"Zen, that backroom deal knife can cut two ways - One could make
the arguement (I'm speaking rhetorically here, don't necessarily believe
this to be true) that the Dept. did a "backroom deal" to not forward
this on to the Commission for debate. After all, it was the single most
requested rules change in this cycle.
I've read the transcript - I'll bet you have as well. It is fascinating
in that the Commissioners brought up virtually every one of the points
that have been debated on the various boards with this issue. Certainly
Commissioner Ozment (sp?) was very concerned over the public perception
of enacting the moratorium at the Feb. 6th meeting with no further
public input. Once again, I would like to understand why WDFW chose not
to forward it on to the Commission for their debate. I've read their
reason and maybe because I really want WSR - I'm blind to their logic,
but, for the life of me I can't understand what logic they used in not
forwarding it on. If they had forwarded it to the Commission, there
still would have been no public debate or input on the issue - the
Commission had very clearly stated that they had no intention of taking
further testimony on ANY of the Rules changes they were deciding on.
One item that no one has seen fit to comment on - I still believe that
there was some motivation on the Commission's part to put WDFW "in their
place" after the Region 5 request regarding increased mortality of ESA
listed stocks in the Springer fishery. That motivation alone may have
caused one Commissioner to cast their vote for the moratorium regardless
of the concerns that some on the Commission had. It is quite unusual in
public bodies to have the level of disagreement present and such a close
vote on the matter before them. Most of the time, these boards and
Commissions get together beforehand, make their horse trades, call each
other names, etc. out of sight of the public and the public record.
That kind of backroom deal is SOP at every level of Government (and Big
Business for that matter) that I have seen.
We will see where this all leads. My hope is that it would lead to:

1. A better situation for Wild Steelhead and Salmon
2. More unity among Sports Fishers
3. Less personal attacks and cross board name calling

But, heck, I'm in sales, I have to be optimistic"

and "… I will not (wouldn't be prudent) be dragged into a discussion of
who did what to whom first and who should be blamed/banned because of
it. Marsha is a strong willed woman who I have disagreed with in the
past and agreed with in the past. So it goes.

I'm just glad that I am not a moderator faced with making the decision.
I already have a couple of kids that sometimes do things that don't make
sense. I don't need a couple thousand more" ?

Most of the time, these boards and Commissions get together
beforehand, make their horse trades, call each other names, etc. out of
sight of the public and the public record. That kind of backroom deal
is SOP at every level of Government (and Big Business for that matter)
that I have seen.