Hi All:
2010 Chinook Quota: 221,800
This number is based on pre-season abundance estimates, as modified by the 15% reduction called for in the 2009-2018 Pacific Salmon Treaty agreement.
2009 = 218,800
Hope to see you at the port meetings next month!
Dale
ATA
Salty
2010-03-31 17:08:23
Dale,
I can not began to communicate my appreciation for all the hard work you, ATA, and our treaty team, with the exception of one appointee to the Department, have done for us. Thank you so much.
I am bitterly disappointed with this number. I felt with the rebound on the Columbia River and in a lot of Chinook systems throughout the Northwest we would have a significant jump this year. The truth for me is that with the declining Chinook price last year, the relative failure of our SE Chinook Hatchery program, a tough outlook for coho prices, and more of the guys with halibut/troll businesses refocusing on trolling as the halibut IFQ declines this number will not sustain us.
Our chum trollers association is working as hard as we can to find more chum troll opportunity on the SE hatchery program that is working, chum production, but it is a daunting task given the run timings, the increasing dependence of the SE gillnet fleet on hatchery chums, and the seiners being below their allocated share of the value of SE enhanced salmon. There is also a lot more interest around the troll fleet in chum trolling without any commensurate increase in opportunity this year, thus we expect more crowded conditions in the few areas we do have opportunity. Hopefully we can eventually get more opportunity on DiPac chums and possibly a little bit at Hidden Falls in June but nothing of significance to report this year.
Unless there is an unanticipated bounce in the coho return or price I see another tough year for the Alaska troll fleet.
Got any good news?
Hi Eric:
As you can imagine, I, too, am extremely disappointed with this number, which is NOT a true reflection of abundance of the stocks in our fishery.
I don't want anyone to think I've forgotten the promises made to trollers in 1985 - and other fishermen along the coast - when the treaty rebuilding program was implemented. You have paid dearly and it pains me every day that you do not receive benefits equivalent to your sacrifices.
Good new? Well, despite the best efforts of some... you're still here. This fleet is amazingly tough and resilient, so let's keep up the good fight and hope for the best.
To abundant coho, plentiful chum, and fair value for superior quality...
Dale
ATA
Dale,
Why is the quota not a true representation of the abundance of the stocks? Was the abundance index artificially low this year or were more fish given to another group? I guess I'm just asking what the abundance index is for 2010 and compared to 2009.
Thanks,
Jonathan
Hi Jonathan:
The quota is mostly driven by an abundance index, as you know. There are pre-season and post-season estimates made by the Chinook Technical Committee (CTC) of the Pacific Salmon Commission. Estimates are made for Southeast Alaska (SEAK), Northern British Columbia (NBC), and West Coast Vancouver Island (WCVI).
The post-season index for Southeast in 2009 came in lower than the pre-season index of 1.33 (quota = 218,800).
Each year the pre-season abundance is estimated and the annual quota is taken from a table that associates the abundance index with a number. Under the 2009-2018 treaty agreement, the quota at every abundance index has been reduced by 15% compared to the 1999 agreement. Meaning, if we had this year's abundance index(1.35) in 2007, you would have had an all-gear quota of 261,000.
Some Canadian fishermen are in the same boat. The West Coast Vancouver Island fishery (WCVI) was reduced by 30% under the new agreement. They are managed on different stocks, so a different table is used for the WCVI quota. This year the WCVI pre-season abundance index is 0.96, for a quota of 143,700. If they had that index in 2007, their quota would have been roughly 205,000.
Another issue with the 'abundance driven' quota calculation is that it uses what's been dubbed a 'broken stick'. Long story short, this puts artificial limits on the amount of fish we can catch at higher abundances, and also allows for a pretty steep drop in what we can catch at mid-to-lower abundance indices. This was put in place in 1999. So, yes, when abundance goes up we generally see the quota rise, but it's not totally 'abundance driven' based on the health of our driver stocks, like we are used to thinking of up here. This is because these were negotiated quota levels between states and countries fighting an allocation battle.
There is more to all this, going back to the 1999 agreement and beyond, and it gets pretty tough to explain without pictures and some conversation, but I hope this helps.
Dale
ATA
Salty
2010-04-01 03:02:37
Dale,
What an eloquent, tactful description of what is happening to us. The description that comes to my mind can be summed up in one word.