The inequality and lack of representation continues in 2014 when WDFW agreed to
reduce recreational fishing opportunity in popular fishing areas 9 & 10 due to concerns about ESA-impacts to Lake Washington Chinook.

In 2014, tribal fisheries accounted for 73.5% of the modeled mortality impacts to Lake Washington Chinook. Following this year’s North of Falcon agreement the tribal share actually increased and recreational anglers will lose nearly 60% of their harvest quota in areas 9 & 10 in order to reduce impacts by 0.7%.

Many observers are forecasting a miniscule 10-day recreational season. In contrast, non-selective tribal gillnet fisheries responsible for over 55% of the impacts to this stock will continue with no changes.

I wonder if WDFW could be in for another lawsuit, this time for breach of fiduciary duty of public resources.

I do not see anything that resembles utmost care, good faith, and loyalty to Washington State license holders in the dealing of Area 9&10 Chinook to name just one example.

This state F&W license holders need better representation than the WDFW cluster of derisory clowns running the show now.

Tribes:
Increasing the indian take over a depressed stock while the other user group takes a 60% decrease wouldn’t have been on the negotiating table without the tribes worshipping the dollar.

“Salmon are the measuring stick of well-being in the Pacific Northwest.”
-Billy Frank, Jr., Chairman, Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission

Is it all talk without actions? It appears to be another false impression projected by the tribe.

The puget sound tribes are a joke. Gillnetting the lake, the nisqually, well all the rivers I guess. They rape the crab stocks all the way until the end. And then they cry about how they aren't getting their half. They can go to hell. Sick of those ass hats and sick of WDFW. I hope someone does sue them.

Second hand report from one of WDFW's check fishers is that there have been a few fish in MA9 but nothing like last year (so far) so the good news is that the season may be stretched out. Good, that is, if you enjoy just being out on the water.

Per Mrs. Smalma there were 15 fish total checked at Everett on Thursday....and a whopping 1 on Friday when we took out. That's a little over 50 fish since the opener checked at Everett by my math. Very unspectacular fishing at best, but I sure the hell am not going to blame the tribes for it.

Ike

Over the last 10 years, the tribe’s average take is 70% of the Puget Sound Coho and 64% of the PS Chinook.

It is asinine and irresponsible that this year the sport user group has taken the full hit of a 60% decline over last year’s quota while the tribes who have taken the greater share of Chinook over the years actually has a increase over their last year’s quota.

There are check fishers (WDFW employees who fish) and fish checkers (WDFW employees who meet and greet at the dock). Looks like feedback from both are indicating slow fishing.

I wonder how inadequate the WDFW staff are at negotiating and just how flawed the North Of Falcon (NOF) process really is??

I understand the A9-10 fishery was very close to being closed for this year.

But how can such a thing happen that the sport user group gets cut 60% of their quota from last year while the tribes increase their quota-- especially since tribal fisheries accounts for 73.5% of the 2014 modeled mortality impacts to Lake Washington Chinook --the stock in question. And it appears that the tribal increase is a direct fishery on the stock in question near the locks.

I’ll have to add these to my Puget Sound list of inequalities along with the ten year average of 70% of Puget Sound Coho and 64% of PS Chinook being caught by the tribes.

WDFW appears not to be representing the close to 800,000 fish and wildlife license holders in even a remotely adequate fashion in Puget Sound.

The system is broken if the tribes as co managers get whatever they want however ridiculous it is.

Or the fishery is a single pawn on a large chess-board and most chess players willingly sacrifice pawns in order to win the game.

What does your theory on the end game look like.

The tribes will get whatever it is they want and the State will be able to continue to develop, grow, pave over, etc.

The economy must be protected at all costs.

I love a good chess game.

In this thread alone --WDFW has lost many pawns.
64% of Puget Sound Chinook caught by the tribe ---sacrifice of a pawn
70% of Puget Sound Coho caught by tribe------------sacrifice of a pawn
60% cut of last year’s quota for sport fishers-------- sacrifice of a pawn
Increase of last year’s quota for the tribes -----------sacrifice of a pawn and position on the board.

It is going to have to be a miraculous comeback.
If behind a good player will look for a stalemate as well as a win. It is harder to accomplish either one according to the higher expertise of the opponent.

A possible stalemate could come in a court management agreement similar to US v. Oregon.
It should provide a better conclusion to the endgame than what is apparently happening in Puget Sound.

We do have a court ordered plan with the Puget Sound Salmon Management Plan, which provides the framework for coordinating programs, treaty fishing rights, artificial production objectives, and artificial production levels. This plan is part of the Comprehensive Chinook Salmon Management Plan.

However, it does not appear to provide the necessary process and teeth that the Columbia River management plan has to resolve disputes.

Current events in Puget Sound seem to prove that.

To need a means to resolve disputes means that one side or the other has a dispute/position they wish to defend. Apparently, the tribes are doing nothing that WDFW/the State of WA is willing to fight for.

If the State were not satisfied with the results they would do something. Unless the felt the risk of losing was greater than the risk of doing nothing.

I was at the NOF meeting in Mill Creek back in April and this was discussed.
I don't fish the Salt so I didn't really pay attention to the details.

I suggest all concerned get involved in the process. WDFW does listen to the sportsman at these meetings. They may not be able to do anything about it, but I have watched seasons set or changed per request of sportsmen.

Pressure with #'s of people does have results. On the other hand if you don't go and speak your mind they in some cases think you don't give a sh..!

Step up, take the time and hold them accountable.

In so many of our management issues the devil is in the details and we simply aren't privy to enough information to be able to determine who specifically has failed. And because of that maybe the answer is to start from the top down.

But there have been a couple of recent specific instances where decisions have been made counter to our best interests or there has been an apparent lack of follow-through that has been catastrophic, as follows:

1. Point No Point launch - Who made the decision (subsequently reversed when it became known) to give up on the trailer boat launch and turn that property into a park and cartopper/kayak launch? Keeping in mind that the property was purchased using boater funds (not from rowboats/kayaks/canoes/paddleboards).

2. Steelhead - Who failed and left WDFW open to suit? Who made the decision to settle with the loss of steelhead plants and why? Well, maybe we'll find out some more come Tuesday's Senate committee hearing.

Bottom line, you hold WDFW accountable by holding the employees accountable. Failure to do so leads to a lack of confidence by WDFW's largest stakeholder and biggest source of income.

Wrong
Arbitration and/or courts do not require everyone to use them. I know plenty of people that have not ever use them.
But they are certainly there if needed.

I like the way US v Oregon management agreement is set up.

Larry B has added more pawns sacrificed in Puget Sound.

If this was a foot race on a circular track, WDFW is so far behind; they think they are in first place.

Louie Are you under the impression that reducing sport impacts is a conservation measure, or are they just being redirected to another industry?