Not quite sure how I feel about this coverage:

http://komonews.com/news/local/total-shutdown-of-puget-sound-salmon-season-sparks-anger

http://www.kiro7.com/news/local/sport-fisherman-angry-over-salmon-season-shut-down/263671907

http://www.king5.com/tech/science/environment/protest-continues-over-salmon-fishing/175301227

I'm sure the tribe is wary of getting bad press and it's possible all the advertising dollars they spend also provides them an opportunity to filter stories.

Vanilla toast coverage at best.

Businesses use PR consultants to place stories with papers and to influence coverage every day. It's legal and accepted, although not much talked about. I suggested to a local conservation group about 3 years ago that they hire such a group. Not a lot of traction. Whether Legal or PR, sport fisherman have been slow to embrace the tools that businesses use to get what they want. The exception is the hiring of a state government lobbyist, which sport fishing groups have done, and which overall has been successful (notwithstanding this current NOF fiasco).

Walking through the crowd was a reporter from national coverage also.

The good thing about these events over the past couple days is that we are being heard and that through the coverage the general public is wakening up to what is going on to some degree.

Several points in general brought up was that the rockfish debacle came close to shutting down Puget Sound and that Alaska this past year went over their allocation by 100,000 Chinook.

And Alaska wants more fish now too...

I thought the King5 coverage was the most neutral. The Kiro coverage was somewhat misleading (suggesting all fishing was shut down, without making it clear that tribes are fishing).

I wish they wouldn't juxtapose the calm, rational public speaker Willie Frank against an angry sportfisherman. Not a good look. The speakers at the protest were all positive about trying to get a solution that helps everyone, but I guess it's better TV to show anger.

yeah. the soft tones of the earnest doe-eyed son of a famous civil rights leader are going to play way better than anything we've got. Especially when he's saying stuff like "let's come together to save salmon". The (urban) general public lap that kind of stuff up. It's damn smart and savvy.

The link provided earlier states Alaska’s rationale for this year’s Chinook allocations comes in part from Alaska’s share of the Columbia River projections.

We all know how ocean fisheries can prosper if projections pan out or not with the terminal areas left with the tribes and state fishers fighting for the scraps instead of working together to get more fish back.

The dollar impact being used is $100 million and as I understand it is pretty much a recreational fishing number tied to the number of fisher trips multiplied by the dollar value/fisher trip established by the 2008 economic study commissioned by WDFW (http://wdfw.wa.gov/publications/pub.php?id=00464).

The actual numbers in the original report are in 2006 dollars so I hope they have adjusted for inflation.

Not fish but about tribal influence ( $$$$$$$ ) and our elected yahoos.

cc: Interested Parties & media contacts
Governor Jay Inslee
Attorney General Robert Ferguson
Members of the WA Legislature

AUTO files complaint alleging Attorney General Furgeson's receipt of campaign contributions from tribal governments violates the prohibition against candidates accepting contributions of public funds
On February 1, 2016, AUTO filed a petition requesting adoption of a rule by the Public Disclosure Commission that oversees elections and campaign contributions in state and local elections in Washington State (see details below). The PDC rejected our request and as a result, AUTO's attorney former state supreme court justice Phil Talmadge of the Seattle firm of Talmadge, Fitzpatrick & Tribe has filed a complaint on behalf of the organization with the Attorney General and the Prosecutor in King County. The complaint cites Ferguson's own receipt of contributions from tribal governments when seeking election as the top enforcer of state law as violations of state law and requests a legal complaint be initiated against Ferguson's political action committee "Friends of Bob Furgeson by one prosecutor's office or the other. If neither file a legal action within 45 days, AUTO intends to exercise its rights under the state law to assume the role of the two prosecutors and file a "citizens complaint" on behalf of the state. The complaint is attached.

The issue is the historical use by tribal governments of "public funds" in making political contributions to influence non-tribal elections in Washington state and subsequently, the decisions coming out of the legislative process or the executive branch. State law prohibits candidates from taking contributions from governments with "Public funds, whether derived through taxes, fees, penalties, or any other sources, shall not be used to finance political campaigns for state or school district office."

Earlier, AUTO pointed out to the PDC our belief that these contributions were resulting in hundreds of millions of state taxpayer's dollars flowing out of the state treasury into tribal government accounts. Shared gambling proceeds found in other states with tribal government gambling monopolies were surrendered behind closed doors rather than providing revenue for public schools as intended when Congress passed the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act. The elected officials making these decisions were on the receiving end of millions of dollars in contributions from the same tribal governments granted these extraordinary privileges.

Additionally, AUTO believes an atmosphere of special treatment for tribes at the expense of the other citizens of the state has evolved. Non-tribal citizens are regularly heard complaining about the loss of fishing or hunting opportunities, land use or water rights, and encroachment on to their private property as a result of decisions by state departments including the Department of Ecology, Department of Natural Resources, Department of Transportation, and Department of Fish & Wildlife wherein staff seem compelled to provide prejudicial treatment for tribal interests.

The first reaction of the PDC staff was to prove our point that the contributions by the tribal governments have created an unlevel playing field in state offices for the state's non-tribal citizens. Nearly immediately upon receipt of our petition, the Executive Director and Assistant Attorney General for the PDC consulted with Bill Craig, head of the Governor's Office of Indian Affairs http://www.goia.wa.gov/ . Craig moved quickly to help arrange a meeting between PDC staff and tribal legal representatives. By the time AUTO was invited to a short meeting with PDC staff, it was easy to predict what was going to happen. The end result was the staff convincing the PDC Commissioners to avoid taking any action by refusing our request. The PDC, citing staffing and budgetary constraints, suggested we go to the legislature with the issue.

AUTO was disappointed, but not surprised by the decision of the PDC which resembled a "cut and run" maneuver. As for appealing to the Governor or turning to the legislature, one could hardly envision those arenas would prove a fair hearing on the issue. The Governor's own political action committee and other Democratic PACS have recently received $403,410 from tribal governments (view here). The majority of the members of the legislature from both sides of the aisle have likewise received contributions of public funds from tribal governments and the election fund raising cycle is just beginning.
The option left AUTO is filing a complaint with the Attorney General for violation of the campaign finance laws of the state of WA (RCW 42.17A). Since the Attorney General has likewise received large direct and indirect contributions from the tribal governments (view here), choosing to file against Mr. Ferguson himself allows the opportunity for the public to understand the depth of the conflict of interest that is so readily recognized by non-tribal citizens trying to compete with a tribal government for the attention of elected officials and departmental staff in Olympia.
Washington's "Campaign Disclosure and Contribution" statute was passed by initiative vote of the people in 1972. The drafter's seemingly recognized that elected officials could be less than enthusiastic about enforcement if protecting the citizens meant loss of personal financial support and inserted a provision to prevent the powers at be from denying the citizens rights. In the event both Attorney General Ferguson and King County Prosecutor Dan Satterberg fail to file an action within 45 days against Ferguson's political action committee "Friends of Bob Ferguson", the law states: "(4) A person who has notified the attorney general and the prosecuting attorney in the county in which the violation occurred in writing that there is reason to believe that some provision of this chapter is being or has been violated may himself or herself bring in the name of the state any of the actions (hereinafter referred to as a citizen's action) authorized under this chapter." AUTO's complaint includes the required notice of AUTO's intent to exercise this right and move forward if one or the other doesn't file on behalf of the state's citizens .

Additional details on the law and presentation documents used with the PDC process are available at AUTO's website including documentation showing the funds held by tribal governments are taxes and incomes that fall under the definition of public funds. Statements from representatives of tribes asserting gambling proceeds (like the state's lotto), motel/hotel, sales taxes, etc. paid by non-tribal citizens at tribal casinos, gas stations, and other enterprises are taxes paid by the public to a government are also provided.

Respectfully,
Tim Hamilton

The state has been doing this for awhile and auto's suits haven't gained much traction that I can find. The suit against the AG campaign funds seem to be because he was obviously was bought in an earlier case.

Look at Auto vs Gregoire in 2010 ( gas taxes). The AG wanted the suit dismissed because they said "any contract with the tribes signed by the governor- no matter how illegal it is or harmful to the Wa taxpayer- is immune from all judicial review because...... the tribe is a necessary part of the suit and also immune from the suit"



So, let me see if I understand this. The tribe is sovereign, therefore can't be held to any WA laws. If our gov ( or anyone else) makes a deal with them and it's found to be illegal, all they need to do is piggyback the tribal immunity and not even the courts can look at it!

Go read it, see if I misunderstood what it said. If this is true, I wish AUTO all the luck with these suits but it seems a fortress has been built and any shots at it just result in a few more bricks. The more I read, the more I think we're fuked

While the Tribes may be sovereign, the citizens of WA are subject to the laws. It seems that the Tribes can give them money, and as sovereigns maybe we can't stop them from giving it but we can stop a citizen of WA from accepting it in WA. Guess the politicos could set up campaign offices in Idaho and Oregon and spend the monies there.

+1 to both posts

I have been stewing on this for a while. Sport fisherman and fisherwomen need to unite across the board with groups that share our passion, and perhaps even some of our enemies to unite against the economic power of the tribes. It would appear to me that a number of tribes want their cake and eat it too, ala, we have Casino's that fill out pocket with money, we want to fish beyond our sustenance (Commercial), we want to use the latest white man technology to catch our fish, and we will use our Casino profits to get what ever the hell we want.

Would it be possible to target the worst offenders in this category, BOYCOTT their casinos, find other tribes that have casinos but are willing to work with us for fishing rights, direct customers from the offending tribes casinos to those willing to work with us, and see what happens? A 10 -15 percent decline in Casino business will be jobs lost and folks pointing fingers within the tribes. I am already seeing tribes fighting over development rights over at Snoqualmie.

Frankly I am sick and tired of sitting on the sidelines. It is time to fight these basturds where it hurts. In the wallet. If we could get traction on this perhaps some broader marketing campaigns would help including internet and TV advertising along the lines of "they say they are endangered, but gill net the salmon. Is your casino visit funding this"

+2

To add to this, the tribes have repeatedly stated they are actually going to be TARGETING COHO this year "in a few terminal areas with harvestable returns of fish." (http://nwtreatytribes.org/habitat-hatcheries-equal-fishing/). They are either for or against selective fisheries, as it suits them.

Somewhat unrelated but equally as irritating is the tribes justification of their quasi-permitted netting of spring chinook in the skagit. They are basically saying that recreational fisherman have been fishing for chinook all winter and spring, and now it's their turn (http://nwtreatytribes.org/tribal-statement-may-fisheries/)

This is purely preposterous, as the blackmouth season was agreed to (by them) at LAST YEAR'S north of falcon and was duly permitted by NOAA. The skagit netting wasn't agreed upon by anybody and not permitted by NOAA.

I'm going to venture a guess here, let me know if this holds water. The tribes were going to go forward with the netting, permit or not. NOAA wasn't going to issue an "express" permit because they haven't had enough time to come up with something that would protect them from litigation. So BIA pulled a rabbit out of a hat and all the sudden... voila, tribal fishing permitted!

As JustBecause can attest, I am not a expert on the pervue of each and every federal agency...but I'm gonna guess the BIA has as much of a right to authorize a fishery as the IRS does. Whatever legal gymnastics were behind this seriously need to be challenged.

I didn't see this in my inbox until today, but here's my reply from Will Stelle on May, 2nd:

Thank you for your e-mail concerning the salmon catch­sharing dispute between the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) and the Treaty Indian fishing tribes in Puget Sound. We at NOAA Fisheries are also deeply concerned with the current impasse between the co-managers and its implications for salmon fishing in Puget Sound this summer. The dispute has negative implications across the board for families, businesses and communities, Indian and non-Indian, and we are energetically encouraging the parties to work out their differences.

This is the first time in thirty years that WDFW and the Tribes have not reached an agreement about catch-sharing in Puget Sound under U.S. v. Washington, the federal court decision affirming Treaty Indian fishing rights. The specific issue is the sharing of harvest of Chinook salmon. Chinook in Puget Sound are listed as “threatened” under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). In this instance, non-Indian and Tribal co­managers are in agreement with NOAA Fisheries on the overall total harvest allowable for Chinook under the ESA, but they differ on how to share it between them. When examining both proposed Tribal and non-Indian fisheries, they add up to Chinook impacts that exceed the agreed-to limit. If WDFW and the Tribes resolve their dispute on means to share the total allowable harvest, without exceeding the total limits, then NOAA Fisheries is committed to reviewing both fisheries under the ESA as rapidly as possible.

This is an extremely tough year. Expected returns to the salmon fishery in 2016 are much lower than we have seen in recent years, making these allocation decisions really hard. But NOAA Fisheries can’t force WDFW and the Tribes to come to terms, and our ESA authorities will not resolve this dispute either. We strongly hope that the co-managers are able to come work it out, and we stand ready to help in any way we can, nonstop. If they do, the pathway for authorizing both Tribal and non-Indian fishing under the ESA is clear.

Sincerely,

Will Stelle
--
William W. Stelle, Jr.
Regional Administrator
NOAA Fisheries West Coast Region
U.S. Department of Commerce
Office: 206-526-6150
Mobile: 206-295-3104
Will.Stelle@noaa.gov

Looks like the Upper Skagits will start netting the skagit thursday. Nooksack tribe will be gillnetting the nooksack starting tomorrow.

"THIS FISHERY IS BY PERMIT ONLY."

heh

Looks like we may get through this soon hopefully...


http://www.king5.com/mb/tech/science/env...rtage/183014893