This the guys latest for those that want it down and dirty. Best to link to the site to get the full flavor and links.


IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON
IN AND FOR THURSTON COUNTY
8

9 TWIN HARBORS FISH AND WILDLIFE ADVOCACY, a Washington nonprofit
10 corporation,
11 Petitioner,
12 vs.
13 WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF FISH & WILDLIFE, an agency of the State of
14 Washington,
15
Respondent.

) No. 19-2-02319-34
)
) DECLARATION OF TIM HAMILTON
) IN SUPPORT OF PETITIONER’S REPLY
) FOR MOTION ALLOWING VIDEOTAPING
) OF DEPOSITION PURSUANT TO
) CR 30(b)(8)(B)
)
)
)
)
)

16 )
17

18 TIM HAMILTON declares and states as follows:
19 1. I am the president of the Twin Harbors Fish & Wildlife Advocacy (hereinafter
20
“THFWA”) in this matter, I am over 18 years of age and competent to testify, and make this
21
22 declaration based upon my own personal knowledge.
23 2. I have served on the Willapa Bay Ad Hoc Committee, which was an advisory
24 board organized by Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife (“WDFW”), and currently sit as
25 an advisor on the Willapa Bay Salmon Advisory Committee. I have attended over 30 meetings
26
during North of Falcon (“NOF”) and presentations to the WDFW Commission. I am familiar with NOF and how WDFW presents NOF to the public.





- 1 of 4

SCHEFTER & FRAWLEY
Attorneys at Law
1415 College Street SE






1 3. I reviewed the WDFW website after Mr. Grossmann forwarded the links to
2 Mr. Frawley. There are some materials related to NOF on the WDFW website, but much of
3
the relevant information cannot be found. There are no records related to the WDFW
4
5 meetings with tribal representatives or the federal government. There is no record of the
6 negotiations, and none of the likely thousands of communications that result in the fishing
7 regulations are on the website. None of the dozens of model runs (WDFW uses large Excel
8
spreadsheets to determine the impacts of the various fishing seasons) could be found. In
9
short, almost none of the meaningful information is on the website.
10
11 4. I attended the NOF meetings this year. No meaningful input was given,
12 although I was not at every meeting across the state and it is possible that other meetings
13 were conducted differently. We were told by WDFW that the tribal co-managers had refused
14
to negotiate potential seasons and that, as a result, WDFW did not have any potential seasons
15
16 or regulations for the public to consider. Really all that had been done was WDFW
17 presenting its forecasted salmon runs, which it emphasized were not yet agreed to by the
18 tribal co-managers and therefore not official, and then overlay last year’s regulations to this
19 year’s forecast. It was again emphasized that the seasons would be different than last years,
20
so this process is largely meaningless (the public has taken to referring to NOF as the “dog
21
22 and pony show”). This continued until after the NOF meetings were over. My
23 understanding, although the public is not allowed at the meetings, is that WDFW and the
24 tribal co-managers reached an agreement (the LOAF) in California after the last of the NOF
25
meetings were over.
26
5. In the past, I have attempted to obtain meaningful information related to season settings from WDFW. In 2016, I filed a public records request pursuant to the Public





- 2 of 4

SCHEFTER & FRAWLEY
Attorneys at Law
1415 College Street SE






1 Records Act. It is attached hereto as Exhibit “A.” As the Court can see, I was attempting to
2 gain information related to the interaction by WDFW and the tribal co-managers. WDFW’s
3
responses to the request are ongoing almost three years later. I last received a response on
4
5 May 29, 2019 and was told to expect another response on July 8, 2019. Attached hereto as
6 Exhibit “B” is the latest transmission from WDFW. Most of the information received is
7 irrelevant and does not disclose any interaction between WDFW and the tribal co-managers.
8
Instead, WDFW appears to be attempting to bury me in paper by submitting thousands of
9
pages of documents such as redd counts (salmon spawning beds) for pink salmon and other
10
11 related, but not all that helpful, information. Nothing has been produced to answer the
12 specific questions, such as internal policies, why there is a deviation from the 50/50 split of
13 harvestable salmon required by United States v. Washington, 384 F. Supp. 312 (W.D. Wash.
14
1974), aff'd, 520 F.2d 676 (9th Cir. 1975) (the “Boldt Decision”), or an explanation of how
15
16 the 2016 List of Agreed Fisheries was arrived at.
17 6. In September of 2017 I again attempted to obtain information from WDFW
18 related to fishing regulations. I emailed Mr. Bird requesting information in response to a
19 notice he published with the Code Reviser. Attached hereto as Exhibit “C” are emails
20
between Mr. Bird and me. As the Court can see, Mr. Bird initially ignored my email for
21
22 roughly two weeks. I followed up with him, and he informed me that he did not have any
23 information related to the proposed rule (concerning commercial fishing) and indicated that
24 he was going to treat my request as a public document request under the Public Records Act.
25
I never heard from anyone concerning the purported public document request and never
26
received any documents from WDFW.

7. It is impossible to get complete information from WDFW. I have tried public





- 3 of 4


SCHEFTER & FRAWLEY
Attorneys at Law
1415 College Street SE






1 records request, requests to the rules coordinator, information communications, attending
2 commission meetings, and serving on advisory committees. WDFW simply will not disclose
3
how the seasons are set and what occurs behind the scenes between WDFW, the Governor’s
4
5 office, the tribal co-managers and the federal agencies.
6 DATED this 12th day of June, 2019.
7

8

9

10

11 TIM HAMILTON
12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26









- 4 of 4


SCHEFTER & FRAWLEY
Attorneys at Law
1415 Colle