Just got word from Gary Hulsey, that shellfish managers are proposing a 4 day a week season and a limit of 4 per day. Not sure which areas, maybe all?

It's time to write the Commission and tell them NO! Here is a tidbit from Gary.

It will only take a minute folks... PLEASE email or call the Commission!

360-902-2267

commission@dfw.wa.gov

I have gotten a bunch of emails on this issue. Seems that the commission is once again ignoring the public or more than likely misrepresenting the public's desires. Here is one short email note I am sure JD won't mind me sharing: From the feedback I have heard this is the opposite of what the crab advisory board and the crabbers out there are saying. OK to the weekly restriction days but no to the reduced limit....What happened to reducing the commercial catch and spreading the lopsided share to sports crabbers?

Just like normal we are going to take it in the backside

I had heard rumblings about the reduction in days per week although I thought it was going to be 5 days per week.

I had not heard about the reduced daily bag limit.

Bummer.

More info... This is from Corey Freeman via Gary Hulsey

I have sent my e-mail to the commisioners office.

Commission@dfw.wa.gov

Steve

Thank you for posting the commisions email. I too have sent an email. I am finally at the end of my rope with the WDFW and the commercials getting complete run of the fishery has got to stop!

CF

Thanks my email was sent this morning.

Sent my email today.

The only way I could even consider supporting a proposal such as this is if the allocation issue were addressed and the total commercial catch, including the tribes, were reduced by a similar percentage (1/3 less crab and about 40% less days crabbing).
Of course I am not holding my breath waiting for our commission to actually listen and I am almost positive that the legislature or governor would want to do anything about something people actually care about. They will be busy revamping our election process in order to put the parties in controll of the ballot counting and changing the ballots to have only one place to mark, democrat or republican.

WDFW staff wants to push this through NOW because they know we'll NEVER go back to what we had, even with newly appointed Commissioners.

I hope Gregoire follows through with her assurances.

BOHICA, funny! I haven't heard that since I was in the Navy years ago!

Sent my email and also a fax today...

Sent my e-mail today - There is no way we should let this happen - How many recreational pots are really out there? I would guess that we may not have even caught 1.5 million pounds

It won't matter what the commission does. Nothing will stop the Bolt quota. Once it's reach the season ends. why not make the season last by smaller limits and fewer crabbing days a week? Get rid of the puget sound enhancement tax. What's being enhanced? for whom?

Bobert - You are right that there is little we can do to overturn the Bolt issues, but we still need to fight for our fair share of the remaining 50% of the harvestable shellfish (and salmon / steelhead).

Right now the big issue that we can fight is the unballanced allocation of resources to the non-indian commercial harvesters. There is no need to reduce our season as long as teh majority of the harvestable resources are being allocated to the commercials.

SA

I just called Olytown.

On January 14 in the afternoon the “Staff” is going to present this proposal to the commission. This will be followed by public comment.

I didn’t have time to write down all the info that the person answering the phone gave me. But, she promised to e-mail me the agenda and dates and all the stuff.

If some one gets the info before me post it up other wise as soon as it come it I will.

I for one will make the drive to Olympia on the 14 and how many other days it takes.

I sent mine and included the mission statement from thier own website. I asked to consider econimic viability, recreational opportunity, allotment considering those factors and protection of the resource for the future.


Mission statement is below. (Seems to me the paragraphs are in the wrong order, but that is a debate for a different day...)


Sound Stewardship of Fish and Wildlife

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In pursuit of this mission, the Department of Fish and Wildlife will strive to achieve these goals:

Department-wide leadership that is effective, efficient and results in public confidence in department management.

An environment of respect and trust within the department fostering quality management and decision making.

Recruitment, development and retention of a diverse, effectively deployed and well-trained workforce.

An informed public, participating in policy development and contributing to quality decision making.

Partnerships with public and international entities, tribal leaders, public volunteers and service groups to share responsibility for fish and wildlife.

Effective practices partnerships with landowners and land use decision makers to maintain and enhance habitat.

Maximum fishing, hunting and non-consumptive recreational opportunities compatible with healthy, diverse fish and wildlife populations.

Sustainable management of marine resources to maintain the economic well-being and stability of the state's fishing industry and to enhance recreational and commercial fishing in state and offshore waters.

Bobert,

Consider this. If there was 35 million pounds of crab harvest... the tribal share is 17.5 million.

Sport was 1.7 million.

Non tribal commercial is left with 15.8 million!

Why should the sport crabbers be the ones to "sacrifice" because of Boldt? Does the non tribal commercial share look fair to you compared to sport crabbers?

I've sent an email as well. Once again this is outrageous. We're the one's getting hosed.

I was just out fishing from Everett twice in the past week and the tribal and non-tribal crabbers are still going strong. Have been since before our brief summer season and everysince we quit. I don't count them but it looks like more pots than I ever saw out there when our quota was being fished. So think about it we get what was it 50 days of crabbing and they get 5 to 6 months.
Recreational fisherman put the most into the economy. Tribes run the fisheries in this state and what they don't take is then given first to the remaining commercials and we get piece meal that's left. I just heard yesterday that the tribes have been fishing crab on the ocean for some time and the non tribal commercials are having tizzy fits because they can't start until mid January.

This is my letter of retraction.

I was caught in a knee jerk reaction due to figures presented to me buy various reports of the impending WDGF commission actions.

Although the figures appear to be correct, they are just a little deceptive. Please understand I’m not saying anyone tried to pull “one” over on anybody. I am just saying after some brief research, What I read ain’t the way it is. I will attempt to put these figures into a prospective that some folks won’t be happy with.

All figures are close enough for government work.

35,000,000 pounds State wide
17,500,000 tribal
1,700,000 sports catch.

These figures are correct as close as I have been able to determine so far.

BUT why are we talking statewide figures when this pending action only effects the greater Puget Sound area.

The figures as reported to me by a “Staffer”

Crabbing seasons for the greater Puget Sound

2002/03 Commercial 2,848,000 pounds
Sports 1,339,000 pounds
Total 4,187,000
Tribal about the same total of sports and commercial (remember it’s the law)
Total-Total 8,374,000 pounds

2003/04 Commercial 2,877,000 pounds
Sports 1,707,000 pounds
Total 4,584,000
Tribal Lets figure the same again
Total-total 9,168,000 pounds

2004/today Commercial still open they haven’t reached the quota of 2,623,000
Sports Closed early because of over quota 1,575,000
Tribal same-o same-o
Total-total 8,396,000 pounds


So the figure of 1,700,000 for 2003/04 seems to be correct. But there are a few pounds of crab missing from the equation. Like 25,832,000 pounds to be exact.

Where’d that 35,000,000 figure come from?

Lets try adding in marine areas 1-2-3 aka the Pacific Ocean. And that my friends doesn’t belong in the equation. Why? You ask, well I’ll tell you why, causes you can go out there right now and drop your two pots and take your 6 crab. And you’ll be able to it this time next year too.

I see this debate as to allocations or do the commercials deserve about 1,100,000 pounds more than the sporty or how accurate are the figures.

As it stands now it’s static.

According to my source (the staffer) there was an overwhelming outcry for a longer season so the sporty could crab on Labor Day. As I recall it upset me, that, on the last summer holiday, all I could do was look at the Hood Canal.

As the gambler would say—You gotta know when to hold them and when to fold them.

I fold.

Trex,

There is only two problems that I can see with your change. The first has to do with accessing the ocean crab for sport fishers. I think it's unreasonable for people from Bellingham to go to Westport for 6 crab. Don't you? In areas that are near/adjacent to recreational launches and facilities, why is commercial crabbing even allowed?

The other issue is the catch data which WDFW admits is far from accurate.

AuntyM, I like your style.

WDFW is claiming that they have a lot of public support for the reduction to 4 per day. I have discovered that most of this comes from Hood Canal. Now if you think about this, those folks can crab out in front of their homes to a greater degree than other areas of the sound so big deal if it is 4 per day. For most of us we don't crab every day it is open and usually have a limited number of attempts compared to Hood Canal crabbers. Once again the data is lacking to determine what is really going on with the sports catch.

I submit that the data is false coming from the tribes. I know they are not catching at traditional rates which might be due to a reduced biomass of crab sound wide. Who knows for sure. What I do know is that the tribes have thousands of pots soaking 24/7 and have since early October. I have noticed more pots in deeper water too indicating to me that the traditional shallower areas are fished out. You can bet that when we do have a season in late June we will see slim pickins on our usual crabbing grounds inside the sound. The commercial pressure is just too much for the resource to support a quality sports season. And it is getting worse.

The good news is that we are working hard to come up with a solution but will face extreme opposition from the commercials, the tribes and even WDFW. Cutting sports opportunities even further without addressing the allocation inequities is blatantly wrong and must be opposed by all of us until a change is made.

Good point.

I do think it is entirely unreasonable to think that ANY sporty would drive to Westport “JUST” to take crab. Along with that, It’s unreasonable to count ocean caught crab in with the gross crab catch as it relates to sporties. Pacific Ocean sports crabs come out of the harbors not the blue water (for the most part). Therefore the sports quota will never be reached areas 1-2 and 3. That is why it’s open for such a long period of time.

“ In areas that are near/adjacent to recreational launches and facilities, why is commercial crabbing even allowed?” I will try to answer that question this way. Boat launches are likening to parking lots at “The Mall”. One puts their car in the lot and then goes into the mall to shop. Once inside the mall they a free to go wherever they want. But you are correct everybody does like to park as close to the door as possible.

The catch data is a reasonable complaint. I also believe that ALL of the figures are way out of plumb. But alas the catch data is not the issue now. It’s limits and seasons. As I said, from what I’ve been able to glean, the quotas have remained static for the last three years and are forecast to stay within the same general numbers.

Auntie, you where one of the proponents of the crab survey, you ask that people stand up and be counted and they did. As my Momma would say, “Be careful of what you ask for, you may get it”.

I, for one, am not going to fight just for the sake of fighting. One could say I’ve tucked my tail between my legs and slunk away. I would prefer to think that I’m saveing my fight for the day it’s needed.

Grandpa,

There are pots at Redondo and Three tree that are in the water 24/7. And I'm sure there are many other places too. It's part of the bennies for high priced property. A 5 day season would get these pots out of the water at least a couple of days.

Isn't that because the crab allocation is on a four year cycle?

It would sure be beneficial to commercials RIGHT NOW to lessen the pressure from sport crabbers so that they will retain the allocation next time around.

A screwing is what we're getting.

The Hood Canal issue is why I have a preference for a yearly limit instead of what has been propsed, to stop the waterfront homeowners from taking so many and leaving some for the rest of us AND the tourists.

Trex, we didn't get enough responses to the survey. We needed 2000. I didn't get a break down from Gary, but I can tell you it wasn't anywhere near the rates that WDFW claimed.

T-Rex is right on the mark. It is about allocation and it is about allocation between non-Indian commercial and sport fisheries, by region, inside Puget Sound.

The issue in the ocean is not at all the same. The sports fishery is, and should remain, as "open" as it used to be in Puget Sound years ago.

Shouting about calculations that the sport harvest of crab in WA was only 7% (or whatever) serves no useful purpose as the majority of crab harvested in this State come from the ocean.... and the harvest of crab in the ocean is probably 99% commercial. The bulk of the sport harvest of crab is done in the Straits & Puget Sound. The ocean is managed differently than the inside. Mixing the harvest results makes no sense.

And the coastal Indian crab fishers do not get half of the harvestable crab in the ocean. More like 15% to 20%. Their fleet size is not large enough to compete equally with the non-Indian fleet. Harvest amounts are negotiated annually, hence the different fishiing times.

[/QUOTE]Isn't that because the crab allocation is on a four year cycle?

If that's the way you figure--Works for me

It would sure be beneficial to commercials RIGHT NOW to lessen the pressure from sport crabbers so that they will retain the allocation next time around.


There have been two post on this thread that have said (in essence) 1.there should be no commercials in the sound 2. The commercials are screwing up our catch. Would it not be benefical to lessen commercials to retain the allocation next time around? There are only so many crab out there. And there are three groups that want them all.


The Hood Canal issue is why I have a preference for a yearly limit instead of what has been propsed, to stop the waterfront homeowners from taking so many and leaving some for the rest of us AND the tourists. [/QB][/QUOTE]


Interesting concept. The yearly thing that is. the rest of it is pure conjecture.

Trex,

The shrimp allocation is set for four years at a time. I believe the crab allocation is also. Grandpa will know.

I also don't think it's "conjecture" that this proposal is being timed for this particular year in the 4 year cycle. WDFW is notorius for the games they play to keep the commercial quotas up there and this is just one more of those games. If you doubt me, go to the top of the fishing board and read the latest game WDFW wants to play with wild Columbia trib steelhead. They are doing that crap for commercials, not sporties. They've done the same thing to us over shrimp in PS.

From Commercial Crab Fishing in Puget Sound

According to the figures you posted Trex, it then rose to 2.8 million pounds for 2002 and 2003 and should be over 2.6 at the end of this commercial season. It would be 2.8 if sporties hadn't gone over their quota. (That amount is for 250 commercial licenses.)

So the same amount of commercial licenses kept getting increases except for this year, but there are no increases for sport crabbers, although their licenses sales and participation has increased.

Rafeedie didn't apply until 1995, so the big jump in allocation to commercials came AFTER the tribes got a 50% allocation.

pnw,

You whined when we jumped on tribal accountability and crab statistics that we never address the non tribal allocation between sport and commercial. Now we are, so what is your problem? Do you just dislike non tribal people and want to see them denied resources as much as possible?

AM... your quote

"pnw,

You whined when we jumped on tribal accountability and crab statistics that we never address the non tribal allocation between sport and commercial. Now we are, so what is your problem? Do you just dislike non tribal people and want to see them denied resources as much as possible?"

Wow, interesting choice of wording... "whined" and "jumped on." Emotions seem to running a little high there, eh?

I never said that "we never address the non tribal allocation between sport and commercial." I said that within the Puget Sound non-tribal share, region by region, the allocation between commercial and sport catch is what needs to be addressed. Throwing all the crab harvest numbers into the same bucket and then saying the sport fishery only caught 7% (or whatever it is) does not serve any purpose. When you go to WDFW with those numbers they react negatively because they know you are trying to purposely distort the picture. Not a good way to get what you want. What would serve the sportsfishing purpose is an exposure, within each Puget Sound region, of what the commercial and sport harvests have been. That is all I am saying.

Why would I dislike non-tribal people? Weird!

Being "denied the rersource" is not what it is about but seeking an appropriate division of the non-Indian, harvestable crab resource is. The WDFW decision makers must come clean with the reasoning they use to divide the allowable non-Indian harvest between user groups. That is where the debate should properly focus. I hope that clears up what my point is.

Right. What are you smoking?

Aunty,

I believe a conspiracy theory is pushing the envelope in this case of timing. So lets just A2D on that.

The “conjecture” part was “to stop the waterfront homeowners from taking so many and leaving some for the rest of us AND the tourists.” I’m sure if one where to talk to a beach front property owner they would have a few choice words about the city folks that go there on weekends and rape the canal.

I’m thinkin this whole debate is starting to get emotional rather than logical.

That would be because it is an emotional issue to be screwed against your will and there is no logic in the way WDFW operates.

I've posted plenty of facts that sport crabbers are not being treated fairly.

And for the record, your new friend you've been defending on the other board admits there is a problem with poaching by folks living on the canal.

If I'm not mistaken, when sport crabbers had their daily limits lowered by half, from 12 to 6, it's in the same time frame that commercials got an allocation increase of 1/2 million!

Sounds like BOHICA to me!

Well, I don't smoke anything so there goes another one down in flames.

But I am gathering, by your off-handed reference to WDFW decision makers, that you no longer believe that working within the Department's "system" is worth your time and effort. This is too bad. Why do I say that? Because it really is the most direct way of getting the issue addressed. Notice I did not say, resolved.... but addressed.

Or, perhaps, you think that taking this to the Fish and Wildife Commission is the solution? Depending on what the outcome of this strategy might be, it is hard to say how much of a solution it will offer. All I can do is remind folks of what happened with the wild steelhead moritorium.

The decision should have nothing to do with how much public support the comission has drummed up to push this change. It should be solely based on good data.

What a bunch of crap.

Rex's rule #2

Don't bring anything from another board over unless it's positive. But for the record I defended you on another board that you never knew about. So lets not bring anything over.

But Poaching is a problem everywhere.

Meanwhile back at the ranch---


I've asked for both sets of figures. Half or what was the year? or I bettcha it was the same year, ain't facts. Those are liken to--- we only got 17 mill out of 35 mill.

If I'm wrong because I don't remember which year it changed, you can chatise me. However...unless you have proof that I'm wrong, you're just being a meany ( ) in advance.

Trex,

This has been a bad day. I am frustrated by someone else and took it out on you.

I'm Sorry.

I will tell you what I see as FACT. The sportsmen generate a hell of a lot more for the economy on a per crab caught basis then do the commercials, be they Indian or non-Indian.

The sport fishery gives all the people a chance for healthy, family oriented recreation and a chance to share in the bounty of our state.

In any rational allocation system, the sport fishery should be given priority over the commercial fishery. Support RFA. Let’s take back what is rightly ours!!!

Dave,

I can't and won't argue with someone I agree with.


Aunty-- It happens.

But if you say it's so I wanna see numbers before I agree or disagree or A2D.

(And Numbers can't be played with like that last thingy put out by the RAF 8.5---17%. what a crock. That's worse than a crock that's scaming )

Trex, I think I did post that wrong! It isn't a half million, it's a full million!

Commercial allocation in 1993 was 1.8 million. Last year it was 2.8 million!

I think 1992 was when the sport limit was changed from 12 to 6.

There must be another old fart out there that has a better recollection which year we had our limit decreased last time. I remember it as 12-13 years ago.

In any case, you can't argue "my" math. Commercials have 1 million more pounds allocated now than they had prior to Rafeedie and our individual limits were cut in half and they're about to be cut again by a third.

I usually buy a combo license and last year took so few crab that I was set on not buying a license this year, untill they set the season. Now I feel that we should start a class action lawsuit for theft of services. If I were to take your money and not produce what was specifically spelled out, then I would be sue'd and would have to pay damages. Perhaps it is time that we become litigents instead of overpaying pawns!

As promised



January 14-15, 2005, Commission Workshop
Natural Resource Building, Room 172
1111 Washington St SE, Olympia
.553.8225

Preliminary A G E N D A*
Times are approximate and subject to change
FRIDAY, JANUARY 14
9:00 AM 1. CALL TO ORDER: Chair
 Approval of Minutes – Dec. 3-4, 2004, Meeting Commission
 Commissioners’ Discussion
 Director’s Report Jeff Koenings
 Budget Update Larry Peck, Dep. Director

2. OPEN PUBLIC INPUT:
The Commission is a direct link between citizens of Washington and the Department of Fish and Wildlife. The public is encouraged to share views of Department programs and topics of concern during this portion of the workshop.

NOTE: This time is set-aside for those who cannot be present later in the day.
If workable, please provide your comments during the Open Public Input session later in the day.


3. INVASIVE AQUATIC SPECIES CONTROL EFFORTS – BRIEFING:
Department staff will brief the Commission on its response to the discovery of a colonial
tunicate species in Puget Sound.

Staff Report: Scott Smith, Aquatic Invasive Species Coordinator, Fish Program; and
Bruce Higgins, Recreational Diver, Fish Program

4. “GO PLAY OUTSIDE” ANNUAL UPDATE – BRIEFING: 30 mins.
Department staff, along with John McGlenn, President of the Washington Wildlife Federation; and John McLaughlin, President of the Washington Wildlife Coalition; will brief the Commission on the status of educational outreach activities in partnership with the Wildlife Coalition.

Staff Report: Bonnie Long, Outreach and Education Program Manager, Fish Program

5. PROPOSED LAND TRANSACTIONS – DECISION:
The Commission will consider approval of various proposed land transactions.

Staff Report: Dan Budd, Real Estate Manager, Wildlife Program

LUNCH BREAK

1:00 PM 6. CAPTIVE PROPAGATION OF WILD RAPTORS – RULE ACTION:
The Commission will consider adoption of proposed amendments to WAC 232-12-129, Captive propagation of raptors – sale, records, reports, and inspection. This item was continued by the Commission from the December 3-4, 2004, meeting in Ocean Shores to the January workshop.

Staff Report: Rocky Beach, Wildlife Diversity Division Manager, Wildlife Program; and
Eric Cummins, Surveys and Forest Wildlife Section, Wildlife Program

PUBLIC INPUT (Item #6 only)


7. ACCESSIBLE FISHING OPPORTUNITIES AT DEPARTMENT SITES – BRIEFING:
At the request of the Commission, Department staff, along with Rory Calhoun, Recreation Accessibility Specialist, Interagency Committee for Outdoor Recreation,
will provide a briefing on accessible fishing opportunities for persons with disabilities.

Staff Report: Brenda Kane, ADA Coordinator, Personnel Division
Kristen Kuykendall, Environmental Engineer, Business Services
Steve Sherlock, Access Area Manager, Wildlife Program


8.
SALE OF WILD SHELLFISH – RULE BRIEFING:
Department staff will brief the Commission on a proposed new WAC section that would establish a trial fishery license for harvesting wild embedded shellfish on private property and provide harvest accountability for purposes of better understanding wild shellfish populations. The Commission will consider taking action on rule amendments at its February 4-5, 2005, meeting in Olympia.

Staff Report: Evan Jacoby, Fisheries Administrative and Criminal Law
Specialist, Enforcement Program

9. GEODUCK FISH TICKET COPY DISTRIBUTION – RULE BRIEFING:
Department staff will brief the Commission on proposed amendments to
WAC 220-69-26401, Distribution of copies of shellfish receiving ticket, that would create a process for the Department of Natural Resources to more accurately track and account for geoduck harvest. The Commission will consider taking action on the amendments at its February 4-5, 2005, meeting in Olympia.

Staff Report: Morris Barker, Ph.D., State Marine Resource Manager, Fish Program


10. COMMERCIAL RAZOR CLAM FISHERY – RULE BRIEFING:
Department staff will brief the Commission on proposed amendments to
WAC 220-52-030, Clams—Coastal – Seasons and areas, which would clarify licensing requirements, provide better enforcement capability, and ensure fairness for licensed commercial razor clam diggers. The Commission will consider taking action on the amendments at its February 4-5, 2005, meeting in Olympia.

Staff Report: Morris Barker, Ph.D., State Marine Resource Manager, Fish Program


11. PUGET SOUND DUNGENESS CRAB FISHERY MANAGEMENT –
BRIEFING: .
Department staff will brief the Commission on 1) the current implementation of Commission Policy C-3609, Puget Sound Crab Fishery, including fishery planning and performance intended to meet the policy’s objectives; and 2) recommendations for the 2005-06 season, including recreational season design and options of methods for estimating recreational catch. The Commission may consider adoption of permanent rule amendments regarding the 2005-06 season at its February 4-5, 2005, meeting in Olympia.

Staff Report: Lisa Veneroso, Shellfish Policy Lead, Intergovernmental
Resource Management (IRM)
Annette Hoffmann, Ph.D., Quantitative Assessment Unit Leader,
Fish Program
Morris Barker, Ph.D., State Marine Resource Manager, Fish Program

12. OPEN PUBLIC INPUT: .
The Commission is a direct link between citizens of Washington and the Department of Fish and Wildlife. The public is encouraged to share views of Department programs and topics of concern during this portion of the workshop.

5:10 PM Recess


SATURDAY, JANUARY 15

8:30 AM 13. OPEN PUBLIC INPUT
The Commission is a direct link between citizens of Washington and the Department of Fish and Wildlife. The public is encouraged to share views of Department programs and topics of concern during this portion of the workshop.

NOTE: This time is set-aside for those who cannot be present later in the day. If workable, please provide your comments during the Open Public Input session later in the day.


14. HYDRAULIC PERMIT MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (H.P.M.S.) – BRIEFING:
Department staff will provide an overview and brief demonstration of the HPMS web application.

Staff Report: Gayle Kreitman, Regulatory Services Section Manager, Habitat Program
Jim Eby, Program Manager, Information Technology Services


15. WASHINGTON INTERACTIVE LICENSING DATABASE (W.I.L.D.) –
BRIEFING:
Department staff will provide an update for the Commission on the WILD Project and the status of plans to develop the next generation of the recreational license sales system.

Staff Report: Jim Eby, Program Manager, Information Technology Services


16. MARINE PROTECTED AREAS UPDATE – RULE BRIEFING:
Department staff, along with Mark Plunkett of the Seattle Aquarium, will brief the Commission on proposed rule amendments and new WAC sections that would create Marine Protected Areas on beaches in six parks owned by the City of Seattle. The rule amendments will be proposed in approximately March 2005 through the expedited rule making process.

Staff Report: Mary Lou Mills, Marine Ecosystems Manager, Fish Program


17. NORTH OF FALCON POLICY – BRIEFING:
Department staff will present a briefing on key elements of the Commission’s current North of Falcon Policy (C-3608), which has a termination date of Dec. 31, 2004. The Commission will consider adoption of a renewed or revised North of Falcon Policy at its February 4-5, 2005, Commission meeting in Olympia.

Staff Report: Phil Anderson, Special Assistant, IRM
Patrick Pattillo Salmon Policy Coordinator, IRM

18. COLUMBIA RIVER WILD WINTER STEELHEAD IMPACT RATE –
BRIEFING:
Department staff will brief the Commission on a request to NOAA for modification to the current impact rate allowed under the Endangered Species Act. In February, Department staff will request the Commission for policy guidance regarding wild winter steelhead management in the Columbia River.

Staff Report: Cindy LeFleur, Columbia River Policy Coordinator, IRM
Guy Norman, Region 5 Director

LUNCH BREAK

1:00 PM 19. SUMMARY OF COMMISSION REQUESTS TO THE DEPARTMENT:
The Commission will review and update the summary list of Commission requests to Department staff and consider new requests.


20. MISCELLANEOUS AND WORKSHOP DEBRIEF:
The Commission will discuss items that arise immediately before or during the meeting and after the preliminary agenda is published.


21. ELECTION OF COMMISSION CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR:
The Commission will elect one of its members as Chair and another member as Vice Chair, each of whom shall serve for a term of two years or until a successor is elected.


22. OPEN PUBLIC INPUT:
The Commission is a direct link between citizens of Washington and the Department of Fish and Wildlife. We encourage the public to share views of Department programs and issues of concern during this portion of the workshop.


23. ETHICS TRAINING FOR COMMISSION MEMBERS – BRIEFING:
Department staff will present an overview and answer questions regarding the
Ethics in Public Service Act for Commission members.

Staff Report: Lembit Ratassepp, Assistant Chief, Enforcement Program

4:50 PM ADJOURN

Washington Fish and Wildlife Commission
2005 Open Public Meeting Schedule*

January 14-15, 2005 Olympia
February 4-5, 2005 Olympia
March 4-5, 2005 Olympia
April 8-9, 2005 Moses Lake
June 17-18, 2005 Yakima
August 5-6, 2005 Spokane
October 7-8, 2005 Olympia
November 18-19, 2005 Vancouver or Stevenson
December 2-3, 2005 Olympia

Commission conference calls are also scheduled for the first and third Thursday of every month.

*Additional meetings, workshops, and/or conference calls may be scheduled
when deemed necessary by the Chair and a majority of the members.
Changes to this list will be posted on the website.
All meetings are recorded.
Contact the Fish and Wildlife Commission office for further information:

Phone (360) 902-2267
Email: commission@dfw.wa.gov
Commission’s web page: http://www.wdfw.wa.gov/com/meetings.htm

Anti,

Where is it that says I been arguing a limit cute?

I'm talking bogis numbers.

But sense you brought it up. Our daily catch limet has been reduced but not our yearly qouta.
Now perhaps thats a matter of time, but not today. And as of yet I ain't seen no figures to the contrary about the past (BUT I'm sure it's happened But-But what's the figure?)