Originally Posted By: bushbear


NOAA Fisheries is aware that a level of controversy surrounded the 2015 non-Indian fisheries in
Puget Sound. Assuming allocation of impacts was a factor in that controversy, NOAA Fisheries notes
its belief that in the most recent five years, the negotiated non-Indian catch in Washington has
exceeded 50% on average for at least two Puget Sound Chinook allocation units -specifically in
2015, it appears to NOAA Fisheries that non-Indians fisheries in Washington exceeded 50% in three
allocation units. It is unclear what a non-Indian fishery would look like if it was proposed without
agreement and complied strictly with allocation requirements - assuming those requirements
themselves did not again become the focus of the dispute.


So, what is the basis for this belief? I am not well-versed in the NoF process, but all I keep hearing about is how treaty fisheries are taking more than 50% in many instances. Can anyone with the facts explain this?