NOAA to stop overtly advocating the tribes wishes? I wish the Federal Gov't (and WA State) would re-assess their relationships with the tribal Governments (that tribal Sovereignty issue) versus their non-tribal citizenry. Easy for NOAA to recommend MPAs and RCAs but they were silent over the issue of how to prevent tribal fishing within such areas. Another: how about non-selective gillnetting and ESA listed Chinook stocks. Want another and probably more egregious Federal agency? Try the Corps of Engineers and their permitting process for anything below high water.

I am not sure NOAA/NMFS could simply give up on certain watersheds w/r/t ESA listed species until such species go extinct (extirpated). That said, beyond my above comments a couple of my complaints about NOAA are:

(1) Using data to make decisions but not obtaining sufficient and most accurate data to ensure that their decisions are based upon the best available information. Example: They are now in the process of delisting one of the three listed rockfish in Puget Sound because it was determined to genetically the same as those on WA coastal waters. They have not been able to obtain genetic material from another while genetic data from the third found both coastal and supposedly unique Puget Sound genetics mixed within Puget Sound. Is there natural selection occurring?

(2) Making recommendations and/or mandating actions by others without NOAA putting any skin in the game. Their rockfish recovery plan espouses the use of MPAs and RCAs but did not commit NOAA to ensuring that there were sunset provisions tied to established recovery goals, determination that those areas were not accomplishing the goals for which they were established, or a failure to actually perform regularly scheduled population monitoring.

(3) Failure to take action to reduce the impact of pinniped predation when those animals are otherwise protected under the MMPA for which NOAA is responsible. Commissioner McIssac made a point this morning of the need for reducing that predation during this morning's presentation. Good for him!! But NOAA should not require the State to go through hoops to first get a permit and then fund an action that is needed to effect their (NOAA's) mandate under the ESA to recover ESA listed Chinook.