February 4, 2016 at 12:43 am #325Sharky McSharkfaceKeymaster
Is this a critical issue explaining the population decline and failure to recover or much ado about nothing?
What were the key insights from the Gisclair et al. reading?
February 4, 2016 at 7:11 am #331bemeyerParticipant
1.) Regardless of the data, there remains a strong public perception that bycatch is a prime suspect to explain the mystery of low Chinook productivity. What are two or three bullet points we could use to counter this misperception?
2.) Where can we find the “dirty dozen” list of vessels that have the worts bycatch rates (p 810, Gisclair 2009)? Is this available to the public? If not, should it be? Why or why not?
February 4, 2016 at 8:25 am #333trthompson3Participant
After hearing state fishery managers talk about the state/federal relationship of management on rivers, they suggested that the federal government takes a back seat to state managers. They also suggested the two work together well in addressing the same goals and priorities. How do you see it? (How does the federal side see it?)
This may be an obvious question but if individual boats are catching bycatch, how are they monitored? Referring to the “carrot/stick” analysis, how could boats be rewarded or incentivized based on behaving well (not catching bycatch) based on current monitoring practices?
Also- the labeling incentive (reduce bycatch by labeling) can run into some First Amendment issues. It would be considered compelled commercial speech, and can be required by the government but there are a few hurdles the government will need to prove before it can require labeling. Just something that caught my eye, and has been debated with GMO labeling (frankenfish). Fascinating stuff
February 4, 2016 at 8:54 am #334mjovanovichParticipant
Kind of off topic, but I’m curious: When they speak of the volume and value of pollock that left AK, how is this different from any other fishery? Aren’t most processing corps WA based, meaning their profits largely benefit offices outside of AK? Does the value of a fishery change how it’s regulated in AK?
Is ecosystem based management really possible? Theoretically it may work, but considering the government agencies, public support, and years of trial and error that will be necessary, it may not be a plausible mediation.
[Did anyone catch the typo in the conclusion?]
This paper gives a great background to both pollock and salmon fisheries involved, changes in regulation, and future possibilities, but I still would like to know more about the correlation between bycatch and population reduction. How great/is there causation linking these issues? Deep understanding of fisheries involved is important, but it only tells us so much about the issue.
Doesn’t it make more sense to think that years of high bycatch would result in subsequent years of low abundance? I am not convinced that a season of high bycatch correlates to that same season having high salmon abundance.
- This reply was modified 4 years, 6 months ago by mjovanovich.
February 4, 2016 at 9:29 am #336blwoodsParticipant
The bycatch numbers of chinook salmon and chum are outrageous and painful to swallow. The bycatch has to be connected to the decline of chinook numbers, some bycatch number exceed escapement numbers. In 2007 chinook bycatch numbers reached 121, 909 and only 27,000 chinook in the Yukon crossed the border into Canada. The bycatch directly hits home in this article, our main traditional staple and way of life is jeopardized for imitation crab!
As the articles progresses it seems like the protected measures are put into place but have many barriers.
February 4, 2016 at 8:48 pm #346bemeyerParticipant
Here’s one catankerous blogger who has made it a point to try and publicize the boats with “consistently bad behavior” with respect to bycatch…
This is for the Gulf of Alaska fishery rather than Bristol Bay. Not sure where he acquired this data.
February 4, 2016 at 11:57 pm #348Alix ConnorParticipant
I definitely agree that the amount of bycatch that currently occurs is pretty shocking.
The idea of a salmon excluder device definitely holds potential, though I wonder how exactly the final product would work (excluding salmon through behavior, size, etc.?), and if this method would select for or against certain genetic and age diversities.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.