Grays Harbor Fisheries Discussion

6 p.m. to 8 p.m.; Montesano City Hall, 112 N Main St., Montesano.
Public discussion of management objectives and preliminary options for Grays Harbor. Fishery management objectives and preliminary fishing opportunities for 2017 are discussed.

Here are the staff notes from the last Public meeting for GH NOF. This link http://wdfw.wa.gov/fishing/commercial/salmon/season_setting.html will get to the GH NOF page and the suggested seasons for Recs are in it.


2017 GRAYS HARBOR NORTH OF FALCON PUBLIC MEETING MARCH 28, 2017
MONTESANO CITY HALL 6-8 pm

WDFW Staff: Larry Phillips, Annette Hoffmann, Mike Scharpf, Kim Figlar-Barnes, Curt Holt Public: 19 individuals

• Will the public be able to call in and listen to PFMC if one can' t attend?

• Correct hatchery Chinook numbers for Chehalis & Humptulips in handouts

• Concerns with Chehalis tribe harvest impacts on spring Chinook

• Marine Area 2.2 Chinook fishery

o If catching too many Chinook - cut off just Chinook retention in 2.2 and do not close entire fishery

o Is there a reason to conserve Chinook jacks? Can there be a Chinook jack retention fishery?

o How many jacks are caught Aug 1 to Sept 15?


• Hatchery vs. Wild comparison of jack Chinook - Check hatchery jack returns

• Rate of harvest on Chinook low with WDFW

o Will WDFW discuss Chinook harvest impacts with Quinault tribe?

o Could Quinault harvest be affecting Chinook stock not meeting escapement?

o Ask Quinault tribe for net per landing information

• Humptulips Alternative

o Make mark select from Oct 16th to Nov 16th hatchery Coho & hatchery Chinook retention, release wild Chinook

• Commercial Fishery

o Meet with Quinault's ask not to fish more than 3 days when Commercials fish

o If Chum are available: Can Commercials fish further into Nov - WK 46?



• Recreational Sports Fishing: Would like to fish 7 days a week during the season

• Wynoochee River

o All Species rule Aug. 16th-Nov. 30 single barbless hooks required - Can that be changed to use barbed hooks later?

• Satsop River Snagging at S-Curves

o Do not allow fishing at S-Curves
o Open S-Curves Nov 1st
o Proposal Suggestion- Would like the upper Satsop to remain open (S-Curves)
• Use tackle restrictions like a 36 inch leader length under the float (used in Skokomish River fishery)
• Float and bait mandatory

• Fish friendly culvert replacement (habitat expansion): When will habitat expansion affect escapement numbers/goals?

• Check to see if GH Advisors phone numbers are on web page



Testimony: Members of the public were not interested in giving an " Individual 3 -minute public testimony"

Bunch of yipping around Willapa and nope I do not know the whole story except that a Rec Adviser ( not from the area ) suggested cutting back Rec limits to allow for a expanded NT Commercial season. Best I can tell between my puter screen crying and flaming e mails that one started things up.

GH is moving along and we have a conference call so more later. Oh we are going to have to live with non retention for Chinook be it H or W as not enough fish. So scream if you like but it is tight and in order to have a season something had to give. Also the QIN numbers as to harvest look OK as they do not go into Oct 8th and only for 2 then 3 then two. State is looking to stack in the Nt's behind them but in compliance with the GHMP.

Anyone have a Willapa update? I stayed away this year so most of my information was second hand. With that said the model options presented revolved around NOR Chinook impacts which is correct by the policy. Then this jumped at me. The options for the Rec revolved around bag limits 2 / 4 / 6 ( might have missed one or so ) which is not odd either except this. Willapa's policy is rather new and with the wipe out commercial fisheries in the past absolutely no long term data sets as to the potential Rec impact of a proposal. Add to that marine Willapa is the boat rule for limit so be it 2 / 6 limit it matters little as two or three guys in a boat seldom limit the boat.

So how does the model change? Effort in other words bigger bag limit which means more fishers so more impacts. In river this can track true and usually does but marine? When pigs fly comes to mind. Then how do you model effort that had not existed until the past few years ? You don't to be honest other than WAG ( wild ass guess ) but I think District 17 has developed a new method! It is called the crystal ball method! Gaze into the clear glass ball woefully and the future will be shown. It is likely to be as accurate as what is going on now.

Why is this important? By reducing the Rec harvest ( crystal ball ) it frees up mystical impacts for the Commercial fleet. Now if you think any of the forecasted harvest numbers are correct please give me your " crystal ball " as mine cannot do it!

Read down a bit to the second CR bit. This is interesting in several ways but frankly it is that the agency is working on a trap / selective commercial fishing method that appears will truly be selective. That is new to say the least.

WDFW RULEMAKING UPDATE
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
600 Capitol Way North, Olympia, WA 98501-1091
360-902-2403 | Rules.Coordinator@dfw.wa.gov
http://wdfw.wa.gov/about/regulations/



· Proposed Rules

·

· Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)
It is necessary to make changes to language related to people with disabilities in order to ensure compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Title II and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act. Moving WAC sections is required to better streamline and clarify ADA rules for the public.

o CR-101 - filed as WSR 17-09-096 on April 19, 2017
Invitation to discuss rules on this subject

o Public Comment Period: TBA

· Trial fishery in Willapa Bay
The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife is interested in designating a trial commercial fishery in Willapa Bay for the purpose of testing a new gear type and intends to issue a limited number of Trial Fishery Permits that set the permissible time, place, and manner of fishing using a newly designated gear type. The gear type being considered is a floating fish trap. This fish trap uses non-permanent spuds to hold the trap in place; no permanent structures will be installed or used. This fish trap passively funnels adult salmon from the "lead", a net positioned at an angle from the shore, into a series of compartments leading to the final compartment or spiller. Fish are able to swim freely the entire time. Hatchery fish are then removed from the spiller and the natural-origin fish are released untouched through a door at the back of the fish trap to continue their trip upstream to spawn.

o CR-101 - filed as WSR 17-09-085 on April 19, 2017
Invitation to discuss rules on this subject

o Public Comment Period: TBA

· General Information on the Rulemaking Process is available here: http://wdfw.wa.gov/about/regulation

In the evaluation of the trap they need to look closely at the economics, especially how many participants are needed to install/operate. We have GN and troll, which are single operator and maybe one crew. Reef nest take a couple of folks to operate and purse seines are more crew-intensive. My point is that both state and tribal GN use the one-man one operation model with the idea that one hard-working person can "make it". I know some opposition to selective fishing with beach seines and such is the requirement for more people. On a declining resource, sharing income may not work.

I would supect that implementation, if it works, will have to closely look at replacing the GN with an option that is economically more viable in addition to being ecologically more viable.

Probably also need to look at release of other species (sturgeon) and how pinnipeds react/interact.

What we have here is a e mail from Mike at R-6 on finalizing the 2017 Chehalis & Hump seasons. Now I cannot post a link to this new model as it is not up but if you want it drop a PM to me. The concerns from some were the 4 days in 46 which is the week of Nov 12th and lates so read on through Mike's bit and I hoped in afterwords for a bit.

Mike Scharpf e mail:

Hi All,

I wanted to update you on the progress on the 2017 Grays Harbor salmon season setting process. We had a meeting with the Quinault Nation last week and came to an agreement on schedules. The recreational fishery is the same as was discussed during the April 14th Advisory Meeting, so NO Changes. There were a couple slight adjustments to the non-treaty commercial fishery. The schedule for 2A/D are 2 days in week 43, 2 days in week 44, no days in week 45, and 4 days in week 46. In 2C there are 1 day each in weeks 43 and 44 and 2 day in 45. The attached planning model represents these schedules. I don’t believe another meeting is necessary, but I’m available for conversation if you have questions.

What I need from the commercial sector are dates and times for the openings. All of the days are modeled for 12 hours so keep that in mind. Also, I’m assuming that the Quinault’s will fish Sunday noon through Tuesday noon in the Chehalis during week 43, so the only time available would be noon Tuesday to midnight, then pick the 12 hour period you want for Wednesday. I need dates and times as soon as possible so the process progresses. Thanks.

Thanks for all the patience and work you have provided this years.


Now immediately some did a double take and concerns for the late Coho came forward which they should. The Chehalis Coho run timing is a bit off from the natural one mostly due to harvest, rebuilding efforts, and labeling. The run timing we have now is not the natural one as the early part of the Coho run is larger than naturally due to the fact that old Simpson hatchery ( now Bingham ) used run compression of the natural side for the egg take. Compression is achieved by taking your eggs off the very front of the run and not much else. Add to it that no mass making so over years the wild side and the hatchery are absolutely the same fish. Which led us to use this stock to rebuild the run with plants & egg boxes in the 70's & 80's so the early part of our Coho run has the same timing but is larger % than was naturally. These are called normal timed.

Now the middle is much smaller than it was say in the 70's for the normal reasons and it shows in the middle November through the first part of Dec. This is where confusion arrives as many call these fish lates and NOPE they are not. This is the old natural run time and it used to be the peak. Not anymore as harvest knocked them back over the years so these fish are the remnants of the old native run. These fish on paper are also part of the normal timed run.

Now the late run timing has moved around on paper but mostly due to the hatchery needs not the fish. When I was a kid we started fishing for lates in the last two weeks of December and January with January being the hog month. Now it was old Dept of Game that used about every early Steelhead stock that they could find ( Chambers Cr preferred ) for plants in a misguided attempt to keep the QIN from netting native Steelhead. That sorta worked for Steelhead but just plain damn near wiped out the native late Coho. Just so it is known I ( being my rude self ) called BS and the Regional Director told me it was Dept of Fisheries problem.

Now they have late Coho at Bingham but open the trap on Dec 1 ( unless things have changed ) so in reality the hatchery late production is not a true late but rather a sorta highbred. CWT's over the years show that a % of normal timed Coho come back late as do a % of the lates come back early. So by moving the start date at the trap led many to believe that Nov is late timing and nope. The lates evolved mainly in the East Fork Satsop & tribs as they naturally do not reach flows and such ( many are summer dry bed creeks ) for spawning to past mid Nov so they evolved in a later timed and bigger fish. Those genes are pretty much gone from the hatchery production.

Hopes this answers some of the questions.

For those interested about Willapa this came in from the Advocacy. Now this is about 2015 but is still relevant.
May 12, 2017

To: Interested Parties

Re: Willapa Bay Gillnetters Association v. Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife

A hearing on the state's motion to dismiss the Willapa Bay Gillnetters Association suit challenging the 2015 season is scheduled for Friday, May 19th at 1:30 PM before Thurston County Judge James Dixon. The Advocacy and the CCA have intervened on behalf of concerned citizens. Advocacy attorney Joe Frawley will be present representing the two co-intervenors. The majority of the effort will come from the Attorney General's Office who represents WDFW. For those who would like to attend, the address is 1100 Deschutes Pkwy SW, Olympia WA 98502. Mapquest directions are here. https://www.mapquest.com/latlng/47.0315,-122.91026

The primary argument by the WBGA is the season set during the North of Falcon process was influenced by the Willapa Bay Salmon Management Policy adopted by the Fish & Wildlife Commission and as a result, the economic value to the gillnet fleet of the season did not rise to an appropriate level. Another claim of the WBGA is no conservation concerns are in play in WB as all stocks are "healthy".

The judge may or may not issue a ruling from the bench that day. Granting the state's motion to dismiss would effectively stand down the suit subject to any appeal of that decision. A decision to not grant the motion would result in the case being scheduled for trial at a future date.

Respectfully,

Tim Hamilton
Twin Harbors Fish & Wildlife Advocacy

This bit below is from Barb at R-6 updating things for folks. Now for those that do not track things all the time the link to the website has all of the NOF GH & Willapa documents up ( I think ) to look at.


FROM BARB:

Hi Everyone, We wanted to send you the final version of the 2017 Willapa Bay Planning Model before we file the CR-102.

That Excel file is attached.

I’ve sent the model to Olympia to be posted on the same webpage we have used all season.
Here is the link in case you’ve lost it: Willapa Bay and Grays Harbor North of Falcon | Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife

Just an fyi, the agency recently switched to Windows 10 so if you have a problem opening the attached file that might be the problem but I’m unaware of any reasons why that might happen.

We are planning on filing the CR-102’s on May 24th. Once that happens, I will send out information (date, time and location) regarding the Coastal Freshwater, Marine (Areas 1 – 4 including WB Marine Area 2.1 and GH Marine Area 2.2) and Commercial Public Hearings (they are separate).

You will be able to submit written comments to the Rules Coordinator at any time once we file the CR-102’s and attend the public hearing to provide comments if you choose.

Here is a update of sorts from the Daily World and this one is hard to get ones arms around.


Willapa Bay, Grays Harbor natural fall Chinook removed from NOAA overfishing list
Mon May 15th, 2017 7:00pmNEWS





Willapa Bay and Grays Harbor natural fall Chinook have been removed from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s 2016 annual report to Congress on the status of U.S. fisheries overfishing list. A second report details the economic impact of commercial fishing and the seafood business across the nation.

A stock is on the overfishing list when the catch rate is too high. A stock is on the overfished list when the population size of a stock is too low, whether because of fishing or other causes, such as environmental changes.

The report, released last week, includes two other Washington salmon runs removed from the overfishing list: Hoh River coho salmon and upper Columbia River Basin summer Chinook.

“These reports show that the U.S. is on the right track when it comes to sustainably managing our fisheries,” said Samuel Rauch, acting assistant administrator for NOAA Fisheries. “Rebuilding and keeping stocks at sustainable levels will help us address the growing challenge of increasing our nation’s seafood supply and keep us competitive in a global marketplace.”

Meanwhile, U.S. commercial and recreational fishing generated $208 billion in sales, contributed $97 billion to the gross domestic product and supported 1.6 million full- and part-time jobs in 2015 — above the five-year average — according to NOAA’s Fisheries Economics of the United States report also released. The report attributes $2.5 billion in sales to Washington state.

“U.S. fisheries are big business,” said Rauch. “Sustainable management of our nation’s fisheries, supported by sound science, opens up economic opportunities to Americans along the supply chain — from buying bait at a local marina to enjoying a seafood dinner.”

According to the report, the U.S commercial fishing and seafood industry — including imports — generated $144 billion in sales in 2015, a 6 percent decline from the previous year, and supported 1.2 million jobs, a 15 percent decline from 2014, although this is still above the five-year average. Factors such as the “warm blob,” marine toxins and El Nino affected the Pacific marine environment in 2015, and West Coast fishermen saw lower landings and revenue for several key commercial species.

Saltwater angling generated $63 billion in sales across the economy in 2015, up 5 percent from 2014. Job impacts in the marine recreational fishing industry remained steady from 2014 at 439,000 jobs. Mississippi, Connecticut, South Carolina, Washington and Alaska had the greatest recreational fishing sector job growth in 2015.

Update on WDF&W's effort to get a selective fishery up and running. It is interesting how little recognition of this effort which is pretty much a first around here. A true selective fishery that is.

Also got word from the Advocacy that the Gillnetters did poorly in court on the Willapa challenge on the 2015 seasons which was really a challenge to the Willapa Policy. More on this soon.




From Region 6:

The Willapa Bay Salmon Management Policy (C-3622) seeks to achieve conservation and restoration of wild salmon in Willapa Bay and avoid ESA designation of any salmon species. While conservation of salmon species within Willapa Bay is the paramount objective of the policy, the policy also seeks to maintain the economic well-being and stability of both recreational and commercial fisheries within Willapa Bay. Under Guiding Principle #4, the Department is to investigate and promote the development and implementation of alternative selective gear to provide an opportunity to target fishery harvests on abundant hatchery fish stocks, reduce the number of hatchery-origin fish in natural spawning areas, limit mortalities on non-target species and stocks, and provide commercial fishing opportunities.

The Department has sent out a call for proposals to commercial fishers for alternative selective gear to be considered. One proposal for using a floating pontoon fish trap will involve the development of a trial fishery. On April 19th, 2017, the Department filed a CR-101 in relation to the use of a fish trap in Willapa Bay in 2017 and will hold a series of meetings over the next few weeks to seek input as to the formulation of the rules and regulations around this trial fishery.

Meeting dates and times are as follows:

Willapa Bay Advisory Group Meeting
May 31st, 2017
2 p.m. to 4 p.m. at Montesano Regional Office

Willapa Bay Public Meeting
June 2nd, 2017
6 p.m. to 8 p.m. at the Montesano City Hall

This is about the NT Net Commercial fishers challenge to the 2015 season which was really a challenge to the Willapa Policy. They loose.



From: Grossmann, Mike (ATG) [MikeG1@ATG.WA.GOV]
Received: May 19, 17:26
To: Unsworth, James W (DFW) [Jim.Unsworth@dfw.wa.gov]
CC: Scott, James B (DFW) [James.Scott@dfw.wa.gov]; Hoffmann, Annette (DFW) [Annette.Hoffmann@dfw.wa.gov]; Herring, Chad J (DFW) [Chad.Herring@dfw.wa.gov]; Thiesfeld, Steven L (DFW) [Steven.Thiesfeld@dfw.wa.gov]; Mcclellan, Barbara A (DFW) [Barbara.Mcclellan@dfw.wa.gov]; Lininger, Tami L (DFW) [Tami.Lininger@dfw.wa.gov]; Frymire, Bill (ATG) [BillF@ATG.WA.GOV]; Shorin III, Joseph (ATG) [JosephS@ATG.WA.GOV]
Subject: WBGA v. WDFW - Judge Dixon rejects all claims and affirms WDFW's actions



Jim,

Just a quick heads up on the litigation brought by the Willapa Bay Gillnetters’ Assn. challenging the Willapa Bay Salmon management policy and the 2015 commercial fishery rules. Bill Frymire and I spent the afternoon in Judge Dixon’s courtroom arguing the merits of their legal challenge. Judge Dixon agreed with the State’s arguments and dismissed all their claims.

In summary:

1. The claims arguing the WB policy looks too much like a rule and is not flexible to accommodate new information that might be provided in rule-making were dismissed on alternate grounds – that we had already litigated this to success in Pacific County; and that, even if the merits of their arguments are considered anew, the Commission and WDFW were acting within their statutory authority to engage in policy and rule-making.

2. The claim WDFW failed to properly consider economic impacts was dismissed on the grounds that conservation trumps economic considerations; that the agency worked hard to consider economic issues where they could do so consistent with conservation; and that general concerns about ways to possibly conduct alternate economic analysis presented by their expert were not sufficient to displace the reasoned economic analysis undertaken by the Department.

3. The claim WDFW improperly reduced the harvest rate on Chinook was rejected on the basis that the Department’s analysis of conservation was thoroughly and well-reasoned, and thus cannot be characterized as arbitrary and capricious.

4. The claim WDFW improperly used emergency regulations to undertake in-season management was dismissed on the basis that WDFW’s actions were consistent with APA requirements on emergency rule-making, were well supported by in-season data collection and analysis, and were thus both lawful and well-reasoned.

Some of the gillnetters were pretty angry. I expect an appeal, but we will see. Judge Dixon was well-prepared and outlined his decision-making in a way that will make success on any appeal a heavy lift for the WB gillnetters.

As always, this was a great team effort. Jim Scott (!!), Chad Herring, and Steve Thiesfeld were huge amounts of help, and the work we/they did with the Commission and DFW staff to anticipate each and every possible argument – from the policy phase to rule formulation - made this case a compelling story of conservation and responsible agency action that considered all interests and made tough but well–reasoned decisions. The story was easy to tell and obviously persuasive to the court.

Tami, please pass along to members of the Commission.

Mike

Michael S. Grossmann
Assistant Attorney General
Fish, Wildlife and Parks Division
P.O. Box 40100
Olympia WA 98504-0100
(360) 586-3550
(360) 586-3454 fax
><((((º>`·.¸¸.·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·...¸><((((º>¸.
·´¯`·.¸. , . .·´¯`·.. ><((((º>`·.¸¸.·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·...¸><((((º>

Given WDFW's track record about complying with rule-making laws we owe a lot of thanks to the Advocacy for forcing them closer to compliance as the Judge ruled that they did a good job.

If the gill netters had made their same arguments 10-15 years ago could the same be said?

Major props to Twin Harbors Fish/Wildlife Advocacy for being the original catalyst for major harvest and hatchery reform in Willapa Bay.

Thanks to THFWA and CCA for joining to intervene in the gillnetters' litigation against the WFWC policy which has been under relentless attack since its adoption.

This court decision is another affirmation of the validity of the Willapa Bay Policy and a victory for conservation.



http://wdfw.wa.gov/commission/policies/c3622.html

OK what we have here is my request regarding the WDF&W effort in Willapa to get some trapping going. Now a lot of ... ah ..... crap (?) been flying around about this but mostly behind the scenes so read with that in mind.

Dave,
A lot of the things you are requesting have yet to be finalized but I can provide a few details that I do have.

Please remember the details below are still preliminary and could change depending on the comments we hear from the public and the final decisions from upper management.

1. Attached are the RFP documents that went out in December.
2. The trap needs to be floating fish trap that recruit Chinook passively. The trap needs to be able to pass natural, unmarked Chinook through without handling.
3. The trap will be limited to natural, unmarked Chinook impacts remaining but not exceed the 20% in the WB Planning model for Naselle River that gets finalized through the Rule Making process this year.
4. The trap will only fish three days/week, Monday – Wednesday starting mid-August through the end of September to fish through the run timing of Chinook.
5. Only 12 hours each day will be fished but those 12 hours will likely be broken up into two periods to be able to fish on the flood tide.
6. The numbers of fish that will be allowed to be retained will be limited to:
o 300 hatchery Chinook per week or the total natural, unmarked Chinook impacts, whichever comes first.
o 500 natural, unmarked coho for all weeks combined. Once the 500 natural coho have been retained, the release of natural unmarked coho will be required from that point forward.
o No chum retention will be allowed to be consistent with the proposed regulations for the commercial gillnet fishery this year.
7. The current site location that was proposed to the Dept. is roughly a half mile section of the Naselle River that is 2.5 miles upstream of the Hwy 101 Bridge.
8. Two live boxes would be required to be on-board the trap.
9. An HPA would be required to be obtained by the fisher through WDFW’s habitat program.

All other details have still not been finalized. There are still a lot of details that needs to be worked out.

Annette Hoffmann is the lead on the project so if you have questions or concerns please contact her to discuss those.

Thanks,
Barbara



Then we have the RFP that went out but only to NT nets permit holders which frankly is questionable as to legality.



December 15, 20I 6

To whom it may concern,

WDFW is interested in any alternative gear ideas or suggestions you would like to pursue in 2017 or in future years in Willapa Bay. This letter is intended to provide background, guidelines, and the procedure for the application process.

In the Willapa Bay Salmon Management Policy C-3622 under Guiding Principles #4 it states "Investigate and promote the development and implementation of alternative selective gear. The development of alternative selective gear may provide an opportunity to target fishery harvests on abundant hatchery fish stocks, reduce the number of hatchery-origin fish in natural spawning areas, limit mortalities on non-target species and stocks, and provide commercial fishing opportunities". The policy also states under the section Fall Chinook Salmon #2b, "pursue implementation of additional mark-selective commercial fishing gear to enhance conservation and provide harvest opportunities. The Department shall provide to the Commission by January 2017 a status report and by January 2018 an assessment of options to implement additional mark-selective commercial fishing gear in Willapa Bay. The assessment shall identify the likely release mortality rates for each gear type, the benefits to
rebuilding naturally spawning populations, and the benefits and impacts to the commercial fishery".

With this in mind, the staff in Region 6 will initiate the process of investigating ideas for alternative gears that may have the potential to be successful in Willapa Bay. Legally, no other gear other than gillnet is allowed. However alternative gears would be designated as a trial or feasibility fishery.

There are some limiters that you need to be aware of:
I . The timeframe that any alterative gear that may be allowed to be pursued in 2017 would be required to stay within the dates provided in the Willapa Bay Salmon Management Policy C-3622. Any ideas for areas below Leadbetter Point (2M, 2N, and 2R) would not be allowed to begin until after Labor Day and any ideas for areas north of Leadbetter Point (2T and 2U) would not be allowed to begin prior to September 16th .
2. Alternative gear is defined in the WB Salmon Mgmt Policy as having a release mortality rate of less than 35%.
3. Any alternative gear ideas would be limited to a small number of natural, unmarked Chinook impacts that have been set aside in the planning model for Willapa Bay. The maximum number of natural, unmarked Chinook impacts would be shared by all of the alternative gears tested in 2017.

4. You would be allowed to keep hatchery Chinook and sell to whomever you choose. However the total number of hatchery Chinook would be limited to a number that has yet to be determined. This would probably depend on each alternative gear type being tested.
There are a few steps that we will need to follow. The first step would be to complete the application included in this packet and return to WDFW. WDFW would then approve or disapprove any ideas and issue permits for those approved. Those permits would include daily reporting requirements, handling procedures, and observer requirements. WDFW would notify the Fish and Wildlife Commission and legislature of upcoming trial fishery and justification as a courtesy. An emergency rule would then be used to open any trial or feasibility fishery to allow for the use of selected alternative gears in Willapa Bay in 2017.

If you are interested in pursuing any ideas regarding the possible use of alternative gear in Willapa Bay, please fill out the application included and return to WDFW by the close of business January 20, 2017. We will then follow up with you and get more details regarding your ideas or plans. This application will start the process for you.

Please take the time to consider this opportunity. Regional staff are open to all ideas and their possibilities for the future of commercial fishing in Willapa Bay.

Thank you,




Barbara McClellan WDFW - Region 6
#360.249.1213 office Barbara.Mcclellan@dfw.wa.gov

Now this is interesting on several levels but is about Willapa alternate gear commercial. Now read this from the bottom up as it is a e mail thread and I removed the e mail addresses as they number pushing a hundred and not nice to throw out. Be nice if staff got BCC down but oh well.

Thanks for your comments. However, with respect, NOAA is federal and the Department is acting under authorization of a state statute. Then, a special new license must be issued for an emergence fishery and the current commercial gillnet license in Willapa Bay/Columbia is not valid or applicable in an emergence fisheries.

Also, you'll see that the RCW you quote says a license has to issued in accordance with another Chapter RCW 77.65.400. Here it is and look to the emphasis I added where it says such an emergence fishery can not be used in any area where there is a limitation on commercial licenses which is exactly what is the case in Willapa.

Chapter RCW 77.65.400
(1) The director may by rule designate a fishery as an emerging commercial fishery. The director shall include in the designation whether the fishery is one that requires a vessel.
(2) "Emerging commercial fishery" means the commercial taking of a newly classified species of food fish or shellfish, the commercial taking of a classified species with gear not previously used for that species, or the commercial taking of a classified species in an area from which that species has not previously been commercially taken. Any species of food fish or shellfish commercially harvested in Washington state as of June 7, 1990, may be designated as a species in an emerging commercial fishery, except that no fishery subject to a license limitation program in chapter 77.70 RCW may be designated as an emerging commercial fishery.
(3) A person shall not take food fish or shellfish in a fishery designated as an emerging commercial fishery without an emerging commercial fishery license and a permit from the director. The director shall issue two types of permits to accompany emerging commercial fishery licenses: Trial fishery permits and experimental fishery permits. Trial fishery permits are governed by subsection (4) of this section. Experimental fishery permits are governed by RCW 77.70.160.
(4) The director shall issue trial fishery permits for a fishery designated as an emerging commercial fishery unless the director determines there is a need to limit the number of participants under RCW 77.70.160. A person who meets the qualifications of RCW 77.65.040 may hold a trial fishery permit. The holder of a trial fishery permit shall comply with the terms of the permit. Trial fishery permits are not transferable from the permit holder to any other person.

In other words, if it is limited to just commercial license holders in an area where licenses are limited, it can't be done at all. I'm not sure exactly where the Dept is headed as the last two routes they took were obviously contrary to state statute. That's why they are "rebooting" which was my recommendation during the public meetings.

Then, state statue sets out the Commission as the party in charge and it has adopted a Willapa Policy which states: Purpose: The objective of this policy is to achieve the conservation and restoration of wild salmon in Willapa Bay and avoid ESA designation of any salmon species. Where consistent with this conservation objective, the policy also seeks to maintain or enhance the economic well-being and stability of the commercial and recreational fishing industry in the state. You'll notice that industry is singular. Doesn't say rec and commercial industries which would be required to consider each one separately. A single fish industry comprised of a rec and comm sectors are common and consistent throughout state statutes.

Also, I'd point out that the Wild Fish Conservatory, which is a nonprofit same as the Advocacy, has been conducting a experimental trap program in the Columbia River since 2016.

Respectfully,

Tim Hamilton





On 6/13/17 4:45 PM, Chris Philips wrote:
With respect, NOAA Fisheries defines “fishing industry” as commercial, and the RCW mentioned below is directed at the commercial fishery.

https://app.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=77.70.160

Those involved in the experimental fishery should be exclusively commercial fishermen, as directed by statute.

Regards,

--
Chris Philips
Managing Editor

Fishermen's News
2201 West Commodore Way
Seattle, WA 98199
206-284-8285
www.philipspublishing.com




From: Tim Hamilton <tim@autowa.org>

Subject: Re: Alternative Gear Update

Annette- Thanks for the update.

I have read your commentary shown below and do not find it changes the email I sent in earlier requesting the Advocacy be considered an interested party eligible for participation in applying for a permit. If the Department feels it can deny the Advocacy participation, please inform me and cite the statutory language that the Dept would rely upon to deny our participation.

Also, you reference that an advisory board will be appointed under RCW 77.70.160 selected from "the effected industry....." The statute actually says "the director shall appoint a five-person advisory board representative of the affected fishery industry." Fishing industry is an inclusive term identifying all those involved in fishing, including the recreational sector which could end up the most effected by a trap, especially one located in fresh water where current commercial license holders are forbid from fishing under a current commercial license. Therefore, the Advocacy strongly advises the Dept not appoint exclusively from the commercial license holders so the advisory group is reflective of fishing industry not just one sector.

Respectfully,

Tim Hamilton
Twin Harbor Fish & Wildlife Advocacy



On 6/13/17 1:45 PM, Hoffmann, Annette (DFW) wrote:
Hello All,

I want to thank everyone for all their input on the alternative gear considerations and provide you an update on where we are at in the process.

The Department has been pursuing the “implementation of additional mark-selective commercial fishing gear to enhance conservation and provide harvest opportunities” consistent with the guidance of the Willapa Bay Salmon Management policy (C-3622). Our specific objective for 2017 has been to determine if trap gear can effectively catch Chinook salmon with minimal immediate mortality to unmarked fish. In pursuit of that objective, the Department solicited public input on conducting a trial commercial fishery in Willapa Bay using fish trap gear upriver of the standard commercial fishing areas during timeframes of expected Chinook migration. Public comment was received through a series of stakeholder, advisor and public meetings. The comments resulted in mixed support for the concept of a trial fishery, with concerns raised over the unlimited entry associated with a trial fishery (RCW 77.65.400), the proposed testing of the gear throughout the entire return period of Chinook at locations upstream of the commercial fishing area boundary, and the ability of interested parties to participate given the amount of resources needed to build a fish trap. These informative public comments have resulted in a decision by the Department to pursue our 2017 objectives through an experimental fishery rather than a trial fishery, although maintaining the time/area considerations necessary to answer the key question. An experimental fishery uses an advisory board from the affected industry to set boundaries around the number and qualifications of participants (RCW 77.70.160) and will entail the use of special permit issued by the Director to ensure that the fishery is conducted in a controlled and scientifically defensible manner.

We will be rescinding the current CR101 for the trial fishery, filing a new CR101 for an experimental fishery, and convening the advisory board. We expect to be able to provide more details as they become available.

Annette

Sir Walter Scott: “Oh what a tangled web we weave, When first we practice to deceive.”

Exactly Larry!

"commercial fishery in Willapa Bay using fish trap gear upriver of the standard commercial fishing areas during timeframes of expected Chinook migration."

This is a thinly veiled ploy by the Commercial fishing Industry and WDFW to introduce commercial fishing into upper fresh water.

Once started, never ending. Imagine, commercial fish traps on all our favorite rivers! Now imagine, sport fishing closures on those same rivers....