Check

 

Defiance Boats!

LURECHARGE!

THE PP OUTDOOR FORUMS

Kast Gear!

Power Pro Shimano Reels G Loomis Rods

  Willie boats! Puffballs!

 

Three Rivers Marine

 

 
Page 22 of 213 < 1 2 ... 20 21 22 23 24 ... 212 213 >
Topic Options
Rate This Topic
#894831 - 05/12/14 12:17 PM Re: FISHINGTHECHEHALIS.NET *** [Re: Rivrguy]
Rivrguy Offline
River Nutrients

Registered: 03/03/09
Posts: 4497
Loc: Somewhere on the planet,I hope
One more update. The Humptulips has a major straying problem with Coho and Natural Origin Coho being overrun by hatchery Coho. It is bad enough that it could impact both Rec & Commercial bay fisheries. ( A/C/D ) For years the local community and agency staff ( in Particular Paul Seidel, Jim Scot, Hal Micheals ) tried to get a intake for Stevens water to reduce straying but Puget Sound had priority. Well in the past Governor's job package the intake was included but not much has been said so I asked for a update and the response is below and this is great news!

" We took bids Wednesday and Quigg Brothers of Hoquiam was the low bid at $1,110,000. This was somewhat higher than the estimate of $950,000, but we’ll be awarding them the contract. We should have the contract executed in 3 weeks, and the contractor can start preparing for construction. Quigg is a good contractor and I’m pleased they got the bid. "


Edited by Rivrguy (05/12/14 12:29 PM)
_________________________
Dazed and confused.............the fog is closing in

Top
#894845 - 05/12/14 01:31 PM Re: FISHINGTHECHEHALIS.NET [Re: Rivrguy]
Carcassman Online   content
River Nutrients

Registered: 11/21/07
Posts: 7592
Loc: Olema,California,Planet Earth
The new intake is a great idea.

But, coho biology is that they spawn high in a watershed and rear low. Seed from the top down and then be pushed downstream to the desired habitat. From which they smolt. So, it is natural and desireable, from the fish perspective, to bypass the hatchery and push on upstream as far as they can. The solution would be to rack the Hump and filter out the hatchery fish.

Or, alternatively, allow enough wild fish to spawn that they numerically overwhelm the hatchery fish.

Top
#894850 - 05/12/14 02:06 PM Re: FISHINGTHECHEHALIS.NET [Re: Carcassman]
Rivrguy Offline
River Nutrients

Registered: 03/03/09
Posts: 4497
Loc: Somewhere on the planet,I hope

My bad, I was corrected as it was Rep. Blake that got the new Stevens Creek intake in the House Capitol Budget.
_________________________
Dazed and confused.............the fog is closing in

Top
#895813 - 05/21/14 08:00 PM Re: FISHINGTHECHEHALIS.NET [Re: Rivrguy]
Rivrguy Offline
River Nutrients

Registered: 03/03/09
Posts: 4497
Loc: Somewhere on the planet,I hope
http://wdfw.wa.gov/about/regulations/development.html#nof_2014_wb

The agency has filed the CR 102 for the Willapa Commercial seasons. Take a look and more to come as we all look through but I was told that it is based upon a 90% compliance on tangle net & revival boxes for the commercial fleet which is a pure District 17 staff fabrication...period. In other words some good stuff in the 102 but also the same old crowd in Montesano Office helped by Olympia is trying to cook the books again.

Little Edit: Yes I immediately asked Kirt Hughes ( District 17 ) for the final model used as Region 6 Fish Program manager Steve Theisfeld is off for a few days.


Edited by Rivrguy (05/21/14 09:33 PM)
_________________________
Dazed and confused.............the fog is closing in

Top
#895814 - 05/21/14 08:12 PM Re: FISHINGTHECHEHALIS.NET [Re: Rivrguy]
eyeFISH Offline
Ornamental Rice Bowl

Registered: 11/24/03
Posts: 12616
Originally Posted By: Rivrguy
http://wdfw.wa.gov/about/regulations/development.html#nof_2014_wb

The agency has filed the CR 102 for the Willapa Commercial seasons. Take a look and more to come as we all look through but I was told that it is based upon a 90% compliance on tangle net & revival boxes for the commercial fleet which is a pure District 17 staff fabrication...period. In other words some good stuff in the 102 but also the same old crowd in Montesano Office helped by Olympia is trying to cook the books again.


Public hearing is Tues June 24... mark your calendars if you can attend
_________________________
"Let every angler who loves to fish think what it would mean to him to find the fish were gone." (Zane Grey)

"If you don't kill them, they will spawn." (Carcassman)


The Keen Eye MD
Long Live the Kings!

Top
#895826 - 05/21/14 10:09 PM Re: FISHINGTHECHEHALIS.NET [Re: eyeFISH]
eyeFISH Offline
Ornamental Rice Bowl

Registered: 11/24/03
Posts: 12616
Kudos to the agency for proposing the new escapement windows (2 days a week baywide and 3 days a week in 2U (Lower Willapa River main channel below the US Hwy 101 Bridge).
_________________________
"Let every angler who loves to fish think what it would mean to him to find the fish were gone." (Zane Grey)

"If you don't kill them, they will spawn." (Carcassman)


The Keen Eye MD
Long Live the Kings!

Top
#895868 - 05/22/14 10:53 AM Re: FISHINGTHECHEHALIS.NET [Re: eyeFISH]
Rivrguy Offline
River Nutrients

Registered: 03/03/09
Posts: 4497
Loc: Somewhere on the planet,I hope
Trying to keep up so this ..... no I do not know the QIN proposed schedule or the NT Commercial for Grays Harbor. Now Region 6 knows the QIN position to be sure but it is my understanding that communications with the QIN have pretty much ground to a halt and last I know of is around the last PFMC meeting AND R-6 IS NOT SAYIN ANYTHING. So much for transparency but nothing new as WDF&W has always regarded the public with disdain.

Now as GH & Willapa go forward one should remember that R-6 Fish Program top gun is Steve Theisfeld BUT WE HAVE THE SAME CREW MANAGING DISTRICT 17 which is GH & Willapa drainages. So what you are about to see is a exercise that will resemble herding cats! The folks that manage District 17 ( or the current Director ) are not going to accept a conservation driven management plan and will require being dragged kicking & screaming into the modern era.


Edited by Rivrguy (05/22/14 11:31 AM)
_________________________
Dazed and confused.............the fog is closing in

Top
#895899 - 05/22/14 01:45 PM Re: FISHINGTHECHEHALIS.NET [Re: Rivrguy]
Rivrguy Offline
River Nutrients

Registered: 03/03/09
Posts: 4497
Loc: Somewhere on the planet,I hope
Update on the Willapa from District 17 Kirt Hughes but I could not get the week calander to come with it.


All – as a follow-up to yesterday’s email below, I wanted to provide the Willapa Bay planning model with resulting output used to evaluate the proposed schedule for Willapa Bay commercial salmon fisheries. As with yesterday’s email, please be aware I have blind copied the Willapa Bay Advisors and others who had provided their email and an interest in Willapa Bay during the 2014 North of Falcon process.


There was substantial deliberation and consideration of input and comment received through the NOF process that went into developing the proposed schedule, below are some of the rational. Please remember that there is still an opportunity for written and verbal testimony from the public on the proposal. The written comment period is open now and comments must be received by June 24th; email and mailing address are included at the very bottom of yesterday’s email below. The public hearing to provide verbal testimony is scheduled for June 24th at the Region 6 Fish and Wildlife Headquarters in Montesano from 10am – noon in the large conference room (48 Devonshire Road in Montesano).


• The proposed schedule is a blend of 4 different models presented to advisors and the public prior to the final advisor meeting and the public meeting on April 4.


• It meets natural origin management objectives for Chinook, coho, and chum, including the reduced 20% harvest rate on Naselle natural origin Chinook.


• This schedule continues to require the release of unmarked Chinook in all fisheries as stated in our management objectives.


• This schedule continues to require the release of chum in all fisheries as stated in our management objectives.


• Provides closures of areas 2M, 2R and 2P through September 15 to protect Naselle natural-origin Chinook as stated in our management objectives.


• Provides a larger closure around North River and Smith Creek to protect natural-origin Chinook in those streams to meet our management objective and some of the extra protection identified by the recreational sector.


• Reserves a small percentage (0.4% of the overall 20%) of the Naselle natural-origin mortality impact for potential new selective gears that might be developed, e.g. beach seines or trap nets.


• Provides a 3.5 day summer fishery as requested by the commercial sector. We propose moving the summer fishery a week early (week beginning August 3) to allow a greater build-up of Chinook in the bay for the recreational sector and reduce the probability of encountering local stocks, including North River/Smith Creek Chinook which were identified by the recreational sector as needing extra protection.


• Provides, to the extent practicable within other constraints, commercial openings are timed to coincide with tides preferred by commercial sector and often less desirable to sport fishers. It also provides a minimum of overlap with potential days of commercial fishing in the Columbia River during the mid- to late-August.


• Except during the summer fishery (prior to August 15, specifically August 7 at 6PM), keeps area 2T closed until September 16th as requested by the recreational sector.


• Except during the weeks beginning October 5 and November 9, provides 2-3 days without commercial fishing during each week to allow additional natural-origin spawners upstream, as well as additional hatchery and natural origin fish for the freshwater recreational sector. Note that these windows are not consecutive days as provided for in the Grays Harbor Policy.


• Results in an ex-vessel value of $594K versus an ex-vessel value of $705K if we used the 2013 seasons. These are relative values because there is very small number of unmarked hatchery fish included in the calculations that the commercial sector would be required to release.


• Provides the recreational sector with 38% of the Chinook harvest and 22% of the Coho harvest. This compares to the average from 2003-2012 of 34% of the Chinook and 10% of the Coho.

Finally, on a calendar this schedule look like this:


Edited by Rivrguy (05/22/14 01:46 PM)
_________________________
Dazed and confused.............the fog is closing in

Top
#895904 - 05/22/14 03:06 PM Re: FISHINGTHECHEHALIS.NET [Re: Rivrguy]
eyeFISH Offline
Ornamental Rice Bowl

Registered: 11/24/03
Posts: 12616
The escapement windows ( similar to what has been achieved in GH) are a BIG win at WB.

At last year's NOF, I got RW to model 2 days/wk escapement thru 2U to help move some fish upriver.... only to have the Prez of the GN association immediately challenge it.

"Jesus Ron, who's running this show anyway, you or some eye doctor?"

The model was promptly ratcheted down to a 1 day window.... then after more objection from the same guy, it was erased minutes later.

24/7 wipeout after mid-Sept was the outcome.

We're eating this elephant one bite at a time, but 2014 alone potentially takes a mighty big bite. Let's see who shows up at the hearing on June 24.
_________________________
"Let every angler who loves to fish think what it would mean to him to find the fish were gone." (Zane Grey)

"If you don't kill them, they will spawn." (Carcassman)


The Keen Eye MD
Long Live the Kings!

Top
#896032 - 05/24/14 06:50 PM Re: FISHINGTHECHEHALIS.NET [Re: eyeFISH]
Rivrguy Offline
River Nutrients

Registered: 03/03/09
Posts: 4497
Loc: Somewhere on the planet,I hope
These comments came from RB a Willapa resident not one of us traveling sports or conservationist and are in response to the talking points circulated by Kirt Hughes the District 17 Bio that I posted a couple of post up in this thread. So I thought I would share them with everyone as he pretty much captured how many seem to feel.



Initial thoughts, not final comments:
1. Whereas nets get most of chinook and coho, if they cannot get any chum (except for a net mortality) then sports cannot have any. This is the old culture (see 6. below).
2. The "gaps" of two days a week are useless when one day at a time, especially with 2N fishery as such a big area. We already know what one day gaps do for escapement and recreational fishing. That is how we got where we are
3. With only one day gaps and the Nov. schedule, the coho wipeout now hits early and late run coho, and models or not, they continue to degrade any coho sport fishery in the bay.
4. With the early August 2T netting, it is now official, they are gill netting Columbia River chinook, plus any early North River natural spawners. Have seen no evidence these are not present in early August. Without such evidence, this schedule is evidence it is OK to risk this depressed run. We should demand proof North River fish are safe from the early 2T schedule, or oppose it.
5. Having seen your analysis of WDFW recreational harvest modeling, claims of a small increase in sport % harvest of chinook and coho are not only tiny, they are not credible. Any claims of increase in escapement may be just as questionable.
6. Chum have been arriving earlier than historically for several years in Willapa Bay. If chum are still in enough trouble that zero retention even by sports is possible, then netting "coho" through Oct 12 is tantamount to accepting a ruined chum run unless Mother Nature takes care of it. I suspect that chum have the high net mortality of chinook, because like chinook, we just do not see them with net marks. When observers see chum in the nets in Oct., the nets should come out. This would qualify as in-season management if we cared about restoring chum.


Edited by Rivrguy (05/24/14 06:51 PM)
_________________________
Dazed and confused.............the fog is closing in

Top
#896255 - 05/29/14 10:00 PM Re: FISHINGTHECHEHALIS.NET [Re: Rivrguy]
Rivrguy Offline
River Nutrients

Registered: 03/03/09
Posts: 4497
Loc: Somewhere on the planet,I hope
Quote:
Results in an ex-vessel value of $594K versus an ex-vessel value of $705K if we used the 2013 seasons. These are relative values because there is very small number of unmarked hatchery fish included in the calculations that the commercial sector would be required to release.

Provides the recreational sector with 38% of the Chinook harvest and 22% of the Coho harvest. This compares to the average from 2003-2012 of 34% of the Chinook and 10% of the Coho.

The quote above is from the e mail authored by Kirt Hughes Bio District 17 ( Grays Harbor & Willapa ) that I previously posted and the bit below is a citizen who reviewed just those TWO lines above. More to come later but frankly the review speaks volumes as to the attempts by D 17 staff to misrepresent the 2014 Commercial CR 102. ( WAC's for the commercial season )



I feel you should be aware that we believe the presentation materials and discussion points circulated with the Willapa model and 2014 CR 102 are inaccurate and will be considered misleading by members of the public.

The bullet points in the presentation implies that the commercial season was cut substantially this year versus last using ex vessel sales projections created by inserting the 2013 season in the model and comparing it with the same for the proposed 2014 season. WDFW's presentation states:

Results in an ex-vessel value of $594K versus an ex-vessel value of $705K if we used the 2013 seasons. These are relative values because there is very small number of unmarked hatchery fish included in the calculations that the commercial sector would be required to release.

The model uses Cell X51 in calculating ex vessel values. We believe this cell has a formula problem (missing parenthesis) that values coho at approximately $1 per fish. If corrected, we believe the ex-vessel value for the proposed season in the 2014 CR 102 is $743,832.

More concerning, a comparison for sport harvest in the next bullet point implies the rec fisher will catch more fish in 2014 than previously. WDFW's presentation states:

Provides the recreational sector with 38% of the Chinook harvest and 22% of the Coho harvest. This compares to the average from 2003-2012 of 34% of the Chinook and 10% of the Coho.

The Department's decision to create a 10 year average and insert it into the presentation following the commercial "this year versus last" does not provide the viewer the similar comparison that is implied. Substituting a decade long average for the 2013 percentage of harvest substantially lowered the percentage of sport harvest from 2013 creating an impression of a dramatic increase occurring in sport harvest with the 2014 proposal. When one compares the 31.3% of the coho harvest by sports last year with the 22% expected in the 2014 season proposal it shows sports fishers will actually lose 9.3% to the commercial interests for coho this year.

The Department forecasts show a significant increase in returning Coho salmon that many challenge as unrealistically high. The increased forecast results in the model predicting a dramatic increase in the numbers of Coho returning to Willapa Bay in 2014 and therefore, more Coho being caught this year than last by both sports and commercials. Using "impacts" or the number of fish actually expected to be caught by the model, the following table shows commercial harvest of Chinook is down from 2013 and the sport catch is projected higher. However, when coho numbers are combined with Chinook, the model shows the 2014 proposed season for commercial nets will result in a impact gain for the commercials of 14,112 and only 2024 for the sport sector.

*2013 **2014 2014 Difference
Nets Chinook 15,303 12,026 -3,277
Sport Chinook 5870 6,809 939
Nets coho 11545 28,934 17,389
Sport coho 5267 6,352 1,085
Nets +/- Total Fish 14,112
Sport =/- Total Fish 2,024

*Chinook & Coho "Harvest info" tabs
** WB Planning Model 2014 tab

The Willapa planning model predicts the 2014 season proposal will result in commercial and sport interests increasing harvest by 16,136 total fish (Chinook & Coho combined). Of that number, 87% of the increase in combined catch numbers will incur on the commercial side and only 13% on the sport side. Using a comparison of the fish counts expected to be caught this year versus last leaves an opposite perception than the one created by WDFW using a 10 year average in percentages and ex vessel sales that were miscalculated by a formula error in the model.

This commentary relates the Willapa planning model supplied by WDFW and reportedly used when creating the season installed in the CR 102 for 2014. XXXXXXXX has repeatedly expressed numerous other concerns over other problems in the model that effect its reliability. Those concerns remain unchanged.




Edited by Rivrguy (05/29/14 10:01 PM)
_________________________
Dazed and confused.............the fog is closing in

Top
#896515 - 06/03/14 01:19 PM Re: FISHINGTHECHEHALIS.NET [Re: Rivrguy]
Rivrguy Offline
River Nutrients

Registered: 03/03/09
Posts: 4497
Loc: Somewhere on the planet,I hope

What we have here is a letter to the agency regarding Wynoochee Mitigation and WDF&W 's failure to meet its obligation for 23 years. It is a rather complicated subject but I think folks can get a idea of what is going on and others have knowledge of the history also they may wish to add.



I am writing on behalf of myself, Mr. XXXX, and Mr. XXXX regarding the Wynoochee Mitigation Funds placed in trust by Tacoma City Light ( TCL ) in 1991 for Mitigation for the dam modifications and power generation. Currently the trust has grown with interest to approximately $2,400,000 and the WDF&W Commission directed that a plan to utilize the funds be completed by September 30, 2014 and too date I do not know a plan being put forth by WDF&W staff for public review or comment for the production of 55,700 Coho smolt and 25,000 Steelhead smolt each year.

This being the case I will approach the issue from a historical perspective. WDF&W staff under the direction of former Deputy Director Larry Peck, and later yourself, in series of problem solving meetings with Chehalis Basin citizens that became known as the Bristol Process developed a plan and budget for Wynoochee Mitigation. ( attachment A ) It was agreed that WDF&W would forward the agreed to plan to the Quinault Indian Nation ( QIN ) representatives and other signatories of the Wynoochee Mitigation Agreement for comment and input. The final document was to be submitted to FERC for approval. If you recall both the local community and agency staff took considerable pride in jointly resolving the Wynoochee Mitigation and WDF&W's Skookumchuck Mitigation violations by working together.

What has become apparent is the fact that WDF&W staff failed to complete any of the task and when questions were directed to WDF&W staff by citizens regarding the issue staff assured these citizens that progress was being made. It was not until myself and Mr. Joe Durham both filed Public Document Request that documents became available that showed WDF&W staff had been less than forthright and were likely intentionally misleading citizens.

It appears that WDF&W Region 6 staff under both Ron Warren and Kirt Hughes took the following actions:

1. Documents provided through the PDR process show WDF&W revised the plan not once but twice ( attachment B ) by dropping out both the line item budget and the priority to produce the 55,700 Coho and 25,000 Steelhead smolt. When citizens questioned progress on the TCL Wynoochee Mitigation information was withheld by Region 6 staff, primarily Mr. Warren and Mr. Hughes.

2. Region 6 staff failed to properly present the Bristol plan for the use of Mitigation funds to the QIN resulting in the letter of 12/10/2010 from Mr. Ed Johnston representing the QIN ( attachment C ) objecting to the process WDF&W was utilizing. Again this information was withheld from the citizens of the Chehalis Basin until obtaining documents through the PDR process.

3. It appears WDF&W staff utilized a group of individuals identified as a Technical Committee to attempt to develop and move the Wynoochee Mitigation issue forward. Chehalis Basin citizen participation was not sought and it appears Wynoochee Technical Committee purpose was to shield WDF&W from the local communities scrutiny regarding the changes made in the planning for the use Mitigation Funds.

With the previously mentioned issues in mind we strongly feel that the following need to be incorporated in a revived Wynoochee Mitigation plan:

A. That the plan utilize a revised line item budget from the original Bristol Wynoochee Mitigation plan. That the budget clearly defined the number of Steelhead and Coho smolt to be produced, the cost associated with the rearing of the smolt, and the duration of the production.

B. The Bristol budget had funding directed toward a pipeline for Aberdeen Lake Hatchery that rears the mitigation production for the Wynoochee River. There is little disagreement as to the need for the pipeline as the health of the fish is of prime importance. This expense was originally in the Bristol prepared budget but due to recent efforts of Rep. Brian Blake state funds were provided for the pipeline construction. The funds made available by this outside funding makes available a considerable amount of funding available to address past failures by WDF&W to produce the additional 55,700 mitigation Coho smolt and 25,000 mitigation Steelhead smolt required for the TCL Wynoochee Dam power generation upgrade. It is our view the funds no longer needed for the pipeline should be allocated to producing the approximately 1,856,100 Steelhead and Coho smolt that WDF&W has failed to produce since the signing of the Memorandum of Agreement ( MOA ) in 1991 as required and prorated for the years remaining in the MOA.

C. Any remaining funds should be used to recycle adults from the dam to a point downstream to enhance harvest opportunity and Friends Landing is a viable release location.

D. The practice of placing large numbers of adult Wild Coho and Native Steelhead above the dam should end and only marked adults be placed above the dam. As very few, if any, smolt survive out migrating through the dam the practice of placing such large numbers of Native Coho and Native Steelhead adults above the dam has been and is a primary reason for the Wynoochee River failing to make Wild Coho and Wild Steelhead escapement and a terrible waste of Native Coho & Steelhead.

E. Wynoochee Dam mitigation production should be required, when possible, to utilize 100% native brood to reduce any possible genetic conflicts now or in the future.

F. The final issue we wish to address is what is not a acceptable use of the TCL Wynoochee Dam Mitigation Trust. It is our understanding that the original mitigation funds for the Wynoochee Dam have been utilized and that twice WDF&W has proposed eliminating the original Mitigation Steelhead production. The shortfall of these funds is the result of the former Washington Department of Game ( WDG ) utilizing a substantial amount of the Mitigation funds to remodel the Aberdeen Lake Hatchery. WDG Director Weyland guaranteed to the Chehalis Basin, that any future shortfall would be absorbed by the agency.

Simply put no part of the TCL Wynoochee Trust should be utilized to pay for expense of rearing the original Wynoochee Dam mitigation Steelhead smolt. That is a WDF&W responsibility outside of the purpose of the TCL Wynoochee Trust.

It is our belief that the steps we have outlined offer the best opportunity to address the failure of WDF&W to meet the TCL Mitigation requirements that WDF&W agreed to fulfill in 1991 as a signatory on the MOA. The TCL Wynoochee Dam Mitigation is a obligation WDF&W has failed to fulfill for 23 years and needs to be addressed promptly and just as importantly properly with citizen participation.

In addition as long time citizen activist we would urge WDF&W to reject its recent policies that shroud this and many other issues in secrecy and embrace the policies of transparency endorsed by the WDF&W Commission.

If you have any questions feel free to contact me.
_________________________
Dazed and confused.............the fog is closing in

Top
#896544 - 06/03/14 04:48 PM Re: FISHINGTHECHEHALIS.NET [Re: Rivrguy]
steely slammer Offline
Three Time Spawner

Registered: 02/24/00
Posts: 1514
wow wow wow that's a killer letter... hope they get the point!!
_________________________
Where Destroying Fishing in Washington..

mainly region 6

Top
#896621 - 06/04/14 12:16 PM Re: FISHINGTHECHEHALIS.NET [Re: steely slammer]
Rivrguy Offline
River Nutrients

Registered: 03/03/09
Posts: 4497
Loc: Somewhere on the planet,I hope
Here is the contact information to place objections or support for the proposed Willapa Commercial Gillnet seasons put forth in the CR 102 and the link to review. http://wdfw.wa.gov/about/regulations/development.html#nof_2014_wb

Frankly the proposed seasons are a strange collection of things that appear to be one thing and are in reality another. I can provide a calendar that shows the seasons but I will have to e mail it to you. A large number of people are pouring over the model and the equity of harvest coupled with the failure of any conservation standards. The agencies take on their efforts are posted previously and I will attempt to get the problems that the "Old Gezer Gang " have found in the next couple of days.


Public Comment Period:
Written Comments may be E mailed to: Rules.Coordinator@dfw.wa.gov
or mailed to: Joanna Eide, Enforcement Program, 600 Capitol Way North, Olympia, WA 98501
Fax 360 902 2156

A public hearing will take place on June 24, 2014, at 10:00 a.m. to 12 p.m.
Region 6 Fish and Wildlife Office, Conference Room
48 Devonshire Rd., Montesano, WA 98563


Edited by Rivrguy (06/04/14 12:18 PM)
_________________________
Dazed and confused.............the fog is closing in

Top
#896623 - 06/04/14 12:35 PM Re: FISHINGTHECHEHALIS.NET [Re: Rivrguy]
Rivrguy Offline
River Nutrients

Registered: 03/03/09
Posts: 4497
Loc: Somewhere on the planet,I hope
Well bit faster than I thought I could be but anyhow here is a compilation of comments that will be placed in opposition to the Willapa Harbor Commercial CR 102.


I am writing on behalf of myself, Mr. XXXX, and Mr. XXXX to express our concerns regarding the Willapa Commercial CR 102. As a citizen I, and all citizens, are offered the opportunity to review and comment on the proposed seasons outlined in the CR 102 as published in compliance with the Administrative Procedure Act ( APA ). Simply put we question that the average citizen will have the ability to do so as Region 6 District 17 staff have misrepresented the CR 102 to such a degree few citizens will have a clear understanding of what they are being asked to comment on.

On 5/21/14 Kirt Hughes provided via e mail a briefing paper to citizens. ( attachment 1 ) Items in red are from Mr. Hughes:


1. Results in an ex-vessel value of $594K versus an ex-vessel value of $705K if we used the 2013 seasons. These are relative values because there is very small number of unmarked hatchery fish included in the calculations that the commercial sector would be required to release.
This is completely misleading as after review it is clear Mr. Hughes declined to correct a error in the model that he had knowledge of . In attachment 2 you can obtain a clearer understanding but the purpose appears to be an attempt to portray the commercial catch value in such a way to understate the value or equity with the Recreational fishers. The error is simply a wrong value in the formula and values a Coho at $1 a fish.

2. Provides the recreational sector with 38% of the Chinook harvest and 22% of the Coho harvest. This compares to the average from 2003-2012 of 34% of the Chinook and 10% of the Coho.
Again this is not correct and in fact is a gross misrepresentation of the actual outcome should the Willapa commercial seasons be implemented as put forth in the Willapa CR 102. Again in attachment 2 you can clearly see that the Willapa planning model predicts the 2014 season proposal will result in commercial and sport interests increasing harvest by 16,136 total fish (Chinook & Coho combined). Of that number, 87% of the increase in combined catch numbers will incur on the commercial side and only 13% on the sport side. Using a comparison of the fish counts expected to be caught this year versus last leaves an opposite perception than the one created by WDFW using a 10 year average in percentages and ex vessel sales that were miscalculated by a formula error in the model.

3. Provides a larger closure around North River and Smith Creek to protect natural-origin Chinook in those streams to meet our management objective and some of the extra protection identified by the recreational sector.
This is correct in the context that this brief statement provides but again is misleading. North River Native Chinook are the last remaining stock unimpaired by hatchery practices in Willapa Harbor. In addition SaSSI identifies that the North River Chinook return earlier than the rest of the Willapa Chinook. Region 6 Fish Program Manager Steve Theisfeld proposed a limited closure area to protect the returning fish that was woefully inadequate and so additional proposals expanding the area were proposed by myself and others.

While the closure area was adopted with the intent to protect the early returning North River Chinook the effort was negated by allowing a mislabeled dip in fishery targeting Columbia bound Chinook in Willapa 2T at the very same time the highest concentration of the North River Chinook are present. In the early commercial fishery scheduled to take place between August 3 to14th a 2T exclusion of commercial fishers needs to be imposed and maintained until September 15th to provide truly meaningful protection to North River Native Chinook .

4. Except during the weeks beginning October 5 and November 9, provides 2-3 days without commercial fishing during each week to allow additional natural-origin spawners upstream, as well as additional hatchery and natural origin fish for the freshwater recreational sector. Note that these windows are not consecutive days as provided for in the Grays Harbor Policy.
The 4/3 policy implemented in the new Grays Harbor with three consecutive days was a major step by the Commission to address the inequities of harvest allocation as the commercial fisheries, be it tribal or non treaty, harvested the vast majority of the fish. In attachment 1 Mr. Hughes identifies the fact that the 4/3 Willapa is different than Grays Harbor's 4/3. This is correct and duplistic at the same time. The one day or two days a week of no commercial harvest starting September 14 in week 38 to the end of week 41 is a attempt at deception again. During this time frame in Willapa Bay returning salmon are primarily Coho and the size and topography of Willapa precludes major distances being covered by returning fish in such a short period of time. The 4/3 concept is dependent on the three net free days being consecutive.

The average citizen would be led to believe that they have a greater opportunity but as outlined previously this is nothing but a shell game intended to misinform the average citizen. What Region 6 District 17 has proposed is a nearly complete wipeout fishery by commercial fishers which precludes any reasonable sharing of harvest. Instead the harvest is misrepresented by Kirt Hughes 5/21/14 " Provides the recreational sector with 38% of the Chinook harvest and 22% of the Coho harvest. This compares to the average from 2003-2012 of 34% of the Chinook and 10% of the Coho" when in reality if represented truthfully it is the Willapa planning model predicts that the 2014 season proposal will result in commercial and sport interests increasing harvest by 16,136 total fish (Chinook & Coho combined). Of that number, 87% of the increase in combined catch numbers will incur on the commercial side and only 13% on the sport side. Using a comparison of the fish counts expected to be caught this year versus last leaves an opposite perception than the one created by WDFW using a 10 year average in percentages and ex vessel sales that were miscalculated by a formula error in the model. ( attachment 2 )

5. Willapa estuary fisheries, both commercial and recreational, are mixed stock fisheries that are not managed to the weakest stocks with equal harvest pressure throughout the entire run timing , a practice disavowed by most present day managers. It appears District 17 staff agree with the Willapa Gillnetters President that there is no need to manage harvest and escapement for natural origin fish only hatchery, which we feel is a rather barbaric view in this day and age. In the model none of the streams flowing into Willapa Bay will make Natural Origin Chinook escapement before either recreational or commercial harvest and fall wildly short after harvest. ( Willapa Model attachment 3 ) This is despite a exploitation rate reduction in the 2014 recreational and commercial seasons from 30% to 20% in an attempt to overcome District 17 Willapa model failures to predict accurately the true impacts of harvest in the Willapa Estuary. This we feel is not a acceptable management policy for Willapa Harbor. In our review several knowledgeable citizens reviewing past model performance believe the model performance is such that the exploitation rate would need to be reduced to 10 to 15% to have any possibility for escapement goals being met for Natural Origin Chinook in the Willapa Harbor estuary.

6. The Willapa model identifies a substantial number of Chum, both hatchery and wild, are killed in the targeted commercial Coho fishery. While it is normal for there to be collateral impacts to non targeted stocks in both commercial and recreational fisheries, some of the proposed weeks in the Willapa commercial seasons are extreme. In the period October 8th through the 14th the model projects a Coho harvest of 3,380 with a by catch mortality of 2,922 Chum which is nearly 1 to 1. The commercial fleet is kept off the water for the days of October 15th through the 31st but return November 1st through the 10th. The model projects a Coho catch of 4,593 with a Chum by catch of 1,163 which results in approximately a 4 to 1 by catch ratio. The proposed by catch of Chum in both weeks is unacceptable and both of these weeks in the commercial should be cancelled and the possibility of alternate days without such extreme by catch explored.

7. It is our understanding that the Chum release mortality rate is calculated at 56% based upon the assumption of 90% compliance by the entire commercial fleet. Having broodstocked with tangle nets, participated in the filming the Grays Harbor Non Treaty Commercial fishers, and understanding that time is money to a commercial gillnet fisher one has to conclude that this is not a valid compliance percentage. It appears rather than identify the proper number of observers to achieve a 90% compliance rate that Region 6 District 17 staff simply picked the 90% rate to extend the commercial seasons to the maximum number of days possible. It is our belief that a minimum of 10% of the commercial fleet must have observers onboard in a 24 hour period to remotely come close to the 90% compliance staff is using in the model. Failure for WDF&W to achieve 10% observers fleet wide should result in a much higher mortality rate being utilized for released fish.

It is our belief staff should withdraw the Willapa Commercial CR 102 and start again regardless if the action results in delays in the Willapa Commercial seasons. Deception and misleading citizens is not acceptable and possibly violates Washington State Law in our view. The APA process and WDF&W's responsibility to comply with it are paramount!


Edited by Rivrguy (06/04/14 08:35 PM)
_________________________
Dazed and confused.............the fog is closing in

Top
#896892 - 06/06/14 10:47 AM Re: FISHINGTHECHEHALIS.NET [Re: Rivrguy]
Rivrguy Offline
River Nutrients

Registered: 03/03/09
Posts: 4497
Loc: Somewhere on the planet,I hope
Pretty dry reading lately as a lot of folks have been trying to get information out. So just what are the objections in English? Well several but lets start with this. The release mortality from the commercial fleet is 56% at 90% compliance. In other words WDF&W is saying in the CR 102 that 90% of the netters will follow the rules and if they do only 56% of the fish the fleet release will perish. This is BS and there is no way that WDF&W will have the ability to get 25% of the fleet fishing days with onboard observers to which is needed to utilize the 90% compliance. In other words what information is out there basically says that commercial selective fisheries compliance with regulations ARE DEPENDANT on the percentage of the fleet with on board observers. Let us say that WDF&W only has 10% boat days with observers then compliance would drop from 90% to 70% or so which means the release mortality goes up 70% or so which results IN FAR LESS DAYS on the water for the gillnet fleet.

Next up is the definition of lethargic. Now when gillnetter drags a non targeted species up in a net the commercial fisher is required to:
a. Assess the condition and release the fish if vibrant,
b. Put the fish in a on board recovery box if lethargic and then release after recovery.

The problem? Well the same District 17 staffer that never saw Chinook coming out of a gillnet dead or lethargic as a observer evidently wrote the definition for lethargic in the Willapa and frankly the fish damn near have rigor mortis setting in to qualify as lethargic. This is important as during the commercial Chinook season and absolutely ALL the time that Chum are present in the commercial Coho season, the injured fish will fill the recovery boxes and require the nets be pulled for a time. So District 17's answer is just redefine lethargic to damn near dead so the commercial fleet can fish in a "selective fishery" with 56% mortality when in reality it much much higher!

This one is ugly. In the week of 10 / 8 - 14 the proposed catch is 3380 for Coho with a by catch of 2922 Chum mortality calculated at 56% @ 90% compliance. This is nearly 1 to 1 a dead Chum as Crab food for every Coho sold. After a two week absence to protect the Chum the commercial fleet returns 11/1-10 and the model projects 5415 of Coho harvested with a by catch of 1163 which is approximately 4.5 Coho sold to 1 dead Chum as Crab feed. Again this ratio is ridiculous to anal you choose but any way you cut it unacceptable.

So why all the gyrations? It is called "cooking the books" and District 17 staff have elevated the practice to damn near a art form! It is about finding a way to get the model to show that commercial impacts are acceptable.




Edited by Rivrguy (06/06/14 11:52 AM)
_________________________
Dazed and confused.............the fog is closing in

Top
#896946 - 06/06/14 06:48 PM Re: FISHINGTHECHEHALIS.NET [Re: Rivrguy]
Rivrguy Offline
River Nutrients

Registered: 03/03/09
Posts: 4497
Loc: Somewhere on the planet,I hope
I received a few questions around the term lethargic and the following is from the Willapa Commercial CR 102 Page 6:

"Lethargic is defined as having or showing very little movement or is nonresponsive."

Now folks this definition of movement or nonresponsive means the fish is ALMOST DEAD!!!! I mean your like one step away from rigor and I swear WDF&W would try and call that lethargic if they could figure out how to make the fish wiggle so they could pitch it overboard and keep the gillnet fleet on the water.


Edited by Rivrguy (06/06/14 06:50 PM)
_________________________
Dazed and confused.............the fog is closing in

Top
#897289 - 06/12/14 01:44 PM Re: FISHINGTHECHEHALIS.NET [Re: Rivrguy]
Rivrguy Offline
River Nutrients

Registered: 03/03/09
Posts: 4497
Loc: Somewhere on the planet,I hope
I have been asked about Grays Harbor Commercial seasons, no idea. They looked like late October and November the new policy limits the wild West bit that existed in the past. In addition the Quinault Nations proposed seasons do not violate court agreed to escapement goals. That is the rub as when Tim Flint headed up Region 6 he separated the Humptulips from the Chehalis not for conservation but to enable a Rec bay fishery. Well with Coho Natural Origin Recruits ( wild spawners ) not making escapement BEFORE harvest it creates scenario riddled with contradictions to the new policy guidelines. One should remember that this IS NOT a big deal on the Rec side but is driven by WDF&W's refusal to recognize that the Chehalis Tribal and QIN ARE the commercial fisheries for Grays Harbor. It is time for WDF&W management to get over this Indian / white guy thing.

The letter below is my, and two other "old Geezers", comments in a letter to the Commission objecting to the Willapa CR 102 and the gross misrepresentation of the proposed Willapa commercial seasons by WDF&W staff.


June 6, 2014 via email: hard copy by mail

WDF&W Commission
Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife
600 Capitol Way N.
Olympia, Washington 98501-1091

Dear Commissioners,
I am writing on behalf of myself, Mr. XXXXXX, and Mr. XXXXXX to express our ever growing concerns regarding the Willapa Commercial CR 102. As a citizen I, and all citizens, are offered the opportunity to review and comment on the proposed seasons outlined in the CR 102 as published in compliance with the Administrative Procedure Act ( APA ). Simply put I question that the average citizen will have the ability to do so as Region 6 District 17 staff have misrepresented the CR 102 to such a degree few citizens will have a clear understanding of what they are being asked to comment on.

On 5/21/14 Kirt Hughes provided via e mail a briefing paper to citizens. ( attachment 1 ) Items in blue are from dissertation and Mr. Hughes stated:

1. Results in an ex-vessel value of $594K versus an ex-vessel value of $705K if we used the 2013 seasons. These are relative values because there is very small number of unmarked hatchery fish included in the calculations that the commercial sector would be required to release.
This is completely misleading as after review it is clear Mr. Hughes declined to correct a error in the model that he had knowledge of . In attachment 2 you can obtain a clearer understanding but the purpose appears to be an attempt to portray the commercial catch value in such a way to understate the value or equity with the Recreational fishers.

2. Provides the recreational sector with 38% of the Chinook harvest and 22% of the Coho harvest. This compares to the average from 2003-2012 of 34% of the Chinook and 10% of the Coho.
Again this is not correct and in fact is a gross misrepresentation of the actual outcome should the Willapa commercial seasons be implemented as put forth in the Willapa CR 102. Again in attachment 2 you can clearly see that the Willapa planning model predicts the 2014 season proposal will result in commercial and sport interests increasing harvest by 16,136 total fish (Chinook & Coho combined). Of that number, 87% of the increase in combined catch numbers will incur on the commercial side and only 13% on the sport side. Using a comparison of the fish counts expected to be caught this year versus last leaves an opposite perception than the one created by WDFW using a 10 year average in percentages and ex vessel sales that were miscalculated by a formula error in the model.

3. Provides a larger closure around North River and Smith Creek to protect natural-origin Chinook in those streams to meet our management objective and some of the extra protection identified by the recreational sector.
This is correct in the context that this brief statement provides but again is misleading. North River Native Chinook are the last remaining stock unimpaired by hatchery practices in Willapa Harbor. In addition SaSSI identifies that the North River Chinook return earlier than the rest of the Willapa Chinook. Region 6 Fish Program Manager Steve Theisfeld proposed a limited closure area to protect the returning fish that was woefully inadequate and so additional proposals expanding the area were proposed by myself and others.

While the closure area was adopted with the intent to protect the early returning North River Chinook the effort was negated by allowing a mislabeled dip in fishery targeting Columbia bound Chinook in Willapa 2T at the very same time the highest concentration of the North River Chinook are present. In the early commercial fishery scheduled to take place between August 3 to14th a 2T exclusion of commercial fishers needs to be imposed and maintained until September 15th to provide truly meaningful protection to North River Native Chinook .

4. Except during the weeks beginning October 5 and November 9, provides 2-3 days without commercial fishing during each week to allow additional natural-origin spawners upstream, as well as additional hatchery and natural origin fish for the freshwater recreational sector. Note that these windows are not consecutive days as provided for in the Grays Harbor Policy.
The 4/3 policy implemented in the new Grays Harbor with three consecutive days was a major step by the Commission to address the inequities of harvest allocation as the commercial fisheries, be it tribal or non treaty, harvested the vast majority of the fish. In attachment 1 Mr. Hughes identifies the fact that the 4/3 Willapa is different than Grays Harbor's 4/3. This is correct and duplistic at the same time. The one day or two days a week of no commercial harvest starting September 14 in week 38 to the end of week 41 is a attempt at deception again. During this time frame in Willapa Bay returning salmon are primarily Coho and the size and topography of Willapa precludes major distances being covered by returning fish in such a short period of time. The 4/3 concept is dependent on the three net free days being consecutive.

The average citizen would be led to believe that they have a greater opportunity but as outlined previously this is nothing but a shell game intended to misinform the average citizen. What Region 6 District 17 has proposed is a nearly complete wipeout fishery by commercial fishers which precludes any reasonable sharing of harvest. Instead the harvest is misrepresented by Kirt Hughes 5/21/14 " Provides the recreational sector with 38% of the Chinook harvest and 22% of the Coho harvest. This compares to the average from 2003-2012 of 34% of the Chinook and 10% of the Coho" when in reality if represented truthfully it is the Willapa planning model predicts that the 2014 season proposal will result in commercial and sport interests increasing harvest by 16,136 total fish (Chinook & Coho combined). Of that number, 87% of the increase in combined catch numbers will incur on the commercial side and only 13% on the sport side. Using a comparison of the fish counts expected to be caught this year versus last leaves an opposite perception than the one created by WDFW using a 10 year average in percentages and ex vessel sales that were miscalculated by a formula error in the model. ( attachment 2 )

5. Willapa estuary fisheries, both commercial and recreational, are mixed stock fisheries that are not managed to the weakest stocks with equal harvest pressure throughout the entire run timing , a practice disavowed by most present day managers. It appears District 17 staff agree with the Willapa Gillnetters President that there is no need to manage harvest and escapement for natural origin fish only hatchery, which we feel is a rather barbaric view in this day and age. In the model none of the streams flowing into Willapa Bay will make Natural Origin Chinook escapement before either recreational or commercial harvest and fall wildly short after harvest. ( Willapa Model attachment 3 ) This is despite a exploitation rate reduction in the 2014 recreational and commercial seasons from 30% to 20% in an attempt to overcome District 17 Willapa model failures to predict accurately the true impacts of harvest in the Willapa Estuary. This we feel is not a acceptable management policy for Willapa Harbor. In our review several knowledgeable citizens reviewing past model performance believe the model performance is such that the exploitation rate would need to be reduced to 10 to 15% to have any possibility for escapement goals being met for Natural Origin Chinook in the Willapa Harbor estuary.

6. The Willapa model identifies a substantial number of Chum, both hatchery and wild, are killed in the targeted commercial Coho fishery. While it is normal for there to be collateral impacts to non targeted stocks in both commercial and recreational fisheries, some of the proposed weeks in the Willapa commercial seasons are extreme.

In the period October 8th through the 14th the model projects a Coho harvest of 3,380 with a by catch mortality of 2,922 Chum which is nearly 1 to 1. The commercial fleet is kept off the water for the days of October 15th through the 31st but return November 1st through the 10th. The model projects a Coho catch of 4,593 with a Chum by catch of 1,163 which results in approximately a 4 to 1 by catch ratio. The proposed by catch of Chum in both weeks is unacceptable and both of these weeks in the commercial should be cancelled and the possibility of alternate days without such extreme by catch explored.

7. It is our understanding that the Chum release mortality rate is calculated at 56% based upon the assumption of 90% compliance by the entire commercial fleet. Having broodstocked with tangle nets, participated in the filming the Grays Harbor Non Treaty Commercial fishers, and understanding that time is money to a commercial gillnet fisher one has to conclude that this is not a valid compliance percentage. It appears rather than identify the proper number of observers to achieve a 90% compliance rate that Region 6 District 17 staff simply picked the 90% rate to extend the commercial seasons to the maximum number of days possible. It is our belief that a minimum of 24% of the commercial fleet must have observers onboard in a 24 hour period to remotely come close to the 90% compliance staff is using in the model. Failure for WDF&W to achieve 10% observers fleet wide should result in a much higher mortality rate being utilized for released fish.

In closing we would like to state that while as citizen advocates we realize the Commission has no desire to nor should it desire to " micro manage " Willapa Recreational or Commercial seasons but the gross misrepresentation of information provided to citizens by District 17 staff for the Willapa Commercial CR 102 leads us to believe that the APA process has been compromised. In addition to the previously outlined actions to modify the Willapa Harbor Non Treaty Commercial Fishery we urge the Commission to consider implementing the following additional steps:

A. Instruct staff to withdraw the Willapa Commercial CR 102 and start again regardless if the action results in delays in the Willapa Commercial seasons. Deception and misleading citizens is not acceptable and possibly violates Washington State Law in our view. The APA process and WDF&W's responsibility to comply with it are paramount!

B. We urge the Commission to use its authority to create the ability for Fish Program Manager Jim Scott and Region 6 Fish Program Manager Steve Theisfeld to replace current underperforming Region 6 & District 17 staff. From continuing model errors, lack of any conservation standards, misrepresentations to the public ( including the Grays Harbor process to the Commission ), and a bias leading to discrimination imposed upon the recreational fisher in Willapa, it is clear that WDF&W Region 6 and District 17 staff lack the desire, the ability, or leadership to properly manage harvest in Willapa or Grays Harbor.

The complete lack of any harvest conservation standards in Willapa is simply one of the most appalling that we have observed in our many years as citizen advocates for the resource. It is our view that without Commission intervention little will change.

Sincerely,

XXXX

CC: Director Phil Anderson
WDF&W Fish Program Manager Jim Scott
Region 6 Fish Program Manager Steve Theisfeld


Edited by Rivrguy (06/12/14 01:46 PM)
_________________________
Dazed and confused.............the fog is closing in

Top
#897886 - 06/17/14 05:17 PM Re: FISHINGTHECHEHALIS.NET [Re: Rivrguy]
Rivrguy Offline
River Nutrients

Registered: 03/03/09
Posts: 4497
Loc: Somewhere on the planet,I hope

The link is to a number of documents created by the Advocacy commenting on the proposed Willapa CR 102 Commercial non treaty net seasons. The models are best viewed after down loading as they are basically reassembled so one better understand them. https://drive.google.com/#folders/0B2tWjgmgVy3yOVZoZzhjV0lVRXc


The letter below is to the Commission from the guys basically calling Bullsheet on Region 6 Willapa process and links to documents are in it also. This is a bit of reading but if you take the time to read the letter to the Commission and the CR 102 comments it pretty much captures the process, such as it is. Keep in mind C&P suffers a bit on PP as the formatting kinda / sorta runs off ....... someplace but you should be able to make heads or tails of it.

Also if anyone would want the documents e mailed so you can send them to others just send your e mail address and I will get them out to you.




May 17, 2014

The Honorable Commissioners
Washington Fish & Wildlife Commission
600 Capitol Way N.
Olympia, WA 98501

Re: 2014 Willapa Commercial Season

Dear Members of the Commission:

The Twin Harbors Fish & Wildlife Advocacy is a nonprofit corporation “.....organized for education, science, and other efforts that encourage the public, regulatory agencies and private businesses to manage or utilize fish, wildlife and other natural resources in a fashion that insures the sustainable of those resources on into the future for the benefit of future generations......”

As you are aware, the members of the Advocacy settled a legal challenge to the 2013 Willapa Bay commercial gillnet season under terms agreed by the Department that included three components as follows:

1. An Independent Fisheries Science Panel (IFSP) would be retained to provide recommended mortality rates for selective fishing in Willapa and Grays Harbor;

2. The Advocacy would assist the Department in improving its image and restore public confidence through a series of jointly sponsored meetings would be held to educate the public on season setting processes;

3. The Director would petition the Commission to reopen the Management Plan for Willapa Bay terminal this year.

The first component has been completed. The other two have not and at this point the Advocacy questions whether the goals of any of the three can be reached. However, we do not seek Commission support to complete these conditions. We have legal remedies available to insure the Department keeps its side of the deal.

At this point in time, the Department has filed the CR102 for the 2014 season in Willapa. The season set and WAC language inserted are expected to be adopted on or shortly after the public hearing set for June 24th. The filing of the CR102 with its current language has pushed all to the brink of the cliff. Shortly after the hearing, we fully expect the Department to force all over the edge by adopting the current proposal. Within days, if not hours of adoption, the Advocacy and others will have no choice but to file yet another legal challenge and the Department will be embroiled in yet another round of contentious and prolonged litigation that pits the state treasury against the wallets of its citizens. The goals we had hoped to achieve when entering into the original settlement seem to be rapidly fading away.

The Advocacy has invested significant resources into a presentation that has been provided the Department and duly filed on the record of the APA process for the season. In a candid, critical, and specific fashion, we explain our concerns regarding the current WDFW proposal. The presentation includes specific language change recommendations and three season options set forth in individual Excel spreadsheets created from the one used by WDFW to establish its proposed season.

Another Excel spreadsheet is included that conducts an economic and harvest impact analysis comparing the season proposed by the Department with the options proposed by the Advocacy. This spreadsheet shows why the Advocacy believes its recommendations and the three season options we have developed offer the Department an opportunity rethink its proposal and incorporate provisions that decrease management costs, provide increased profit potentials for the commercial fleet, prevent thousands of fish being killed only to be flung overboard, improve conservation performance and dramatically reduce gear conflicts between the stakeholders.

Review of the Advocacy’s presentation shows that it is not impossible to develop a season that promotes conservation while maximizing harvest opportunity. Unfortunately, while it tries desperately to do so, the Department cannot satisfy all the stakeholders, as it cannot “create 3 full filets out of one salmon.” This is especially true in Willapa for the commercial season as:

• the decline in run sizes diminishes the available harvest;

• the historical fishing practices have decimated natural spawning stocks that the Department is mandated to protect; and

• The ever-increasing costs of taxes, labor and fuel incurred by the gillnet fisherman, combined with the large number of licenses issued (fewer fish per boat) makes the success of the commercial fleet reliant upon the state delivering larger numbers of fish into the nets than are available for harvest.

Recognizing these obstacles, what does seem impossible for the Department is to deliver a season acceptable to the commercial sector even if the season put every one of the few returning natural spawning fish entering the bay into a tote on the deck of a gillnet boat. As a result, the Advocacy accepts the Department staff face a “damned if you do and damned if you don’t scenario” and any season it proposes would likely disappoint the fleet.

However, the Advocacy refuses to accept the notion that it is impossible to improve the performance of the Department when setting seasons. As an example, the Department issued a statement to the public as it filed the CR 102 several weeks ago that claimed the expected “exvessel value” or gross sales of fish to the fleet of the season was “$594K”.

Disclaimer: The Advocacy repeatedly advised the Department during the NOF process that a cell in its harvest model was miscalculating the exvessel value due to a missing parenthesis in a formula inserted in a particular cell. To open the model, find the cell, and make the correction took the Advocacy less than a minute. For some unknown reason, the Department failed to make the correction. If corrected, the model calculates the exvessel value of its current proposal at $736,595.

Regardless, at the point it filed the CR102 containing its proposed season, the Department believed the season it was proposing provided $594K of exvessel value, fished nearly to the last available fish, necessitated extensive investments by the Department into onboard programs during selective fishing cycles (funding source unknown), and killed 5,459 Chum that were to be flung over the side as crab bait. We believe these statements are undisputable facts as documented in WDFW’s own harvest model used to file the CR 102 and create the presentation materials provided the public thereafter.

The Advocacy simply will not accept this proposal is the “best that we could do”. The three season options that the Advocacy is presenting for consideration exceeds the Department’s claim for its proposal with its own model predicting exvessel sales opportunity of $535,569, $636,940, and $742,641. Non-selective 24 hour gillnet seasons with shortened days are offered that allow the fisher flexibility in selecting net mesh sizes and times to be on the water reducing the costs to the fleet as a means to improve the bottom line, which is the true goal of a commercial fisherman.

Conservation standards are improved by avoiding fishing to the last fish. Enhanced protection of native spawning stock is provided and not a single salmon is killed and thrown overboard as crab bait. When selective fishing is utilized, the season is structured to reduce the compliance costs to the fleet and the Department. The Advocacy even goes to the point of offering to provide financial support to help cover the Department’s cost of onboard observer programs to maximize time on the water for the fleet.

The Advocacy is not requesting that the members of the Commission either individually or jointly attempt to intervene in the season setting process or micromanage the Department. However, we do believe it is time to error to the side of candidacy and “lay all cards on the table, face up”. Simply put, the process utilized to set season reflects a Department that is politically polarized and without help from the Commission, it’s all going to come to a head on or shortly after June 24th.

Many in the public are convinced that a season was determined in negotiations outside of public view between upper management and a small number of commercial license holders who consistently turned to key legislators for support and leverage. The basic parameters of the agreed season were supplied to Fish Program staff assigned the dubious task of massaging and manipulating the harvest model to get the predetermined season to fit under the harvest caps set in the model as conservation standards. Then came development of presentation materials to promote the season as the CR 102 was filed.

Not being skilled in the arts of forensic accounting, legalese, and political spin, the presentation to the public came across clumsy at best. The ever-growing number of critics look over the model used and quickly determine where and how the “books have been cooked” to fit the season into the model. Since staffers are not skilled in the art of political spin, review of the sales presentation lead many to the conclusion all is a blatant attempt to deceive (reminiscent of the public reaction to staff’s presentation to the Commission during the re-writing of the Grays Harbor Management Plan). Since the season also fails to deliver the number of fish needed to deliver the desired profit, the commercial interests join in the fracas. Fish Program staff is hung like a punching bag in a gym and the poles and the nets combine forces to work them over.

While it may seem unbelievable to some reviewing its presentation, the Advocacy is convinced the staff within Fish Program have all the education, experience, expertise and experience needed to adopt a season appropriate for Willapa Bay. Key leadership needed is in place. While it unlikely we will reach consensus on all issues, the Advocacy believes Jim Scott and Steve Theisfeld have the talents and abilities to get the job done. However, due to the political polarization and management culture found within the Department, we are also convinced they will not be allowed to actually do the job for which they are paid.

This all leads us to the point where we ask for the support of the Commission. Again, not to adopt or oppose any particular season and, certainly not to micro-manage. Rather, we simply ask that the members of the Commission use individual or combined influence to insure the public that the professional staff within Fish Program have the freedom to make the final decisions for a 2014 commercial season based on their combined professional judgment using the education and expertise they hold and to do so without fear of damage to their careers.

The Advocacy remains committed to protecting and enhancing fish resources in Willapa and Grays Harbor. We fully recognize reasonable people can “agree to disagree” and pledge to remain open-minded until the WAC is adopted. If the current season proposed rules the day, we will honor our commitments to protect these valuable public resources with conviction and vigor.

The Advocacy believes it has done everything possible to avoid yet another legal confrontation and at this point, fear all our efforts have failed. We now pass the ball over the net into the Commission’s court. We stand ready to respond to any questions or requests for additional information.

The Advocacy presentation provided the Department, with attachments, and all the previously referenced Excel files that include the season options referenced have all been posted on Google and are available for downloading at the following addresses:

Advocacy Presentation.PDF (https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B2tWjgmgVy3yeG40eGtHLWZsajA/edit)

Comparison Model.xlsx (https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B2tWjgmgVy3yQi1TNFdHY0VLbG8/edit)

Advocacy Option 1 Model.xlsx (https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B2tWjgmgVy3yQTJDeTBtazFiN0E/edit)

Advocacy Option 2 Model.xlsx (https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B2tWjgmgVy3ycGpPN1FLQldELTA/edit)

Advocacy Option 3 Model.xlsx (https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B2tWjgmgVy3yYmIxTkJXQUdEUGs/edit)


Respectfully,




Edited by Rivrguy (06/17/14 05:23 PM)
_________________________
Dazed and confused.............the fog is closing in

Top
#898342 - 06/21/14 11:02 AM Re: FISHINGTHECHEHALIS.NET [Re: Rivrguy]
Rivrguy Offline
River Nutrients

Registered: 03/03/09
Posts: 4497
Loc: Somewhere on the planet,I hope

The letter below is self explanatory but if one ever wanted a break out of how & what the turmoil in WDF&W Enforcement has been this should take care of that problem in short order.



To: WDFW Commissioners, WA State Legislators, and Governor Jay Inslee
From: WDFW Detective Todd Vandivert (retired)
Re: WDFW “Issues”

We want to take this opportunity to tell you about several significant issues with WDFW (WA Dept. of Fish and Wildlife) in hopes that you can help to resolve these problems, get WDFW back on track, and allow the dedicated employees of WDFW to do their jobs without fear of abuse, corruption or retaliation.

I need to first introduce myself to all of you. I worked for WDFW for about 34 years, before retiring in December 2012. I spent ~22 years as a uniformed fish and wildlife officer before promoting to fish and wildlife detective, where I worked undercover on commercial fish and wildlife criminal cases until my retirement. I have been stationed on both sides of the state, have worked both land and marine duties, and have twice received the statewide officer of the year award.

Over my 34-years with WDFW (I started with the Game Dept.) I have seen some tough times, but nothing as severe as in the last several years. Under Director Phil Anderson’s lead, I have seen cronyism become the norm, employees being threatened berated and retaliated against, and corruption in promotions and discipline. I have watched as top-notch senior officers have fled to other jobs or retired early, while the administration grew more top-heavy with “yes men”. I have watched the WDFW enforcement program virtually unmerge, back into two separate entities (marine officers and land officers) as it was before the merger of Dept. of Fisheries and Dept. of Wildlife.

Shortly after my retirement, I wrote a book (OPERATION CODY) which detailed both the most successful investigation of wildlife trafficking in Washington’s history, and the absolute disfunctionality of WDFW enforcement. As most of my experience is with the enforcement program, that is the perspective from which I will address you, but in the 2013 DOP “State Employee Survey” only one state agency had lower “(employee) General Satisfaction” survey results than WDFW, and WDFW tied for 2nd worst in “(employees) Treated with respect”, so it’s safe to assume these issues at least somewhat cross all programs in WDFW.
I also want to make it clear that I do not speak for all WDFW enforcement employees. That being said, I would guess that if you ask WDFW land officers you will find most agree with my position (but are afraid of coming forward) while most marine officers would not. The distinction between the satisfactions of marine officers vs. land officers is largely attributed to Deputy Chief Mike Cenci (a former Dept. of Fisheries officer). Cenci is, without a doubt, the most abusive supervisor I have ever heard of in state government. Many officers have pleaded with Director Anderson and former Chief Bruce Bjork to remove or at least demote Cenci, but to no avail. In-fact Director Anderson ignored those pleas for help until finally in early 2013 when WDFW hired an “investigator” to look into many serious allegations against the deputy chief. The “investigation” was (in our opinion) a sham and read as if it was written by the deputy chief himself, but did verify several disturbing allegations (other allegations were either not investigated at all, or were only partially investigated, while some allegations were determined to be unfounded). Why the director has allowed enforcement to run out of control, and even protect those whose behavior is well below professional standards is an unanswered question. Perhaps it is because those same offenders (the administration of WDFW enforcement) gave the director’s son a fish and wildlife officer job, or perhaps he just doesn’t care.
The following pages will provide you with some examples of what motivated us to write this letter, in hopes of protecting our resources, as well as the fine officers of WDFW left behind when I retired. If any of you so desire, I can provide you with written materials documenting and supporting the allegations we list below. These same allegations, and supporting documentations have also been provided to several investigative reporters with both the print and television media.
The below allegations listed have been investigated to best of our abilities but interviews and further investigation, by a truly independent law enforcement investigator (NOT A WDFW EMPLOYEE), should be conducted to substantiate these allegations independently.

Supporting documentation, for the allegations listed below, is available upon request.
1) Within months of Steve Crown being appointed to the Chief of enforcement, he fired the vice-president of the F&W (Fish and Officers) Guild and demoted the president of the F&W Sergeants’ union.

2) Cronyism. Enforcement always promotes from within, and eliminates anyone with opposing views/opinions. Experience seems to no longer be a factor.
A) When Chief Bjork retired (summer of 2013), a “nation-wide search” for a new chief was conducted, by posting the job announcement on the WASPC (WA Association of Sheriffs and Police Chief’s Association) website. The posting lasted 23 total days, including 6 weekend days and a holiday (only 16 work days in total).
B) Newly appointed Chief Crown worked in the same office with ex-chief Bjork, yet had only supervised one uniformed officer in his entire career. He now supervises the entire force.
C) When Chief Crown was the training/hiring Lt., he earned a reputation for being lazy, non-responsive and disconnected. He rarely responded to emails or phone calls from officers who were to train the newly hired officers, and often sent new officers into the field without the necessary equipment or training materials.
D) On 07/09/13 the F&W Officer’s Guild asked Director Anderson to be included in the selection process for the new chief.
On 07/15/13, Director Anderson agreed to allow WDFW officers and sergeants to assist in selecting a new chief. In an email Anderson said; “It is important to me to gain the insights from the Guild and the other sectors of the Enforcement Program prior to making the final selection. I would like to ask the Guild to designate four officers to participate in a group made up of representatives of the Program that will be afforded an hour to interact with our finalist(s) prior to my making the final selection.”
On 07/22/13 Director Anderson sent out the following email; “We have selected Lt. Steve Crown as the finalist for the Chief's position. Joe and I have offered an opportunity for representatives of the Officer, Sergeants, Captains, and headquarters Staff to interact with Steve on Wednesday afternoon here in Olympia at the NRB in room 172 beginning at 3:00 p.m. Our meeting will consist of two 45 minute segments, one to hear from and interact with Lt. Crown and the second 45 minute segment will be for Joe and I to hear from you regarding your perspectives on what you heard and the abilities of our finalist to be a strong and effective leader of the Enforcement Program.”
Before the panel, including officers and sergeants, were to convene Director Anderson had already narrowed the application pool to only one candidate; Steve Crown, even though he had agreed to include F&W officers in the selection process.
F&W Officer’s Guild President Mark James then asked Director Anderson why he had already selected one candidate without including the guild, to which Anderson answered; “So to be clear, a job offer has not been extended to anyone yet. After conducting a thorough review of applications and interviews of those meeting the minimum qualifications, we have a single candidate that rose to the top.”
At the 07/24/13 meeting (a meet and greet with the new chief), Director Anderson stated he recognized there were significant issues with enforcement (and listed many of them out), then assured the participants (including sergeants and officers) these issues would be resolved within 6 months. 15 months later things have only gotten worse.
E) When region 4 (Seattle region) Captain Bill Hebner retired, both Sgt. Rich Phillips and Sgt. Hobbs applied for the promotion. Sgt. Phillips had over 30 years of experience, had been a Sgt. many years more than Hobbs, was very well respected, had experience in negotiating tribal issues as well as labor contracts, and had served as assistant commander of the WA CJTC (Criminal Justice Training Commission) police academy, but also served as the F&W Sergeants Union President. Hobbs had very little experience, yet somehow beat out Phillips for the promotion.
F) Chief Crown recently promoted Alan Myers to region 4 Captain. When the position was first announced, only Lt. Eric Anderson (not related to Director Anderson) applied. Crown closed the position and retested, stating he would not award the promotion to Anderson because Anderson had been the only applicant, and Crown wanted the process to be competitive. The irony was that Eric Anderson had been the only applicant for the Lieutenant, when he had applied for and was awarded that position. Upon re-announcement of the captain position, four candidates applied, and Crown awarded it to Alan Myers (a friend of Crown’s who worked in the same office). Myers has a reputation of using poor judgment, and he had absolutely no supervisory experience (other than training new hires). When Alan Meyers was an officer in Clarkston, he created so many problems with the community, the citizens had a public meeting to discuss how to get rid of him.
G) Deputy Chief Hobbs, went from a 34-year old F&W officer to Sergeant, to heading up SIU (the statewide investigative unit), to Captain of region 4 to Deputy Chief in approximately 3 years. Once Hobbs was promoted to the head of SIU he was stationed in Olympia, where he remained (never moving his family, even when he was then promoted to the Captain of the Mill Creek office), until he ultimately ended up as one of the two deputy chiefs in Olympia.

3) Top-heavy. Under Director Anderson, enforcement has removed positions from the field, and moved them to headquarters in Olympia. Enforcement now has a chief, has two deputy chiefs (historically only had one), a captain (removed from the field office in region 6), two lieutenants and one sergeant in the office, for 7 total commissioned officers in the headquarters office. They also employ five communications staff members, a radio technician, and nine “administrative support” employees, for a total of 15 non-commissioned enforcement employees in headquarters. In 2000, administrative positions (Lt. and above) made up 5.5% of the commissioned staff. Now, that has risen to 8.7%. Under this administration officers spend ~35% of their work time on “Administrative duties” (including training).

4) Unequal treatment- A well respected sergeant was recently demoted because he had knowledge of one of his subordinates having handled “evidence” (it was actually not evidence, but firearms from a WDFW employee, held for safe-keeping) improperly, yet Chief Crown’s (while he was acting as a WDFW designated Property/Evidence Custodian) own drug evidence from one of his own cases, was lost, and Crown apparently never notified the defense or defendant of such, and there was an effort to classify the missing evidence as “destroyed” by preparing to incinerate the evidence envelope (but the evidence destruction witness refused to sign the destruction form since the envelope did not contain the listed evidence items). Chief Bjork’s “investigation” of Crown’s missing drug evidence amounted to having Crown write a memo (in which Crown said he didn’t even remember the case, nor could he find anything in his officer’s notebook), then Chief Bjork signed off on the evidence as “closed- undetermined”.
Recently, the vice-president of the officer’s guild (Dave Jones) was fired, in part, for the same “evidence” situation (improperly handling property for safe-keeping) as the Sgt. was demoted for.
The investigation of Officer Jones and Sgt. Phillips was handled by Deputy Chief Hobbs who, when he was in-charge of the detectives, ignored warnings that evidence was being mishandled, by a detective, during the single largest wildlife trafficking case in WDFW’s history (Operation Cody). Once it was determined that the evidence was so badly handled that prosecutors needed to be warned of the evidence issues (Brady exculpatory evidence disclosures were attached to all reports), Hobbs apologized to the involved detectives for not properly supervising the detective in charge of evidence. The very same issue (but to a much lesser degree) is why Sgt. Phillips was demoted, yet no disciplinary actions were taken against Hobbs for failing to supervise the detective who mishandled the Operation Cody evidence, and within months Hobbs was promoted to captain and then (a few months later) to deputy chief.

On 02/14/14 I submitted a Public Disclosure Request to WDFW demanding any and all written documents relating to “Evidence Irregularities and/or Evidence Discrepancies”. On 02/19/14 I received confirmation of receipt of my PDR. On 02/21/14 (two days after WDFW enforcement received my PDR) WDFW Sgt. Dan Chadwick (Deputy Chief Cenci’s neighbor and best friend) entered a pistol into evidence for Deputy Chief Mike Cenci. The report states the pistol was seized in 1992. The narrative of the evidence report reads; “On 02/21/14 at about 1230 hrs., Deputy Chief Mike Cenci was cleaning out his old files in the Long Beach Office. He came across an old handgun with an evidence tag on it dated 10/13/1992. The tag indicated the gun was seized on that date from xxxxxxxxx (unk dob). Violation indicated poss. of a firearm when under 21 yoa. I ran the name in CODY and observed that an xxxxx was cited on the same date by then Wildlife Agent Corky Roberts. Current address lists the defendant in Aberdeen now and the evidence tag had a Hoquim address. I placed the firearm in Evidence locker no. 1 Long Beach.”
When this pistol was seized by Dept. of Wildlife Agent Roberts in 1992, the pistol would have been held in the Dept. of Wildlife Montesano office evidence locker, but somehow the gun made it from the WDFW Montesano (where Cenci later was stationed as a sergeant) evidence storage to Cenci’s “old files in the Long Beach Office”. It certainly appears that for some reason Cenci retained a seized pistol, (which he had no role in, as he worked for a totally separate agency (Fisheries) at the time) for an extended period of time, then just “found it” while cleaning his office, two days after receiving my PDR regarding “evidence irregularities and/or discrepancies”, yet they demoted a Sgt. and terminated an officer for not properly logging in firearms held for safe-keeping.

Cenci has received at least four written reprimands, including one suspension without pay (for 2-days). The only reprimands, to Cenci, I received through PDRs are for: 2007- losing night vision equipment and a digital camera ($2,000+ of equipment), 2006- vehicle accident/speeding ($11,000+ damage), 2005- profanity directed at a citizen, 2005- vehicle accident/speeding (total loss of patrol vehicle). Out of Cenci’s 8 known vehicle and vessel accidents (just since 1998), he has only been reprimanded for 2 of the accidents. Despite Cenci’s less than stellar record, he has been promoted to Captain, and twice promoted to Deputy Chief.

While Chief Crown was the training/recruiting Lieutenant, he put into place a policy which disallowed officers from being FTOs (Field Training Officers- officers who train the new hires) if those officers had a founded disciplinary actions against them, yet despite Cenci’s personnel record, Crown immediately re-promoted Cenci into a deputy chief position.

In 2010, WDFW Officer Brian Alexander charged a suspect and the suspect’s wife for hunting without a license, exceeding the limit, wastage involving several elk in Ocosta. Alexander placed the bull elk antlers into evidence (in the Montesano impound yard). In preparing for the WDFW antler sale (http://wdfw.wa.gov/news/may2412a), Lt. O'hagen gathered up antlers, including the antlers seized in the above criminal case and brought them to Olympia where they were later sold. Lt. O’Hagen photographed all the antlers he took, and claimed there were no evidence tags on the antlers he sold. When O’Hagen gave Officer Alexander a picture of the rounded up antlers, Alexander could clearly see evidence tags on some of the racks. During an evidence audit by Lt. Dennis Nicks, it was found that the Ocosta case antlers were missing. In searching for the missing evidence, Alexander found the missing evidence antlers in the photo that O'hagen took of the sold antlers. The loss of evidence was reported to the prosecutor, since the case was still open. Captain Dan Brinson was assigned to do an investigation into the missing antlers. Lt. Nicks also reported the incident to Chief Bjork in the evidence audit, but Lt. O'hagen was never disciplined for misconduct.


5) WDFW enforcement program values fish and shellfish above wildlife.
A) Deputy Chief Cenci has, several times, stated “Nobody gives a [Bleeeeep!] about deer and elk. If they are so important, then why do we give out kill permits for them?” When confronted with this statement, he will likely respond with “I have made more deer and elk cases than most officers” or “those statements were taken out of context”, but it’s difficult to understand in what context a deputy chief of fish and wildlife enforcement would feel that statement is appropriate.
B) The statewide investigative unit (Detectives) has spent a disproportionate amount of time, effort and money on shellfish (primarily geoduck), yet makes very few actual geoduck cases.
C) Director Anderson came from a fisheries background (Pacific Fisheries Management Council, charter captain), as did Cenci (who came from Dept. of Fisheries).

6) I have three different sworn and signed statements, from officers who spoke directly with Officer Apple and/or read Apple’s original report to support the following (even though the documentation I presently have does not include the original report referred to in this section): WDFW Officer Mike Apple recently made a strong criminal case of illegal trapping of otter on Vashon Island, including surveillance video of the suspect with the illegal traps, but Captain Alan Meyers apparently instructed Apple to not file charges (likely because of fear of potential political fallout). On 04/30/14 I submitted a PDR for the case report (report # 14-001121). According to officers who spoke directly with Officer Apple; a couple of days after the PDR was filed, Captain Myers reportedly ordered Officer Apple to change his case report so that it would not show that Myers had instructed Apple to resolve the serious wildlife violation with a verbal warning. Apple refused to change the report. On 05/06/14 I received the PDR response including case report 14-001121, which had apparently been altered and no longer made reference to Captain Myers telling Apple to resolve the crime with a warning. Officer Apple stated he did not make the changes to the report, yet the report was changed. Someone from WDFW changed Officer Apple’s report, then WDFW sent me the PDR response which worked more favorably for the administration. If WDFW employees altered an official police report, then purposely sent me an altered inaccurate response to my PDR, those actions would likely constitute a crime.

7) Disclosure of confidential information to the media by WDFW administrators- On Sept. 18th 2012, DC Cenci was on television and internet telling the world (at 11:15 am) about an undercover WDFW case (Operation Cody) and the warrants which would be served across the state that same date. Many warrants were scheduled to be served later that same day (as late as 7pm), yet Cenci warned the state (by way of the media) about the warrants; thus jeopardizing the case evidence as well as his own officer’s safety; http://www.king5.com/news/local/Raids-target-alleged-wildlife-poachers-170212656.html
The above-listed release of confidential information was certainly not the only incident of such Cenci has made, but perhaps the most egregious in that it also violated a written contract (Cooperative Agreement) between the US Fish and Wildlife Service and WDFW.
On 06/29/11, WDFW Chief Bjork and USFWS Special Agent in Charge (Paul Chang) signed a case specific contract/agreement for Operation Cody. Section IV I states; “All press releases associated with this investigation shall be reviewed and approved by the Special Agent in Charge of Region 1 and Chief of WDFW and will be released only upon mutual agreement of both. All press releases will be coordinated with the appropriate State District Attorney and US Attorney’s Office.” No such approval was made for Cenci’s new releases, nor were the US Attorney’s Office or the USFWS even contacted about such.
After the initial news release, regarding Operation Cody, Cenci conducted other media releases (also without clearing the releases with the US Attorney or the USFWS), including a radio interview in-which he describes a portion of Operation Cody which was a federal investigation of paddlefish caviar (strictly a federal crime), and untruthfully described the suspects as engaged in international smuggling (there was no indication the caviar had entered international markets); http://kuow.org/post/back-alley-caviar . Apparently Cenci either spoke about the case without bothering to check his facts, or he embellished the truth because “international smuggling” sounded better than the truth.

In response to a PDR I submitted (asking for the internal investigative report of Crown’s missing drug evidence) WDFW provided a suspect’s complete confidential criminal history, including his conviction records. WDFW redacted the suspect’s social security number, but left all remaining information in-place, including his name and date of birth (WDFW actually did this on two of the PDR returns). This is a violation of RCW 10.97 (Washington State Criminal Records Privacy Act) punishable by a criminal misdemeanor and potential loss of criminal history access.

8) Quoted from retired WDFW Sgt. Matt Nixon- “I heard him (Cenci) direct HQ staff to change timesheet coding to reflect the spending of federal grant money in ways it were not worked. I heard him direct investigators to find crimes committed by tribal members to embarrass the tribes publicly. I believe a forensic audit of the program's use of federal monies would show vast abuse of overtime and misdirected funds.”

9) Under Bjork and Cenci’s administration, F&W Officer changed to “F&W Police Officer”. The change was more than just a change of title, as WDFW Officers are now praised for law enforcement work which has nothing to do with WDFW’s mandate to “To preserve, protect and perpetuate fish, wildlife and ecosystems while providing sustainable fish and wildlife recreational and commercial opportunities”.
While most officers did not object to the title change, they have found they are now spending far less time doing what the general public expects of them; catching poachers, and more time seeking out violations of “general authority” crimes. WDFW “Police” are now rewarded for working duties outside of F&W violations; officers are also being praised for spending huge amounts of time on marijuana eradication, traffic violations, check fraud, metal theft, etc., all the while spending less time working fish and wildlife crimes.

10) Many officers and Sergeants are retiring early, to escape the abuse and mismanagement.

11) WDFW Officer Dave Jones, as the F&W Officer Guild vice-president, pushed for Director Phil Anderson to conduct an investigation into multiple allegations of wrong-doing by Deputy Chief Cenci. For months, Director Anderson refused to investigate and when Anderson finally conducted an “investigation” it was incomplete and biased. Months after Jones pushed through an investigation of Cenci, Jones was fired.

12) Loss of officers in the field- WDFW continues to shift officers from the field to administrative positions. In 1997 WDFW had ~122 F&W officers in the field. Currently WDFW has ~96 officers in the field, a reduction of over 23%, despite the fact the legislature has funded “additional F&W officer positions”.

13) Cenci interjecting himself into WDFW investigations- Due to his love of cameras and the media (as well as the money he receives from unnecessary travel expenses) Cenci frequently interjects himself into WDFW investigations, at the take-down stage. Multiple times a year Cenci interjects himself into WDFW high profile investigations or patrols, normally at the culmination of the cases. He does so without always bothering to attend briefings and reading all the applicable reports, but rather shows up and takes over, normally taking the lead role in the interview/interrogations of key suspects, then stands before the media to brag about WDFW’s success. In no other large law enforcement agency, does the deputy chief interject himself or herself in such a manner, as doing so is unnecessary and can jeopardize the success of the operation (i.e.- interrogation of key suspects without full knowledge of the case, can lead to missed opportunities for full confessions). Also; such behavior costs the state unnecessary travel expenses.

Cenci also misleads younger officers into inappropriate behaviors. One such example seemed to have occurred in the San Juan Islands, in November of 2013, when Cenci came all the way from Olympia to lead a routine deer decoy patrol on Lopez Island. It is our understanding that under Cenci’s supervision the decoy deer team (consisting of Officer Rosenberger, Officer Stout, and Cenci) trespassed and placed a decoy deer on the private property, in hopes of enticing suspects into unlawfully shooting the decoy deer, but the landowner caught the officers trespassing on his property (this information has not yet been verified, due to those involved being totally supportive of Cenci (all marine officers)).

14) Reckless driving- Cenci has a well-earned reputation for reckless driving. Cenci has reported at least 5 vehicle accidents, in state owned vehicles, since 2000 and an additional one in 1998 (it is unknown if there are additional unreported accidents). Cenci has also been involved in at least 2 boating accidents/incidents, and has been stopped for speeding. In several of Cenci’s vehicle accidents, he admitted to speeding and/or reckless driving. These accidents have cost the state 10’s of thousands of dollars, but fortunately have not yet hurt or killed any citizens. Cenci’s accident record is rather impressive considering he spends the majority of his time behind a desk.

15) Promotions- Several promotions were custom made for specific officers- examples: Chris Clementson (a personal friend of now retired Captain Volz’s). Captain Volz crafted the Detective job announcement to Clementson’s background and geographical location, told SIU detectives he was going to make Clementson the next detective, and reduced minimum qualifications (as Clementson came nowhere near the existing minimum qualifications), then announced (at a retirement luncheon with the chief and deputy chief present) that Clementson would be the next detective, before the position announcement even came out.

Deputy Chief Cenci “self-demoted” to captain when Chief Bjork retired, but weeks later when Steve Crown was appointed the chief, Crown gave Cenci a deputy chief position back without even announcing the position, or interviewing for it. Crown also created a second deputy chief position, which he held interviews for.
Several years ago, Charles “Alan” Myers (now Captain Myers) said this about the promotional process in WDFW (under Cenci and Bjork’s leadership): “Charles Myers wrote: I had some experience recently in interviewing for a detective position this past summer. I interviewed for the position that was filled by Brad Rhoden. Anyone planning on applying for the position needs to know some things right up front. For example, If you are not networked in with anyone from SIU, especially Ed Volz do not bother applying. Until and unless someone from SIU is your children's god-parent, or something else just as intimate, it will be a waste of time. Also, get a heads up on the interview questions. They ask you questions that demand that you have extensive commercial investigation experience and knowledge. Also, check and see who was already pre-ordained to fill the spot. This is relatively easy information to find out. It seems that most know ahead of time who is more apt to be given the golden pass. If it's not you, then don't bother, unless you're just a sucker like me who was looking for a soul crushing, ego stomping experience to have. But, don't cry for me Argentina. I should have done more to prepare myself. Like move to the west side and become marine officer for one. That definitely would have helped.” Shortly after writing this email, Officer Myers took an undesirable office job in Olympia which allowed him to gain access to the administrative inner circle. He then was quickly promoted up the ladder to Captain.


16) Investigation of Deputy Chief Cenci- When guild representative (Officer Dave Jones) was investigated for an allegation of inappropriate behavior, the investigation was handed to WSP and the Whatcom County Sheriff’s Office. When WDFW finally investigated Deputy Chief Cenci, a private attorney was hired by WDFW to conduct the “investigation”; many witnesses were not contacted, and the report was badly skewed and incomplete.

17) Wasting money by retaining unused vessels- One large patrol vessel (vessel #1- protected by Cenci) is believed to have zero hours from November 2010 through June 2011, but the moorage bill for that vessel is over $380 per month for it to just sit there. That is well over $3,000 in moorage costs alone (not including power and maintenance), over 8 months for an unused vessel.

18) Petition- In late March 2014, retired WDFW Detective Todd Vandivert started a petition to remove Director Anderson, Chief Crown and Deputy Chief Cenci (this was at least the second petition to remove Cenci, as the citizens of his own county had one going in 2006). Vandivert obtained well over 1,000 signatures in the first week! Many present and past WDFW employees signed the petition.

19) WDFW employees have been harassed by WDFW administration for supporting the petition to remove the administration, including a WDFW office worker who was brought to tears by administrators (including Captain Myers) for “liking” the petition on her personal Facebook page; in what seems to be a clear violation of freedom of speech.

20) Many WDFW employees voiced support for the petition to remove administrators, but would not sign it due to a valid fear of retaliation.

21) WDFW Officers have been ordered to not have any contact with myself or Officer Dave Jones, as we are both known to be involved in investigating wrongdoing by WDFW enforcement personnel.

22) Almost all of the marine officers support the administration, and very few land officers support them, which shows clear favoritism towards marine issues and programs.



In an 04/12/13 letter to Director Anderson, the F&W Officers’ Guild attorneys stated “Upon review of this investigation, it appears that the following allegations against Cenci are SUSTAINED by the investigator, or SUPPORTED by the investigative report” (Director Anderson was made aware of the investigative report findings on March 12th 2013):
23) Cenci failed to file a WDFW boating accident report for a boating accident he had at Seafair.
24) Cenci engaged in sexual intercourse, with a dept. employee, while at work.
25) Cenci called a female officer a “bitch”.
26) Cenci commented, in a restaurant, about a waitress’ breasts.
27) Cenci called officers (including a female officer) “cowards” and “pussies” for not jumping into the water to find a missing boater, and failed to listen to their explanation of why they did not do so.
28) Cenci has, on different occasions, told officers “you don’t know @#$#”
29) Cenci made a comment, in reference to a Sgt., that he was “going to kick his ass”.
30) Cenci has stated, several times when discussing work priorities, “Nobody gives a [Bleeeeep!] about deer and elk” and “if it doesn’t have fins, it doesn’t mean [Bleeeeep!]”.
In Director Anderson’s response letter to the F&W Officers Guild (regarding the Cenci “investigation”), Anderson ended his letter by stating; “From the Department’s perspective this concludes the matters associated with the allegations of unethical and unlawful actions on the part of either Chief Bruce Bjork or Deputy Chief Mike Cenci. It is regrettable that these two outstanding and dedicated employees were subjected to these type of unwarranted allegations.”
As you digest and process the above-listed information, keep in mind that WDFW just demoted an outstanding sergeant (Rich Phillips) and terminated a dedicated K-9 officer (Dave Jones). The sergeant was demoted for failure to supervise Officer Jones (because the Sgt. had knowledge that Officer Jones had allegedly not properly handled “safe-keeping property”). Officer Dave Jones (the officer who initiated the investigation of Deputy Chief Cenci) was terminated, in part, for not properly handling property held for safe keeping. Yet Chief Crown mishandled drug evidence, Deputy Chief Cenci “found” a pistol in his files, which had been missing for 22 years, and Deputy Chief Hobbs (who conducted the investigations of Sgt. Phillips and Officer Jones) had himself failed to supervise one of his subordinates resulting in severe evidence issues in a major case. We don’t think we need to point out the hypocrisy of the WDFW administration terminating/demoting employees for the same, more serious, acts they have committed themselves.
What saddens me the most it that for 25+ years, when any young college student would ask me what it’s like to be a Fish and Wildlife Officer in Washington, I always answered; “It’s the best job on earth”. Now, I (like many others) tell them to look elsewhere.
We sincerely thank all of you for your attention to these serious issues, and I will avail myself to questions, comments or requests for supporting documentation.
_________________________
Dazed and confused.............the fog is closing in

Top
Page 22 of 213 < 1 2 ... 20 21 22 23 24 ... 212 213 >

Search

Site Links
Home
Our Washington Fishing
Our Alaska Fishing
Reports
Rates
Contact Us
About Us
Recipes
Photos / Videos
Visit us on Facebook
Today's Birthdays
No Birthdays
Recent Gallery Pix
hatchery steelhead
Hatchery Releases into the Pacific and Harvest
Who's Online
4 registered (Streamer, snit, fishbadger, 1 invisible), 1094 Guests and 11 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Newest Members
NoyesMaker, John Boob, Lawrence, I'm Still RichG, feyt
11499 Registered Users
Top Posters
Todd 27838
Dan S. 16958
Sol Duc 15727
The Moderator 13942
Salmo g. 13447
eyeFISH 12616
STRIKE ZONE 11969
Dogfish 10878
ParaLeaks 10363
Jerry Garcia 9013
Forum Stats
11499 Members
17 Forums
72912 Topics
824728 Posts

Max Online: 3937 @ 07/19/24 03:28 AM

Join the PP forums.

It's quick, easy, and always free!

Working for the fish and our future fishing opportunities:

The Wild Steelhead Coalition

The Photo & Video Gallery. Nearly 1200 images from our fishing trips! Tips, techniques, live weight calculator & more in the Fishing Resource Center. The time is now to get prime dates for 2018 Olympic Peninsula Winter Steelhead , don't miss out!.

| HOME | ALASKA FISHING | WASHINGTON FISHING | RIVER REPORTS | FORUMS | FISHING RESOURCE CENTER | CHARTER RATES | CONTACT US | WHAT ABOUT BOB? | PHOTO & VIDEO GALLERY | LEARN ABOUT THE FISH | RECIPES | SITE HELP & FAQ |