I am not saying that I am for or against what the Compressions have just done, but I will bet you that their action will be challenged legally, and that they will likely have to reverse their decision on the 2 year Moratorium that they just passed.

The reason why I say this is because if you read what goal and guide lines are in the Wild Salmonid Policy, (the guides lines that the commissioners must follow) it appears that their "blanket action" violates the WSPguide lines.

Read it yourself, and make up your own minds! My opinion is they have violated it!

Goal of the Wild Salmonid Policy

Performance Standards
1. Harvest management will be responsive to annual fluctuations in abundance of salmonids, and will be designed to meet any requirements for sharing of harvest opportunity.

2. The allowable incidental harvest impact on populations shall be addressed in existing preseason and in-season planning processes as described in policy number 1.

3. Where a population is not meeting its desired spawner abundance level, the State, in managing the non-treaty harvest, may give priority to non-treaty fisheries that can minimize their impacts on weak stocks and increase their harvest on healthy stocks by: (1) using gears that can selectively capture and release stocks with minimal mortality, or (2) avoid impacts by eliminating encounters with weak populations (proven time/area closures, gear types). This must be done consistent with meeting treaty and non-treaty allocations and in accordance with agreed mass marking policies.

Fish Population Management

Spawning Escapement Policy

2. Policy Statement
The wild populations or management units to which this spawner escapement policy applies will be defined on a comprehensive, statewide, or regional basis, recognizing scientific uncertainty, in accordance with policy statement #1. The parties will review existing court orders, joint agreements, and management plans to determine if it is agreed whether modifications are necessary to be consistent with the goals of this Policy. Within this context, sufficient escapement of appropriate naturally spawning fish will be provided to encourage local adaptation and maximize long-term surplus production that sustains harvest, and to provide for recreational opportunities and ecological benefits.4 Exceptions to this general policy may be developed on a regional basis through agreement of the Department and affected Tribes to provide for recovery and rebuilding of wild stocks or where natural productivity is low.

Performance Standards

1. In each watershed region, for each species, populations and/or management units to which MSH management will apply shall be identified and the pertinent management agencies shall establish escapement goals designed to achieve MSH. MSH shall be calculated by using long-time series of accurate spawner and recruit statistics for each population. When such statistics are not available, MSH may be calculated by using historical production, habitat availability, or the best available methods for calculation.

2. The State and Tribes will seek agreement on the total escapement rates, escapement levels, or escapement ranges that are most likely to maximize long-term surplus production for wild populations or combinations of wild populations or management units. These rates, levels, or ranges will be based upon achieving MSH and will account for all relevant factors, including current abundance and survival rates, habitat capacity and quality, environmental variation, management imprecision, and uncertainty, and ecosystem interactions.

3. For other resident and anadromous trout and char, managers may employ wild fish release and other approaches that can maintain high abundance as agreed upon in watershed or sub-regional management plans that may be developed between the Department and the affected Tribes after consultation with affected stakeholders and pursuant to applicable law and court orders. Where an affected Tribe has not chosen to participate in such management, the Department may continue to rely on the escapement approach for wild managed populations contained in A Basic Fishery Management Strategy for Resident and Anadromous Trout in the Stream Habitats of The State of Washington adopted in 1986.

4. It will not be necessary to physically measure spawner abundance for each and every stock, though every stock will need to be covered by the inventory process. Index stocks that are typical of stocks within an area may be used to estimate abundance for the entire area. Surrogate measures such as standing stocks, random samples, stock composition or other measures may be substituted for actual measures of spawners. Evidence of the utility of such surrogates will need to be established for their use.5

5. If spawner management goals are not achieved for three consecutive years, or if the five-year moving average of spawner abundance falls below 80% of the goal, a management assessment including all factors responsible for the failure to reach this goal (e.g., forecast harvest rate estimates, environmental variation or spawner enumerations, appropriateness of spawner abundance goals, loss of habitat quantity and quality) will be completed within six months to determine the cause(s). The Department and affected Tribal parties will cooperatively design and implement appropriate actions to return spawning levels to, or above, the goal. Actions will include any necessary measures to meet the goals of this Policy.


Cowlitzfisherman