Fraser River Sockeye Fisheries and Fisheries Management - Cohen ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Table 13 Annual estimates of the harvest of Fraser sockeye by Canadian fisheriesinside and outside of the Fraser Panel Area waters, 1986-2009 (extractedfrom PSC annual reports).YearAreas 121-124 TrollFraser River Panel AreaArea 20 Areas 17-18Net and 29 TrollArea 29NetTotalNon-Panel AreasAreas 1-10 Areas 11-16 Areas 124-Troll and Net Troll and Net 127 Troll 1 TotalSelectiveFisheries1986 206,000 2,003,000 209,000 2,535,000 4,953,000 37,000 2,195,000 1,610,000 3,842,000 0 8,795,0001987 208,000 463,000 33,000 600,000 1,304,000 79,000 1,572,000 277,000 1,928,000 0 3,232,0001988 16,000 219,000 77,000 682,000 994,000 2,000 148,000 32,000 182,000 0 1,176,0001989 463,000 3,286,000 65,000 2,420,000 6,234,000 350,000 4,984,000 584,000 5,918,000 0 12,152,0001990 312,000 3,379,000 324,000 3,032,000 7,047,000 1,079,000 2,738,000 1,594,000 5,411,000 0 12,458,0001991 275,000 1,278,000 124,000 811,000 2,488,000 257,000 2,420,000 1,117,000 3,794,000 0 6,282,0001992 103,000 880,000 4,000 257,000 1,244,000 169,000 2,049,000 66,000 2,284,000 0 3,528,0001993 148,000 460,000 137,000 2,630,000 3,375,000 1,211,000 8,684,000 477,000 10,372,000 0 13,747,0001994 233,000 846,000 352,000 1,298,000 2,729,000 1,145,000 6,042,000 119,000 7,306,000 0 10,035,0001995 9,000 61,000 1,000 186,000 257,000 43,000 476,000 23,000 542,000 0 799,0001996 1,000 69,000 4,000 708,000 782,000 0 173,000 0 173,000 0 955,0001997 0 259,000 19,000 1,315,000 1,593,000 434,000 6,408,000 0 6,842,000 0 8,435,0001998 0 0 15,000 268,000 283,000 93,000 902,000 0 995,000 0 1,278,0001999 0 0 0 1,000 1,000 47,000 1,000 48,000 0 49,0002000 0 0 4,000 418,000 422,000 0 532,000 1,000 533,000 0 955,0002001 16,000 46,000 25,000 12,000 99,000 0 163,000 0 163,000 35,000 297,0002002 111,000 226,000 17,000 950,000 1,304,000 0 796,000 43,000 839,000 75,000 2,218,0002003 0 0 0 249,000 249,000 0 737,200 0 737,200 49,900 1,036,1002004 0 10,600 0 246,300 256,900 0 787,700 0 787,700 13,100 1,057,7002005 0 0 0 3,375 3,375 0 126,004 0 126,004 0 129,3792006 83,000 54,000 0 775,000 912,000 0 2,162,000 13,000 2,175,000 160,000 3,247,0002007 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 02008 0 11,240 331 0 11,571 0 4,644 0 4,644 0 16,2152009 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Averages1986-91 246,667 1,771,333 138,667 1,680,000 3,836,667 300,667 2,342,833 869,000 3,512,500 0 7,349,1671992-00 54,889 286,111 59,556 786,778 1,187,333 386,875 2,812,556 76,333 3,232,778 0 4,420,1112001-09 23,333 38,649 4,703 248,408 315,094 0 530,728 6,222 536,950 37,000 889,044Percentages1986-91 3% 24% 2% 23% 52% 4% 32% 12% 48% 0% 100%1992-00 1% 6% 1% 18% 27% 9% 64% 2% 73% 0% 100%2001-09 3% 4% 1% 28% 35% 0% 60% 1% 60% 4% 100%Total41
Table 14 Summary of available information on accuracy, precision and reliabilityof the catch monitoring programs used to produce estimates of thecommercial harvest of Fraser sockeye in Canadian waters (2001-2009).% of Quality of Catch EstimatesLocation Catch Accuracy Precision ReliabilityFraser Panel AreasTroll 3% Good Unknown HighSeine (Area 20) 4% Fair Unknown MediumGillnet (Area 29) 28% Fair Unknown MediumNon-Panel AreaTroll 9% Good Unknown HighNet (Area 11-16) 52% Fair Unknown MediumSelective Fisheries 4% Very Good High HighTotal 100% Fair Unknown MediumFigure 4 Fishery management areas and commercial gear types used in the FraserRiver Panel Area and Canadian south coast waters (from PSC 2008).42
Page 2 and 3: Fraser River Sockeye Fisheriesand F
Page 4 and 5: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY1. Catch Monitorin
Page 6 and 7: implement harvest rate ceilings to
Page 8 and 9: Table of ContentsEXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Page 10 and 11: List of TablesTable 1 Annual estima
Page 12 and 13: List of FiguresFigure 1 Fraser sock
Page 14 and 15: Figure 21 Estimates of total catch,
Page 16 and 17: List of AppendicesAppendix A Statem
Page 18 and 19: used to (1) estimate catch for each
Page 20 and 21: FISHERIES HARVESTINGOverview of Fis
Page 22 and 23: Figure 1 Fraser sockeye marine migr
Page 24 and 25: Table 2 Summary of available inform
Page 26 and 27: Table 3 provides the annual estimat
Page 28 and 29: Table 4 Summary of available inform
Page 30 and 31: season update teleconference meetin
Page 32 and 33: Catch Estimation MethodsThe procedu
Page 34 and 35: catch estimates was detected using
Page 36 and 37: of precision. The overall rating fo
Page 38 and 39: 1998-00 - No agreements with Sto:lo
Page 40 and 41: initiation of the AFS Agreements in
Page 42 and 43: Table 12 Comparison of annual socke
Page 46 and 47: Canadian Commercial FisheriesThe pr
Page 48 and 49: logbook systems. In addition to the
Page 50 and 51: Table 15 Fraser River sockeye salmo
Page 52 and 53: Available catch estimates for the r
Page 54 and 55: Table 17 Summary of available infor
Page 56 and 57: anged from less than 100 to over 30
Page 58 and 59: Washington State Recreational Fishe
Page 60 and 61: equirements have been applied to se
Page 62 and 63: salmon were biopsied or tagged with
Page 64 and 65: Stellako-Late Stuart and 531 Adams)
Page 66 and 67: FISHERIES MANAGEMENTOverview of Pre
Page 68 and 69: parents of the recruits). Effective
Page 70 and 71: within the confidence limits. For e
Page 72 and 73: Ratio of Return to Forecast5.04.03.
Page 74 and 75: Ratio of Return to Forecast5.04.03.
Page 76 and 77: Table 20 Pre-season forecast models
Page 78 and 79: different from the straight line),
Page 80 and 81: Prediction ability of ForecastsProp
Page 82 and 83: Stock MAPEReturn Explainedby Foreca
Page 84 and 85: test fisheries are analyzed in-seas
Page 86 and 87: Inputs to the cumulative-normal mod
Page 88 and 89: eginning of the runs, but by mid-ru
Page 90 and 91: Median Absolute Percent Error (1997
Page 92 and 93: variety of hydroacoustic techniques
Page 94 and 95:
enefited from improved technologies
Page 96 and 97:
Post-season estimates of Escapement
Page 98 and 99:
precision achieved was considerably
Page 100 and 101:
m 3 /sec during the sockeye run. Fi
Page 102 and 103:
Escapement TargetsOur evaluations r
Page 104 and 105:
20% of the average of the 4-year se
Page 106 and 107:
Table 24 Low escapement benchmarks
Page 108 and 109:
Table 25 Comparison of post-season
Page 110 and 111:
fisheries have been permitted to ta
Page 112 and 113:
sub-dominant cycle years (e.g., 200
Page 114 and 115:
SummaryLow Escapement Benchmarks (L
Page 116 and 117:
Extent of OverharvestingThe estimat
Page 118 and 119:
2,000,0001,800,000Early StuartCatch
Page 120 and 121:
Cultus Lake Sockeye Recovery Effort
Page 122 and 123:
Figure 23 Number of adult sockeye e
Page 124 and 125:
Recovery ObjectivesIn anticipation
Page 126 and 127:
2008 the escapement estimate was 34
Page 128 and 129:
BRISTOL BAY, ALASKA SOCKEYE FISHERY
Page 130 and 131:
accurate, precise, and timely, (2)
Page 132 and 133:
The Bay is subjected to large tidal
Page 134 and 135:
activity (Bocking and Peterman 1988
Page 136 and 137:
% of total run45%40%35%30%25%20%15%
Page 138 and 139:
Harvest estimation methodsTotal har
Page 140 and 141:
Millions of sockeyeYearFigure 27 Hi
Page 142 and 143:
management structure complements th
Page 144 and 145:
1.5Togiak4.03.5NushagakMillions of
Page 146 and 147:
Millions of sockeye7.06.05.04.03.02
Page 148 and 149:
logical given the dynamics of the r
Page 150 and 151:
1.61.4Number of fish (millions)1.21
Page 152 and 153:
Pre-season forecastsAs noted above,
Page 154 and 155:
8.0y = 0.79x + 1.59R² = 0.417.8Log
Page 156 and 157:
12010080MAPE60402001971-1980 1981-1
Page 158 and 159:
Median percent error (MPE)3020100-1
Page 160 and 161:
Table 28 Average age composition of
Page 162 and 163:
dampeners to reduce surface turbule
Page 164 and 165:
current year’s run is accounted f
Page 166 and 167:
and 1999 Revised Annexes. This inte
Page 168 and 169:
Bristol Bay was in 1997 when there
Page 170 and 171:
upon by managers to determine when
Page 172 and 173:
STATE OF THE SCIENCECatch Monitorin
Page 174 and 175:
2006) due to concerns regarding the
Page 176 and 177:
RECOMMENDATIONS1. DFO needs to ensu
Page 178 and 179:
LITERATURE CITEDAdkison, M.D. and R
Page 180 and 181:
Beacham, T.D., M. Lapointe, J.R. Ca
Page 182 and 183:
CSAS. 2007 Pre-season run size fore
Page 184 and 185:
Evans, D.G., J.B. Browning and B.G.
Page 186 and 187:
Hardie, D.C., D.A. Nagtegaal, K. He
Page 188 and 189:
Pacific Salmon Commission. 1998. Re
Page 190 and 191:
Robichaud, D., J.J. Smith, K. K. En
Page 192 and 193:
Valderrama, D. and J.L. Anderson. 2
Page 194 and 195:
Appendix A Statement of Work.Cohen
Page 196 and 197:
All sectors3.7 The Contractor will
Page 198 and 199:
“State of the Science”. Comment
Page 200 and 201:
3.3 The Contractor will review and
Page 202 and 203:
Appendix BList of requests to DFO b
Page 204 and 205:
DFO Request 15: Recent CSAS documen
Page 206 and 207:
Item Description DateRequestedReque
Page 208 and 209:
Appendix CFirst Nation catch monito
Page 210 and 211:
Table C-1 Summary of information re
Page 212 and 213:
Table C-2 Weekly catch monitoring e
Page 214 and 215:
Table D-1 Summary of information re
Page 216 and 217:
community of Port Renfrew. The area
Page 218 and 219:
IPrecision ( + % of the estimate)10
Page 220 and 221:
Table E-2 Annual Strait of Georgia
Page 222 and 223:
Table E-4 Annual Johnstone Strait e
Page 224 and 225:
Table E-6 Lower Fraser River recrea
Page 226 and 227:
0 would mean that the forecast does
Page 228 and 229:
the general ups and downs of the ob
Page 230 and 231:
Appendix G Graphical representation
Page 232 and 233:
Early Stuart Timing GroupEarly Stua
Page 234 and 235:
Summer-run Timing GroupSummer run7.
Page 236 and 237:
Fraser River Indicator Stocks (list
Page 238 and 239:
Page 240 and 241:
Page 242 and 243:
Page 244 and 245:
Page 246 and 247:
Page 248 and 249:
Page 250 and 251:
Page 252 and 253:
Page 254 and 255:
Appendix H Pre-season forecast: sum
Page 256 and 257:
ManagementGroup(IndicatorStock)MAPE
Page 258 and 259:
ManagementGroup(IndicatorStock)MAPE
Page 260 and 261:
Appendix I Methods of In-season Sto
Page 262 and 263:
Marine Gillnet Test FisheriesThe gi
Page 264 and 265:
Expansion line (x1000)9080706050403
Page 266 and 267:
Table I-2 Mean values for purse sei
Page 268 and 269:
Figure I-5 Map of test fishing loca
Page 270 and 271:
Appendix J The Hydroacoustics progr
Page 272 and 273:
An SEF project was secured in 2007
Page 274 and 275:
Conservation action Comments Partne
Page 276 and 277:
Table K-2 Summary of actions to rec
Page 278 and 279:
Table L-1 Catch and escapement of s
Page 280 and 281:
Table L-3 Performance criteria of p
Page 282 and 283:
Ratio of annual return to the avera
Page 284 and 285:
Appendix M Reviewer comments on the
Page 286 and 287:
Request #5: Sockeye allocations by
Page 288 and 289:
utility of pre-season forecasts. Pr
Page 290 and 291:
3. Are there additional quantitativ
Page 292 and 293:
made via tagging and experimentatio
Page 294 and 295:
Page 60: The authors make extensive
Page 296 and 297:
ensure the reader does not assume t
Page 298 and 299:
The reported excerpts from Bradford
Page 300 and 301:
(budgets, legal issues, pseudo-cons
Page 302 and 303:
REVIEW 3/3Reviewer Name: Dr Sean Co
Page 304 and 305:
season forecasts that eventually co
Page 306 and 307:
allocation shows "No agreement", an
Page 308 and 309:
size.Figures showing errors for pre
Page 310 and 311:
Goals can easily generate confusion
Page 312 and 313:
Total rows from all these tables be
Page 314 and 315:
Exploitation Rate100%90%80%70%60%50
Page 316 and 317:
Exploitation RateEarly Stuart90%80%
show all

Fraser River Sockeye Fisheries and Fisheries Management - Cohen ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?