With one of my rare days off this time of year, I just tried to speak with Bill Freymund in the Montesano WDFW office. He told me that he would not speak with me on the basis that I placed data / comments from him on the site after our last discussion. Pretty sad, are they afraid that that people might see through the smoke-and-mirrors??

So, I'd urge you contact to him at 360-2749-4628 and ask him some hard questions that I have for the WDFW in the following note I sent to the Governor, Director of WDFW, and the WDFW Commission after he fefused to speak with me. If he doesn't want to talk with me and have me pass it on, perhaps he'd like to field a few dozens calls asking the same things!

Dear Fish & Wildlife Commission, Director Jeff Koenings, and Governor Gary
Locke:

My name is Bob Ball, I'm a full-time steelhead and salmon guide that lives
in Forks and fishes the Quillayute and Hoh watersheds.

I am writing to you to voice a concern over a brief talk that I just had
with WDFW employee Bill Freymund in the Montesano office.

I called Bill to ask about the Department's take on the current poor returns
we are seeing on the North Coast Rivers. By the Department's numbers,
through the last update on your site, it is reported that only 302 steelhead
have been harvested by sports anglers on the Quillayute watershed thus far
this winter ... far, far below normal numbers.

When I contacted Bill, he told me that he would not discuss the matter with
me due to the fact that I placed data and a portion of his comments on my
website after one of our previous discussions and said that I would have to
place a written request to ask him any questions.

Given the very poor upstream escapement that we are faced with, I frankly
find it appalling that a regional biologist refuses to discuss what many of
us see as a crisis in this area. I believe that his refusal to speak with me
to be poor policy and counterproductive to the future health and management
of the North Coast rivers.

In addition to informing you of the aforementioned action of a Department
employee. I also wish to have a few questions answered if I may.

First of all, given the poor returns, higher than normal netting success for
the tribes, low snowpack leading to poor spawn survival this coming spring /
summer, closures in the Puget Sound region and the ensuing increase in sport
traffic on the North Coast streams - why has there been no move to protect
what few fish are making it up the river? Is it the Department's contention
that the returns are normal?

Secondly, in light of the Department's recent news release at: http://www.wa.gov/wdfw/do/jan01/jan1801a.htm in which Regional Fisheries
Manager Tim Flint states "... that recreational crabbing must remain closed
to give tribal fishers an opportunity to catch their court-ordered share of
the overall allocation." I am looking for some insight as to why tribal
netting has not been reduced on our area rivers to allow the same "catch-up"
scenario.

While I fully believe these rivers should be managed with a
catch-and-release requirement and a more conservative and less
harvest-oriented model, as it stands right now, the fishery is managed for
harvest like many others and I don't understand why the same type of closure
isn't implemented when the table is turned against sport anglers?

From the last report I received, tribal success was up over 250% on the
Quillayute systems, and 300% on the Hoh. Yet, sport catches have plummeted
this season both for C&R and harvest-minded anglers. Clearly, there is no
50-50 split currently in place, why has there not been an adjustment?

In addition, I urge you to follow the National Park Service's decision to
implement emergency regulation changes to full C&R on the Queets watershed
in response to poor returns. I see that the Humptulips has been closed to
all fishing as of March 1 - a situation that places severe negative economic
impacts on local businesses around that area. Please help avoid such future
closures in the Forks area by emplacing more restrictive regulations and
working to curb tribal netting in periods of such poor returns.

I thank you for your time and your response.

Respectfully,

Bob Ball
Bob's Piscatorial Pursuits
Alaska / Washington Salmon, Steelhead, Halibut Fishing
312 Steelhead Ave Forks, WA 98331 (360) 374-2091 http://www.piscatorialpursuits.com
"If it's wild, let it go!"

Maybe Mr. Freymund should take a look at who ultimately pays for him to have a job. I beleive that the WDFW is funded by tax dollars like the ODFW is here in Oregon. He should answer any questions the public (read taxpayer) would have. If he feels differently, maybe he should think about not taking that part of his pay provided by tax dollars. Amazing that some, not all, public employees forget that they are just that, PUBLIC EMPLOYEES not private employees. If you read this Mr. Freymund, please reconsider your position on answering questions posed by the public. After all they provide you and your family with with a career and food for your table.

Bob
Did you identify yourself and indicate that you might be posting some of the conversation on a website? You probably don't fall under the classification as "the media" so its probably a grey area as to whether you had any obligation to reveal this. Public employees do answer to the public but they do not have to put up with rude, disrespectful, misleading behavior... try that on an officer of the law (public employee) and see where it gets you!

Forgive my French, but that is crap.

Under the Freedom of Information Act, anything that you requested and he gave you is public information that anyone else can access, with a proper request.

His unwillingness to give you further information only further disintegrates the already bad relationship between sportfishers and the state fish "managers".


Fish on...

Todd


[This message has been edited by Todd (edited 03-02-2001).]

I would be interested on what kind of response you receive.

I feel if a crab harvest is managed per region, so should the steelhead harvest. Currently the steelhead harvest is managed statewide per year. So the overharvest of the tribes during the winter is diluted in the numbers, when the state as a whole is examined. Look at the pretty graph http://www.wa.gov/wdfw/fish/harvest/98-99/99shs-f.htm
Every river should be treated as a separate region, and harvest after escapement should be managed accordingly.(if one is going to manage a watershed in terms of harvest) As it currently is , the state allows the overharvest of certain regions, arguing the sportsmen make up for it in other regions, during the other months of the year. This logic allows for certain wild strains to be overharvested. Poor management

If you want to be shocked, look at some of the tribal numbers(or should I say reported numbers) http://www.wa.gov/wdfw/fish/harvest/98-99/99shs-e.htm
Look at the total catch in the Queets. I wonder why escapment is so close.

[This message has been edited by KORE (edited 03-01-2001).]

Just read those harvest numbers and my stomach is churning, just like after yesterdays quake. It just makes me sick!

------------------
Steve Ng....The FishNg1
99 F-350 Powerstroke 4x4 , 18ft Alumaweld Formula Vee Sled, 115 Yamaha, and now also Campion 215 walkaround, 135 Merc.

Bob,
Just be thankful you don't live in SW WA where they are currently netting for spring chinook on the Columbia river. What are the odds that a 10+ pound wild winter steelhead gets up here!! I was out on one of our rivers today and we did hook fish but wouldn't you know it the beautiful 10lb hen I caught had net marks all over it, you could see where the scales were missing.. IT MAKES ME SICK!!! All those late feb. and early March hogs, I sure wonder where they went?????
Keith


------------------

Legal Advisor

According to Bob's own post Mr. Freymund did suggest that if Bob had questions he go the route of asking for the information formally in writing (i.e. Freedom of Information Act). There is no obligation under the Freedom of Information Act that requires a response over the phone whenever anybody might feel inclined to call.

Hey Cosmo Skunkmaster - You're right, public employees don't have to disclose everything over the phone whenever someone calls - BUT - unless someone is being a pest, the public interest, and likely the intent of the Freedom of Information Act and the Public Disclosure Act, is best served when public employees provide as clear and accurate information as possible to whoever asks for it.

In my mind there are only two exceptions, the most important being information developed for litigation purposes that is legally protected from disclosure and then the aforementioned public pest that occasionally prevents employees from tending to their work. I strongly doubt Bob's request falls in that catagory. Since Bob's questions pertain to run strengths, over and under harvests, and the disparity between treaty and non-treaty catches, the only legitemate reason for not answering Bob's questions is that the Department must be preparing a legal case regarding the tribes' steelhead harvests, right? Form your own opinions, folks.

Methinks our public servants dislike disclosure of poor public decision making. Who wouldn't, that's human nature. However, that doesn't discount the public's right to know.

Sincerely,

Salmo g.

Yeah, put it in writing. Thats a whole lot easier than talking. What an efficient way to do business, ask someone to put in writing what they want to ask, and then have a written reply sent back. Man, why did'nt the private sector think of that? Just think of how much would be saved by not having that inefficient means of communication called a telephone, no phone bill! And as a side bonus, it would take care of that real menace the cell phone that everyone hates, but owns. See, you never realized how smart the government is. Yeah right! What a waste.

Sounds like the Tribes are running the Fish and Wildlife Dept. when it comes to fisheries. I think this is something to ask Curt Krammer at the next meeting of the WSC.
Bob could you send your questions in writing to this guy? Just curios as to what his response would be. thanks.

Salmo,
I just read your reply to Blackjack's questions about hatchery and wild crosses. As usual, your response was very well thought out and thorough. Can you imagine trying to explain all of the details you listed over the phone? As Blackjack stated, he had printed your response so he could study it.

I think the same can be said about Mr. Freymund's response to Bob's questions. I think it would be best to have the answers in writing so we can see exactly what the WDFW response was. One need only look at Bob's original post to see an example of how details can be mis-interpreted. Bob stated that only 302 steelhead have been caught by sportsmen in the Quillayute this year. I looked at the WDFW web page and 302 is the number of wild fish checked so far and it is not expanded to total catch. I'm sure there is still a large discrepancy between Tribal and sport catches but we surely have more than 302 fish.

Thanks for the correction that I NEEDED to make (a little late now ...opps) on my wording fishslayer ... in the midst of the little fit I had after reading the wording of the crab closure I didn't write that it was the creel count and not the total catch ... a big oopsy, but nonethless, the creel count is still much lower than what is normal and even if you expand the creel count numbers to estimate the total sport numbers, there's still a huge disparity in the balance between the 50-50 split parties. Thanks for catching it, wanna proof-read more of my fit-written messages??

I will send a formal and hopefully, a little more precise note, off to Mr. Freymund requesting the numbers

Big Bob - I rarely disagree with you on the issues discussed on this BB and it's even rarer than I would write about it. But this is one of them. I will try to do so politely.

It is likely that Mr. Freymund was only following agency protocol. Face it Bob, you are not just a fishing guide on the OP. You are also the proud owner/sponsor of a well known and widely respected website on steelhead/salmon fishing. As such, you can disseminate information quickly and widely. Therefore, to a government employee you may be no different than a newspaper reporter. In fact, when you obtained quotes from Mr. Freymund and put them on your website, you did what any reporter from, say, the Seattle Times might do. But your media is electrons, not paper and ink. Plus, your media is accessible to anyone in the world with a computer and a modem. Free of charge. Can’t say that about the Seattle Times. Indeed, your website is a very powerful tool for dissemination of information. In some cases, more powerful than a newspaper.

Most government agencies have very strict protocols regarding information provided to the press. Since Mr. Freymund appears to consider you a member of the press (rightly or wrongly), he was just doing his job. From what I can tell, Mr. Freymund did not say that said he would not provide you with whatever information you want. He just said you must provide your questions in writing. It seems like a pretty extreme response to me but before we get too wound up over this issue, perhaps you should get a copy of the WDFW policy for media contacts and see what flexibility it contains. I know nothing about their policy, or even if they have one; but if they do, I’m sure their intent is not to prevent the free flow of information but to make sure the agency speaks with one voice on important management issues. I’m sure we can all agree with that. After all, there is nothing more confusing to anglers than getting two different answers to the same question from the same agency.

Just my .02



------------------
MSB

Big Bob - I rarely disagree with you on the issues discussed on this BB and it's even rarer than I would write about it. But this is one of them. I will try to do so politely.

It is likely that Mr. Freymund was only following agency protocol. Face it Bob, you are not just a fishing guide on the OP. You are also the proud owner/sponsor of a well known and widely respected website on steelhead/salmon fishing. As such, you can disseminate information quickly and widely. Therefore, to a government employee you may be no different than a newspaper reporter. In fact, when you obtained quotes from Mr. Freymund and put them on your website, you did what any reporter from, say, the Seattle Times might do. But your media is electrons, not paper and ink. Plus, your media is accessible to anyone in the world with a computer and a modem. Free of charge. Can’t say that about the Seattle Times. Indeed, your website is a very powerful tool for dissemination of information. In some cases, more powerful than a newspaper.

Most government agencies have very strict protocols regarding information provided to the press. Since Mr. Freymund appears to consider you a member of the press (rightly or wrongly), he was just doing his job. From what I can tell, Mr. Freymund did not say that said he would not provide you with whatever information you want. He just said you must provide your questions in writing. It seems like a pretty extreme response to me but before we get too wound up over this issue, perhaps you should get a copy of the WDFW policy for media contacts and see what flexibility it contains. I know nothing about their policy, or even if they have one; but if they do, I’m sure their intent is not to prevent the free flow of information but to make sure the agency speaks with one voice on important management issues. I’m sure we can all agree with that. After all, there is nothing more confusing to anglers than getting two different answers to the same question from the same agency.

Just my .02



------------------
MSB

Why cant we ask and question the allocation.....its a law. Thats like asking a cop your rights and him saying no! As a taxpayer , resident of washington, and most importantly a sportfisher I deserver to know whats going on with OUR fish or laws for that matter. We have the right to know.

[This message has been edited by BK (edited 03-07-2001).]

great questions Bob. After you comply with strict govt protocals (sounds like Borg lingo....resistance is futile) maybe we can get back to the subject.

Hey Cohoangler ... yes, you're right that they probably view me as the same. But if evry bit of info from the state had to come in written correspondance, think of the countless hours it would take across the state. It's a lot easier to verbally answer the questions than writing them out ...

Perhaps this is why we are faced with program shutdowns, lack of new enforcement and so on ...

While I know they have every right to do this, it just seems like there's more red tape everywhere, especially when they probably don't want to field these to begin with.

I'll follow their protocol if that's what it takes, and I'll pass the answers along after they get around to replying to them ...