Link is to D's Rant on the FTC website. http://fishingthechehalis.publishpath.com/is-nof-dog-pony-show- In our recent PDR we received some very interesting pieces of information ( which are linked to ) regarding the NT Commercial WAC. Bottom line R-6 staff were informed that they were violating the WAC process in 2011 and they simply ignored it. No need to read the Rant if you do not care to but the links will provide insight in how R-6 does business.

https://docs.google.com/folder/d/0B2tWjgmgVy3yTXZ6UmNHZkUtWFU/edit This is a link to the first installment on PDR 13108 we just received. The larger files are multiple e mails ( hundreds ) so when you open the file you will have to do a down load ( usually on a prompt ) and get a warning that the file is to large to scan but the files are virus free so just hit a download. You will see a list of e mails at the top of the page and it scrolls and you can open each up. Adobe Reader or Adobe is required and some of what I outlined will differ dependent on how your computer is set up. Interesting reading.

Yesterday I listened to a group of steelhead anglers who were upset at the way some steelhead proposed regs were politicked for and snuck back into the process. Couple that with the whole Cabezon situation and it looks like there are a lot of games being played with the regulation process.

Anyone else have anything to add that they know about the reg / WAC process not being followed. In Willapa / GH that utter disregard is documented, as is the Cabezon fiasco. Seems to be a pattern of manipulation of the WAC / public hearing process to get and outcome that is not necessarily what WDF&W staff says it is. Thoughts?

For my part the following links take away any of the " " we are confused bit " often used. This link is to an email thread where Lori Pruess clealy identifies to R-6 staff that you can not make major changes to the CR 102 https://docs.google.com/folder/d/0B2tWjg...Q0VBcG56bG1HZTg which is how the regs / seasons are set. Why is this important? Take this year the CR 102 was in March 8th before even the Advisers met which means no major changes allowed with out a supplemental WAC or redo is another way of putting it.

Hit this link https://docs.google.com/folder/d/0B2tWjg...QmxIYXNKZVNKWVk and look at 2010 / 2011 / 2012 and you will see the very process used each year that Lori is commenting on and this link will be the history by years. http://apps.leg.wa.gov/wac/registerfiling.aspx?cite=220-36-023

Bottom line is as put forward before, the NOF process for sports and commercial fisheries is smoke and mirrors in and attempt to meet requirements for public input. Most folks have given up on that process but few have grasped just how WDF&W did this year after year. The reality is they do a public NOF that is little more than a " rope a dope " then pretty much do whatever they want which has been in recent years screw the fish and in river sports.

The link provided is to a document that was attached to a e mail in the latest PDR response. Why is this interesting one might ask? Well it concerns Wynoochee Mitigation and not the funds from TCL but the ORIGINAL dam mitigation. Twice before WDF&W has attempted to cut the Steelhead Mitigation in budget reductions and the local folks nailed them. Seems old WDG used the funds to upgrade Aberdeen Lake Hatchery and guaranteed they would make up future shortfalls out of pocket. Now WDF&W appears to be out rummaging around again.

The thing about both the original mitigation and the failure to produce the additional fish that were funded at the time the dam power plant went in 1993 is utter lack information they provide even when asked point blank.

Anyway here is the link. https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B2tWjgmgVy3yWGtBV1hEMHpzRmc/edit

Was asked to update on the commercial seasons so here it is ........... got me. The silence is deafening but sooner or later WDF&W has either to move the current CR 102 forward http://wdfw.wa.gov/about/regulations/development.html#13-01-064 or drop a supplemental WAC for a redo. The last word was seven days @ 25% mortality with tangle nets but that takes a supplemental WAC and as as I said nothing yet. As to the QIN seasons their are lots of rumors swirling around but nothing formally announced.

As to the question regarding the accuracy of the preseason forecast, they are seldom correct. https://docs.google.com/folder/d/0B2tWjg...d2NJRHV4Sm5SSkE for 2013 Coho and https://docs.google.com/folder/d/0B2tWjg...SXE0Rnd6SFlRNUk for 2013 Chinook. The best way to view the spreadsheets and down load them ( just hit the down load arrow ) as the data base stores them as they were constructed and by down loading you get the functioning sheets. Their is a considerable amount of information in each spread sheet including performance graphs. Just walk through the tabs at the bottom of the sheet.

The paper below is a briefing paper created for the WDF&W Commission by R-6 staffer Kirt Hughes. Now lets not get side tracked on a hatchery good or bad thing as this was a conceptual briefing but that said look to the thoughts involved. In particular how the proposal is completely aimed at creating another commercial fishery and maybe the sports might catch some. ( I will highlight the spots ) Now I do not think this ever went anyplace but the mind set and thought process on assigning values does come out. Often words while not intended to do so show the bias in a persons thoughts unintentionally and brother this little ditty does. I will try to get a link to the Power Point presentation that went with this soon.


“GREEN SHEET”

Meeting dates: August 8-9, 2008 Meeting (briefing)

Agenda item #: Willapa Bay SAFE Program – briefing

Staff Contact: Kirt Hughes, Region 6 Fish Program Manager (Fish Program)

Presenter(s): Kirt Hughes, Region 6 Fish Program Manager (Fish Program)

Background:

In June 2008, WDFW staff received an official request from the Washington Fish and Wildlife Commission, to investigate the benefits, risk, logistics and costs associated with the development of a hatchery spring Chinook (SAFE type project) program to provide additional fishery opportunity in Willapa Bay. Staff has discussed the merits of this type of program and outlined the details associated with developing such a program in the Willapa Bay watershed. The following is a brief synopsis of those discussions.

Meaningful Fishery
The first item to consider is whether a meaningful fishery would be created. From a commercial perspective the threshold for a meaningful fishery was measured in terms of ex-
vessel value a range of program sizes were determined by back-calculating price/pound,
average weight of returning adults, contribution to fisheries and smolt release to adult survival rates. Assumptions utilized in these calculations are an average 15 pounds per fish, $7.50 per pound with 72.9% of the adult return contributing to the local commercial fishery. An average of 0.88% smolt to adult return rate was used to estimate the number of fish available to the fishery. The contribution to fisheries and return rate are averages for similar programs in the lower Columbia River. A pilot or proof-of-concept program with a 50K yearling smolt release would provide a projected return of 440 adults and approximately $36,000 ex-vessel value annually after the third release year; a full production level release of 300K – similar to Deep River net-pens – would yield 2,640 adults with a projected ex-vessel value $217,000. Defining a meaningful fishery in recreational terms is a bit more abstract although availability of returning adults in abundance that support commercial harvest generally provides for recreational opportunity at some level.

Facility Location
Any of the three existing Willapa hatchery facilities (Forks Creek, Nemah and Naselle) could rear spring Chinook, however that production should not displace current production.
However, because of the additional water needs and pond space required for rearing spring
Chinook, current programs would be impacted if this new production was anticipated to occur at existing facilities. With that in mind, a net-pen facility offers the greatest possibility of
success. Net-pen production would be developed in a similar fashion to the Columbia River
Select Area Fishery Evaluation Projects (SAFE projects) at Deep River, Youngs Bay and other locations in the lower Columbia River. Additionally a net-pen facility would concentrate returning adults in the vicinity of the pens thereby maximizing the contribution to harvest.
Net-pen site location requires certain physical conditions such as water depth, high levels of tidal exchange or freshwater flow, and a host of parameters associated with permitting a site.
Within Willapa Bay the best locations appear to be near Toke Point or in the lower Willapa River between towns of South Bend and Raymond; other sites continue to be explored.

Broodstock Source
There are no natural spring Chinook stocks in Willapa Bay, therefore a hatchery brood stock would require an out-of-basin source. As with any hatchery program there are disease considerations that must be taken into account. Development of a hatchery Spring Chinook program in Willapa Bay would need to be done consistent with fish health standards and in compliance with the co-managers disease policy. Sources considered in this evaluation:
• Willapa Bay; does not have natural spring Chinook stock.
• Chehalis River springs Chinook; closest stock geographically, however the absence of spring Chinook hatchery programs within the Chehalis system would require brood stock
collection from natural spawning stocks within the upper river.
• Sol Duc River spring Chinook, which were historically introduced have integrated genetically with the Sol Duc River summer Chinook and as a result have a later run timing.
• Puget Sound has a number of spring Chinook hatchery programs, however these are recovery projects and as such not available for transfer to out-of-basin locations.
• Cowlitz and Kalama hatcheries in the lower Columbia River basin, both have spring Chinook program; these are considered to be the most viable sources.

The most likely brood stock source would be Kalama Hatchery because of their ability to provide early rearing of juveniles needed to meet program goals. A proof-of-concept size program might represent a first step. Fingerlings would be transferred to the site after initial rearing at a land-based facility in the lower Columbia, again Kalama in the most likely brood source. It is assumed that a proof-of-concept level of production could be absorbed into Kalama’s current program. However at the receiving facility on additional hatchery worker would be required to feed and care for the fish while there are in the net-pens. To reduce disease loss due to temperature of the receiving water it is recommended that fingerlings be transferred in September or October and reared to release in May.

Non-target Stock and Species Interactions
Hatchery net-pen operations and fisheries management have the potential to have unintended implications on non-target stocks and species. The full extent of fishery impacts on non-target stock and species are unknown. This is the case for any new fish production project and those which have not operated for the length of time necessary to evaluate through data collection and monitoring. Proper fishery management requires that all fisheries are monitored at some level. Monitoring and evaluation of fisheries targeting a spring Chinook in Willapa Bay would be critical to understanding the impact on non-targeted stocks and species and the success of the program. To facilitate monitoring and evaluation all releases would need to be coded-wire tagged and externally marked. The commercial component would require on-board observer coverage and dockside sampling. Additional spawning ground surveys and hatchery sampling would be needed. This information would provide estimated catch, bycatch, estimated escapement back to the release site and the spawning grounds to obtain survival rates, as well as potential information about interactions with natural spawning stocks.

Enforcement
This fishery would be conducted during spring and early summer, during a time when fisheries had not been previously occurring in Willapa Bay. This would require additional enforcement. It is likely that this would result in some additional enforcement costs and potential conflicts with other enforcement priorities.

Cost
Net-pen and associated cost of set-up are estimated at $7,000 per net-pen (except permitting); loading densities and size of net-pen evaluated here have a capacity of 50,000 yearling smolts
averaging 10 fish/pound. Annual fish food cost currently $4,300, per year per 50,000 yearlingsmolts being reared from fingerling to an average of 10 fish/pound at release. Salary and operating costs (vehicle, vessel, etc.) for a temporary worker to care for and feed fish while in the net-pens are approximately $63,000. The cost of initial rearing at the source facility has not been evaluated. For the initial acquisition of permits, sighting of the location, installation of required markers, buoys, and other associated hardware, plus the aforementioned actual rearing costs, the pilot projects estimated first year budget impact would be approximately $120,000; subsequent annual costs would be about $75,000 at the pilot project level of fish production. The total cost of this program if initiated would require new funding from the legislature. Additional cost will be associated with monitoring and evaluation once adult begin
to return and fisheries are initiated.


Policy issue(s) you are bringing to the Commission for consideration:
Should WDFW staff continue to pursue this activity?


Public involvement process used and what you learned:
It will be important to involve the public should WDFW Regional Fish Program staff be asked to move forward with investigating this concept further. As part of that staff would look to the Willapa Bay Fishery Advisory Group to gain initial insight and comments from both recreational and commercial interests and from the local Regional Fisheries Enhancement Group. Staff would also request that the Hatchery Scientific Review Group review and comment. Should those discussions result in a favorable outcome relative to this concept; staff would begin discussing logistical aspects of this program with other agencies at both the state and federal level, such as: Washington State Department of Ecology, United States Army Corps of Engineers, and NOAA Fisheries to name a few.


Action requested:
None. Briefing Only.


Draft motion language:
N/A


Justification for Commission action:
N/A

Form revised 10/25/07

The value of a recreational fishery is participation. The "perfect" fishery is lots of anglers and no catch; notice how sports fisheries are all about "opportunity"? That mindset has been around WDF/WDFW for a long time.

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B2tWjgmgVy3ybDhZWWRMOWVONU0/edit

The link to the Willapa Springer presentation.

Looking at the SAFE pens in the CR:

SAFE pens have the same inherent problems as private aquaculture pens and go through similar permit process.

It would seem hypocritical for those against private aquaculture pens to be for state run SAFE pens in Willapa.

This posting is a letter obtained in PDR 13108 directed at the Commission in 2010. Not a lot has changed since, well they moved the NT Nets back a bit in the bay but that is all. I have blocked out the gentleman's name as a courtesy

.
From:
To: Commission (DFW);
Subject: Willapa Bay and Grays Harbor
Date: Wednesday, March 16, 2011 12:25:36 PM

Commission Members,

I thought you might be interested in this situation.


Westport/Grayland Chamber of Commerce

I am contacting you on behalf of recreational fishers in Willapa Bay and Grays Harbor. Business owners should be able to support both commercial and sport fishing. They should not be bullied into making a choice. Most of the gill netters in this area are fine people. There is a very small fraction that want the sport fishers out by any means. There has been name calling and harassment on the Tokeland
docks. Here is an example, a man was walking down the dock to his boat in the morning. He passed by a few gill netters standing by one of their boats. He said nothing to them but after he walked by one of them shouted "we gotta get these ---- suckers outa here". They threaten business people with the loss of their dollars if they support us in any way. My wife and I stayed a month per year in Tokeland for 18 years and spent a considerable amount of money from South Bend to Westport. We don't fish there anymore because of what I have encountered. I won't elaborate on what I have been called.

In past years, we had to struggle but both sides got a decent season at the annual salmon meetings. In 2010 the WDFW made no pretense of fairness. The sport fishing representatives that attended thought it was not a legitimate negotiation. They held private meetings with the gill netters before each of the last two meetings. Towards the end of the last meeting, one of the commercial fishers said something like, "we've wasted enough time, isn't it time to tell them how it's going to be?" Soon after his statement the DFW did just that. In recent years the gill net fishing started around mid September in Willapa Bay. In 2010 They received a so called "test fishery" with not many boats but quite a few dates. They got two full fleet openers in August just when the recreational season is beginning. They started their regular season
about four days earlier than the recent average.

The DFW also required us to release all unmarked Chinook and coho. This is very frustrating, many anglers reported a 50% release rate. With Chinook, the naturally spawning and hatchery salmon are all the same stock. The native silvers that are scarce don't come in until nearly a month after the marine sport fishery is basically over. They required the gill netters to release the unmarked salmon also. Catch and release gill netting makes no sense. At the mortality rate they are assessed at, they wasted 940 kings and 9,544 silvers, then add the sport fishing mortality. This is an awful waste of food and I was told it was a disgusting sight, the dead salmon drifting down with the tide.

Westport spends a lot of money attracting us to this area. The DFW and the gill netters appear to be trying to get rid of us. The Department totally ignored the letter the Chamber sent last year. If this doesn't change there will be a constant decline in recreational fishing. I was told the South Bend launch was down about 50% last year, Tokeland was down too. Some members of the Legislature seem to have some

leverage on the DFW. You probably know a lot more about that than I do. We do not want to take over, we just want what is fair for us and for the business community. I am sending a copy to the 19th District Legislators.

On the subject of South Grays Harbor, as you know a great Chinook sport fishery has been lost. It was good for us and for you. The DFW still allows a non tribal gill net Chinook mortality and they have allowed a sport fishing Chinook mortality with a coho fishery. With Tribal fishing, I wondered if you had tried talking directly to them. This could be of interest to sport and commercial fishers also. There is also the habitat destruction in the Chehalis headwaters. I really hope we can make some progress on all these problems.

Sincerely,

CR 102 Supplemental Splits Grays Harbor / Willapa WAC



As we have all waited for the CR 102 Supplemental for Grays Harbor & Willapa that will define the Non Treaty Commercial seasons one had to wonder how WDF&W would get the implementation timelines in sync with the legal requirements. TaDa .................. now we know how, you separate Willapa from Grays Harbor with a CR 102 Supplemental. http://wdfw.wa.gov/about/regulations/development.html#13-01-064

From WDF&W the notification below:

Today we filed a CR-102 Supplemental for Willapa Bay and river-mouth definitions. You can view it by going to this page, http://wdfw.wa.gov/about/regulations/development.html, and clicking on the item for NOF Willapa Bay/Grays Harbor. Our Fish Program tells me they do not know when they will be ready to file a CR-102 Supplemental for Grays Harbor. I’ll let you know if and when we do file one.

With mid August for the Willapa Commercial start up and supposedly the first week of October in the Chehalis something had to give as the timeline for public comment / passage / implementation on the combined Grays Harbor and Willapa WAC was about to be out of reach for the agency. To be honest this is not really a surprise for the reasons stated above and at first read looks to follow what Region 6 staff put forward at the Olympia North of Falcon meeting March 29th.

Grays Harbor? Darned if I know but they do have a CR 102 on the books filed March 6th ( same Link provided above ) that could be voted on by the Commission or they can do a CR 102 Supplemental. Anyway you look at it the separation of Willapa and Grays Harbor did little to solve any of the issues revolving around the 2013 Commercial Seasons just simply got the Willapa timeline in compliance with the law.

Come to think of it that is a new one .............. being in compliance with the law ............... look at the progress!

Everyone should make a point of submitting input to WDFW. This is basically NOF starting over because WDFW couldn't push through it's original plan.

I forgot to add that another individual was told by R 6 staff that the CR 102 supplemental for the GH commercial fisheries will be submitted July 3rd. As to the QIN, all I know is that the word is they have a " big disagreement" with the agency. Time will tell but until the commercial CR 102 supplemental is filed and the QIN commercial days are announced one has no idea on the lay of the land this fall for the in river sport.

At last WDF&W Region 6 ( R-6 ) has put the CR 102 Supplemental for the Non Treaty Commercial Nets ( NT ) for Grays Harbor in play and here is the link to take a look at it. http://wdfw.wa.gov/about/regulations/development.html#13-01-064 As outlined at the March 29th North of Falcon ( NOF ) by R -6 Fish Program Manager Ron Warren at the meeting in Olympia it is seven days on the Chehalis with tangle nets. To achieve this the Humptulips 2 C is not targeted because that fishery would harvest a substantial number of Chehalis bound Chinook but as last year the Quinault Nations ( QIN ) commercial fishery will in all likelihood pick up the slack.

So simple terms what does this mean to the inriver sport fishery and the fish. Now not knowing the QIN's netting schedule for the 2013 one can only make a educated guess that with the similar run size to 2012 it will closely resemble the 2012 effort. So folks you should see nets of one kind or another in the Chehalis six to seven days a week for the entire month of October. Which means the inriver sport is getting paper fish just as the last four years but real opportunity is not there because the fish will be killed at the 101 bridge in Aberdeen. The same old inept and corrupt management of Region 6 marches on!!!

So what to do? Well to start you can object to the CR 102 Supplemental by e-mailing your comments opposing this horrific giveaway to the commercial fishery to Lori.preuss@dfw.wa.gov. and urge others to do the same. Fishing The Chehalis will begin a in depth review of the CR 102 Supplemental after the Forth of July holiday so more to come to be sure!

(3) Recovery boxes and soak times:


(a) For Areas 2A and 2D, soak time must not exceed 45 minutes. Soak time is defined as the time elapsed from when the first of the gillnet web is deployed into the water until the gillnet web is fully retrieved from the water.

(b) Any steelhead or salmon that is required to be released and is bleeding or lethargic must be placed in a recovery box prior to being released to the river/bay. The recovery box must meet the requirements in (d) of this subsection.

(c) All fish placed in recovery boxes must be released to the river/bay prior to landing or docking.

(d) Each boat must have two operable recovery boxes or one box with two chambers on board when fishing Areas 2A and 2D. Each box must be operating during any time the net is being retrieved or picked. The flow in the recovery box must be a minimum of 16 gallons per minute in each chamber of the box, not to exceed 20 gallons per minute. Each chamber of the recovery box must meet the following dimensions as measured from within the box: The inside length measurement must be at or within 39-1/2 inches to 48 inches, the inside width measurements must be at or within 8 to 10 inches, and the inside height measurement must be at or within 14 to 16 inches. Each chamber of the recovery box must include a water inlet hole between 3/4 inch and 1 inch in diameter, centered horizontally across the door or wall of the chamber and 1-3/4 inches from the floor of the chamber. Each chamber of the recovery box must include a water outlet hole opposite the inflow that is at least 1-1/2 inches in diameter. The center of the outlet hole must be located a minimum of 12 inches above the floor of the box or chamber. The fisher must demonstrate to department employees, fish and wildlife enforcement officers, or other peace officers, upon request, that the pumping system is delivering the proper volume of fresh river/bay water into each chamber.

In a nutshell the new CR102 REDUCES commercial time from 14 days spread over the entire Hump/Chehalis estuary using std gillnet mesh and condenses the fishery to 7 days prosecuted ENTIRELY on the Chehalis side with small mesh "tangle" nets.

The old schedule which was approved at NOF on March 29 was as follows

Five 24-hr days in 2C (Hump estuary) on Aug 20, 24, 28, 30, and Sept 6.

Eight 12-hr days in 2A/2D (Chehalis estuary) on Oct 1, 2, 12, 14, 19, 20, 22, 24.

One 24-hr day in 2A/2D on Oct 21

...


The new revised schedule submitted in the CR102 yesterday reflects a recalculation of the assigned tangle net mortality for this fishery. With a bit of pressure WDFW was persuaded to increase the release mortality by an additional 67% compared to that proposed on Mar 29 at NOF. That recalculation logically increased commercial chinook impact by 67% resulting in a massive scale-back of the original GH gillnet schedule above.

The new and improved schedule is as follows:

Seven 12-hr days in 2A/2D on Oct 7, 8, 14, 22, 24, 29, 30.

Note that the final opener on Oct 30 allows them to fish an expanded area for the entirety of 2D (all the way west to the marker at the mouth of Johns River)

As Rivrguy states, even though the reduction in GH gillnet time went from a total of 240 hrs down to only 84 hours, ALL 84 HOURS WILL BE PROSECUTED ON THE CHEHALIS SIDE.

This does not include the tribal schedule, which has yet to be published.

Well those are the proposed days that were revised in the text of the CR102 filed y'day. As I was typing my post, my 50 yr old brain kept telling my fingers, "Damn, I remember something more along the lines of 14 days on the Chehalis side"

Not sure how I managed to remember that, but hey.... the ol' noggin' was right!

I took an iPhone image of the final package (in Excel format) that was approved at NOF on March 29, and here it is...



As you can see, Region 6 was ready to go with a 14 day package on the Chehalis side.... and that doesn't count the 5 days on the Hump side. So a total of 19 days has been reduced to only 7.

Count our blessings?

FYI, from a letter I received, here's the final breakdown on how all the paper Chehalis chinook will be spent this fall.

Total harvestable = 2768 kings, to be split 50:50 w/ QIN.

QIN share = 1384 kings.... consider them spent, and then some

NON-treaty share = 1384 kings.... allocated on paper as follows:

Chehalis Tribe = 229 (16.5%)
State nets = 170 (12.3%)
Rec = 985 (71.2%)

Spent right down to the LAST paper fish in grand NOF tradition!

It will be interesting to see how it all works out in real life.

Count our blessings? I'd like to think so but the bigger (and all important) unknown is how does the tribal side respond?

Quoting Riverguy from an earlier post...



Pretty easy to surmise what that disagreement is.

So, the scaling back of the NT commercials to 7 days could definitely be a blessing IF the tribe doesn't fill those lost NT days with days of their own above and beyond what they are already planning. If they do, it will be the same obscene net schedule as the last several years with no marked improvement or hope for the in-river fishermen having decent numbers to fish on.