Washington Fly Fishing Forum banner
1 - 13 of 13 Posts

·
The wanted posters say Tim Hartman
Joined
·
2,100 Posts
Thanks for that Mark!

It's been obvious for quite awhile that the tribes know they're sitting in the catbird seat! :mad:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
555 Posts
Those of you that haven't been paying attention to this process should really look at the link that Mark provided.

I have not ever been one to bash the tribes but if the things alleged in this post are true then we can basically kiss our fishing rights in the saltwater goodbye.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,555 Posts
I have long supported treaty tribal fishing rights. I also support complete government transparency to the citizen public. I also think the WDFW is beyond foolish to tie non-treaty fishing to the BIA section 7 ESA fishing permit. WDFW should pursue its own permit, be it section 10 or a section 4(d) with NMFS. By attaching non-treaty fishing to a BIA permit, truly the tail is wagging the dog. And that just ain't right, no matter how you compute it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
555 Posts
Agree with Salmo 100%. I believe we need to wean ourselves off this mutual rule setting process even if it costs us a couple years of fishing. The Boldt decision does not mean the tribes get to decide how we manage our half, our managers are failing us. We need our own permit!
 
G

·
I have long supported treaty tribal fishing rights. I also support complete government transparency to the citizen public. I also think the WDFW is beyond foolish to tie non-treaty fishing to the BIA section 7 ESA fishing permit. WDFW should pursue its own permit, be it section 10 or a section 4(d) with NMFS. By attaching non-treaty fishing to a BIA permit, truly the tail is wagging the dog. And that just ain't right, no matter how you compute it.
I would be willing to sacrifice a season if it meant WDFW demanding open process while obtaining their own permit.

Couple questions:
1- what are disadvantages/advantages to section 10 versus section 4d?
2-what needs to be done to start the permitting process?
3-how long would the permitting process take For WDFW to gather information and submit and for NMFS to review and issue?

How does one go about lobbying for WDFW to start this process?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
555 Posts
This process is already getting some attention...

http://www.king5.com/mb/tech/scienc...sparency-in-setting-salmon-seasons/386588066‬

I hope people get on board with this, if not we will not be fishing Puget Sound Salmon.

Edit: Forgot to point out that you should really read Lorraine Loomis' comments at the end of this. It is readily apparent that the tribes have no interest in providing transparency to these negotiations.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,555 Posts
I would be willing to sacrifice a season if it meant WDFW demanding open process while obtaining their own permit.

Couple questions:
1- what are disadvantages/advantages to section 10 versus section 4d?
2-what needs to be done to start the permitting process?
3-how long would the permitting process take For WDFW to gather information and submit and for NMFS to review and issue?

How does one go about lobbying for WDFW to start this process?
The 4(d) rule grants certain exceptions to consultations in the original or revised ESA listings. I don't know if PS salmon fishing qualifies under that exception or not. If it does, it's a much faster route. Section 10 would be in the form of a Conservation Plan that includes fishing within specified ESA take limits, and would be a one to two year-long process.

WDFW can start the process by drafting a Resource Management Plan for PS salmon fishing and submitting it to NMFS.

As mentioned above, a section 10 plan and permit, with a NEPA EIS would take between 1 & 2 years.

Send a letter to the WDFW Commission, cc Director Unsworth urging such action.
 

·
Geriatric Skagit Swinger
Joined
·
8,260 Posts
And this is something that should have been done at the very least last year. It would just be nice to see wdfw be proactive instead of reactive as they always seem to be
The 4(d) rule grants certain exceptions to consultations in the original or revised ESA listings. I don't know if PS salmon fishing qualifies under that exception or not. If it does, it's a much faster route. Section 10 would be in the form of a Conservation Plan that includes fishing within specified ESA take limits, and would be a one to two year-long process.

WDFW can start the process by drafting a Resource Management Plan for PS salmon fishing and submitting it to NMFS.

As mentioned above, a section 10 plan and permit, with a NEPA EIS would take between 1 & 2 years.

Send a letter to the WDFW Commission, cc Director Unsworth urging such action.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
199 Posts
I have long supported treaty tribal fishing rights. I also support complete government transparency to the citizen public. I also think the WDFW is beyond foolish to tie non-treaty fishing to the BIA section 7 ESA fishing permit. WDFW should pursue its own permit, be it section 10 or a section 4(d) with NMFS. By attaching non-treaty fishing to a BIA permit, truly the tail is wagging the dog. And that just ain't right, no matter how you compute it.
I'm no expert, but even if WDFW pursues a separate permit for non-treaty fisheries, BIA would still likely be involved in the Section 7 consultation. At minimum, tribal interests would likely argue that treaty fisheries would be adversely affected as the result of incidental take, which would probably require a biological assessment. And, I think you have to assume that litigation is probable if any tribal stakeholder believes it will be adversely affected by a permitting decision, even one relating to non-treaty fisheries.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,740 Posts
If we're going to right the ways we're being wronged, it's going to require us to make some pretty hefty sacrifices in the short term, up to and including foregoing at least one full salmon season. The bottom line is that we are seeking legal change, which takes time and is often wrought with painful compromises.

My two cents is that, considering the likely dismal prospects for salmon this year, we might as well make this the year we give up, to send the message that so sorely needs to be sent to WDFW. They know we're not pleased with the way things are going, but until we actually put our money where our mouths have been (stop buying licenses), our words will continue to fall on apathetic ears.

Depending on what numbers you look at, sport licenses currently account for about 20% of what it costs to provide commercial and rec fisheries in Washington (the number I saw at a Commission meeting Saturday was 19%). The nearly double license fees they will be asking us to pay this year suggest that their intent is to have us nearly double our contribution to the program, probably in hopes of freeing up more General Fund money for education. In simple terms, we're being counted on to pay for more of the program costs than ever, while we all agree we are receiving less opportunity with each passing year. If we don't come through for them, it will create all sorts of problems for WDFW and the Legislature; the sort of problems that MUST manifest themselves if we are to make meaningful headway.

If you care about the future of sport fishing, my advice is to forget about the present - not for long, but long enough to make our point. This is a golden opportunity to assert ourselves as the glue that holds the whole thing together. I'm praying that either WDFW convinces the Legislature it's time to change. If that doesn't happen, I will imlore all of you to carefully consider NOT purchasing your license this year. Even if your favorite fishery isn't affected at present, you can rest assured that if we don't change the status quo, it eventually will be. Do it for your kids and your grandkids....
 

·
Wishin I was on the Sauk
Joined
·
4,449 Posts
It is clear the tribs have the upper hand and don't want any witnesses to the shady dealing with wdfw, and by their statements are worried about public opinion. The best thing we can do is get the general public to put pressure on the tribes, start boycotting casinos and hurt their pocket book and they might be willing play nice.
I will protest with no new license for me this year. My money is going to Canada, unless the tribe's play ball and we have a salt season... but why would they.
 
1 - 13 of 13 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top