I can confirm as sitting WDFW Puget Sound Salmon Commission member that there were no falsely spread rumors,. The commissioners all conferenced earlier in the week with a decision to close, which was later overruled by the new Director. While I feel we have to trust the Director's judgement, it's concerning that the commission was not consulted in the over-ruling of the jointly made decision.
I do believe that we have consensus amongst the commission to begin managing all marine areas as a single entity, aggregating the impacts and encounters across areas, versus closing a specific area when it happens to reach it's predetermined impact percentage. This management technique allows fishing to continue when all of the fish congregate into a specific area on any given year due to bait fish concentrations, their inherently transitory nature, or other conditions. I expect this to be a major topic at the upcoming NOF.
The issue at hand in my mind is, how does this scheme fly when it hasn't been etched in stone yet during an annual cycle?
Time will tell.
I can appreciate your comments LarryB and will certainly echo them in our next meeting. Good feedback. Keep it coming.
Two immediate observations:
1. If the commission to which you belong made a recommendation which was "overruled" without explanation that should be of concern to us all as you opined. This seems to go to one of my concerns about the Advisory Group concept as utilized by WDFW in that recommendations go to the Group's agency liaison and supposedly up the chain rather than there being written minutes/recommendations with originals to the Director and Commission.
2. As to the issue at hand It might be reasonable to establish predetermined impact percentages by MAs and adjust as seasons progress if it so happens that impact levels in some MAs do not occur as anticipated. But as I indicated earlier to have a great season in MA7 result in an early closure in mid and south sound MAs will simply not be acceptable for obvious reasons.
Previous Topic
Index
