1. Development and Implementation of a Monitoring Program for Mark-selective Chinook Salmon Fisheries in Puget Sound, Washington Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Mark Baltzell Pete McHugh Laurie Peterson Steve Thiesfeld April 1, 2009

2. Topics  Introduction/Background: mark-selective fisheries  Overview of WDFW Puget Sound Sampling Unit’s comprehensive monitoring program for Chinook mark-selective fisheries.  Methods  Results  Conclusions  Questions

3.  Adipose fin-clip; external mark indicating hatchery origin fish.  Marking program consistent with hatchery reform practices. Production of Marked Chinook

4. Mark-Selective Fisheries

5. Marine Areas with Chinook MSFs Summer Seasons Winter Seasons Higher effort Some are quota-managed Directed at maturing migrants Fewer fish handled per kept Multiple species encountered Lower effort (weather driven) Directed at resident “blackmouth” More fish handled per kept (size) Mostly single species encounters

6. Chinook Mark-Selective Fishery Objectives No increase in wild stock impacts Reduce wild stock impacts if possible Increase Angler Opportunity Increase Hatchery Fish Harvest Sample, Monitor, Enforce All Fisheries

7. Evaluating Selective Chinook Fisheries Key Objectives:  Determine if the data needed to estimate critical selective fishery parameters can be collected.  Evaluate if sample sizes needed to produce estimates with agreed levels of precision can be realistically obtained.  Enable evaluation and planning of potential future mark-selective fisheries.

8.  Mark rate in the fishery - from estimates of marked and unmarked encounters.  Number marked and unmarked fish retained.  Number marked and unmarked fish released.  Number of the Chinook encounters that are of sub-legal size (less than 22 inches total length).  Stock composition of the mortalities– estimated by CWT and DNA.  KEY CHALLENGE: Indirect estimation of impacts on unmarked fish that are caught and released. Critical Data Parameters

9. WDFW Puget Sound Sampling Unit Selective Fishery Monitoring Program

10. Dockside Sampling On-the-water Surveys Test Fishing WDFW Puget Sound Sampling Unit Selective Fishery Monitoring Program Size Measures; Select Sites Out-of- frame effort proportion

11. Dockside Sampling On-the-water Surveys Test Fishing WDFW Puget Sound Sampling Unit Selective Fishery Monitoring Program Length, age CWTs Fishing methods Size Measures; Select Sites Out-of- frame effort proportion

12. Dockside Sampling  Recover CWT’s from salmon that detect positive for a tag.  At least 20% sample rate is the goal.  Length measurements and scale samples.  Fishing method data.

13. Dockside Sampling On-the-water Surveys Test Fishing Chinook Size/mark- status comp. Length, age CWTs DNA sampling Length, age (all) WDFW Puget Sound Sampling Unit Selective Fishery Monitoring Program Fishing methods VTRs Size Measures; Select Sites Out-of- frame effort proportion

14. Test Fishing  Encounters by species.  Chinook mark rates and encounter rates by size/mark status.  DNA samples on all Chinook.  Scale and length samples on all Chinook.  Emulate the recreational fleet (gear types, locations fished).

15. Dockside Sampling On-the-water Surveys Test Fishing Total salmon encounters Chinook Size/mark- status comp. Total Fishery Impacts Length, age CWTs DNA sampling Length, age (all) WDFW Puget Sound Sampling Unit Selective Fishery Monitoring Program Fishing methods Size Measures; Select Sites Out-of- frame effort proportion

16. Dockside Sampling On-the-water Surveys Test Fishing Total Chinook Encounter Estimates (Retained + Released) Total Estimated Fishery Impacts  Legal-size marked (LM)  Legal-size unmarked (LU)  Sublegal-size marked (SM)  Sublegal-size unmarked (SU) Chinook Size/Mark-Status Apply size- specific release mortality rates 15% Legal 20% Sublegal Apportion Total Encounters into 4 Size/Mark groups Compare to Model (FRAM) predictions

17. Voluntary Trip Reports  Encounters by species.  Chinook mark rates and encounter rates by size/mark status.

18. Marine Area Year(s) Est. Number Angler Trips Est. Number Marked Chinook Harvested Est. Number Chinook Released Est. Number Unmarked Mortalities Area 52003-08129,69816,60250,8645,935 Area 62003-0719,7153,1265,017988 Area 92007-0838,5588,98419,5151,513 Area 102007-0822,1832,5428,101501 Area 112007-08144,68618,04134,2671,875 Total354,84049,295117,76410,812 Estimated Unmarked Chinook Mortalities (Summer Fisheries) Providing Opportunity and Meeting Conservation Goals

19. Unmarked Chinook impacts: similar to or less than model predictions. Unmarked Mortality Estimates vs. Modeled (FRAM) Predictions

20. Legal-sized, marked Chinook harvest: consistent with model predictions. Legal-size Marked Chinook Estimates vs. Modeled (FRAM) Predictions

21. Test Fishery Results Emulating the Fleet Mark RatesTotal Lengths

22. CWT Recoveries For All Chinook Mark-Selective Fisheries in Puget Sound 2005-08 N = 1184

23. CWT Recoveries for Chinook Mark Selective Fisheries in the Strait of Juan de Fuca 2003-08

24.  High percentage landed catch and angler trips sampled overall, exceeding the 20% sample rate target:  38% (winter fisheries)  31% (summer fisheries) Adequacy of Sampling Program Sample Size Goals

25. Estimated Parameter (Chinook) Summer MSF Fisheries CV Winter MSF Fisheries CV Total Landed Catch11%9% Unmarked Releases12%10% Test Fishery Mark Rates9%3% Adequacy of Sampling Program Precision of Estimates Coefficient of Variation (CV)  Opportunities to make sampling more efficient & cost-effective?

26. Conclusions  Pilot selective Chinook fisheries enabled recreational fishing opportunities while meeting the conservation constraints defined for Puget Sound Chinook.  Sampling programs collected critical information necessary for evaluating and planning future pilot selective Chinook fisheries.  Measured impacts of the fishery were either less than or comparable to pre-season expectations (FRAM model) for unmarked Chinook salmon.  Enabled implementation and assessment of our comprehensive selective fishery monitoring program in Puget Sound marine areas.

27. Sampling Program Conclusions  Dockside sampling and test fishery efforts succeeded in:  Achieving agreed-to sampling objectives.  Yielding precise estimates of key fishery parameters.  Test fishery emulated the fleet  Continue feedback loop to test boats --spatial data collection and dockside fishing method question.

28. If you would like to know more…..the place to find all of our documentation on Chinook MSF’s http://wdfw.wa.gov/fish/ selective/techniques/ technical_documents.htm