I read this very interesting reply from a gentlemen named Bill on the Tidal Exchange article. I think Bill brings some good points, some that should be considered if the state and tribal co-managers are serious about ESA recovery. Big steps, and steps that won't be popular, but steps that would have major consequences for reducing impacts and a good place to start:

Bill | January 14, 2018 at 5:14 pm | Reply
I am glad to see all the responses especially the Tribal response, I doubt we would ever see a WDFW or NOAA response.
I like many others have lost trust in the co-managers. You can point to many issues habitat loss, over harvest, ocean conditions but secret meetings without input from all stakeholders is flawed & corrupt, this latest plan is a fine example, they don’t have all the facts but are crafting a plan in secret?? The fist issue I have is sale for profit of ESA listed fish, this should be the first manageable issue. STOP THE SALE OF ESA listed PUGET
SOUND CHINOOK! Second issue, the only group that fishes selectively also pumps the Most money back into the economy, funds hatcheries, gets SCREWED! Why allow commercial harvest in the Puget Sound selling ESA listed Chinook for profit? The co-managers make no distinction between a commercial harvester and a selective fishing sportsmen. One catches,sells ESA listed fish, the other pays $1000.00 per hatchery fish for the opportunity.
A note to our Tribal Co-Manager’s you could help us understand your position by being more transparent, you can read what we are thinking and you can comment, where can we read what your thinking and respond? You can read creel reports open to all, easy to find. Your catch not so easy to find…….
The commercial harvesters fish in Alaska and then come down here and fish…Why??
Why allow commercial harvest in Washington we get very little return and lose a lot in way of ESA listed fish. Why not give the their quota to the only group using selective methods?
Where is Jay Inslee in all of this? he would probably make things worse but he is asleep at the wheel again!!!!!!!

Note: There are commercial selective fisheries in Puget Sound. The point I believe is that "What is mandated to sport fishermen should also be mandated to all other user groups. In addition, the economic impact of commercial fishing needs to be explored deeply. Yes, there are those that depend on it for a livelihood, but many commercial fish for supplemental income. Perhaps we can reduce the impacts on ESA fish through a by-out program and a reduction in commercial licensing into the future. As a equitable trade, we may have to look at a cap or reduction in recreational guide licenses. Painful yes, but fair. In addition, we have to face the music, the population is exploding and the pressures on our waterways are increasing. There will have to be sacrifice from the sport fishing community too. We cannot have it all, but we can spread the pain equally and to insure that, we must have everything out in the open by everyone involved.