<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2800.1522" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Many thanks to Sari Sommarstrom for forwarding this
message. This appears to apply to Klamath-Trinity fisheries.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>TS</FONT></DIV><FONT face=Arial
size=2></FONT><BR>THE COLUMBIA BASIN BULLETIN:<BR>Weekly Fish and Wildlife
News<BR><A href="http://www.cbbulletin.com"
eudora="autourl">http://www.cbbulletin.com</A><BR>January 13,
2006<BR><BR><B>REPORT CITES WEAKNESSES IN CODED WIRE TAG PROGRAM<BR><BR></B>A
U.S./Canada scientific panel says there is no ready, or inexpensive, cure for
problems that have beset the north Pacific's coded-wire tag program for
monitoring ocean fishing's impacts on individual stocks of fish.<BR><BR>That
program's integrity needs to be restored until a better system is found to
support fishery management decisions, according to the panel's recent
report.<BR><BR>Panelist David Hankin previewed the report Tuesday afternoon for
members of the Pacific Salmon Commission at a meeting in Portland. Hankins is
chairman of the Department of Fisheries Biology at Humboldt State University in
California.<BR><BR>"These threats are not new," Hankin said.<BR><BR>The report,
"Report of the Expert Panel on the Future of the Coded Wire Tag Recovery Program
for Pacific Salmon" can be found at <A
href="http://psc.org/info_codedwiretagreview_finalreportintro.htm"
eudora="autourl">http://psc.org/info_codedwiretagreview_finalreportintro.htm</A><BR><BR>"Mass
marking and mark-selective fisheries together pose serious threats to the
integrity of the CWT system," according to the reports' list of major
findings.<BR><BR>An adipose fin clip had been chosen in the 1970s by the PSC to
serve as a sign that a fish had been implanted with a CWT.<BR><BR>Each piece of
wire contains a code that uniquely identifies an individual group of fish --
their place of origin whether it be wild or hatchery raised, its brood, etc. The
tag information generally informed experiments.<BR><BR>The various fishery
management agencies at that time agreed to share data, and coordinate the effort
to recover tags from fish that were harvested. The Pacific States Marine
Fisheries Commission remains the repository for that data.<BR><BR>The
information also allowed fishery managers to adjust harvests as need be to
control impacts on salmon stocks, particularly those with conservation
concerns.<BR><BR>In most cases tagged hatchery surrogates have been used to
estimate the toll of ocean commercial and recreation harvest upon naturally
produced fish.<BR><BR>Studies have shows that some 54 state, federal, tribal,
and private entities conduct CWT experiments involving some 1,200 new codes
annually.<BR><BR>More than 50 million juvenile salmon and steelhead are now
tagged annually at a total cost more than $7.5 million annually, according to
the report. Approximately 275,000 CWTs are recovered each year in commercial and
recreational fisheries and in spawning escapements, at an additional annual cost
of $12 million to $13 million.<BR><BR>The uncertainty of the data being
collected has grown since the early 1990s for a variety of reasons. Columbia
basin wild stock numbers plummeted, thus forcing a reduction in fisheries. That
resulted in lower numbers of CWT recoveries and lesser statistical validity.
Likewise the more common catch-and-release of unmarked stocks leaves mortality
for those fish incalculable.<BR><BR>"Because marked hatchery fish and unmarked
natural fish are no longer subject to the same patterns of exploitation under
MSFs, CWTs on hatchery indicator stocks can no longer serve as surrogates to
evaluate and monitor presumed fishery impacts on natural stocks," the report
says.<BR><BR>"Thus, although MM and MSFs had promise for increasing harvests of
hatchery fish while keeping fishing impacts on natural populations within
desired constraints, these same programs threatened to jeopardize the commitment
made by the United States and Canada to maintain a viable CWT program," the
panel said.<BR><BR>The mass marking also confounded the recovery of CWT tags,
since the tagged and untagged hatchery fish are marked with the same
ad-clip.<BR><BR>The use of electronic "wands" to detect CWTs were encouraged.
But their use is not universal, another factor that biases research results
because study fish might be detected in one fishery but not others.<BR><BR>"An
additional and serious consequence of MM and MSF has been a gradual loss of the
kind of cooperation, coordination and consistency of programs that characterized
the first two decades of the CWT tag recovery program. &, ETD (electronic
tag detection) remains inconsistently applied, and, in some jurisdictions,
marine recreation sport fisheries are not sampled by trained fishery
technicians, but estimated recoveries are instead based on voluntary returns by
recreational fishermen," the report says.<BR><BR>The number of tags, and
attendant costs, may have to be increased to restore the reliability of the
information the system produces, according to Hankin. <BR><BR>PSC chairman Larry
Rutter said during Tuesday meeting that the next step for the PSC and fish
management entities would be to discuss implementation of the report's
recommendations, including the development of a design for its coordinated
"grand experiment." The panel envisions research beginning later this year to "
provide current and high quality information for the continued evolution of
management models and assessments."<BR><BR>A part of assessment of the report
and its potential implementation would be the development of cost estimates for
both a reinvigoration of the CWT system and potential alternatives.<BR><BR>At
the meeting, Rutter noted that mass marking is a long-simmering political issue.
<BR><BR>Lower Columbia treaty tribes have long been opposed to the mass marking
of fish.<BR><BR>"I want to emphasize that the tribes have long used selective
fisheries, such as time and area restrictions, gear restrictions, and voluntary
fishery closures as conservation measures to protect weak stocks and we will
continue to use such effective tools," Olney Patt, Jr., Jr., executive director
of the Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission and an alternate on the PSC,
said in Jan. 9 comments on the report. "In contrast, we view mark-selective
fisheries simply as a tool to target hatchery produced fish, and therefore
support status quo hatchery production practices, not conservation."<BR><BR>"It
is also obvious that the unilateral implementation of mass marking and mark
selective fishing programs undermines the continued viability of this management
tool," Patt said of the CWT program.<BR><BR>Washington Fish and Wildlife
Department Director Jeff Koenings disagrees with Patt and the report's finding
that mass marking and selective fisheries "pose a serious threat to the
integrity of the CWT system&."<BR><BR>"This finding is inconsistent with the
fact that mass marking and selective fisheries have been implemented in a
responsible manner for more than 10 years," Koenings wrote in a cover letter
accompanying generally favorable WDFW comments on the report. <BR><BR>"We can
only conclude that the Panel believes that mass marking and selective fishing
can exist without serious threat to the integrity of the CWT system, depending
on the intensity of the MM and MSF and if reasonable actions are take to insure
that basic data are collected," according to the WDFW comments. "As one of the
agencies responsible for tagging, marking and recovery programs, WDFW has made
substantial investments to the CWT system and has acted to insure the quality
and reliability of collected data&."<BR><BR>The report lists steps for
implementation of its recommendations:<BR>1. Correct current deficiencies in CWT
system;<BR>2. Respond to Mass-marking and Mark-selective fisheries;<BR>3.
Develop a coordinated research and implementation plan;<BR>4. Consider new
management paradigms.<BR><BR>"The challenge here is not to be black and white,"
said PSC member Larry Cassidy, who also represents his governor on the Northwest
Power and Conservation Council and Washington's Salmon Recovery
Board.<BR><BR>"The challenge here is to make them work together," Cassidy said
of the CWT program's mission and many fishery managers' goal of maximizing the
harvest of hatchery fish through the marking of fish and selective fisheries.
Hundreds of millions are spent annually for hatchery construction, operations
and maintenance and monitoring by states, federal agencies and tribes.<BR><BR>He
said the panel's recommendations are the best course -- to improve the CWT
system even while research is conducted to identify alternatives. The goals
remain the same -- to improve escapement of wild fish while allowing fishers to
harvest hatchery fish grown for that purpose.<BR><BR>Cassidy said taxpayers and
Bonneville Power Administration ratepayers want to reap the benefits from those
hatcheries. Many of the region's hatcheries are funded through the NPCC's fish
and wildlife program by the BPA.<BR><BR>The Pacific Salmon Commission is a
16-person body with four commissioners and four alternates each from the United
States and Canada, representing the interests of commercial and recreational
fisheries as well as federal, state and tribal
governments.<BR><BR></BODY></HTML>