Is the CR-102 on the Dept's website? I couldn't find it.

The CR 102 for Commercial Fishing in the Harbor is on the web site. I am concerned because I have been trying to obtain the CR 102 for Sportfishing in the Grays Harbor area rivers. I was told that it was filed the same day as the CR 102 for commercial fishing and would be posted on the website but is has been 2 1/2 days but it is not there.

You can find the CR 102 rule making links here:


http://wdfw.wa.gov/about/regulations/development.html

Thanks.

Here is a link to the proposed GH & Willapa REC seasons modeled up on FTC. It is a bit to transfer off Excel and formatting goes nuts. So hope this helps. Remember this is PROPOSED.

http://fishingthechehalis.net/daves-blog

WDFW, this is unacceptable! there are handicapped and elderly people who fish there because it is the only place they can get to easily. These non tribal gillnetters need their umbilical welfare lifeline cut, and right now. Just [Bleeeeep!] get it over with for crying out loud. Enough manipulations. JUST SAY NO TO IN-RIVER GILL NETTING!

WDFW does not hear this....2A, in river, is the one of the very favorite netting area to some of the "favorite gill netters".....this has been approached many, many, many, many, times over the past few years.

All the past WDFW Region 6 "upper personnel" have refused to listen to any approach to 2A as the area of the Chehalis River that should be small boat and handicapped fisherpersons over NT gill netting.

I just thought I would post my public comment to the commission concerning the new Willapa Bay policy. The 9:00 am Saturday meeting will be worth attending.

After extensive modeling with the new AHA model the department demonstrated that the maximum exploitation of Naselle natural origin Chinook is 14% if recovery of the run is to be achieved in 16-21 years. Anything beyond 14% will result in perpetuating the decline. It was disappointing that the department focused on a 20% exploitation rate in proposed versions A, B, and C. After the commission asked the department for a plan using a maximum of 14% exploitation there are now five proposed versions, A, B, C, D, and E. It should be an outright embarrassment to the leadership that these first three versions at 20% exploitation are still on the table.

The department’s long term focus on harvesting to the last theoretically available fish clearly shows in these models. Recovery of weak natural origin stocks seems to be a concept that the department does not buy into. At first the commission’s request to model 14% exploitation seemed extreme because it would limit harvest. Upon further reflection this is really the maximum exploitation rate possible if recovery is ever going to be achieved. Imprecision in the model or over exploitation by the harvesters may result in never achieving recovery. The department really should have presented a plan that was based on one or two percent less exploitation than the theoretical maximum.

The remaining plans D and E both consider harvesting to the theoretical maximum exploitation but version D considers an unrealistic hatchery production rate, leaving only version E as a viable choice among the five versions. The Twin Harbors Fish And Wildlife Advocacy presented a modified version E which I signed onto and support. Thank you for your consideration of the modified version E.

This is the inriver season announcement for the CR102. Hit the link and read away.



The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife is proposing rule changes for recreational salmon fishing: Coastal Freshwater. The agency developed these changes through a pre-season planning process known as “North of Falcon” that includes a series of public meetings with federal, state, tribal and industry representatives and other concerned citizens. Rules based on the North of Falcon planning process change from year to year to reflect resource availability and achieve conservation goals.

The CR-102 and proposed WAC can be viewed and downloaded at: http://wdfw.wa.gov/about/regulations/development.html.

In accordance with RCW 34.05.320, a public hearing will be held on Tuesday, July 7, 2015, at 11:00 a.m., at the Region 6 Fish and Wildlife Office, Conference Room, 48 Devonshire Road, Montesano, WA, 98563.

Please also be aware that to reduce paper and associated costs, from now on this information will be provided through email and public news release. To continue receiving this information, please sign up at this website, http://wdfw.wa.gov/lists/, and select “WDFW Regulation Updates.” The public news release will continue to provide contact information for those that need a hard copy.

In case you are unable to or do not wish to attend the public hearing, you may submit written comments to me, Charmane Ashbrook, as shown below. WDFW must receive comments by July 3, 2015. For an electronic or printed copy of the proposed rules, please contact Charmane.Ashbrook@dfw.wa.gov or call (360) 586-0734.


Charmane Ashbrook
600 Capitol Way N.
Olympia, WA 98501-1091
via e-mail at Charmane.Ashbrook@dfw.wa.gov
via fax at (360) 902-2183


Regards,

Charmane

RE: Willapa Bay:

DONE.... discussion/public input/decision this morning in Olympia.

Option E with phase-in modifications tweaked by the Fish Committee passed 6-3 at the WA Fish/Wildlife Commission hearing today.

A very BIG day for conservation and a BIG win for the fish!

Full news release forthcoming.... soon.

My observations, on Saturday 6/13/2015

1. Fish committee of the WDFW did lots of thinking on this final draft of the Willapa Plan.

2. Closed a loop hole that I've hated, that was if the "fleet caught to many fish" in a season, the general attitude was "Oh well". WDFW fish committee put in a penalty box, " if too many fish are taken over the 20% limit", then in the next season that amount will be taken off their total for the new season. No one will ever convince me, that the fleet doesn't know when they are 16 - 20% over what they are entailed to catch.

3. NO netting in 2 T and 2 U, until September 16!!!!!!


I don't even fish Willapa, just been VERY interesting to watch the NOF process this year....

Should be a very good sport fishery, go for it !!!!!!

All should understand the 20% harvest rate is for the next 4 years then 14 % after in the future. You know folks there where several key players in WMP process. That said it was not those folks that truly carried the day but it was the citizen participation. A large number of people made every bloody meeting and stayed with the process. Then we have everyone that followed the process on PP and other places. In the end most came to the position do right by the fish, no more than 14% harvest rate and followed up with comments & e mails. It made a difference!

So for myself my greatest satisfaction is the simple fact that most got past personal desires and stuck to conservation first. Sure the Rec lost some & gained some depending on the fishery but the real winner was the natural order and natural spawning fish.

In the not to distant future the Steelhead issue will becoming toward the Commission. The manner in which citizens participated in Grays Harbor & Willapa Management Policies is a template to follow in other regions in the state. It takes effort, time, a willingness to learn the agency processes, and putting the fish first. It can be done as Grays Harbor and Willapa Management Policies have shown.

Thanks to Rivrguy and all that stayed in the game with you.

It is hard to believe that the sporties won one.

Mebbe one of these days I'll get out there and catch one.

fp

Make that TWO, fp. Can't forget about the big WIN in Grays Harbor last year.

As far as WB, you got til Sept 16 in 2T to catch one.

As SZ likes to say...

GOOD LUCK!

This is, without question, an overdue improvement for the sport fishery. Congratulations and thanks, Rivrguy and Co.!

I'm pleased to see progress toward managing for recovery as well, but I'm concerned about the phased impact reduction rate. If 14% was the accepted maximum impact for recovery to occur within 20 or so years, how far out will another 4 years of exceeding that target impact by 30% or more move the recovery goal? How will the record heat and dryness this summer (and likely for much of those next 4 years) impact the ability of the wild fish to recover, or for that matter even sustain their current status?

The other concern is that 4 years is a lot of time for the gillnetters and their political puppets to get the plan overturned, while still harvesting at a rate near to what they did last year in the meantime. This fight is likely far from over.

Putting aside the future for a moment, let's get back to the present, and the much-improved sport fishing prospects for Willapa Bay. If we're to continue progress toward recovery, we'll need to keep impacts on wild fish as low as possible. No doubt, the gillnetters will be complaining loudly to the Legislature about the devastating impact this brand of management has on their livelihood. Our best defense will continue to be the economic impact of sport fishing vs. commercial. That means we need to collectively put our money where our mouths have been. The increased sport opportunity in WB this year needs to result in a proportional increase in benefit to the local economies. That means not only flocking to WB from places far and wide, but also buying gas, bait, food, and lodging in Pacific County. If participation doesn't increase dramatically, the gillnetters will be able to legitimately argue wasted opportunity, and they'll be right there with a hand out to scoop up anything we don't use.

All you 206ers who are getting royally screwed in Areas 9/10 this season should plan a trip to WB to ease the pain a bit. Please....

The 20% phase-in rate has incentives/disincentives built in.

1) First is the disincentive for over exploitation. If they go over in one year, the following year impact WILL be proportionately REDUCED.

2) Then there's the incentive for selective gear in each of the 4 years. A certain amount of the 20% is held back, to be used only by partipants who want to make the change toward more selective gear. The "selective" benchmark will be a release mortality rate of no greater than 35%

Year 1 will only see 19% max impact allocated to std gillnet gear.... with a 1% holdback for selective gear.
Year 2 will see only 18% max impact allocation for std gear... 2% holdback for selective gear.
Year 3 and 4 will see a 14% max impact allocation for std gear... 6% holdback for selective gear

Without significant "selective gear" adoption by the fleet, we're effectively at 14% after the first 2 years.

If they eventually do come along, then congratulations to them for finally stepping into the 21st century.

Glad to see those disincentives to continuing the status quo built in. It will be interesting to see if the gillnetters decide to invest in more selective gear, but I share your doubts on that one.

Thanks again, guys. This really is a remarkable result, and it definitely looks like progress.

They went with Option B on Chum also which is basically similar to what we got in the Grays Harbor plan. It penalizes failure to make escapement.

Official announcement here...

http://wdfw.wa.gov/news/jun1515a/

Final policy document posting is pending the additional amendment language introduced and approved by the commission over the weekend.