For those of you who don't really know, or understand, what is going on in these "secret elite fishery technical committee meetings" please go to; http://www.ci.tacoma.wa.us/Power/parks/cowlitz/default.htm, when you get there, hit "Fishery Technical Committee". You will be able to read their "corrected" public versions of their meeting minutes, and read what they want you to known. There are a few "rats" in this FTC that are willing to give up your sport fishing opportunity on the Cowlitz, and maybe you may be able to identify (smell-out) who these "rats" really are without me saying who they are. Please don't mind the fact that they are only (and always have been) running about 3 months late (I wonder why?). Sometimes it takes awhile to delete all the real facts, to cover your @ss of what you had really said (remember, these are the "new breed" of the good old boys). So much for their BS about public comment and our opportunity to make comment in a timely matter to make any real difference in their actions!

This is not "adaptive management". All this is; is learning how to cover your @ss because you were to d@me lazy to do your job right in the first place, and then face the public with the results of your decision, and the effects that they will have to the fishery! Without any real sport fishermen having a voting right in this elite "decision making committee", and the opportunity to tell the public of what is really being planned, the Cowlitz sport fishery is doomed! As it stands right now, there is nothing more than a bunch of elite snobs that "think they know" what is best for the Cowlitz. Lets make the needed change before it's too late!

I DARE "them" to make comment back to me about this issue. I would love this board to read that debate.

Cowlitzfisherman

Is the taste of the bait worth the sting of the hook????

Cowlitz

Everytime I went to that page it said it had been removed.

I tries it on three different comps(different isp's) and the same thing.

Wonder if it was removed for a reason????

cf,
Help us out on this one...page doesn't come up and sends me to city of tacoma. Did a search there on "fishery technical committee" and didn't find anything. I would appreciate in your own words what you believe is going on.

Jim

The link you supplied us has a comma at the end of it. Here's a link that should work.

http://www.ci.tacoma.wa.us/Power/parks/cowlitz/default.htm

after you click on his link and its acts like it can't get there click on the new link in middle of page it'll get ya there. Nothing like some big wig flatlanders to screw something up and blame someone else for their mistakes.

Thanks BillBob for putting up the right link. Sorry I didn't get back earlier to correct the problem, I apparently added a comma at the end of the web site location. Hope that this information will let you folk's know what's really going on behind those closed doors! Maybe now fishermen will understand why we fishermen must have a voting seat when it comes to how the Cowlitz fishery will be managed for the next 35 years. All theses bureaucrats want is to allow us to make comment AFTER they have decided what they think is best for us. That must not be allowed to happen!

It's not too late to tell the big wigs in WDFW that they should remove their signature from the Settlement Agreement now. It will be really interesting to see what was said at the missing May FTC meeting minutes. We must not allow these elite group of bureaucrat people to dictate and decide what our future sport fishing needs will be on the Cowlitz. We must remain united if we are to succeed… and we will do that!!

Cowlitzfisherman
Is the taste of the bait worth the sting of the hook????

Cowlitz - Sorry but I lost ya on this post. I read the meeting minutes from several FTC meeting and your lengthy post regarding WDOE's problems with water quality certification. However, I'm not sure of your point.

The WDFW/NMFS/Tribes have the authority manage the fisheries resources of the state of Washington. As anglers, we don't always agree on the management priorities outlined by these agencies. In fact, wide spread disagreement is normal. You seem to disagree with the direction taken by this group. That's okay. Disagreement and discussion is appropriate in any public forum where important issues/resources are at stake. However, you seem to disagree with certain folks without saying who they are, why you disagree, or how you think things ought to be done. Some additional information on your part would be helpful.

As you know, the fishery management agencies are required to manage for the long-term good of the resources, not necessarily for the users of that resource (i.e., recreational anglers such as you and I) or anyone else. If the agencies are putting other interests ahead of the fish resources or are letting Tacoma Power roll over them, then please point out specifically where this is happening so we can join you in protesting those actions.

However, let's not lose sight of the big picture on the Cowlitz River. FERC and Tacoma Power killed the river on the alter of hydropower development back in the early 60's when they licensed and built Mossyrock and Mayfield dams. Now that the licenses have expired, we are left with trying to pick up the pieces and restore whatever is left of a once beautiful and productive river system. Dam removal would be nice but that ain't happening. So, there isn't much there to work with and I would like to think the settlement agreement provides alot more protection and mitigation than has been present since the projects were built. But clearly there is no way anyone can restore what's been lost. But thanks for staying with the issue and keeping us up to date.

Cohoangler

Let me attempt to answer your questions as best as possible, in the order that you have asked them. First you asked; "The WDFW/NMFS/Tribes have the authority manage the fisheries resources of the state of Washington. As anglers, we don't always agree on the management priorities outlined by these agencies". For the first 4 years, the Yakima Nation did not give a tinkers dame about the Cowlitz, until TACOMA arranged a private secret meeting with them because the Cowlitz Indian Tribe has from day one, demanded volitional fish passage (fish ladders) over the dams. From day one, NMFS representatives did not get along with the Cowlitz Tribe. But they (NMFS) did suck up to the Yakima's.

Did you know that the Yakima's Indian Tribe never even protested Tacoma's original Cowlitz license? But the Cowlitz Tribe did. They have have been at it since the early 1950's! And they have always been there on the side of the fish's best interest. If any tribe has a right to harvest, it is the Cowlitz Tribe! But Tacoma was smart, and decided to play the Yakima against the Cowlitz Tribe.

Question #2; "You seem to disagree with the direction taken by this group. That's okay. Disagreement and discussion is appropriate in any public forum where important issues/resources are at stake. However, you seem to disagree with certain folks without saying who they are, why you disagree, or how you think things ought to be done. Some additional information on your part would be helpful" OK, I will do the best that I can with my answer to your questions. First, some of these people are members of this board, and I see no reason to attack them personally by naming them. Secondly, I know them personally, and I highly respect their opinion, even those it is different then that of my own. They basically are representatives of either the state or federal agencies. That in its self tell us a lot (read their names)!

Some members of that group were supported financially during the relicensing process and we (CPR-Fish) were left on the side lines because we would not suck up to Tacoma, or American Rivers (AM), and Trout Unlimited (TU). Basically they cut off our use of the "technical advisor" and denied us the opportunity to either ask for, or request any extremely important studies, that in my opinion would have changed the "Settlement Agreement" in its final form. There is an accent word that is commonly used for such services, but this is not the place to use it.

It took and official request and petition to FERC by CPR-Fish ( I know, becuase I wrote it) before FERC was forced into the position that that they HAD TO cut a deal with American Rivers, and Trout Unlimited to allow us to once again use the "technical advisor". The glitch was that we had to run our study requests through American Rivers first before it could get approval and the settlement agreement was almost a done deal at that time.

Do you know what the term "Never bite the hand that feeds you means"? They did! Do you really think that AM and TU would insult Tacoma and cut off their own gravy train money? It sounds like you have been around this game for some time now, so make your own conclusions.

I will not say who is making the decisions now for these 2 groups, but I will tell you who the representatives were during this relicensing process. The person who was representing AM during the time of the settlement agreement was Mr. Rob Masonis. The person, who was representing TU at that time, was Bill Robinson. I do not know if these same persons are the ones who are making all the decisions now, but if you read the minutes, you can make that decision for yourself. Your third question is a good one. And I do have an answer for you! You said; "As you know, the fishery management agencies are required to manage for the long-term good of the resources, not necessarily for the users of that resource (i.e., recreational anglers such as you and I). That is true Cohoangler, but Washington state law also mandates that WDOE (another state agency) must "under the current law, Ecology has a duty, under the anty-degrad action standard, to protect that existing, beneficial uses, absent any legislative amendments to the contrary. To read the standard any other way would effectively negate the policy of the protecting all existing beneficial uses… without further degradation which would interfere with or become injurious to the existing beneficial uses… "WAC 173-201-070 ((1)." Now what does that tell you about recreational fishing on the Cowlitz?

Your following question was; if the agencies are putting other interests ahead of the fish resources or are letting Tacoma Power roll over them, then please point out specifically where this is happening so we can join you in protesting those actions. Cohoangler, I hope that this same answer will answer your above question too!

And your final question was; "Now that the licenses have expired, we are left with trying to pick up the pieces and restore whatever is left of a once beautiful and productive river system. Dam removal would be nice but that ain't happening. So, there isn't much there to work with and I would like to think the settlement agreement provides a lot more protection and mitigation than has been present since the projects were built"

Cohoangler, who is this "we" stuff? The only players now are CPR-Fish and Friends of the Cowlitz and The Cowlitz Indian Tribe. There isn't anyone else. We are picking up the pieces that the agency bureaucrats have left behind in their half @ss settlement agreement. Have you really read the Settlement Agreement in its entirety yet? If you have, please tell me and this board what are its great benefits to assure that the Cowlitz will ever recover?

If you have any specific questions about the Settlement Agreement, I would be more than happy to discuss each issue in front of this board with you. Thanks for your concern, and I hope that that I have answered all of your questions.

Cowlitzfisherman

Is the taste of the bait worth the sting of the hook????

Cowlitz - I will not debate the issues you've raised. I agree with some points and disagree with others.

However, in your last reply, you outlined your basic concern. That is, you disagree strongly with the settlement agreement regarding the Cowlitz Project relicensing. This helped me understand your concern. I don't blame you in disagreeing with the settlement. I read the agreement and the FERC licensing order. It seems like the fish got too little for such a major project.

But the question is whether anyone could have gotten more and what would that have been? In these negotiations, the participants are only going to get what the applicant (i.e., Tacoma Power) wants to give up. It is highly unlikely that FERC would have required more. FERC has never shown an interest in protecting fish if it's expensive or reduces power output. An example is volitional fish passage. Getting volitional fish passage at Mossyrock and Mayfield would have been great but if Tacoma declines to proposed that, FERC is not likely to force them. Why? Because it's expensive and the merits are questionable, particularly since getting the juveniles downstream is still a difficult, if not impossible, task. The folks that I've talked with who participated in the negotiations (you weren't one of them) honestly believe that they got more in the settlement than FERC would have required in the absence of an agreement. I suspect you would disagreement with that assessment.

So, was it enough? No. Should there have been more. Absolutely yes. But could the participants gotten more? In my view, not likely.

That's all for me. I'll let you have the last word. I'm headed for the Kalama River to hit the summer runs.......

Well (I know -- DEEP subject), what can we do? Would a letter writing/e-mail campaign targeting the Tacoma City Council (and perhaps local media i.e. News Trib and area TV stations) have any effect (or am I misunderstanding the whole process)?

Sincerely,
Roger