Maybe there will be some time for the public to comment at this meeting. Know what I mean? bob r

Yes I do and I would urge anyone to speak to the fact that WDFW has intentionally allowed the public to remain uninformed as to the progress and the manner in which NOF is going forward. The APA process can / will be confusing to many but it is the legal process that establishes the fishing WAC's. http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=34.05 Oh, at the end of the meeting citizens can place comments that will go into the legal record which in the Concise Explanatory Statement ( CES ) which by law WDF&W must respond to.

Melanie and I sat for over 3 hours listening to the last meeting (other then the "regulars" we were the only public present)and after all that time we were told that we wouldn't get to comment publicly 'till almost 10:00 P.M., and that these meetings sometimes go 'till 11:00 , all I have to say is that the public is treated like S*** at these meetings, they are run like s*** by the state reps(new region 6 manager for one), VERY discouraging to those from the "public"who give up their time (and supper!) to attend these "talkfests", don't quite see what our input has to do with anything that they will "accomplish", BUT WE WILL BE THERE on Wed. Bob R

bob r:

I agree.......I see another "dog and pony show"....different pony ring, different music and a different year.

Well here is the next meeting for Willapa and it is the public input portion of the NOF process. Now considering the bomb that WDF&W dropped in scrapping the so called Willapa Management Plan at the Adviser meeting and implementing new objectives it might be a meeting to attend. There is a lot of doubt out in the public as WDF&W outlined commercial cut backs but not the rec. Word is the gillnetters are out recruiting Rep Blake & Senator Hatfield to stop any reform or reduction in commercial net seasons. Several folks are trying to get the agency to put forth a meeting notice and a copy of the new Willapa Objectives for the public to review but so far WDF&W has refused to do so.

Please folks recognize it is not accidental as they are conducting business as usual out of sight no input no nothing. It would appear WDF&W and Region 6 have not learned a damn thing in the past two years. One would think if your going to have a auction ( hidden influence ) on the citizens salmon seasons they would at least let everyone know the starting bid.

Willapa Bay NOF Public Workshop #1
(APA record testimony to immediately follow)
March 25th 6 pm to 8 pm Raymond Elks
APA Process Review Forecast
Management Objectives Management Plan Implementation Fishery suggestions

This link is to the final report for the revised commercial net mortalities in Grays Harbor and Willapa Harbor. https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B2tWjgmgVy3ycDFKTUoxYWdVLVU/edit

The panel review and report was part of the out of court settlement challenging the 2013 seasons.
http://fishingthechehalis.net/nof-process

Interesting reading to say the least.

Cliff Notes version....

In a nutshell 65/61/30...

Now becomes 62/56/31.

Small mesh gear (6" coho mesh) now carries a 56% chinook mortality ... effectively stretching the limited available gillnet impacts by another 10%. Might buy them another day in GH, almost certainly more in WB.

Actual practice table 3 at 90% compliance is where those numbers originate. The key is the numbers are off 90% compliance with the rules and add the 3% drop out to the numbers. Read the section on on-board observers and Willapa had .71% per boat trip. That does not appear to have pasted muster with the ISFP so what WDF&W does to get the observer per boat ratio up is going to be interesting to watch.

From ISFP: "To the ISFP, observer presence as implemented in past years is likely not sufficient to affect compliance rate for Fish Friendly techniques by the fishing fleet. "

Region 6 Fish Program Manager Steve Thiesfeld has provided several model options for folks to work with. If you were not on his contact list PM me your e mail address and I will forward it to anyone who wants to take a shot at working with the modeled options.

Little edit: To the question would one understand the model easily, ah no unless your very familiar with Excel. In addition the staff notes on the model identify using the Columbia 45% mortality on commercial release mortality which is not what will used but rather the new mortalities developed by the Independent Scientific Review. Any bio mathematicians out there familiar with fishing models that would like review the model would be great as the more eyes the better.

That said if one has the model I can show anyone interested how to navigate through the thing as it is not shall we say user friendly.

Did not know my e mail could melt, now I do. Here it is down and dirty. Many of us over the past year & half have beat the holy hell out of agency staff for not being forthright and transparent if you like. So The new R 6 Fish Program Manager Steve Theisfeld took a different track. He was rather frank on the status of negotiations with the QIN but stressed it is a work in progress. He asked that those present not blast things all over the web until the co managers have completed their negotiations.

Bottom line is oh so many have asked that the agency do just that, be transparent. So I ask all to respect that and let the co managers complete their process. Soon enough all can complain / endorse / scream your choice but at the moment all should respect the request and allow the co managers to finish their work.

Date place and time for the CR102 hearing?

Unknown date and time at this point. Depends on date they actually file the CR 102. Can't have a hearing for at least 30 days to allow public comment via emails & letters. Currently expected in August around the 8th with adoption by Director following day. I expect the hearings will be in Monte office, but they can hold them in Oly if they want.

Just a bump for those asking what the status on GH & Willapa is. Previous post has it as to what is the status.

From the FTC crew, you all enjoy Easter and family as they are most important.

Having managed to get sicker than my dog I have had little time ( or desire ) to track things but this bit below concerns the closure on the Hoh. I asked what was up and the response I received is below. My question was what was up with the Clearwater & Hoh seasons.

From WDF&W:

No changes to Clearwater that I’m aware of. I did a quick glance and didn’t see a change.

We are below escapement on the Hoh for spring chinook and made a decision to close. Data showed we only caught ~ 30 hatchery Chinook a year. Seemed like a pretty low harvest to incur impacts on the wild stock . We talked about that a couple of times at NOF. We are trying to keep the tribes to 6% harvest rate.




From another email response:

Greetings Mr. XXX,

Your interpretation of the new fishing regulations is not in error. For a number of recent years we have been experiencing lower than normal returns of Spring Chinook in the Hoh River (see graph below). This year the run was forecast down yet again. As a result, we chose to limit our impacts on this depressed stock by closing the sport fishery for retention of all Chinook during this time period. That being said, the summer steelhead fishery opens the first Saturday in June, June 7th.

I hope this clarifies the regulations for this season. If you have further questions or concerns, feel free to contact me.

Thank you for your time,
David


David Low
Fishery Biologist
Washington Dept. of Fish & Wildlife
Montesano, WA 98563
360-249-1216

I was asked to update folks on how the negotiations between WDF&W and the Quinault Nation ( QIN ) are going for the 2014 season. To be honest I do not know all that much more than everyone else does but I did ask a bit back. The response I received is below and is a pretty straight forward assessment. While I could take issue with several of the points regarding the QIN I will leave that for another day. Keep in mind the information below IS NOT my views but another individuals opinion.

I will try my best to lay out the QIN position:
They are upset about the policy because it was developed without them and because we did not go out to them and walk them through it.
Walking them through it didn’t make them feel any better.
They feel like they are now being asked to consider a policy they had no hand in the development of.
They don’t feel that there is a conservation problem in Grays Harbor.
They feel like DFW staff did not push back hard enough that there isn’t a conservation problem in Grays Harbor.
They feel like the recreational anglers are going to come after them next. They specifically pointed out the “Ban Gillnets” sweatshirts that folks wore to the commission meetings.

With regards to this year’s fisheries:
Despite best efforts to point out the low run size of Hump NORs and the fact that we haven’t made the aggregate Chinook escapement goal in the past 2 years, they have not moved off their schedule.
They correctly maintain that all of the agreed-to escapement goals are being met with their original schedule.
They have conveyed that they remain flexible to discuss gear conflict, tides, first starts, etc.
They have conveyed that they don’t feel obligated to help us achieve the policy objectives.
At the last meeting, the issue of 4 calendar days or 96 hours came up. They felt we needed to clarify that. I have asked for that clarification, and it is 4 calendar days. That has really hamstrung us.

Boo [Bleeeeep!] Hoo!

GH chinook seldom meet escapement, yet QIN doesn't feel there is a conservation problem. Says a lot, right there.

Sg

Ask the tribe located about 30 miles upstream (the basin's namesake) if they think there is a conservation issue, and I suspect you may get a different answer.... Makes one wonder what thinking goes on at the QIN table. Maybe for them it's simple: "We catch plenty of fish; there must not be an issue."

Low holing does lend a much more optimistic perspective, it seems.

So far, the paraphrased response above more or less looks the way I thought it would.

After running through my e mail I can put forth the following as pretty much right on.

1. WDF&W is still trying to have further conversations regarding the 2014 seasons but the QIN has pretty much put their cards on the table. One must remember that the QIN court mandates require them to manage to 50% harvestable across the bar. Escapements goals are for the basin and the QIN has no responsibility to manage down to the goal of each tributary reaching the escapement goal just the basin and the Humptulips is in the Chehalis Basin or Grays Harbor numbers. My view as to the new management plan excluding QIN participation is BS as the QIN could have participated at the Commission level but CHOSE NOT TO. They would prefer a behind closed door deal with WDF&W with no pier review or public scrutiny. Hell WDF&W has refused to provide the proposed QIN seasons for 2014 so this secrecy bit is both of them not just the QIN.

2. Humptulips hatchery funding that the QIN & WDF&W are working on is still in limbo.

3. Wynoochee Mitigation is still a issue. In 2010 the QIN's Ed Johnstone called BS on a revised plan that WDF&W put together which basically dropped out the additional mitigation production. WDF&W has been claiming that the QIN are holding things up and yes that may be true but Thank God or we would have truly had Region 6 running a muck. Now that the Commission has said the issue must be resolved by September so they need to go at it and get it done but not out of the public eye with WDF&W using some so called Technical Committee as a license to raid the mitigation funds.

4. With the passing of Billy Frank the QIN is pretty much looking inside to tribal functions honoring one of their leaders so not much is going to happen for a couple of weeks or so.