Petition for Open WDFW/Tribal NOF Meetings

[Larry3215]

The tribes are a nation unto themselves. They are not subject to state laws in this matter. I thought we established that early on in this thread? Something from the Attorney General or some big shot lawyer?

Thats Federal law and has been supported in the courts for decades. There is absolutely nothing Unsworth - or any State official - can do to change that except ask very nicely.

If Unsworth doesnt handle things diplomatically, then the tribes get pissed, they walk, they get a season and we dont. Just like last year. NOAA and Dept of Indian affairs have to follow Federal law on this and they will.

All of that double talk Person was spouting sure sounded like political speak for budget cutting to me. What else could "preserving core functions" mean? WDFW has been under funded for decades. This sounds to me like an excuse - covered up by deliberately obtuse language - to cut the budget even more - and blame someone else when it fails because of the cuts.

If Unsworth is the problem, then fire Unsworth. Yanking the rug out form under him just sets him up to take the blame when WDFW cant even do the jobs they are trying to do now after they cut the budget.

I suppose I could be wrong, but since these guys are mostly all republicans, I think Im much more likely to be right on what they really mean.

[Larry3215]

By the way, not trying to start a fight here, we are still in agreement on the basic premis of this thread, but I think we disagree on this one point.

[Bay wolf]

By the way, not trying to start a fight here, we are still in agreement on the basic premis of this thread, but I think we disagree on this one point.

Dialog is important. I appreciate your views and your support for the Open Meetings Issue.

I guess it will be one of those things that we will have to wait to see how it all comes out.

[BARCHASER10]

On July 2, 1979, the Supreme Court rejected a collateral attack[fn 1] on the case, largely endorsing Judge Boldt's ruling and the opinion of the Ninth Circuit. In Washington v. Washington State Commercial Passenger Fishing Vessel Ass'n, Justice John Paul Stevens wrote that "oth sides have a right, secured by treaty, to take a fair share of the available fish."[

Sovereign nation, certainly. But clearly there is supposed to be a mechanism to ensure that both sides get their "fair share". Obviously there is no such mechanism. Without such a mechanism neither the state or the feds are in compliance with the Boldt decision. Sometimes I wish I was a billionaire so I had the $ to sue everybody in sight.

Dream on, dream on teenage queen....

[Larry3215]

By the way, not trying to start a fight here, we are still in agreement on the basic premis of this thread, but I think we disagree on this one point.

Dialog is important. I appreciate your views and your support for the Open Meetings Issue.

I guess it will be one of those things that we will have to wait to see how it all comes out.

Yeah, its probably a tiny bit unfair to criticize a politician for what they say if they havent actually done anything yet. They can rarely be trusted to tell the truth no matter what.

Especially when the wording they use is so incredibly vague. That vagueness makes me very suspicious that something is being hidden though.

Once we find out what the budget really is, then we can start screaming or praising for sure.

[Larry3215]

On July 2, 1979, the Supreme Court rejected a collateral attack[fn 1] on the case, largely endorsing Judge Boldt's ruling and the opinion of the Ninth Circuit. In Washington v. Washington State Commercial Passenger Fishing Vessel Ass'n, Justice John Paul Stevens wrote that "oth sides have a right, secured by treaty, to take a fair share of the available fish."[

Sovereign nation, certainly. But clearly there is supposed to be a mechanism to ensure that both sides get their "fair share". Obviously there is no such mechanism. Without such a mechanism neither the state or the feds are in compliance with the Boldt decision. Sometimes I wish I was a billionaire so I had the $ to sue everybody in sight.

Dream on, dream on teenage queen....

Thats an excellent point, but my take is that there is nothing WDFW, Unsworth or the state can do short of revisiting the original treaties and the Bolt decision in federal court - which could take a decade or three to resolve itself. I also dont think there is any chance, politically, for that to happen.

I think its unfair and unproductive to blame them when they have no power to change things.

On the other hand, the Bureau of Indian Affairs and NOAA might be able to push - some. Maybe. I actually don know for sure on that.

[Bay wolf]

There is plenty WDFW can do.
What they choose to do is nothing. They are content in allowing an arbitrary designation of Gov't to Gov't stand without challenge or justification.
They condone the roadblock to public oversight, and disregard the citizens who have asked to have the fisheries managed in an open and transparent way.
They make excuses rather than ask for Federal mediation. Of course, they would only do that IF they truly wanted the meetings open themselves.
They choose to continue to stall and evade an open discussion with the stakeholders on why no progress has been made to resolve the permitting issue which gives one party leverage over the other.
They choose to put the importance of public image of one group, above the rights to have transparency in the management of our public fisheries.
They preach conservation, yet make deals in locked rooms with no method or authority of accountability.
They hold public meetings, showing wonderful slides and asking the public for "input" on what they want, yet all the while are fully aware that no matter what the public would like, it's the "other group" that dictates who gets what. Blatantly threatening to walk out of negotiations if their demands aren't met.

It's so easy for the leadership of WDFW to wipe their hands and say...we can't do anything. It's not the right thing to do, but it sure is the easy way out!

[dj2loud]

There hasn't been any real news coming out from the recent meetings that have been made public.... Anyone have any new news to share?

[Bay wolf]

I will be posting something tomorrow following a scheduled conference call. I'm sorry I haven't been able to post an update recently but we ran into a situation that requires some clarification.

[Onmygame]

There hasn't been any real news coming out from the recent meetings that have been made public.... Anyone have any new news to share?

According to the WDFW there are several coming up and an already convened series of North of Falcon meetings open to the public -

http://wdfw.wa.gov/fishing/northfalcon/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

onmygame

[dj2loud]

Onmygame, I'm referring to the real meetings, the NOF meetings, not the smoke and mirrors Houdini meetings you are referring to are meaningless, public input my derrière. Our inpu is being sat on.or like talking to ol dumb dumb here---

Bay and a few others are working diligently to bring the sporties some info---

[Onmygame]

Onmygame, I'm referring to the real meetings, the NOF meetings, not the smoke and mirrors Houdini meetings you are referring to are meaningless, public input my derrière. Our inpu is being sat on.or like talking to ol dumb dumb here---

Bay and a few others are working diligently to bring the sporties some info---

The link I provided is for public NOF meetings, at least according to the WDFW website.

Based on your comment, I'm assuming then that you've attended these before and have first hand knowledge as to them being meaningless?

It would be helpful if you could give us some examples of how they end up being a waste of time for all involved.

I'm fully aware of Baywolf's effort, and can only offer praise in his presentation, congeniality and determination.

The only possible outcome I see to his continued effort, is that if he attains what he is after - 100% of what he is asking - is that it will amount to nothing more than a brief preview for sportsmen of the regs that come out each June.

onmygame

[dj2loud]

Maybe you should do your research sir, that or troll some other site asking questions you already know the answer to... Its been a proven fact that we the sportsman have NO SAY in the NOF meetings.... YOU SHOULD BE READING FROM THE START OF THIS POST....

[Onmygame]

Nowhere in my post did I imply that sportsmen had a voice in those meetings - only that those meetings open to the public exist.

That sportsmen allowed to be present during closed meetings would have a voice is not even part of Baywolf's effort or request - as CLEARLY stated by him in this thread.

He is asking only to be present, along with other interested sportsmen to view the process, without interruption or any other form of disruption to the process.

I'm not sure what kind of 'research' you suggest - other than to ask questions, very much like I asked you previously. Am still waiting on your response to the questions of whether or not you've even attended these meetings, and if so what is wrong with them.

onmygame

[Bay wolf]

We just posted an update on the petition. In short, we have had a very interesting meeting with our newest WDFW Commissioner, Barbra Baker and the WDFW Deputy Director, Joe Stohr. The meeting was informative and cordial. It allowed us the opportunity to speak directly to leadership and let them know how important having an open management process is to the citizens and for the fish. Although we did not get any concrete assurances of assistance, we have opened a dialog which will allow us to continue to address the issue. We do know that others in senior leadership positions have taken notice of our fight and as we stated in the update, the tide has turned. We now have influential leaders looking at the problem of secret meetings.

Government moves slow. As Senator Pearson so elegantly said, "at times it's like watching paint dry." However, be assured, it is moving, and it is moving in our direction to affect change to end these distrustful secret meetings.

We will continue to move the process forward. We will reach out to elected officials, appointed leader and tribal representatives and we ask all of you to do the same. Stay resolved, victory for open management is ours if we will continue to fight for it.

Remember, the numbers of petition signers is powerful. It speaks very loudly to everyone involved in this issue. Do your part and continue to get supporters on board. Besides the letters and calls your making, it is the single most powerful tool we have!

[Bay wolf]

If I might interject on both your points gentlemen:

Cleary, WDFW has made gains in trying to bring the sportsmen into the process of NOF. I, and many others have attended the "Open, public meetings that WDFW puts on. In fact, I have attended them for some time. It was at such a meeting I first became infuriated to learn of the "Secret" NOF meetings held with the tribes. I noticed there we no tribal members in the Public meeting and asked Ron Warren why? He said they hold separate meetings with the Tribes. So, naturally I asked when they were, because I wanted to attend. He replied "Your not allowed, there's no need for you to be there anyway, it's mostly just technical stuff." Well, I found out differently and it started me on the path to do something about it!

To the point that the Public meetings are a waste of time. Yes..and no. We are presented projections and possibilities, all of which some very dedicated and hard working WDFW staff have spent many hours putting together. But, it is only half the information. The Tribes are doing the same thing with their bio guys to create projections and possibilities which, naturally favor their agenda. It's not a waste of time to attend the public meetings as there is some very good information put out, and it allows us sportsmen to interact on a personal level with WDFW staff. That is always good. Another part of the Public meetings is the sportsmen's input piece. This is where the department asks of our input as to what seasons and such we would like.

So, how can so much effort and good be turned into a waste of time?

It happens when WDFW, armed with all its data sits down with the Tribes and all their data and the doors are locked and the public is barred from any method of seeing and hearing what is going on in that room! Why is that a problem? Because, currently, we have to have the Tribes agreement in order to get our permits in time to have a season. Conversely, the Tribes DO NOT need our agreement, they can simply walk out, go get their permits and fish! You see how this puts everything that WDFW walks into the room with as a waste of time? If WDFW proposes some fishery, and the Tribes don't like it, they threaten to walk out...so who gives in? Here's a hint straight from Director Unsworths mouth; "Any season is better than no season."

So, you see how important having the meetings open to public oversight is. So, what is public oversight and what are We asking for? Having a room full of sportsmen, yelling and throwing shoes would, as we can all agree, be counter productive. However, we do need to see and hear, real time, without spin or edit, what each side is doing and saying, to prevent some of this grandstanding and coercion. So, we have asked for (and been denied by the tribes and the state) a live video feed, to the pubic access chanel, so anyone who wants can tune in and watch and listen to the negotiations.

In conclusion gentlemen, you are both correct, at least from my perspective. The more important thing is not who's more correct, but that we stay cohesive and focused on the fight. The forces we are up against are powerful and influential and have lots of money. It is only through staying strong and together can we fix this wrong.

[TrackerPro16]

I thought the WDFW already stated there would be more cuts? I am sure I read that somewhere... Hmmm.

[dj2loud]

Last year there was 0 meetings between the public and WDFW/Tribal... If you remember correctly it was all on line commenting towards the fisheries and the only thing WDFW did was continue to apply them towards wac codes and state they wouldn't be considered and that was that.... It was an open door that was shut....This is the 1st year they felt the burn of the sportsmen.... Hope they like the burn cause its only going to get hotter and itchier from here... Lets be that rectal itch they will never forget....

[Bay wolf]

The Fight continues:

WDFW has asked for "Public Input" on proposed rule changes! What an insult! Asking for the public's input on rules that they made in secret, behind doors that they colluded with NWIFC to KEEP US UNINFORMED UNTIL AFTER THE DIRTY DEALS ARE MADE, THEN RAM THEM DOWN OUR THROATS!!!

IF AT ALL POSSIBLE, ATTEND ONE OF THESE MEETINGS AND LET THEM KNOW WE WILL NOT ACCEPT THIS CHARADE ANY LONGER! Last year we played nice, and they felt the pressure, but kept the doors locked. This year we will not be so gentle!

If you cannot attend in person, send in an email comment to: Rules.Coordinator@dfw.wa.gov

You can also copy your comments to us, at: OpenNOF@Gmail.com and we will present or read them at the Olympia meeting on the 27th.

The public input meetings are listed here:

__Recreational Salmon Fishery Public Hearing Schedule:__

--Puget Sound Freshwater and Saltwater
Written comments are due by June 27, 2017
A public hearing will take place on June 27, 9:00 a.m. to 10:00 a.m. 
Natural Resources Building Room 184 
1111 Washington St. SE 
Olympia, WA 98501

--Coastal Freshwater
Written comments are due by June 26, 2017
A public hearing will take place on June 27, 2017, 10:00 a.m. - 12:00 p.m. 
Region 6 Fish and Wildlife Office, Conference Room 
48 Devonshire Road 
Montesano, WA 98563

-- Ocean and Coastal Saltwater
Written comments are due by June 26, 2017
A public hearing will take place on June 27, 1:30 - 3:30 p.m. 
Region 6 Fish and Wildlife Office, Conference Room 
48 Devonshire Road 
Montesano, WA 98563

If you’re at the Olympia Meeting, please introduce yourself.
Hope to see you there.

Perry

[Bay wolf]

WE ARE NOW ON TWITTER!

https://twitter.com/OpenNOF

PLEASE SHARE THIS AND TWEET US.