On June 18, 2018 ADFG Sand Point released Commercial Salmon Fishery Announcement #5 an Emergency Order that slashed 48 hours from the 88 hour openings beginning June 20th for seine and drift fishermen and June 22th for set net. Although there was no explanation accompanying the original announcement, it became clear the fishery managers were taking the action as an emergency measure to help the failing Chignik first run of Sockeye salmon. Commissioner Sam Cotten held a teleconference on the 19th to answer stakeholder questions, and on June 21st ADFG released the Emergency Order including justification for the action. On June 20th Mayor Alvin D. Osterback considered AEB options. The letter that follows is the AEB's initial response to the Emergency Order.
June 20, 2018
June 20, 2018
Commissioner
Sam Cotten
Alaska
Department of Fish and Game
333
Raspberry Road
Anchorage,
AK 99518
Commissioner
Cotten,
The
recent emergency management action taken by ADFG to restrict fishing on the
South Peninsula was designed to address a failing first Chignik sockeye run.
However, data from the WASSIP study suggests that very few Chignik fish will be
conserved by restrictions proposed in some areas.
The
table below shows numbers of Chignik fish harvested in each of four South
Peninsula areas in the last third of June (Appendix D1-D3)[1]
and the Chignik run size, for 2006, 2007, and 2008 (Tables 3-5)[2].
The figures are derived by multiplying estimated harvest numbers for each
district in the last part of June, by the mean Chignik stock proportion in that
fishery period for that year. If one divides that Chignik harvest number by the
Chignik run size, the result is a harvest rate estimate for that fishery
location and period on Chignik fish. In Shumagin, Unimak, and Ikatan, the
harvest rate on Chignik fish is 1% or less for June 20-30. This means that for
a Chignik run of 100,000, roughly 1,000 might be saved if no fishing occurred
in these areas. In Unimak and Ikatan, the harvest rate is more like 0.5%,
saving less than 500 fish.
(numbers in thousands)
|
2006
|
Chignik
Harvest Rate
|
2007
|
Chignik
Harvest Rate
|
2008
|
Chignik
Harvest Rate
|
Chignik Run size
|
2,300
|
1,650
|
1,500
|
|||
Shumagin catch of Chignik sockeye
|
18.1
|
0.008
|
14.3
|
0.009
|
17.0
|
0.011
|
Dolgoi catch of Chignik sockeye
|
88.1
|
0.04
|
8.8
|
0.005
|
6.77
|
0.005
|
Ikatan catch of Chignik sockeye
|
4.0
|
0.002
|
0.85
|
0.001
|
3.84
|
0.003
|
Unimak catch of Chignik sockeye
|
-
|
-
|
0.79
|
0.000
|
4.9
|
0.003
|
We
suggest that the department adopt a more targeted and meaningful strategy that
still provides some positive impact on the Chignik run, by restricting the
Dolgoi area only. We know from the WASSIP study that a higher proportion of
Chignik fish is harvested here. Clearly, actions in Unimak and Ikatan, will
provide little impact on the troubled Chignik run. This would help alleviate
substantial negative impacts on coastal communities of the South
Peninsula.
Sincerely,
Alvin
D. Osterback, Mayor
