Let's face it. The Department is balless. Mostly because of the institute they built, but perhaps more so due to the climate of appeasement that they are forced to accept from the top.

Kelly Susewind can't win. The cards are, and have been, stacked against him from the begining. He failed to make the sweeping personnel changes that were needed, and he relied on and trusted others that he shouldn't have.

The Commission is as much a part of the problem as anyone, and continuing to wait on them to grow a spine is useless since they answer to the Gov, and only the Gov. We all know how that goes.

Susewind has now realized just what a patsy position he holds. He tried to make a show of it. I give him credit for that. He's pushed to resolve the Skokomish land grab. But he quickly found out that he holds no cards worth playing. So now, instead of the Skokomish being opened, he's found himself begging for a return to the farce of "Negotiating" the North of Falcon.

I wish Susewind would have the balls to call the bluff. Let the Skokomish walk out of the negotiations. Maybe, just maybe someone would then take a look at how crooked the whole NOF process really is.

My bet is Ron Warren is already working a deal. Remember his moto:
"Any deal is better than no deal"

Look how well thats working out so far for recreational fishermen.

Here's the story:

Northwest Sportsmen: Skokomish River Boarder Disput Rises Again

Every time someone asks me about the skokomish (which is a lot, because I grew up fishing it) I always tell them that it’s NEVER reopening to non tribal sport fishing. Period.

The state will not stand up for us. They’ll just continue to roll over. They see anything that could be misconstrued as “racist” or “unsympathetic to the needs of indigenous people” as their biggest hurdle. It’s simple, tell them to shove it. “Guy” is playing the the race card/us vs them really hard. Just look at some of his and the councils remarks. “We see this as an invasion of our sovereign land”. Such BS.

I’d honestly rather see them go scorched earth. Shut down ALL fishing in hood canal and take the 60% of the fish out of George Adams (the states share). Sell it to Tacoma power and move on. If the tribe wants fish in the river, they can make up the difference.

Shut the Hoodsport hatchery down too. Sell it to the tribe for as much as possible. Move those chinook to the satsop (from Hoodsport and George Adams).

Oh yeah, let’s not forget...they skoks want to net the upper satsop. The state is even making accommodations for them. I fish the private property that the tribe wants to fish (the confluence of the middle and East forks). I can tell you with certainty that the people that live there will block the gate and fight to keep it from happening.

I stopped by purdy cutoff to look at the fish I helped pay for go into nets. While talking to one of the Middle Aged “fisherman” about the satsop. I was polite enough. He told me the plan was to start next fall. The state is doing “riparian restoration” at the confluence but it’s actually to accommodate tribal netting. I asked him about the locals saying they wouldn’t allow tribal boats to launch on their property or even drive into the river on the gated road. His response “well, I don’t know how it works exactly, but when we have rights, the feds will help us”. I asked him “you mean with negotiating access?” He said “no like with warrants, bolt cutters and guns”.

I still can’t get a straight answer, can they just claim some sort of tribal fishing rights and access your property? Doesn’t private property mean anything? I really am confused on how this would work. You can’t just build a boat launch on private property without permission.

I hope I’m wrong, but they might just buy them out. That would be expensive. One small cabin today is going for $275,000. That would be a multimillion dollar deal.

One of the earliest decisions made by the Supremes was that Tribal fishing rights included access across private property to fish, including erection of temporary structures to catch and process fish. If memory serves, this decision was handed down in the late 1800s or early 1900s.

I don't believe that they can make permanent alterations, but could probably do a temporary launch annually, if that was necessary to access U&A. The QIN may be your friend in this argument.

I believe it was the Rafeedie decision which established that treaty tribe members could harvest clams on private tidelands within their U&A but with certain conditions attached to include not crossing uplands and providing advance notice to those property owners.

So far no publicized conflicts on the beaches that I have read about so the judicial effort to balance private property rights with treaty rights seems to be working.

WDFW rushes headlong into becoming irrelevant as far as recreational fishing for anadromous fish goes.

If WDFW had any spine, which it clearly has lacked for the past 5 years minimum, it would simply close George Adams hatchery. The Department has made a list of hatcheries it will close in response to the Governor's directive to slash agency budgets in response to declining state revenue because of the pandemic. George Adams is not on the list of proposed closures. Why the hell not? The Department is planning to shut down the main trout hatcheries in Puget Sound that provide the majority of trout stocked in the PS region, where the majority of state taxpayers and fishing license buyers reside. Yet the Department plans to continue to operate salmon hatcheries that provide salmon mainly to Canada, Alaska, and WA treaty fisheries, with only a few salmon returning to the creels of WA taxpaying fishing license buyers. On economics alone, WDFW's actions and planned actions are shear idiocy. Idiocracy has arrived in WA State.

Larry, the access decision was specifically centered on salmon and was in the Columbia. And, they could cross uplands to access the fishing site.

As to GA, it is primarily a mitigation hatchery with funding provided by Tacoma. Or it was when I was there. So, they can't as easily close it but they could just give it to the Skoks and let them work with Tacoma.Plus, they could remove the state-funded portion. But, they can close the other two upstream from GA as well as Hoodsport.

But, as you note Salmo, WDFW lacks not only a spine but also functional gonads. Does that make them bacteria, virus, or something like an amoeba?

Thanks for the clarification on locale. The thing with Rafeedie is that he limited their right for access to be via water. That might provide an argument that modern boats provide a means to access fishing locations on the river rather than through private property.

Speculation at its best.....

I wonder what the odds are that you could walk out there and fish and not get confronted. And I wonder who'd confront you, and what lengths they'd be willing to go to to enforce this complete pile of horse sh!t crapola fucktardery.

This entire situation has passed the point of being ridiculous. Posting the south side of the river private property owned by the tribe? Yeah? Go get fvcked. I say it isn't. Take it to court, then I'll believe it. If WDFW is too gutless to take it to court, then perhaps another party can escalate it.

My buddy lives on Case Inlet and received a letter from the tribe they were going to harvest clams on half his beach.
I can’t recall exactly how it went down, but instead of the tribe harvesting the clams he had a private party do it which paid him for the clams. Some of those funds then had to go to the tribe.
If I see him while I’m fishing this weekend, I’ll ask him how everything worked.
SF

The court case was United States v. Winans, 198 U.S. 371 (1905).

Unless things have changed dramatically at George Adams under the Skokomish settlement with Tacoma City Light, the amount of money that TCL was providing for GA was a very small part of the total hatchery budget - only about enough to fund the relatively small coho program if I recall. Of course things may have changed since I was knowledgeable about the mitigation that TCL was paying to WDFW.

It's issues like these that make me wish my dad would have introduced me to golf (or some other gay hobby) rather than steelhead/salmon/crabbing/clamming and even big game hunting!!!

I'm not privy to the legal-speak in the assorted treaties and court cases to offer my synopsis of the situations. BUT, I've always wondered how a tribe continues to exist over time when their future members may fall short of the required % of tribal blood to be deemed a member? I remember the Colvilles lowered their requirement years ago (assuming for this reason??). Just keep dropping the minimum requirements, to keep the numbers up to stave off extinction?

Anymore, I feel it's a losing battle honestly. Seems that the political climate is just too big with too much CASH and POWER at stake? Quite obvious that the tribes want to continue to expand, and who can blame them?! There's enough PC out there now, that even if they are challenged it's very easy to play the "race card". Plus with the current political and racially charged environment, anyone/group who even tries to defend a position against a tribal group will suffer career suicide. I think the only way to try to get a point across is to somehow cut some money off...if that can even be accomplished? That's where Warren is headed, he's following the money I bet! (Turn the cash faucet off; fish, hatcheries, etc.Phuuck it! Close it down and re-boot!)

I've also wondered what the ramifications might be if a non-tribal member fished the Skok. The best outcome is that you'd never be contacted by anyone. However, if WDFW has it closed by their regulation you could be cited by them. Their is an argument that the tribe has no criminal authority over non-members on the reservation, or U&A. But, there might be a civil process that I'm unaware of wherein the tribe could seize your gear (and maybe your boat). Could be a real mess.

Tug, what happened in the case up in Brinnon where the Tribal cops arrested some elk hunters? Who were hunting legally.

Well, one scenario has WDFW not rescinding its letter (which it should not do in any case) and the tribe not participating in NOF leading to WDFW establishing a 2021 Chinook season and putting the ball back upon DOI. Or tribes en masse boycott NOF putting the ball back on DOI and WDFW submits for its own permit dragging NOAA into the conflict.

Not sure I can afford the popcorn needed to watch that play out.

That would mean growing even one, much less a pair. There was a chance, under DT's administration, to push the Federal Agencies to be more responsive to non-Indians. That ball was dropped. I seriously doubt the state will do anything to upset the Tribes. It will take citizens suing the State for not meeting their legally set responsibilities.

The covid concern has had the best ramp limited to tribal members...

Even the chum fishery is closed.

New World Order?

Todd may known, but I wonder if the tribes wording is a threat that if someone does try to challenge it by fishin, they will slap them in jail with every charge in the world, deny bail, convict no matter what and then let the person sit in jail waiting for the federal court to come in on appeal, while the tribe continues to fight every attempt. All the while agreeing to drop charges if you admit guilt and pay a huge fine.

Anyone know how hard it is to get an injunction?

Bump.

Anyone have any updates on this? (If there is even anything to report.)

I have had pretty good luck on getting Mark Baltzell (Mark.Baltzell@dfw.wa.gov) to respond to questions regarding this area. It may take awhile, and the answer may not be complete, but he usually tries to be good about it. I feel I was misled a few times, but it is hard to say if it was his fault, something going on that he is not allowed to discuss, or was something somebody in the department or Tribe undercut him on.

With a douche bag governor and the leftwing Dems running this [Bleeeeep!] into the ground Kelly didn't have a [Bleeeeep!] Chance to do much ! I feel for the guy because there needs to be wholsale sweeping changes in personnel , the mission and how they go about doing business and the commission needs to shut the [Bleeeeep!] up too !!!!

Peace Fly

As I recall neither of the two tribal officers involved (operating outside their jurisdiction) were charged despite holding those two hunters and a child at gun point for hours. Again, as I recall, the senior officer on scene was subsequently fired by the tribe. Was there any quiet deal for compensation? If so, it was really a quiet deal.

Has anyone heard any update on this? The NOF is underway, are the Skokes participating? Did WDFW withdraw the challenge?

I would be shocked and amazed if Ron Warren doesn't agree to absolutely every demand made by any of the PS tribes. He and Susewind get their paychecks whether they work on behalf of recreational fishing or not. Makes no difference based on their performances to date.

We were successful. We got you fifteen minutes in Area 10.

So you're saying we get enough time to launch and retrieve our boats, just no time to put a fishing line in the water. To heck with this defund the police nonsense; how's about we defund WDFW?

It's the catching, it's the OPPORTUNITY to be out in nature and on the water. By the way, I support such defunding.

It's only opportunity if it includes a reasonable chance of catching fish. Just like the SCOTUS said that treaty fishing rights are meaningless if there are no fish in the water to catch. Which appears to be the direction we're heading, even for many of the tribes. SCOTUS may have to re-address this issue soon if the U&A become functionally fishless.

That's true. Boldt II was supposed to cover that.

Have to disagree. My interpretation of that rule is that the moment your bait/lure hits the water the clock starts and like when shrimping your bait/lure has to be out of the water when the clock tics 15 minutes. And if that becomes too burdensome for the managers next year there will be a defined 15 minutes; as in 4:00 A.M. to 4:15 A.M.

Oh, and any fish hooked and not in the boat within that 15 minutes will have to be released.

It is all about opportunity after all.......

The Boldt II decision went to the SCOTUS a couple years back. It ended with a 4-4 tie when Justice Kennedy recused himself since he voted against the Tribes when this issue came up at the 9th Circuit court, back when he was a Circuit court judge. A 4-4 tie meant that the original decision from the 9th Circuit stands, but only for the 9th Circuit territory (nine Western States which include 15 District courts).

But if Justice Kennedy had participated in the decision, the Tribes likely would have lost the case. The Tribes are well aware of that. My sense is that they may no longer see the SCOTUS as a reliable path to adjudicating their issues. As such, they will likely avoid going to the SCOTUS for anything.

The Tribes aren't the only ones who can bring cases. Plus, the Tribes won the Culvert Case at the Supremes. That was here the State argued for the right to destroy runs with no consequence as a part of development.

Back a bit a friend of mine who is tribal told me the tribal golden rule for individuals was you do nothing that would put tribal rights ( be it fish or gambling or gas tax ) in court. I doubt that has changed much.