Since I seem to have been attending quite a few Commission meetings lately to include this past Friday when this matter was discussed and the vote taken I certainly would not categorize it as a "Cave In" by the Commission. By the way, that description smacks of sour grapes.

I also do not have a direct interest in access to the Lake Sutherland fishery.

My observation is that those folks with a direct interest wanted on open process where all of the facts pertaining to possible recolonization by sockeye could be examined. Their "political pressure" achieved that goal. I do not believe their "political pressure" resulted in the final decision to allow a continued fishery with a slot limit.

Several critical points considered by the Commission were:

1. There is nothing in the plans for the Elwah to actively try to re-establish a sockeye run. Instead, any recolonization would occur by individual fish from the current kokanee population reverting to an anadromous life cycle or via strays.
2. There are several significant beaver dams on Indian Creek. When queried about the ability of sockeye to pass over/through these the regional biologist stated that due to access difficulties and the size of the dams they had been unable to determine if there were open slots for fish passage. He did opine that he was sure that silvers could transit them. He made no statement regarding whether sockeye would be successful.
3. There are no plans to breach those dams.
4. Commissioner Mehnken added that his experience with Redfish Lake sockeye was that its return from the brink was due to capture of the few remaining returning sockeye and a successful artificial spawning/rearing program rather than resident kokanee reverting to an anadromous life cycle and that few, if any, such reversions occur.

So, I hope this debunks the "cave in" accusation.

And if anyone thinks that doing away with the Commission will improve the decision making process you are simply delusional.