#956805 - 05/04/16 10:30 AM
Re: North of Falcon/PMFC update
[Re: Salmo g.]
|
Returning Adult
Registered: 06/23/04
Posts: 419
|
The treaty tribes do need a permit to fish. The previous co-management permit expired for both WDFW and the tribes on April 30. The tribes may have filed for a 2017 permit separate from WDFW, but NMFS certainly hasn't issued it yet.
The Swinomish, and Sauk-Suiattle by Swinomish invitation, are fishing for hatchery spring Chinook salmon. The NMFS permit is an approval of the salmon fishery management plan. There are wild ESA-listed spring Chinook intermingled with the hatchery Chinook, so an approved plan is necessary to cover the incidental take of listed Chinook and listed steelhead that are caught incidental to Chinook fishing.
The enforcement responsibility is NMFS'. Unfortunately NMFS LE is more likely to make sure that whale watchers don't get too close to ESA-listed killer whales than they are to interfere with treaty fishing, legal or illegal. I'm sure the tribes will insist that treaties, as the Supreme law of the land, trumps incidental take of ESA-listed salmon, approved fishing permit or not. The tribes need a permit. Except when NMFS doesn't want to make them get one.
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#956806 - 05/04/16 10:33 AM
Re: North of Falcon/PMFC update
[Re: Toddp]
|
Carcass
Registered: 11/30/09
Posts: 2267
|
Bureau of Indian Affairs approved the fishery. They assumed limited impact and proceeded under Section 7d of ESA.... For Skagit. Tulalip, or both fisheries
_________________________
The world will not be destroyed by those that are evil, but by those who watch them without doing anything.- Albert Einstein
No you can’t have my rights---I’m still using them
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#956808 - 05/04/16 10:43 AM
Re: North of Falcon/PMFC update
[Re: Toddp]
|
Spawner
Registered: 02/06/08
Posts: 511
|
Bureau of Indian Affairs approved the fishery. They assumed limited impact and proceeded under Section 7d of ESA.... Funny. I don't recall the BIA having a very extensive staff of fishery biologists to knock something out like this in such short notice.
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#956809 - 05/04/16 11:21 AM
Re: North of Falcon/PMFC update
[Re: Sky-Guy]
|
River Nutrients
Registered: 11/21/07
Posts: 7634
Loc: Olema,California,Planet Earth
|
But they do have political appointees, and that is all that is necessary now. Maybe a good lawyer or two on the side.
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#956810 - 05/04/16 11:31 AM
Re: North of Falcon/PMFC update
[Re: Sky-Guy]
|
Returning Adult
Registered: 02/02/05
Posts: 334
Loc: Lake Stevens
|
The Section 7D sure is convoluted. The one phrase that does come up quite often is........"......license applicant shall not make any irreversible or irretrievable commitment of resources....."
Seems kind of ironic considering they are using gill nets and killing everything.
Reading through it, it would seem to me the tribes are probably given an exemption under Section 7H, which is linked back to 7D thru Section 7(A)(2). Maybe that's the link for avoiding everything? It surely doesn't seem possible that in 2 working days the tribes went through all of the normal procedures for acquiring permits AND got them approved???? I imagine they also certainly didn't go thru consultation with the State of Washington as called out.
If so, GREAT. That means we shouldn't even be worried about getting ours approved.
If not, my question, why can't WDFW use this same path?
_________________________
Team Haters
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#956811 - 05/04/16 11:32 AM
Re: North of Falcon/PMFC update
[Re: Sky-Guy]
|
King of the Beach
Registered: 12/11/02
Posts: 5199
Loc: Carkeek Park
|
So who and what permits are needed for the tribes to actually fish? None it appears...business as usual and they can do as they please.
It seems you have NMFS, NOAA and now BIA giving the OK to fish or working on the permitting process. What is the pecking order as far as which supersedes the other and can one stop another from issuing a ok or permit to fish? With all the agencies looking like they can give the green light to fish, The NOF process is looking like more of a sham every day that passes. SF
_________________________
Go Dawgs! Founding Member - 2025 Pink Plague Opposition Party #coholivesmatter
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#956812 - 05/04/16 11:36 AM
Re: North of Falcon/PMFC update
[Re: Sky-Guy]
|
River Nutrients
Registered: 11/21/07
Posts: 7634
Loc: Olema,California,Planet Earth
|
Because WDFW is not the Tribes. The Federal Gubmint believes it has a special (Trust) responsibility to the tribes superior to its responsibilities to any other citizen.
There are quite possibly some legal questions to be debated but it will not only take time but it will take money. The Feds can just keep printing it, the State doesn't want to spend it in a suit so that leaves "third parties" who might or might not have the standing to sue. But it will take googobs of money.
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#956813 - 05/04/16 11:46 AM
Re: North of Falcon/PMFC update
[Re: Sky-Guy]
|
River Nutrients
Registered: 10/28/09
Posts: 3343
|
I have not substantiated this, but I'm sure someone can. Word is that the Tribes started independent negotiations with NMFS prior to NOF. They knew this was going to happen, so they got to work on their own permit right away. Only hearsay, but it would do a lot to explain why the tribal members kept coming to meetings with WDFW and repeating the same demands. They knew they didn't need to negotiate, and the only way they were going to compromise was if the State offered them something sweeter than what they asked for.
IF this is true, NOAA did us a major disservice, and they should hear about it on Thursday.
Carcassman came back to the subject of AK and BC... I still say this all could have been avoided if the Tribes and the State were negotiating over a larger percentage of ESA impacts. We all know the process is broken (and has been from the beginning), but it took a forecast low enough to make closures a strong possibility to wake the sleeping giant. If we weren't relegated to fighting over the scraps open ocean fisheries leave behind, we'd all be fishing this season, if with major restrictions on coho. I'll continue to support this effort, but I think we're waging this war on the wrong battlefield.
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#956826 - 05/04/16 02:03 PM
Re: North of Falcon/PMFC update
[Re: Sky-Guy]
|
Juvenile at Sea
Registered: 02/29/08
Posts: 112
|
I might determine that perch fishing in Lake Washington with my kids has 'limited impacts' and just go for it. A ticket would be unfortunate, but I guess I'd then have more 'standing' to participate in the legal system.
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#956827 - 05/04/16 02:09 PM
Re: North of Falcon/PMFC update
[Re: Take-Down]
|
Returning Adult
Registered: 08/15/12
Posts: 247
|
I might determine that perch fishing in Lake Washington with my kids has 'limited impacts' and just go for it. A ticket would be unfortunate, but I guess I'd then have more 'standing' to participate in the legal system. I'd be interested to know if WDFW is actually patrolling the lakes and enforcing the closure.
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#956828 - 05/04/16 02:10 PM
Re: North of Falcon/PMFC update
[Re: Take-Down]
|
Returning Adult
Registered: 05/31/08
Posts: 257
|
I'd watch out for assuming only a "fishing in closed waters" fine is levied. ESA violations might be tacked on, here is what I found for costs: http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/pdfs/laws/esa_section11.pdf looks like anywhere from $500 - $25k...
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#956830 - 05/04/16 02:19 PM
Re: North of Falcon/PMFC update
[Re: Sky-Guy]
|
Juvenile at Sea
Registered: 02/29/08
Posts: 112
|
Expensive perch. But it's not really clear to me that fishing for perch (or bass, or blue-gill, or most anything else that is not caught with a downrigger) in Lake Washington is actually a violation of ESA. Seems more like a hyper technical over-reaction by the State. Heck, the WDFW 'how to catch perch' video says catching them is a high priority for resource management. Having more of the buggers in the Lake as a result of a fishing ban may just increase predation on Chinook smolts.
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#956835 - 05/04/16 05:53 PM
Re: North of Falcon/PMFC update
[Re: Sky-Guy]
|
Juvenile at Sea
Registered: 04/06/11
Posts: 219
Loc: S River central
|
100> 0 is not sharing Ms. Loomis if the fishery is considered sustainable..why is it not shared? ?
_________________________
salmonsteelsox rod covers check it before you wreck it! #hatcheryfishhavenospiritname
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#956838 - 05/04/16 06:41 PM
Re: North of Falcon/PMFC update
[Re: Sky-Guy]
|
Three Time Spawner
Registered: 06/03/06
Posts: 1534
Loc: Tacoma
|
Interesting that there claim includes that it is " essential to the tribes’ subsistence, economy". While that may be true for some tribes, it isn't true for others. For the Casino rich tribes, only a hand full of members may actually fish, and the overall revenue from fishing likely does not equal 1% of net revenue. When we get into culture, I then would ask about the need to drift net with jet sleds and other methods that greatly increase the ability to exploit the resource. To blame habitat loss strictly on non-tribal interests makes me wonder where they get the power to light up all those bill boards.
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#956839 - 05/04/16 07:20 PM
Re: North of Falcon/PMFC update
[Re: Lucky Louie]
|
Returning Adult
Registered: 02/21/06
Posts: 295
Loc: Marysville, WA
|
Did the tribes throw their nets out like planned? Stretched across the whole river. King 5 Footage
_________________________
One does not discover new lands without consenting to lose sight of the shore for a very long time. - Andre Gide
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#956852 - 05/05/16 08:27 AM
Re: North of Falcon/PMFC update
[Re: Sky-Guy]
|
Returning Adult
Registered: 07/13/12
Posts: 257
Loc: Vashon
|
Don't let the toilet seat hit you in the neck----why are the sports always last at the table?? The fish making it to their natal streams to spawn are the ones who genes should be preserved---I was about to pull the trigger on a new Boulton 18ft, something told me to wait until spring. And May 1 was a dark dark day for me, and for all sport fishers in WA, and for the businesses that serve us.
_________________________
Build a man a fire and he's warm for a night. Set a man on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life.
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#956854 - 05/05/16 09:00 AM
Re: North of Falcon/PMFC update
[Re: Salmo g.]
|
Dick Nipples
Registered: 03/08/99
Posts: 27838
Loc: Seattle, Washington USA
|
Since the Tribe's fishery is the same as what has been conducted and approved by NMFS in the past, and they have received preliminary approval for this current spring Chinook fishery, then WDFW can schedule all the normal fisheries that have been conducted and approved by NMFS in the past, and NMFS can offer its preliminary approval for these usual fisheries. Right? If not, why not? Unless a double standard exists . . . This. Fish on... Todd
_________________________
Team Flying Super Ditch Pickle
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
3 registered (DrifterWA, Salmo g., 1 invisible),
1049
Guests and
10
Spiders online. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
11499 Members
17 Forums
72933 Topics
825121 Posts
Max Online: 3937 @ 07/19/24 03:28 AM
|
|
|