I am still learning the process, but I think it goes something like this. The PMFC divides the fish among the states. Then, Oregon and Washington and the states meet to divide up the allocations in the state. The first division would not be under Boldt, but the second is. At this stage, the tribes and the state are court mandated to split the fisheries at no less than 50% of harvestable numbers. What happened in 2016 was that the state of Washington could not get the tribes to agree to negotiate in good faith. Alaska, Canada, Oregon, and California could fish, but the Fisheries in the State of Washington were in limbo. At this point, the process would fall under the court mandate in Boldt. If no agreement could be reached in any area, they were ordered to each present their side to the Fishery Advisory Board and then the Board would make a decision and forward that to the court which would make a decision, usually agreeing with the board but not having too. The Centennial Accord was an agreement to stop using the Board and just negotiate in good faith as best as possible. The process is a whole lot cleaner this way, with each side reaching an agreement that should be somewhere close to the middle. The agreement, how ever, acknowledged that at times this might not work and that no one was giving up their right to address the courts if necessary. NOAA is not under the court order and probably could issue any permit they wanted, but I do not think that the order would mean anything if the order was challenged. Really, the NOAA should have nothing to do with it. This is a state issue that settled in BOLDT. Does anyone think the NOAA could issue a permit that gave 100% to either side? If they are not subject to Boldt then what difference would it make?
Again, I am just starting to learn this but I think I am starting to get a grasp of it all. What I assume happened is that the state and tribes could not get NOAA approval for any fisheries of the states total shared until the tribes agreed. The tribes simply ignored it all and got approval from the BIA, which really has nothing to do with the process. I am not sure if the NOAA then agreed to the fishery or if they simply stepped back. The state then rushed to the tribes and gave them what they wanted so they could get a the NOAA approval for there share. The proper and court ordered path would have been for the state or the tribes to petition the courts and take the issue to the fishery advisory board and then eventually to the courts. The federal departments should have stepped back until this took place. They should have nothing to do with the internal division within the state, except I can see their point that since both side have 50% of the fisheries, both sides would have to sign off on the agreement. If one side refused to and no court direction was given, then they step back and wait for the two sides to go through the process. Which is what they did. An issue of a permit for one side or the other in an adverse situation (sides don't agree) , especially one from the BIA, most certainly appears to be in violation of the court mandated process.

So yes, agreements have always taken place at the north of Falcon meeting, and under the best circumstances that is how it should be done. When an inability to reach an agreement takes place, then the courts were always a possibility. The truth is, both sides realized that the Board would almost always come out with something that they could just as easily get to. Since it was a whole lot messier, took a whole lot more time and effort, both sides agreed it was a waste of time to fight. The Centennial agreement was simply an acknowledgement of that fact. Since Billy Frank has died, however, the tribes seem to have forgotten how the process works and the state has simply caved into their new approach.

Remember, I know very little about all of this. I just have read the court orders ( they are all on line) and read some legal journal articles that discussed and outlined the history of the issue and how the courts ruled to solve the problems. So, feel free to point out where in the process I am off, for I am sure I am missing something.