Here is the answer for PSA. We are going to sign in support of the bill. I have worked politics for many years and this bill looks great to anyone that looks at it. I had to call the chapters in for a vote and it is not easy with 15 voting chapters. There are chapters still waiting to be heard from. I am going to lay it out as I see it as I have had so many calls and pressure to succomb to this bill. PSA is a ground up organization meaning it does what the chapters want.

I have been working in the political arena for many years and was able to bring in a lobbyist to help with our cause. There are many battles we have fought. PSA as a whole is going to go forward to support SB5844 on Wednesday. We have taken a chapter vote and will go forward with a yes vote. This has not been easy as there are many things at play here. This is something we have not taken lightly. We always want to pick our battles wisely and make sure there are not repercussions down the road that we made the right choice. This bill puts added pressure on several of the remote chapter communities that have differences in how their fisheries are managed. This bill is stated as a recreational priority bill. It says when dealing with our fisheries recreationals get priority.

The reason we had given the neutral stance is because we knew that Representative Blake was not going to hear (HB1660) in the House, it is a huge longshot that PFMC is going to change the ocean fisheries management towards the recreationals. This boils down to going after the ocean trollers. We know that to change any ocean fisheries management, it has to go through PFMC. The ocean is managed federally and not as much the state. PFMC is comprised of 14 voting members and only 1 is from Washington. Most has almost always voted commercial. Oregon would not be on board, but there is one issue where they might. Let's say even if we could get a bigger share of the Ocean Chinook, the Oregon trollers are going to come right in and take those fish away. These fish will be open game for them. So a win would be quickly taken away.

Right now of the Non-tribal fisheries side we have already:
1. Repositioned crab and shrimp for the recreationals in the Puget Sound. We have the lion's share of halibut in Washington state. PSA was the reason this happened as they were the advisors that did the ground work to get it done.
2. Have most of the Chinook and Coho managed for sport in the Puget Sound. Non tribal commercials get the Pink and Chum.
3. Puget Sound Halibut (from Neah Bay in) non tribal is 100% recreational. No commercial fishery.
4. Non tribal ocean halibut fishery-Recs get most of it.
5. We have 73% of the Coho in the ocean and 50% of the Chinook out there. If we could change the ocean troll fleet we would have to get a law mandated in Oregon to stay off of these fish. Not likely as PFMC is mainly managed for commercial fishing.
6. Our seasons for Puget Sound Rockfish are closed. We have a managed Lingcod fishery.
7. Columbia River is already trying to be managed for the sports and has issues between Washington and Oregon and non stop fighting.

The rest of the ocean fishery is a non issue. We can fish for and catch about as much tuna, rockfish,and lingcod as possible except going up against the impacts caused by species of concern, i.e, Canary and Yelloweye Rockfish. These are the drivers that shorten our opportunity.

We have not sat idly by as some may think. We have been working on this through many calls to make sure we are doing the right thing. There are always reactions for every action so we want to be careful.

Do we want to send our PSA NOF representatives into the North of Falcon process making it tough to deal with the other user groups that are comprised of Tribes, Non tribal commercials, and recreationals on the chance that this bill might not make it? I know there is a lot of pressure on Brian Blake to pass HB1660 but reality is that he lives in a commercial fishing town with commercial family members.

Do we want to make the North of Falcon planning process meeting tough on our reps that have to sit in a room with all parties that partake in splitting up the salmon on the west coast, from Point Falcon California to the Canadian Border.

They have to divide up all of the salmon between the user groups and come to an agreement on who gets what salmon. Our NOF representatives work very hard with all entities looking forward to a positive outcome for us.

We have some remote chapters that this affects differently and think we should be respectful of their situations.

We had to cast a chapter vote due to outside pressure trying to paint us as "for" or "against." So we will be going forward with the yes. As of right now the votes that have come in are high enough to have the state board represent a yes vote on these two bills. The accusations that have come to me are ludicrous and unacceptable.

From I went behind our organizations backs to legislators to cut their throats to being a traitor. With all of the fishing issues that PSA has rolled up its sleeves and helped to gain for the recreational, that was a huge slap in the face.

There are a lot of positive aspects in this bill and legislators have stuck their neck out for this bill to happen for recreational fishing. PSA signing on will help this bill move forward.

If it wasn't for the strength of PSA, this would never be an issue. We are focusing our energies on the Puget Sound Rockfish ESA listing. This is going to make this bill issue seem like peanuts as there is intent from NOAA to shut down parts of the Puget Sound to fishing. This would be a federal permanent closure on our fishing grounds. PSA is the only fishing organization that is at the table trying to guide this in our favor to stop these closures. The rest are NGOs that are paid to be there and many want closures. In my opinion some are there to fund their organization through crisis funding. No crisis no funding. Remember that we are a 100% volunteer organization with no salaries.

I really hope this helps shed light on what we see that is happening. If you would like to speak or comment on the bill please do. We are not trying to tell you how to vote. We want our perspective to be known. I have called about everyone in the world that this would affect to make sure we are doing the right thing. This takes time. We want to make sure that this is not ready, shoot, aim.

The scheduled public hearing is on Feb 18, this Wednesday, at 1:30 PM in Olympia. This is in the Senate Committee on Natural Resources and Parks. This is in the John Cherberg Building, 304 15th Ave SW, Olympia, bottom floor. Please come and support your position. If you choose to not show up and be heard, don't complain.
Thank you and see you in Olympia.
Sincerely,
Ron Garner
PSA State President