Post by: Sitka_Blacktail on January 12, 2018, 02:00:28 PM
https://www.nwfsc.noaa.gov/news/features/recovering_marine_mammals_increase_pressure/index.cfm
Post by: Special T on January 12, 2018, 02:33:26 PM
There is no Graft available when you solve a problem through a hunting season.
Cornmerants, Merganzers, sealions.. There is no danger of these guys going extinct. The Walt Disney world folks can't seem to compared what is going on.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk
Post by: Boss .300 winmag on January 12, 2018, 06:16:23 PM
Post by: JimmyHoffa on January 12, 2018, 06:20:37 PM
Post by: plugger on January 12, 2018, 07:24:52 PM
Post by: Stein on January 12, 2018, 07:34:57 PM
Post by: Sitka_Blacktail on January 14, 2018, 09:47:30 PM
Couldn't get it to open.
I didn't have any trouble opening it just now Special T. But I'll copy and paste some of the text.
"Recovering populations of sea lions, harbor seals, and other marine mammals on the West Coast are eating more and more Chinook salmon, and their consumption may now exceed the combined harvest by commercial and recreational fisheries, a new study finds.
The study used models to estimate marine mammal consumption of Chinook salmon based on several assumptions about their diet and the size and weight of salmon. The researchers estimate that from 1975 to 2015, the yearly biomass of Chinook salmon consumed by sea lions, seals, and killer whales increased from 6,100 to 15,200 metric tons, and from five to 31.5 million individual salmon.
Over the same time span, they found that the annual Chinook harvest by fishermen decreased from 16,400 to 9,600 metric tons, and from 3.6 million to 2.1 million individual fish. (While marine mammal consumption includes many juvenile salmon, fishermen harvest only adults.)"
Post by: onmygame on January 15, 2018, 10:11:45 AM
The text of the study states they MAY be taking more.
The numbers are all over the place in this study - and it merely suggests the possibility.
Post by: bighorn1 on January 15, 2018, 12:11:25 PM
Post by: Skyvalhunter on January 15, 2018, 12:17:09 PM
Post by: Sitka_Blacktail on January 15, 2018, 06:10:51 PM
The title of this thread states the mammals are now taking more salmon than fishermen.
The text of the study states they MAY be taking more.
The numbers are all over the place in this study - and it merely suggests the possibility.
I'm guessing the article says "may" because it's an estimate based on computer models. Sea mammals obviously don't report their take like humans.
But other than being an estimate, this sounds pretty definitive. I'm sure they will do more research and decide if their computer models are realistic.
"The researchers estimate that from 1975 to 2015, the yearly biomass of Chinook salmon consumed by sea lions, seals, and killer whales increased from 6,100 to 15,200 metric tons, and from five to 31.5 million individual salmon."
"Over the same time span, they found that the annual Chinook harvest by fishermen decreased from 16,400 to 9,600 metric tons, and from 3.6 million to 2.1 million individual fish. "
Post by: onmygame on January 15, 2018, 06:51:06 PM
The title of this thread states the mammals are now taking more salmon than fishermen.
The text of the study states they MAY be taking more.
The numbers are all over the place in this study - and it merely suggests the possibility.
I'm guessing the article says "may" because it's an estimate based on computer models. Sea mammals obviously don't report their take like humans.
But other than being an estimate, this sounds pretty definitive. I'm sure they will do more research and decide if their computer models are realistic.
"The researchers estimate that from 1975 to 2015, the yearly biomass of Chinook salmon consumed by sea lions, seals, and killer whales increased from 6,100 to 15,200 metric tons, and from five to 31.5 million individual salmon."
"Over the same time span, they found that the annual Chinook harvest by fishermen decreased from 16,400 to 9,600 metric tons, and from 3.6 million to 2.1 million individual fish. "
You do understand the difference between NOW doing something an MAY BE doing something.
There is absolutely nothing definitive about that. Period.
As I said earlier, the numbers are all over the place - and a range from between 5 million and 31.5 million fish makes the study look to be more speculation than scientific in nature.
Don't get me wrong - I applaud your efforts to enlighten those here on any developments, new, old or otherwise, and suspect your efforts are pure of heart.
What you might consider in the future though, is not editorializing these things - if your intention is to simply report them.
Let the data speak for itself, and let everyone come to their own conclusion - which may differ by the way - from yours, or someone else'. Herd mentality is best served on four hooves.
Post by: metlhead on January 15, 2018, 07:00:49 PM
Post by: onmygame on January 15, 2018, 07:10:57 PM
I don't believe that 5 million to 31.5 million was a range. The way I read it is a difference between years.
I do believe you're right.
So from that timeline did we have more mammals, or more fish? Both? Was it proportionate?
Good eye though -
Post by: lokidog on January 15, 2018, 09:43:09 PM
After first arriving, the Harbor Seal population seemed to increase a lot each year. In the last three or four years, it actually seems that their levels locally are down. I've also received less calls to check out marine mammals from the Marine Mammal Stranding Network, of which I am a responder, in the last three years. Having said that, there are still an awful lot of seals.
Sea Lions, on the other hand, specifically the huge Steller Sea Lions, have shown a steady increase since I first came here. The Steller can be 8X the weight of a Harbor Seal. They also can catch, and eat, much larger prey. I would guess that the Harbor Seals are the primary mammalian predator of juvenile salmon whereas the Stellars, at least adults, eat many more adult and almost adult fish. Imagine how many 8-15 pound Chinook salmon a 2400 lb animal needs to eat to survive.... :bash:
Post by: Miles on January 16, 2018, 03:51:54 AM
The title of this thread states the mammals are now taking more salmon than fishermen.
The text of the study states they MAY be taking more.
The numbers are all over the place in this study - and it merely suggests the possibility.
HW thrives off drama. Don’t be realistic, it ruins the excitement. It’s the end of salmon in WA, damn it!
Post by: lokidog on January 16, 2018, 07:30:47 AM
I don't believe that 5 million to 31.5 million was a range. The way I read it is a difference between years.
I do believe you're right.
So from that timeline did we have more mammals, or more fish? Both? Was it proportionate?
Good eye though -
Post by: Special T on January 16, 2018, 11:16:08 AM
Are the Killer whale number increasing dramatically?
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk
Post by: James on January 16, 2018, 11:31:01 AM
Just because they look like dogs of the ocean doesn't mean they shouldn't be managed like game animals. Balancing carrying capacity of the environment, human interactions, sustainability, etc. to targeted seasons and bag limits.
We need to repeal the marine mammal protection act and start selling tags for a sustainable hunt. I would buy one.
Post by: Skyvalhunter on January 16, 2018, 11:31:17 AM
Post by: James on January 16, 2018, 11:44:49 AM
I could have swore that several weeks ago I heard that the killer whale population was decreasing and they attributed it to the decrease in the Chinook salmon their main food source.
The southern resident Orcas are struggling to get enough food because they refuse to eat much of anything other than salmon.
Salmon populations in Puget Sound have been declining for quite a while, as Seal and Sealion populations have been on the rise. Add in restrictive fishing seasons and you can see how the tables have turned in terms of who catches the most fish.
Post by: JimmyHoffa on January 16, 2018, 11:58:59 AM
I wonder if the whales know something about the seals? Like do the seals accumulate toxins at such a high level to be dangerous or did a past whale have a bad experience with a seal in the past--like watch its mom choke on a seal. Maybe they just didn't bother eating them in the first place because the salmon used to be plentiful and they've never thought to eat the seals. Just seems odd that a rather intelligent animal won't adapt with such a plentiful food source around. I know that bears will take off as fast as they can when they see, hear or smell me in an open hunting unit; but if I go to the other side of the ridge inside the national park the bears feed right up next to me and will take naps under the same tree you're camping under. A whale I assume is quite a bit smarter than the a bear. :dunno:I could have swore that several weeks ago I heard that the killer whale population was decreasing and they attributed it to the decrease in the Chinook salmon their main food source.
The southern resident Orcas are struggling to get enough food because they refuse to eat much of anything other than salmon.
Salmon populations in Puget Sound have been declining for quite a while, as Seal and Sealion populations have been on the rise. Add in restrictive fishing seasons and you can see how the tables have turned in terms of who catches the most fish.
Post by: Special T on January 16, 2018, 12:05:10 PM
One could hope that they pickup on hunting techniques from the transient pods that come from elsewhere.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk
Post by: magnanimous_j on January 16, 2018, 12:11:34 PM
I wonder if the whales know something about the seals? Like do the seals accumulate toxins at such a high level to be dangerous
Yes, but so do the whales. All large, long-lived marine predators bio-accumulate high levels of toxins and heavy metals. It's why you can eat smelt for every meal and be just fine but eating swordfish twice a week will turn you into a thermometer.
Post by: JimmyHoffa on January 16, 2018, 12:15:57 PM
Post by: James on January 16, 2018, 12:27:33 PM
The southern resident killer whales are a small percentage of the whale population (I think around 70-80 individuals), and are the least healthy (only Orcas with ESA protection).
Most killer whales hammer pinipeds, and are doing a much better than their salmon eating brothers.
If the southern residents would start eating seals, I think you would see them rebound.
Post by: Sitka_Blacktail on January 16, 2018, 12:31:29 PM
You do understand the difference between NOW doing something an MAY BE doing something.
There is absolutely nothing definitive about that. Period.
As I said earlier, the numbers are all over the place - and a range from between 5 million and 31.5 million fish makes the study look to be more speculation than scientific in nature.
Reading comprehension..... I thought they taught that in school.
That is not a range, it is the estimated increase between 1975 and 2015, a period of 30 years.
Post by: magnanimous_j on January 16, 2018, 12:33:00 PM
You think the whales actively or instinctively know this? "Whale so and so ate a diet of seals all his life and died at 30, all the whales that eat salmon live to be 70. I'll eat salmon only!"
I don't know. Good question. Maybe they feel sick after eating seals.
Post by: lokidog on January 17, 2018, 11:42:52 AM
While I can't rule it out, I think it's unlikely.
The southern resident killer whales are a small percentage of the whale population (I think around 70-80 individuals), and are the least healthy (only Orcas with ESA protection).
Most killer whales hammer pinipeds, and are doing a much better than their salmon eating brothers.
If the southern residents would start eating seals, I think you would see them rebound.
Or even eat pink salmon. It has been shown that they pretty much eat just Chinook. Drives me nuts though when you see the headlines Orcas Going Extinct Due to Lack of Salmon or some such nonsense....
Post by: Gobble Doc on January 17, 2018, 12:29:23 PM
Post by: Jake Dogfish on January 17, 2018, 10:31:54 PM
The title of this thread states the mammals are now taking more salmon than fishermen.
The text of the study states they MAY be taking more.
The numbers are all over the place in this study - and it merely suggests the possibility.
I'm guessing the article says "may" because it's an estimate based on computer models. Sea mammals obviously don't report their take like humans.
But other than being an estimate, this sounds pretty definitive. I'm sure they will do more research and decide if their computer models are realistic.
"The researchers estimate that from 1975 to 2015, the yearly biomass of Chinook salmon consumed by sea lions, seals, and killer whales increased from 6,100 to 15,200 metric tons, and from five to 31.5 million individual salmon."
"Over the same time span, they found that the annual Chinook harvest by fishermen decreased from 16,400 to 9,600 metric tons, and from 3.6 million to 2.1 million individual fish. "
You do understand the difference between NOW doing something an MAY BE doing something.
There is absolutely nothing definitive about that. Period.
As I said earlier, the numbers are all over the place - and a range from between 5 million and 31.5 million fish makes the study look to be more speculation than scientific in nature.
Don't get me wrong - I applaud your efforts to enlighten those here on any developments, new, old or otherwise, and suspect your efforts are pure of heart.
What you might consider in the future though, is not editorializing these things - if your intention is to simply report them.
Let the data speak for itself, and let everyone come to their own conclusion - which may differ by the way - from yours, or someone else'. Herd mentality is best served on four hooves.
Pinnipeds ate 5 million, now they eat 31.5 million. At the same time human Salmon harvest has gone down.
What is not definitive about that?
How far are they off? Did they get the numbers backwards?
Post by: Jake Dogfish on January 17, 2018, 10:33:25 PM
That’s a very interesting theory guys. I had not thought of that.You think the whales actively or instinctively know this? "Whale so and so ate a diet of seals all his life and died at 30, all the whales that eat salmon live to be 70. I'll eat salmon only!"
I don't know. Good question. Maybe they feel sick after eating seals.
Post by: Sitka_Blacktail on January 18, 2018, 05:33:03 PM
That’s a very interesting theory guys. I had not thought of that.You think the whales actively or instinctively know this? "Whale so and so ate a diet of seals all his life and died at 30, all the whales that eat salmon live to be 70. I'll eat salmon only!"
I don't know. Good question. Maybe they feel sick after eating seals.
Could just be the way they were raised, their culture so to speak. Just like different human cultures eat different foods and get adapted to them. How many here would eat the bugs and worms eaten by some cultures? They might be good for you, but they'd be pretty hard to stomach. And some of the things we eat are gross to others. Not to mention the way they are prepared.
Post by: KFhunter on January 18, 2018, 05:45:19 PM
Post by: Idighuntin on January 18, 2018, 06:03:39 PM
You do understand the difference between NOW doing something an MAY BE doing something.
There is absolutely nothing definitive about that. Period.
As I said earlier, the numbers are all over the place - and a range from between 5 million and 31.5 million fish makes the study look to be more speculation than scientific in nature.
Reading comprehension..... I thought they taught that in school.
That is not a range, it is the estimated increase between 1975 and 2015, a period of 30 years.
Good thing you paid attention in English because your math is lacking. 1975 to 2015 would be 40 years.
Post by: Special T on January 18, 2018, 07:22:45 PM
I've eaten locusts & scorpian. Monkey brains, cow brains, dog, seacucumber.... well mostly I could chew it up but it wouldn't make it past my Adams apple...That’s a very interesting theory guys. I had not thought of that.You think the whales actively or instinctively know this? "Whale so and so ate a diet of seals all his life and died at 30, all the whales that eat salmon live to be 70. I'll eat salmon only!"
I don't know. Good question. Maybe they feel sick after eating seals.
Could just be the way they were raised, their culture so to speak. Just like different human cultures eat different foods and get adapted to them. How many here would eat the bugs and worms eaten by some cultures? They might be good for you, but they'd be pretty hard to stomach. And some of the things we eat are gross to others. Not to mention the way they are prepared.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk
Post by: magnanimous_j on January 18, 2018, 07:40:31 PM
I've eaten locusts & scorpian. Monkey brains, cow brains, dog, seacucumber.... well mostly I could chew it up but it wouldn't make it past my Adams apple...That’s a very interesting theory guys. I had not thought of that.You think the whales actively or instinctively know this? "Whale so and so ate a diet of seals all his life and died at 30, all the whales that eat salmon live to be 70. I'll eat salmon only!"
I don't know. Good question. Maybe they feel sick after eating seals.
Could just be the way they were raised, their culture so to speak. Just like different human cultures eat different foods and get adapted to them. How many here would eat the bugs and worms eaten by some cultures? They might be good for you, but they'd be pretty hard to stomach. And some of the things we eat are gross to others. Not to mention the way they are prepared.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk
Sea cucumber is the single most disgusting thing I've ever eaten. If I wasn't in a banquet room with 200 other people, I would have spit it out.
Locust fried with a little salt and lime is pretty good, actually.
Post by: Special T on January 18, 2018, 08:25:58 PM
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk
Post by: timberfaller on January 18, 2018, 09:46:19 PM
NOW HOLD on just one minute, back in late 90's early 2000, the Salmon was put on the ESL because of the evil loggers and uncontrolled irrigate-rs stealing water from them and causing in-stream silting of spawning beds!!! :bash: :bash:
During the ensuing water wars, the irrigation districts told "the powers that be" THEY were NOT considering the toll taken on Salmon fry by numerous predator's, THEY didn't care and as far as they were concerned MORE predators were OK with them!!! It was the "egregious people of the Methow"(farmers/ranchers) and all the logging activity taken place(hardly any) was killing the runs! :bash:
Post by: Sitka_Blacktail on January 19, 2018, 03:50:25 AM
You do understand the difference between NOW doing something an MAY BE doing something.
There is absolutely nothing definitive about that. Period.
As I said earlier, the numbers are all over the place - and a range from between 5 million and 31.5 million fish makes the study look to be more speculation than scientific in nature.
yup a typo
Reading comprehension..... I thought they taught that in school.
That is not a range, it is the estimated increase between 1975 and 2015, a period of 30 years.
Good thing you paid attention in English because your math is lacking. 1975 to 2015 would be 40 years.
yup a typo
Post by: magnanimous_j on January 19, 2018, 07:44:38 AM
"The study used models to estimate marine mammal consumption of Chinook salmon based on several assumptions about their diet and the size and weight of salmon. The researchers estimate that from 1975 to 2015, the yearly biomass of Chinook salmon consumed by sea lions, seals, and killer whales increased from 6,100 to 15,200 metric tons, and from five to 31.5 million individual salmon."
NOW HOLD on just one minute, back in late 90's early 2000, the Salmon was put on the ESL because of the evil loggers and uncontrolled irrigate-rs stealing water from them and causing in-stream silting of spawning beds!!! :bash: :bash:
Two things can be true at the same time.
Post by: Southpole on January 19, 2018, 08:17:43 AM
"The study used models to estimate marine mammal consumption of Chinook salmon based on several assumptions about their diet and the size and weight of salmon. The researchers estimate that from 1975 to 2015, the yearly biomass of Chinook salmon consumed by sea lions, seals, and killer whales increased from 6,100 to 15,200 metric tons, and from five to 31.5 million individual salmon."Don't forget the evil rural peoples' well water draining the rivers, depriving the salmon of a good swim :hello:
NOW HOLD on just one minute, back in late 90's early 2000, the Salmon was put on the ESL because of the evil loggers and uncontrolled irrigate-rs stealing water from them and causing in-stream silting of spawning beds!!! :bash: :bash:
Post by: Southpole on January 19, 2018, 08:29:41 AM
You think the whales actively or instinctively know this? "Whale so and so ate a diet of seals all his life and died at 30, all the whales that eat salmon live to be 70. I'll eat salmon only!"Funny you mention this. I saw a show on the animal planet a few nights ago. It was centered around a female orca killing a shark off some islands off the coast of San Francisco. The orca bio explained the different regional pods and what they eat. Canadian, Washington and I can't remember but I think Alaska pods (I could be wrong on that) eat salmon only and other pods around the globe will eat seals amongst other critters. Like Sitka said it's a cultural thing, they haven't seen their peers eating seals yet so they don't, yet...
Post by: lokidog on January 19, 2018, 12:01:06 PM
The way I had sea cucumber didn't taste bad. There was just a taste texture disconnect. Imagine a jellow shot that was leftnin the fridge forn a week or 2. Some where between yellow and a rubber band with bumps on it. It tasted something like a greasy piece of gristle. (One of my favorites). A good hard chew could not cut said sea cucumber into smaller pieces. This wasn't at some discount shack it was a high end restaurant in China.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk
I've stripped the five longitudinal muscles out of them then breaded and fried, it is tender and delicious, but way too much work for the little return to do on a regular basis. You guys probably had whole dried ones reconstituted or something nasty like that. :chuckle:
Post by: Special T on January 19, 2018, 12:28:48 PM
I saw the same one with my girls.You think the whales actively or instinctively know this? "Whale so and so ate a diet of seals all his life and died at 30, all the whales that eat salmon live to be 70. I'll eat salmon only!"Funny you mention this. I saw a show on the animal planet a few nights ago. It was centered around a female orca killing a shark off some islands off the coast of San Francisco. The orca bio explained the different regional pods and what they eat. Canadian, Washington and I can't remember but I think Alaska pods (I could be wrong on that) eat salmon only and other pods around the globe will eat seals amongst other critters. Like Sitka said it's a cultural thing, they haven't seen their peers eating seals yet so they don't, yet...
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk
Post by: Special T on January 19, 2018, 12:29:29 PM
Don't know, didn't ask but sounds about right!The way I had sea cucumber didn't taste bad. There was just a taste texture disconnect. Imagine a jellow shot that was leftnin the fridge forn a week or 2. Some where between yellow and a rubber band with bumps on it. It tasted something like a greasy piece of gristle. (One of my favorites). A good hard chew could not cut said sea cucumber into smaller pieces. This wasn't at some discount shack it was a high end restaurant in China.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk
I've stripped the five longitudinal muscles out of them then breaded and fried, it is tender and delicious, but way too much work for the little return to do on a regular basis. You guys probably had whole dried ones reconstituted or something nasty like that. :chuckle:
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk
Post by: Special T on January 19, 2018, 12:33:07 PM
This is true how ever one is easily estimated where another is more difficult. This estimation does not include the huge increase in other forms of depredations. Cornmerants are protected, and obviously need none. Not to mention the increase of walleye, Pikeminnow, and Mergansers."The study used models to estimate marine mammal consumption of Chinook salmon based on several assumptions about their diet and the size and weight of salmon. The researchers estimate that from 1975 to 2015, the yearly biomass of Chinook salmon consumed by sea lions, seals, and killer whales increased from 6,100 to 15,200 metric tons, and from five to 31.5 million individual salmon."
NOW HOLD on just one minute, back in late 90's early 2000, the Salmon was put on the ESL because of the evil loggers and uncontrolled irrigate-rs stealing water from them and causing in-stream silting of spawning beds!!! :bash: :bash:
Two things can be true at the same time.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk
Post by: The Real Sisu on January 19, 2018, 04:56:36 PM
https://www.ktoo.org/2011/12/06/report-says-sea-otters-hitting-dive-fisheries-hard/
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk