Todd R
Offline
Chromer
Profile Status:
Reged: 10/29/01
Posts: 892
Loc: Seattle, Washington
|
|
WDFW will not be saying "we don't want our half anymore"...they'll be saying "for the good of the resource, we want our half to have a better chance of spawning and making both halves bigger".
Fish on...
Todd.
--------------------
http://www.rvrfshr.com
For all your fishing hardware needs!
"Correct in Design"
|
daveb
Offline
egg
Profile Status:
Reged: 02/09/04
Posts: 1
Loc: pt.angeles,wa.
|
|
Hows the thumb Marty? This is my 1st time on this forum, and I'd like to offer some comments and maybe a little different perspective. everyone has their own opinion of this new regulation, and catch and release in general. I'm neither pro or con c&r, but believe that as long as you stay within the boundrys of the regs that it is and should be a matter of personal choice. I release most of the wild fish I catch, but not all. Everyone talks about how this blanket c&r reg is gonna bring back the fish, come-on! this reg only affects a very small number of rivers that have a strong run of native fish the rest of the state was allready under c&r or closure. their was no scientific reasons given for this reg change.Shame on the wdfw for telling the public at large that this proposal would not be looked at this year. Shame on TU and WSU for letting them do it that way. Do the ends really justify the means. As an avid fisherman and conservationist I,m saddened to see our different sportfishing groups stabbing each other in the back. The tribes present a united front, the commercial fishers present an united front, and the mirriad sportfishing groups fight among themselves. Untill all us fishermen can work together with a little more give and take,make decisions based on science instead of politics and passion, or personal agendas, we won't acomplish much of anything. Like I said everyone has their own opinion. United we stand divided we'll argue over the last fish.
|
Gooose
Offline
Ancient Mod
Profile Status:
Reged: 09/14/01
Posts: 11071
Loc: Area 12
|
|
Aunty why does anyone assume that Foregone Opportunity would be tested in court?  As I have pointed out in the past and as pointed out by Rich G it has already occurred on the Quillayute. The Quileute tribe made a legal formal request per Federal court guidelines for access to the unharvested(sport) wild winter steelhead and was legally granted those fish by the state under the Foregone Opportunity clause of Boldt. The precedent is already there. Unless there is a violation of Federal law the enviro groups or for that matter any group or even the state agencies have no legal basis under which to challenge the tribes.  Relying on public sentiment to sway the tribes actions is just putting on a  .
--------------------
Independent Advocate For The Fish
Not Represented By Any Organization
Simple Solutions to Simple Problems
Simple Solutions to Complex Problems
There's lies, damned lies and then there are statistics......Mark Twain
|
AuntyM
Offline
Looking for a few good fish!
Profile Status:
Reged: 05/07/01
Posts: 10194
Loc: Harstine Island
|
|
Gooose,
My guess is it won't be tested in the courts.
When it comes to environmental groups, their interpretation of the ESA and federal law is different than yours or mine. If you think they can't find a basis, you're fooling yourself. Anybody can sue anybody these days if they have the money.
I'm also betting the tribes themselves are becoming concerned about continuing low returns, and it would be foolish to harvest those "foregone opportunity" fish. So much of this discussion has assumed the tribal members and their fisheries people are not smart enough to figure out we are all taking too many. I think some of them are more on the ball than many of us. We have some real nimrods at WDFW.  Can you say Cindy Lefleur?
Maybe since we took the first step, the tribes won't go overboard. 
--------------------
Landslide: Stevie Nicks greatest song!
http://www.ccapnw.org
The Monster Breathes!
"Don't fall in!" Doug Richert Sr. 10/18/2008 
|
Gooose
Offline
Ancient Mod
Profile Status:
Reged: 09/14/01
Posts: 11071
Loc: Area 12
|
|
Problem is that the issue is not a matter of ESA....that would require someone to petition NOAA Fisheries for a listing and for the Feds to decide to list.  A lawsuit in this case could only occur if there was a violation of ESA or the Boldt decision....if there is another avenue for that to happen I'd really like to hear what that might be? It certainly does appear to many that anyone can bring suit for just about any reason but in regards to this issue those avenues just are not there. The Supreme court simply just won't recognize any other forum in which to sue.
--------------------
Independent Advocate For The Fish
Not Represented By Any Organization
Simple Solutions to Simple Problems
Simple Solutions to Complex Problems
There's lies, damned lies and then there are statistics......Mark Twain
|
RICH G
Offline
chum
Profile Status:
Reged: 05/15/01
Posts: 70
Loc: Forks Wa.
|
|
Gooose,
I got a nice little wild hen out of the Dose about a month ago. Thought you would like to know that.
Anyways I think what has just happened could change everything. Forgone Opportunity is in place under the assumption that both user groups allocations are being managed for harvest, it was set up this way under the Boldt Decision. On the Quileute, sport fishing harvest showed a trend they could not harvest their allocation It only made sense under Forgone Opportunity the tribe could take those fish, they had the right didnt they, and they took advantage of it.
CnR and using it as a management priority be it for opportunity or conservation, it matters not, throws a big kink in the rope as far as what the ruleing intended. The ruleing has nothing in it about anything other than a harvest goal for each group. Each group had to have the opportunity to havest their allocation and if one group didnt the other group could.
Well now things have changed. One group decided they were not interested in harvest any more for their allocation. they were interested in CnR opportunity and conservation of their wild steelhead. Now that their goal has changed their allocation can not be management for harvest, MSH/MSY makes no sense if they wont be harvesting any fish. New management will be needed for the sport fishers allocation probally MSR. Under MSR the intenet of the Boldt Decision wouldnt have changed for the sport allocation as the group still needs to have the opportunity to take advantage of their allocation. The thing that does change is that if Forgone Opportunity is used by the tribes they take away the other groups opportunity and that goes agianst the Boldt Decision.
You see under MSR the fish have to get to the sport anglers for them to take advantage of their allocation, trends of allocation use are meaningless without harvest as far as Forgone Opportunity intent.
Its Quileute Tribe could have to and should have to go back to a quota of their allocation or risk having the Boldt Decision re-opened to elovle or be re-enterperated what Forgone Opportunity means when one group changes the management of its allocation.
I dont know but I would worry If I were them.
Its a theory but it makes sense.
Edited by RICH G (02/09/04 05:07 PM)
|
Gooose
Offline
Ancient Mod
Profile Status:
Reged: 09/14/01
Posts: 11071
Loc: Area 12
|
|
Rich thanks for the info....i haven't even seen one on the local rivers this year.
The problem is that the federal court only recognizes harvest. For our choice not to harvest to be recognized legally would require the Supreme court to allow the Boldt case to be revisited or reopened. As far as I know their ruling was final...I forget the legal term used....but suffice to say when they do that they usually consider the issue before them to be done with unless the petitioners can present evidence of violation of Federal law. I don't see where the state or anyone else for that matter can make a case for such a violation. So legal challenges to foregone opportunity are pretty much a lead balloon unless it can be proven that there is no surplus fish to be harvested....that would require the state to admit such and then pursue the issue before the special masters assigned to the Boldt case by the federal court system.
--------------------
Independent Advocate For The Fish
Not Represented By Any Organization
Simple Solutions to Simple Problems
Simple Solutions to Complex Problems
There's lies, damned lies and then there are statistics......Mark Twain
|
RICH G
Offline
chum
Profile Status:
Reged: 05/15/01
Posts: 70
Loc: Forks Wa.
|
|
I understand what you are saying, but I dont see the logic.
We shall see what happens, I dont think the public is going to take Forgone Opportunity for an answer or allow it to happen, or continue to allow it to hapen if it begins.
This is an issue that could very well break outside the sport fishing community into the public. The tribes are not going to want to look greedy and bad even if it is their right. They have much more to loose then face. The record on wild steelhead runs are not good and it isnt going to look good for them to take fish that the other group is trying to save.
|
Gooose
Offline
Ancient Mod
Profile Status:
Reged: 09/14/01
Posts: 11071
Loc: Area 12
|
|
Who said the legal system used logic?  Where's our local legal beagle Todd?  Rich I hope as you do that this will all workout for the best of wild steelies but consider this....do you or anyone else really see the majority of this states voters who live within the I-5 urban beltway as actually rallying enmasse to the cause of wild steelhead? Sorry but I refuse to believe in utopia...just my opinion though. 
--------------------
Independent Advocate For The Fish
Not Represented By Any Organization
Simple Solutions to Simple Problems
Simple Solutions to Complex Problems
There's lies, damned lies and then there are statistics......Mark Twain
|
Marty
Offline
redneck yachter
Profile Status:
Reged: 07/17/00
Posts: 19067
Loc: Olympic Peninsula
|
|
The hoh tribe petitioned for more fish and were granted them.. Have a nice day
--------------------
Marty
Got Your Steelheader.net stickers?
Pay it forward
Steelhead dues paid one cast at a time repeated a 1000 times a day...one more cast looking for a fix
|
JacobF
Offline
dual red striper
Profile Status:
Reged: 12/21/01
Posts: 275
Loc: Seattle
|
|
Where'd you get that info, Marty?
--------------------
Xtream Fly Fishing & Outdoor Gear Pro Staff
206-762-6170
http://www.pugetsoundanglers.org
|
micropterus101
Offline
Incurable Fish virus.
Profile Status:
Reged: 11/18/02
Posts: 598
Loc: Port Orchard
|
|
Quote:
Todd R said:
WDFW will not be saying "we don't want our half anymore"...they'll be saying "for the good of the resource, we want our half to have a better chance of spawning and making both halves bigger".
Fish on...
Todd.
wdfw can say all they want till there blue in the face. they regulate our privilage to fish.
They cannot regulate self regulating tribes as set forth in the Boldt decision. Especially while there is still harvestable fish.
Some stuff from the boldt decision. Please understand we have got to get rid of the nets first. This regulation only covers a few rivers. It is not the big victory the purist claim it is for sportsfishermen. The rest have already been C&R yet nothing has changed except that we are loosing more privilages. This was just a victory for people that prefer to Catch & Release and want evrybody else to fish the way they do. As long as there are harvestable fish the indians will have the right to fish for them whether we partake in are privilages or not.
[*403] 32. In order for regulations not to discriminate against treaty Indians, the Department of Fisheries' harvesting plan must provide for an opportunity for treaty Indians to take, at their off-reservation usual and accustomed fishing places, a share of the harvestable fish as set forth in the Final Decision, pages 342-343.
notice it says harvestable fish, not does not distinguish between native or non native.
Regulation of off-reservation Indian treaty fishing by the United States, the State, or the Plaintiff tribes does not preempt the regulation by any of the other two. Jurisdiction of each entity to regulate is unimpaired by the exercise of another entity's regulatory jurisdiction. With respect to matters over which there may be multiple jurisdiction, the extent of exercise or non-exercise of regulatory jurisdiction by the entity having primary interest [**252] in the matter may be relevant to the appropriateness of another entity's exercise of its jurisdiction. Also the exercise of federal or tribal regulatory control may affect the finding of "necessity" which is required for the validity of any state exercise of its police power to preserve the resource .
The state cant show necessity to preserve the resource when they have already showed scientifically there are harvestable amounts of wild steelhead. Even if they could show necessity for wild stocks there is no distinction between native fish and hatchery fish in the Boldt decision!
I am not done yet I just got into the interesting parts! But its getting early in the morning and I gots to go to work later.
|
Jerryberry
Offline
3 salt
Profile Status:
Reged: 09/18/03
Posts: 30
Loc: Everett Wa
|
|
Hey B.P.--- CNR worked on the NF(I think) Toutle after the eruption. Steelhead recolonized the river and were making a big comeback in a devastated watershed, that is until WDFW started planting hatchery summerruns, then the numbers of wild fish started to decline.
|
plugger
Offline
steelie
Profile Status:
Reged: 02/15/01
Posts: 240
Loc: moses lake wa usa
|
|
If for one second, anyone thinks this will benefit the sport fisherman by reducing or limiting tribal fishing, you need to pull your head out of your !#&#!. The only user group this WILL benefit is the tribes.
The state doesn't have a prayer of winning a court battle with the tribes, nor are the tribes going to stop netting because they fill sorry for the fish or the white man. Were have you people been the last 20 plus years.
For all you that pushed this issue, Do you think twice about killing a salmon (native) while of the coast? I think not. A wild fish is a wild fish, so don't preach one thing and do another.
I personally release "most" native steelhead I catch, but if I want one for dinner and its leagle to do so then I don't think twice about bonking one on the head. It was nice to have a choice.
Just my thoughts on the matter, Time to go pull the knife's out of my back.
|
AuntyM
Offline
Looking for a few good fish!
Profile Status:
Reged: 05/07/01
Posts: 10194
Loc: Harstine Island
|
|
Quote:
Anticipated low steelhead return leads
to early closure of Green River fisheries
OLYMPIA - State and tribal fisheries managers are closing the Green River to all fishing because of anticipated low returns of both hatchery and wild steelhead.
The river will close to all sport fishing beginning Feb. 16.
Although projected to return at higher levels than last year, this year's wild winter steelhead run is potentially the fifth in a row to come in below the co-managers' escapement goal of 2,000 fish.
"State and tribal fisheries managers have reviewed the steelhead run size data, and we agree that the wild steelhead stock on the Green River needs additional protection," said Phil Anderson, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife special assistant to the director.
The lower Duwamish/Green River was scheduled to close to sport fishing for steelhead Feb. 29, while the middle and upper stretches of the river were scheduled to close March 15. Commercial tribal fisheries were closed on Dec. 22, 2003, more than a month earlier than scheduled, after the in-season update for the hatchery run showed a very low return.
Nope. Don't see any cooperation there! WDFW kept it open a month and a half longer than they probably should have. You don't supposed WDFW and all of us have something to do with this problem.
Criticism of tribes BEFORE they have actually done anything. Typical, and not very conducive to change.
--------------------
Landslide: Stevie Nicks greatest song!
http://www.ccapnw.org
The Monster Breathes!
"Don't fall in!" Doug Richert Sr. 10/18/2008
|
BP
Offline
returning spawner
Profile Status:
Reged: 08/22/02
Posts: 41
Loc: Auburn, WA
|
|
Quote:
Marty said:
The hoh tribe petitioned for more fish and were granted them.. Have a nice day
Marty when did this happen? Please post or email me any info about this.
|
Jerryberry
Offline
3 salt
Profile Status:
Reged: 09/18/03
Posts: 30
Loc: Everett Wa
|
|
Aunty, It's easy to criticize others and not come up with a viable solution. And as far as Will Roehl saying that WDFW was coming up with a Management plan for steelhead, I don't think the wild fish can wait. If it's anything like waiting for their hatchery plan, wild fish will really suffer.
|
AuntyM
Offline
Looking for a few good fish!
Profile Status:
Reged: 05/07/01
Posts: 10194
Loc: Harstine Island
|
|
I agree with you there Bruce.
--------------------
Landslide: Stevie Nicks greatest song!
http://www.ccapnw.org
The Monster Breathes!
"Don't fall in!" Doug Richert Sr. 10/18/2008
|
YBNORML
Offline
chum
Profile Status:
Reged: 02/08/04
Posts: 56
Loc: Kent ,Wa
|
|
Bruce they just want more cause it's blown most of the time.Not alot of pressure. 
|
Todd R
Offline
Chromer
Profile Status:
Reged: 10/29/01
Posts: 892
Loc: Seattle, Washington
|
|
The Hoh tribe has nothing to do with this regulation or this thread.
What it looks like they're trying to do (the details are sketchy for me at this point, I'm trying to find out what's up), is net 4-5 days a week on the Hoh River. The run projection there this year anticipates that the Hoh River will again not meet escapement goals.
And they want to fish for them...
Fish on...
Todd.
--------------------
http://www.rvrfshr.com
For all your fishing hardware needs!
"Correct in Design"
|
Marty
Offline
redneck yachter
Profile Status:
Reged: 07/17/00
Posts: 19067
Loc: Olympic Peninsula
|
|
Why doesn't it? Exercising foregone opp at its best and the state unwilling to fight them because of fear of losing
--------------------
Marty
Got Your Steelheader.net stickers?
Pay it forward
Steelhead dues paid one cast at a time repeated a 1000 times a day...one more cast looking for a fix
|
Todd R
Offline
Chromer
Profile Status:
Reged: 10/29/01
Posts: 892
Loc: Seattle, Washington
|
|
Also...
The Hoh is open for sporties to catch and kill wild steelhead, too, and the river is expected to be underescaped, as noted above. There are sportfishermen over there catching and bonking those fish right now...next year if the Hoh's try this we'll have a little more credibility to call BS on it.
Todd.
--------------------
http://www.rvrfshr.com
For all your fishing hardware needs!
"Correct in Design"
|
BP
Offline
returning spawner
Profile Status:
Reged: 08/22/02
Posts: 41
Loc: Auburn, WA
|
|
"And they want to fish for them..."
I think you mean the will fish for them...
|
micropterus101
Offline
Incurable Fish virus.
Profile Status:
Reged: 11/18/02
Posts: 598
Loc: Port Orchard
|
|
Quote:
AuntyM said:
Quote:
Anticipated low steelhead return leads
to early closure of Green River fisheries
OLYMPIA - State and tribal fisheries managers are closing the Green River to all fishing because of anticipated low returns of both hatchery and wild steelhead.
The river will close to all sport fishing beginning Feb. 16.
Although projected to return at higher levels than last year, this year's wild winter steelhead run is potentially the fifth in a row to come in below the co-managers' escapement goal of 2,000 fish.
"State and tribal fisheries managers have reviewed the steelhead run size data, and we agree that the wild steelhead stock on the Green River needs additional protection," said Phil Anderson, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife special assistant to the director.
The lower Duwamish/Green River was scheduled to close to sport fishing for steelhead Feb. 29, while the middle and upper stretches of the river were scheduled to close March 15. Commercial tribal fisheries were closed on Dec. 22, 2003, more than a month earlier than scheduled, after the in-season update for the hatchery run showed a very low return.
Nope. Don't see any cooperation there! WDFW kept it open a month and a half longer than they probably should have. You don't supposed WDFW and all of us have something to do with this problem.
Criticism of tribes BEFORE they have actually done anything. Typical, and not very conducive to change.
Aunty the indians could not win there in the green because it was scientifically shown the there was not going to be any harvestable fish.The tribe had to concede to the states decision.
The more I read the Boldt decision The more I realize we as sports fishermen are just plain lucky to have the oportunitty to fishing privilages in this state and we should hold on to every privilage.
If there are harvestable fish (fish returning above escapment minimum numbers to support run) the state cannont deny petitions by the tribes for take above 50% if we give up part of the qouta .
50% is a number to make sure the indians get a fair amount of fish. there is nothing that says they cant take more. If the sportsfishers and commercials dont get all of there 50% it is no where to be read in the boldt decision that the indians cant take the extra for themselves as long as there are harvestable fish.
--------------------
XXX fish porn Naked-fish-Pics.com
|
micropterus101
Offline
Incurable Fish virus.
Profile Status:
Reged: 11/18/02
Posts: 598
Loc: Port Orchard
|
|
Quote:
Marty said:
Why doesn't it? Exercising foregone opp at its best and the state unwilling to fight them because of fear of losing
The state is not afraid of losing, They know they will lose as long as there are harvestable fish.
--------------------
XXX fish porn Naked-fish-Pics.com
|
micropterus101
Offline
Incurable Fish virus.
Profile Status:
Reged: 11/18/02
Posts: 598
Loc: Port Orchard
|
|
I hope its getting clearer that the state doesnt have a leg to stand on. Especially when they cant even count on the sportfishermen to keep there privilages, at least the state could fight for our 50% and slow the tribes down.The state is losing there bargaining power along with are privilages. I know its getting more complicated now but try to think really hard and go read the boldt decision thoroughly!
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
[Re: 
Edit
Reply
Quote
