness of alternative broodstock, rearing and release practices at Winthrop NFH William Gale and Matt Cooper -USFWS, Mid-Columbia River Fishery.
Using PIT tags to evaluate the post- release survival of spring chinook salmon following their release from commercial nets C. E. Ashbrook, J. R. Skalski,
4/24/2017 Juvenile Salmon Ecology in the Lower Columbia River and Estuary: Tidal Freshwater Research Presented by Nichole K. Sather Northwest Power &
Chinook Salmon Supplementation in the Imnaha River Basin- A Comparative Look at Changes in Abundance and Productivity Chinook Salmon Supplementation in.
Adult steelhead evaluations in Imnaha River tributaries William Young, Jocelyn Hatch Nez Perce Tribe Department of Fisheries Resources Management.
Mrs Nafisat Bolatito IKENWEIWE (PhD) DEPARTMENT OF AQUACULTURE AND FISHERIES MANAGEMENT UNIVERSITY OF AGRICULTURE, ABEOKUTA FISH STOCK ASSESSMENT
Fisheries 101: Modeling and assessments to achieve sustainability Training Module July 2013.
Steve Gaines Bren School of Environmental Science & Management Sustainable Fisheries Group UC Santa Barbara12 May 2011.
Puget Sound Salmon Hatcheries April 2003 Puget Sound Salmon Hatchery Management Decision Making ESA & NEPA Processes Independent Scientific Review Process.
St. Thomas Grouper Analysis Carried out under STFA Funding Josh Nowlis, Ph.D. Stock Assessment Specialist.
Ocean rivers SARs LGR-LGR SARs LGR-LGR Harvest Mouth of Columbia predicted returns Mouth of Columbia predicted returns Juvenile travel time and survival.
What do we have in common? Do more with less! PNAMP Integrated Status & Trend Monitoring Workgroup.
West Coast Salmon Genetic Stock Identification Collaboration Renee Bellinger, Coordinator.
1 The Collaborative, Systemwide Monitoring and Evaluation Project (CSMEP) CBFWA – Ken MacDonald ESSA Technologies Ltd. - Marc Porter State Agencies IDFG.
Fisheries Overview1 The Fisheries Technician and Data Acquisition What questions are answered by field work?
Data requirement of stock assessment. Data used in stock assessments can be classified as fishery-dependent data or fishery-independent data. Fishery-dependent.
USVI Commercial Catch Form Status. USVI Commercial Catch Form Developed as part of the Caribbean Commercial Data Improvement Project –USVI Department.
Potential Effects of Mark-Selective Fisheries on Central Valley Salmon Brian Pyper and Steve Cramer Cramer Fish Sciences.
WHAT QUESTIONS ARE ANSWERED BY FIELD WORK? Fisheries Overview 1 The Fisheries Technician and Data Acquisition.
Land Use Permit Tracking: Monitoring and Evaluation of Land Use Regulatory Programs for Salmon Recovery Planning in Hood Canal Scott Brewer, Hood Canal.
Presentation transcript:

Development and Implementation of a Monitoring Program for Mark-selective Chinook Salmon Fisheries in Puget Sound, Washington Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Mark Baltzell Pete McHugh Laurie Peterson Steve Thiesfeld April 1, 2009

Topics  Introduction/Background: mark-selective fisheries  Overview of WDFW Puget Sound Sampling Unit’s comprehensive monitoring program for Chinook mark-selective fisheries.  Methods  Results  Conclusions  Questions

 Adipose fin-clip; external mark indicating hatchery origin fish.  Marking program consistent with hatchery reform practices. Production of Marked Chinook

Mark-Selective Fisheries

Marine Areas with Chinook MSFs Summer Seasons Winter Seasons Higher effort Some are quota-managed Directed at maturing migrants Fewer fish handled per kept Multiple species encountered Lower effort (weather driven) Directed at resident “blackmouth” More fish handled per kept (size) Mostly single species encounters

Chinook Mark-Selective Fishery Objectives No increase in wild stock impacts Reduce wild stock impacts if possible Increase Angler Opportunity Increase Hatchery Fish Harvest Sample, Monitor, Enforce All Fisheries

Evaluating Selective Chinook Fisheries Key Objectives:  Determine if the data needed to estimate critical selective fishery parameters can be collected.  Evaluate if sample sizes needed to produce estimates with agreed levels of precision can be realistically obtained.  Enable evaluation and planning of potential future mark-selective fisheries.

 Mark rate in the fishery - from estimates of marked and unmarked encounters.  Number marked and unmarked fish retained.  Number marked and unmarked fish released.  Number of the Chinook encounters that are of sub-legal size (less than 22 inches total length).  Stock composition of the mortalities– estimated by CWT and DNA.  KEY CHALLENGE: Indirect estimation of impacts on unmarked fish that are caught and released. Critical Data Parameters

WDFW Puget Sound Sampling Unit Selective Fishery Monitoring Program

Dockside Sampling On-the-water Surveys Test Fishing WDFW Puget Sound Sampling Unit Selective Fishery Monitoring Program Size Measures; Select Sites Out-of- frame effort proportion

Dockside Sampling On-the-water Surveys Test Fishing WDFW Puget Sound Sampling Unit Selective Fishery Monitoring Program Length, age CWTs Fishing methods Size Measures; Select Sites Out-of- frame effort proportion

Dockside Sampling  Recover CWT’s from salmon that detect positive for a tag.  At least 20% sample rate is the goal.  Length measurements and scale samples.  Fishing method data.

Dockside Sampling On-the-water Surveys Test Fishing Chinook Size/mark- status comp. Length, age CWTs DNA sampling Length, age (all) WDFW Puget Sound Sampling Unit Selective Fishery Monitoring Program Fishing methods VTRs Size Measures; Select Sites Out-of- frame effort proportion

Test Fishing  Encounters by species.  Chinook mark rates and encounter rates by size/mark status.  DNA samples on all Chinook.  Scale and length samples on all Chinook.  Emulate the recreational fleet (gear types, locations fished).

Dockside Sampling On-the-water Surveys Test Fishing Total salmon encounters Chinook Size/mark- status comp. Total Fishery Impacts Length, age CWTs DNA sampling Length, age (all) WDFW Puget Sound Sampling Unit Selective Fishery Monitoring Program Fishing methods Size Measures; Select Sites Out-of- frame effort proportion

Dockside Sampling On-the-water Surveys Test Fishing Total Chinook Encounter Estimates (Retained + Released) Total Estimated Fishery Impacts  Legal-size marked (LM)  Legal-size unmarked (LU)  Sublegal-size marked (SM)  Sublegal-size unmarked (SU) Chinook Size/Mark-Status Apply size- specific release mortality rates 15% Legal 20% Sublegal Apportion Total Encounters into 4 Size/Mark groups Compare to Model (FRAM) predictions

Voluntary Trip Reports  Encounters by species.  Chinook mark rates and encounter rates by size/mark status.

Marine Area Year(s) Est. Number Angler Trips Est. Number Marked Chinook Harvested Est. Number Chinook Released Est. Number Unmarked Mortalities Area ,69816,60250,8645,935 Area ,7153,1265, Area ,5588,98419,5151,513 Area ,1832,5428, Area ,68618,04134,2671,875 Total354,84049,295117,76410,812 Estimated Unmarked Chinook Mortalities (Summer Fisheries) Providing Opportunity and Meeting Conservation Goals

Unmarked Chinook impacts: similar to or less than model predictions. Unmarked Mortality Estimates vs. Modeled (FRAM) Predictions

Legal-sized, marked Chinook harvest: consistent with model predictions. Legal-size Marked Chinook Estimates vs. Modeled (FRAM) Predictions

Test Fishery Results Emulating the Fleet Mark RatesTotal Lengths

CWT Recoveries For All Chinook Mark-Selective Fisheries in Puget Sound N = 1184

CWT Recoveries for Chinook Mark Selective Fisheries in the Strait of Juan de Fuca

 High percentage landed catch and angler trips sampled overall, exceeding the 20% sample rate target:  38% (winter fisheries)  31% (summer fisheries) Adequacy of Sampling Program Sample Size Goals

Estimated Parameter (Chinook) Summer MSF Fisheries CV Winter MSF Fisheries CV Total Landed Catch11%9% Unmarked Releases12%10% Test Fishery Mark Rates9%3% Adequacy of Sampling Program Precision of Estimates Coefficient of Variation (CV)  Opportunities to make sampling more efficient & cost-effective?

Conclusions  Pilot selective Chinook fisheries enabled recreational fishing opportunities while meeting the conservation constraints defined for Puget Sound Chinook.  Sampling programs collected critical information necessary for evaluating and planning future pilot selective Chinook fisheries.  Measured impacts of the fishery were either less than or comparable to pre-season expectations (FRAM model) for unmarked Chinook salmon.  Enabled implementation and assessment of our comprehensive selective fishery monitoring program in Puget Sound marine areas.

Sampling Program Conclusions  Dockside sampling and test fishery efforts succeeded in:  Achieving agreed-to sampling objectives.  Yielding precise estimates of key fishery parameters.  Test fishery emulated the fleet  Continue feedback loop to test boats --spatial data collection and dockside fishing method question.

If you would like to know more…..the place to find all of our documentation on Chinook MSF’s selective/techniques/ technical_documents.htm