BW -
I understand your concerns; it was not unexpected. The same concerns were expressed when the mark selective Summer Chinook fisheries in central sound were added in 2007.

Without a doubt expanded fishing in front of a given area typically result in fewer fish for the one fishing behind that increased effort and that has to be a legitimate concern.

A common concern one constantly hears in recreational salmon discussions is that non-treaty catches continually a below their "full share". The proposal presented above (and it is only a proposal) was to examine our current season structures to see if there potential changes that access in recreational more of the available fish. While doing so it was thought to be important to stay within current WDFW commission polices; provide diverse opportunities across users and geographical areas, continue giving the recreational fisheries for Chinook and coho as the highest priority, etc.

One of the observations that give an indication that re-structuring the seasons might provide benefits was the experience following the 2007 start of the central sound mark selective fisheries. I looked at the Puget Sound summer (July-September) Chinook (MA 5-13) comparing the catches in 2004 through 2006 (3 years before the change) with 2007 through 2009. That comparison showed that your concerns are indeed valid; there was approximately a 10% reduction in Chinook harvested during the summer in MA 11 and 13 (based on WDFW's sport catch reports). At the same time there was an overall increase of about 30% in the total number of recreational harvested Chinook in Puget Sound during that summer period. Obviously the catches would also be a reflection of the over all Chinook abundance. In that 6 year period the 2007 forecasts was the largest and the 2009 forecast was the lowest (it is important to note even during the 2009 poor year the catches matched the best during the 2004 to 2006 period.

It is hoped that there can be an examination of a potential re-structuring of our season that could involves all diverse interest. It may well be that increased over-all summer seasons are not doable or that trades involved may not be worth it. However what I do know is that if we don't look we will not know!

If we want increase non-treaty harvest we have to go down a path similar to this idea or look at some sort major paradigm shift in how significant portion of the non-treaty share is catch, ie increased use of gill nets in terminal areas.

I for one welcome your thoughts and input and hope that if some sort of discussion occurs within the angling community that you can be part the discussion.

Curt