Poaching and Its Impact
Dear Editor,
I see by your paper that the game warden, Oscar Lewis, is in possession of some wire fencing brought from Hyampom. I am the owner of that wire, but was not arrested for it as heretofore. However, am I to have the man arrested who is in possession of stolen goods?
Now is it unlawful to put wire into a creek to catch a salmon? Is it unlawful to spear a salmon to eat? If it is, why shouldn't it be unlawful to net 3,000 in one haul at the river mouth and sell them all over the world? Our representative Mr. Anderson allows a bill to pass, sponsored by the fish trust, that would force us to buy our salmon out of a can. -
B.F. Russell (Trinity Journal, 1926)
In the early days of settlement in the South Fork Trinity River basin, people relied heavily on fish, particularly spring chinook, for part of their subsistence. The method of take was often anything but sporting. Even when angling methods were used, limits were often ignored. Personal accounts of "trout fishing" in the 1950's recounted catches of 50 to 100 fish per day in Hayfork Creek below Nine Mile Bridge, and on the South Fork below Hyampom. The relatively low human population and high productivity of the healthy stream habitat prevented depletion of runs.
Decreased depth of the river after the 1964 flood may have made salmon and steelhead more vulnerable to poaching. However, poaching effort for all salmon and steelhead seems to have decreased in recent years, possibly as a function of decreased abundance. There is also a growing awareness that poaching threatens some stocks, such as spring chinook and summer steelhead, with extinction.
Descriptions of more recent poaching activity below are taken from personal accounts in interviews during the scoping for this project. Neither the person providing the information nor the person who was alleged to have participated in the act are named. The authors of this report do not wish to place blame or bring recrimination on anyone who shared information freely. Rather the purpose of these descriptions is to raise community awareness of the problem so that local solutions can be initiated.
During a recent winter, barbed wire was fashioned into a weir and adult steelhead migrations up Salt Creek were blocked. Steelhead were taken with pitchforks.
An account was given of poaching activity of fall chinook salmon in the vicinity of Hyampom. As the fish rose to the surface in a large pool, they were shot in the head from a cliff overlooking the stream.
Young adults were reported to have shot spring chinook with a 22 calibre handgun under water in recent years.
In the fall of 1986, when chinook were abundant in the South Fork Trinity, a drift boat caught and unloaded 37 salmon at various points along the river in one day.
In 1992, an inscription was found on a bridge over the South Fork: " Bob W. (name changed) shot his first salmon here - 1992." After inquiries were made by a concerned citizen about who might be responsible, a post-script was added later in the summer to the carved message: "Too bad he missed."
Several people indicated during interviews that even with the extremely low abundance levels in recent years, some spring chinook continue to be poached from the river.
High Seas Driftnet Fisheries
There have been no tagged Klamath basin salmon or steelhead found by NMFS agents in monitoring efforts of high seas drift net catches, or any evidence of the overlap of ocean range of Klamath basin stocks and drift net fishing effort. Considerable international attention has been focused in recent years on high seas drift net fisheries that catch salmon, steelhead, other fish species, sea mammals, and sea birds (NOAA, 1989). The Japanese have been using driftnets on the high seas since 1905. Seven different driftnet fisheries are currently operated in the Pacific Ocean and fishing effort has increased in the last decade. Factors that have led to the proliferation of driftnets are rising fuel costs, reduced profitability or increased regulation of traditional fisheries, and the high catch rate.
Japanese, Korean and Taiwanese fishing vessels employ long-line driftnets to catch squid in areas of the northeast Pacific where incidental catch of salmon and steelhead may occur (Figure 7-3). Most of the area being fished is in international waters so regulations and accords must be negotiated with nations involved in the fishery. The squid fisheries are regulated by time-area closures based on sea surface temperatures to reduce "by-catch" of salmon and steelhead. Japan, Korea and Taiwan have all passedlaws that prohibit their own vessels from keeping salmon and steelhead caught incidentally in the squid fishery. Unfortunately, there is also unregulated driftnet fisheries that have been operated primarily by Korean and Taiwanese fishermen. Illegal catches and sales of salmon from rivers further to the north are known to occur (Lewis, 1990).
Figure 7-3. High Seas Driftnet Squid Fishery in the Northeast Pacific Ocean. Map of where the high seas driftnet fishery for squid takes place (Graphic used with permission of Klamath River Education Program). NOT AVAILABLE IN ELECTRONIC FORMAT
NOAA special agents began to crack down on sales of salmoncaught illegally in driftnets in 1989 (Lewis, 1990). In 1990, Congress amended the Magnusen Act to call for a ban on all long line driftnet use in the ocean (Oregon Coastal Law Memo, 1990). United Nations Resolution 44225 called for a ban on all long line driftnet fisheries in May of 1992 (Oregon Coastal Law Memo, 1990) but enforcement in international waters remains problematic.
No Evidence High Seas Driftnet Fishing Impacts South Fork Stocks
Although the specific migration patterns of South Fork Trinity River chinook and coho salmon stocks have never been determined, evidence suggests that Klamath basin stocks of these species range fairly near shore along the Continental Shelf off California and Oregon (Laufler et al., 1986; Barnhardt, 1986). Therefore, there is virtually no possibility that salmon stocks from the basin are at risk in high seas driftnet fisheries. Some information gathered by the NMFS suggests that coastal stocks of large winter steelhead from some California streams may have extended migrations, as far north as Alaska and well into the mid-Pacific (Light et al., 1988). Steelhead exhibiting this ocean range could have some exposure to harvest in the squid high seas driftnet fisheries.
The majority of South Fork Trinity steelhead spend one year or less in the ocean and, therefore, most likely exhibit an ocean migration pattern that does not take them into far distant ocean areas where drift net fisheries are conducted. Satterthwaite (1988) documented an unusually high rate of straying between Klamath and Rogue River "half-pounder" steelhead which suggests that fish showing this life history may feed in the rich waters off the Continental Shelf between these rivers. Adult steelhead scale analysis from the South Fork Trinity River showed that 44% and 39%, respectively, had returned as half-pounders (Mills and Wilson, 1991; Wilson and Mills, 1992).
Foreign Factory Ships Replaced by Domestic Fleet in Hake FisheryPacific whiting (Merluccius productus), also known as hake, are a migratory species that spawns off Baja California and central California during January and February. This species is harvested with mid-water trawl nets. The fishery begins in April off northern California then moves north through Oregon and Washington and into Canada as the season progresses. (Information provided in this section comes largely from NMFS, 1992a).
In the 1960's there was little commercial interest in hake by United States fishermen and U.S. territorial waters extended out only twelve miles. Consequently, factory ships of foreign fleets were allowed to come in to target this species. The Magnusen Act extended U.S. territorial waters out to 200 miles so foreign fleets needed permission from the PFMC to fish for whiting. Beginning in 1978, U.S. fishermen began to catch whiting in mid-water trawl nets for the foreign factory ships. From 1978 to 1989 these "joint ventures" harvested an increasing amount of the catch. Since 1989, American corporations have built factory ships which have now displaced foreign vessels. Local on-shore processing of whiting has also increased. NMFS has had an observer program to monitor catch rates and species of fish delivered to factory ships by "catcher boats."
Whiting Fleet Has Low Impact on Klamath Salmon
Along the entire coast from California to Canada, an average of 221,000 metric tons of whiting are harvested annually, but by-catch of salmon has averaged less than 10,000 fish since 1987 (NMFS, 1992b). The allowable impact rate is .05 salmon per metric ton of whiting harvest (KFMC, 1991). None of the salmon may be kept by the factory ships or catcher boats. The average sport and commercial harvest of salmon off Oregon, Washington, and California in the same time period was over 1,300,000 fish. The relative impact of the whiting fishery is low when compared to directed fisheries. In 1991, approximately 8,500 chinook salmon were taken incidentally in the whiting fishery, with most fish being only one or two years old (KFMC, 1992). Because these fish would have substantial natural mortality before reaching maturity, the whiting fishery is thought to have little impact on spawning escapement. The KFMC requested an analysis of how many Klamath Basin salmon were in the by-catch and NMFS estimated the number at only 850 fish (KFMC, 1991). By-catch in the whiting fishery of salmon is comprised of 82-98 percent chinook salmon; therefore, impacts to coho salmon are very minor and there is little information that suggests that steelhead are taken.
The PFMC implemented numerous measures in 1992 to reduce the take of salmon in the whiting fishery off California due to extremely low stock abundance of Klamath fall chinook. The opening of the season was delayed to April 15, fishing was not allowed at night, no fishing was allowed in shallow water (less than 100 fathoms), and no at-sea processing was allowed.
Fall chinook salmon from the Klamath Basin became a major focus of management through the Pacific Fisheries Management Council (PFMC) as a result of allocation conflicts and stock declines (Fraidenburg and Lincoln, 1985). The initial escapement goal set in 1978 was for 115,000 fall chinook, including 97,500 natural spawners (Fraidenburg and Lincoln, 1985). Natural spawners are those fall chinook that spawn outside hatchery facilities, although some hatchery strays may contribute to part of what is counted as natural spawners (USFWS, 1991).
In 1980, the short-term goal for escapement was modified to 86,000 to avoid severe disruption to California ocean fisheries. The PFMC (1980) expected that the goal of 115,000 could still be attained after one life cycle. The PFMC again proposed an alternative rebuilding schedule in 1983 that would take four brood cycles (16 years) to achieve rebuilding of the stock (PFMC, 1983). It allowed a minimum escapement of 68,900 in order to allow for more predictable ocean fisheries.
After the Klamath Fisheries Management Council (KFMC) was created by Congress in 1986 under the Klamath Restoration Act (PL 99-552), the KFMC influenced the PFMC in 1987 to adopt a rebuilding escapement floor of 35,000 adult natural spawners (KFMC, 1992). This number of spawners was recognized as a minimum viable population for conservation and this minimum population for conservation was codified into law as Amendment IX of the Magnusen Act. Also incorporated as the primary management goal is to implement harvest rate management in order to allow an escapement rate of 34% for naturally spawning fall chinook salmon (KFMC, 1992). This is thought to be an optimal rate for sustained yield.
Despite considerable effort to manage Klamath basin fall chinook on a sustained yield basis, the stock showed precipitous declines in recent years. Escapements of adult natural fall chinook to the Klamath River in 1990, 1991, and 1992 were 15,536, 11,499, and 11,120, respectively (CDFG, 1992). This averages just 13% of the initial target for natural spawning escapement set in 1980 and just over one third of the absolute floor adopted by the PFMC in 1987 (Figure 7-4). Harvest took place in 1992 "into the floor," which was the first time that the PFMC had purposefully acted in violation of Amendment IX. Preliminary estimates indicate that the 35,000 goal for Klamath fall chinook natural spawners was missed again in 1993 (CDFG, 1993b) with approximately 20,800 adult spawners returning. This now makes a complete life cycle in which under-escapement has occurred.
How Harvest Rate Management is Implemented
The California Department of Fish and Game has marked Trinity River Hatchery and Iron Gate Hatchery chinook salmon with coded wire tags to aid in the determination of the range and abundance of Klamath stocks in the ocean. The majority of these marked Klamath fall chinook have been caught between Brookings, Oregon and Shelter Cove, California, with a minor amount of Klamath fish also harvested by commercial and sport fishermen in areas further to the north and south. The area between Cape Blanco, Oregon and Point Delgada has been designated as the Klamath Management Zone (KMZ). Fishing effort in this zone is restricted in years when Klamath fall chinook salmon abundance is low. Fisheries to the north and south of the KMZ are also cut back in years when Klamath fall chinook stocks are severely depressed. Chapter 7 continued