Larry is correct in noting that pre-season quality assessments are critical. But the way the Rec/Tribe allocations are taken is not flawed/broken, if/when based on proper assessments. Recs should not pine to overlap with the Tribes starting sometime in May or June just for the sake of starting at the same time. Generally speaking, the Tribes have bigger boats, more traps, and financial incentive to actively crab all day long until they get their quota--really not great to try and compete with that out on the water, on the same day. Better to get the Tribes in and out (for 50% or less of their annual allocated share) over a two or three day period a month or two before the Rec season starts. If crab abundance is too low, the Tribes take a hit on the back half of their allocation, which is fair considering they went first. I suspect that, as a result of what's happening this year, the MA-10 assessment will be more conservative next year, and that the Tribe's initial take will be adjusted accordingly. If Tribes truly do try to cork the Rec share (and we've seen that in S. Puget Sound) then WDFW will have to let everyone start at the same time. That's a card that could be played, but not a great outcome.
I guess there could be a definition of terms issue here. My perception of being corked (time wise) is when we have a set season established in the current Commission policy and the other co-managers slide in ahead of us on a consistent basis with the aforementioned impacts.
What has happened in South Sound (MA 13) is simply an unwillingness of one tribe to agree to any harvest poundage and then pound it before and during the rec season. Draw your own conclusions as to how that may have contributed to the virtual elimination of the Dungy fishery there. The WDFW did open the rec season early in that MA for at least the prior two years apparently to give recs some access to harvestable crab. This year they opened MA 11 early.....presumably for the same reason since tribal pots have been going in around Mother's Day. So, basically, that seems to be a deterioration of "co-management" such that we are chasing the last crab.
I think it fair to also point out that in a prior post you mentioned how one or more tribes actually extended their early season (as in, before the rec season) because of low harvest rates. That merely exacerbated the scenario I described. That low harvest rate should have triggered an in-season adjustment to the total harvest poundage.
Now, whether it wise to have recs in direct competition with tribal crabbers is worthy of discussion as it would come with "issues." But maybe that is a potential action to use in negotiations with the tribes over crabbing management and other areas of conflict (hmmmm, would that possibly break loose the tribal objection to the Point No Point ramp??).
Previous Topic
Index
