Thanks fb. I appreciate the pat-on-the-back.

Lots of good discussion on this thread. Salmo g’s summary is likely very accurate. His views on the different negotiating styles is very insightful. The Tribes often negotiate based on values, not on science. WDFW likely negotiates on science, not values. That dichotomy makes for a difficult negotiation, regardless of the issue.

The Tribes have the same concerns regarding mark-selective fisheries in the Columbia River. They believe pre-spawn mortality on C/R fish is significantly higher than is being used for incidental take purposes. But if NMFS decides the mortality rate estimate is 100% as the Tribes would like, mass-marking and mark-selective fisheries become worthless as a conservation tool. So I don’t expect NMFS to ever conclude that C/R mortality rate is 100%. They might conclude that it’s higher than it is now (if supported by the data), but 100% mortality would mean that all fish caught must be considered ESA listed, and would count against the ESA impacts. The result would be a drastic reduction in harvest by recreational and commercial fishing, and perhaps Tribal fishing too, but that’s not clear.

However, if harvest is curtailed significantly, the resulting high numbers of hatchery fish on the spawning grounds will be an impact that NMFS will want to avoid. NMFS would likely ask for a significant reduction in hatchery releases, including Federal hatcheries. That’s an outcome nobody wants. But if the recreational and commercial fishermen can’t catch those fish anyway, due to ESA restrictions, there is no sense for the State to raise and release them. So they might be okay with big reductions in hatchery releases. But the Tribes will scream loudly.

This underscores what NMFS has been saying. That is, if the State and the Tribes go forward together, the outcome can be reasonable, and perhaps predictable. But if they go separately, the path forward is uncertain, and fraught with peril. But given the breakdown as described by SkyGuy going-it-alone is the likely the path forward.

That puts NMFS in a difficult position given that they want the State and the Tribes to work together in the future. Giving one side or the other exactly what they want, and in a timeframe that allows fishing to continue, will guarantee that future negotiations will fail. That will put NMFS in the primary fishery management position on Puget Sound. That’s an outcome NMFS will go to great lengths to avoid. My sense is that both sides are going to feel some pain before this is over.