There is no foregone opportunity anymore. If we choose to forgo our opportunity to harvest our share of fish and let them hit the gravel instead, that is our choice to do so.

Thanks Doc for the support. I'm hoping we can overcome all of this. I am supprised more people have jumped in on this. Ohh well time will tell...

Harbor Hog

Harbor Hog,

User friendly or not, the GH model, whatever it is, is public property and information. I suggest you file a Public Disclosure Request for it and its supporting documentation tomorrow.

I don't fish GH enough to have strong feelings beyond wanting to fish the Harbor, the Chehalis, and the Hump a couple times each year. And it would sure be nice to take a chinook and 3 or 4 coho a season if the runs are healthy enough to allow it. You can represent my interests as an angler who desires fishing opportunity and a chance to harvest a few salmon a season.

Sincerely,

Salmo g.

Nothing is done at NOF until the final gavel falls next Friday. WDFW was meeting with the tribes today to outline the recommendations that came out of Lynnwood.

I'm not sure of all the protocols, but calls/contacts with WDFW staff, the Commission, and cc's to your local legislators might help. Of course, some of the local legislators don't seem to give a damn about recreational impacts, they just want their commercial buddies to make a few more bucks and damn the resource.

If someone can attend the NOF meetings at Sea-Tac, you can buttonhole the players and push for changes. The following is a copy of the Commission policy on the NOF process. Not sure how much it might help, but it gives you some idea of where the Commission, is coming from.

The key words are to minimize impacts on depressed stocks. I'd be making the argument that the rivers/stocks should be split and managed accordingly. WDFW does that around Puget Sound. They also talk about sharing the conservation responsibility in the Grays Harbor section.

It galls me that some folks think the state owes them a living based on the resources that belong to everyone. The sports take a lot of hits in the name of conservation, but you don't see the commercials or tribes being restricted in a similar manner. And then, when the returns aren't there, the same folks are lined up hat in hand asking the government to bail them out, buy their licenses, etc. How many other private businesses get similar treatment......
POLICY DECISION

POLICY TITLE: 2007-2008 North of Falcon POLICY NUMBER: C-3608

Cancels: C-3608, 2005-2006 North of Falcon Policy Effective Date: February 2, 2007
Termination Date: December 31, 2008

See Also: POL C-3001 Approved by: / /s/ Jerry Gutzwiler
Chair, Washington Fish and Wildlife Commission
DOWNLOAD: Signed copy of POL-C3608 (PDF)


North of Falcon Policy

This Policy will guide Department staff in considering conservation, allocation, in-season management, and monitoring issues associated with the co-management process known as the North of Falcon. When considering management issues, Department staff will insure that decisions are made consistent with the Department's statutory authority, U.S. v. Washington, U.S. V. Oregon, the Endangered Species Act, the Puget Sound Chinook Harvest Management Plan, Pacific Salmon Treaty, the Pacific Fishery Management Council's Framework Salmon Management Plan, pertinent state/tribal agreements, and the applicable Fish and Wildlife Commission policies.

Harvest Management

General

On a statewide basis, fishing opportunities will be provided when they can be directed at healthy wild and hatchery stocks while minimizing impacts on depressed stocks. ·
When assessed from a statewide perspective, fishing directed at chinook, coho, pink, sockeye, or chum salmon will not be exclusively reserved for either sport or commercial users. ·
When managing sport fisheries, meaningful recreational fishing opportunities will be distributed equitably across fishing areas and reflect the diverse interests of fishers, including retention and catch and release fisheries. ·
The Department will seek non-treaty fishing access to unutilized portions of treaty harvest allocations through the implementation of pre-season agreements, taking into consideration changes in abundance, fishery conflicts, and factors that may influence attainment of spawning escapement objectives.
Sockeye, Chum, and Pink Salmon

Marine area harvest management objectives for chum, pink, and sockeye stocks, except for Puget Sound-origin sockeye, in priority order, are to (1) provide the majority of harvest to the commercial fisheries, and (2) identify and provide meaningful recreational opportunities.
For fisheries directed at Lake Washington sockeye, the first 200,000 non-treaty harvest will be provided to recreational fishers. If the allowable non-treaty is above this level, commercial harvest directed at this stock may be considered.
Chinook and Coho Salmon

The Puget Sound harvest management objectives for chinook and coho stocks, in priority order, are to (1) provide meaningful recreational fishing opportunities, and (2) identify and provide opportunities for commercial harvest. When managing sport fisheries in this region, recreational opportunities will be distributed equitably across fishing areas, considering factors such as the: uniqueness of each area, the availability of opportunities for various species in each area throughout the season, desire to provide high levels of total recreational opportunity, and biological impacts.
Grays Harbor harvest management objectives shall include opportunities for both the recreational and commercial fisheries.
Columbia River harvest management regimes shall be developed in cooperation with Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife representatives. Commercial and recreational fishing opportunity will be scheduled to optimize the non-treaty harvest of chinook and coho and to provide a balanced opportunity to each fleet. When developing recreational and commercial fishing options, the Department shall consider fair and reasonable catch opportunity, stability and duration of fisheries, as well as sharing of the conservation responsibility.
Willapa Bay harvest management shall be consistent with Willapa Bay Framework management objectives. The following general intent shall apply: Willapa Bay harvest management objectives shall include meaningful opportunities for both recreational and commercial fisheries.
Pacific Ocean harvest shall be managed consistent with the Pacific Fishery Management Council's Framework Salmon Management Plan and the National Standards that provide for fair and equitable allocation of fishing privileges among various fishers.
In-Season Management

When in-season management actions are taken, they should be implemented in a manner that is consistent with pre-season conservation and harvest management objectives and fishery intent developed through the North of Falcon process.
Monitoring

Fishery participants will be required to comply with fishery monitoring and evaluation programs designed to account for species and population impacts.
Gear and Fishery Conflicts

Recreational and commercial fisheries shall be structured to minimize gear and other fishery conflicts. Unanticipated fishery interaction issues identified in-season, including conflicts with fisheries directed at other species, shall be resolved by involving the appropriate sport and commercial representatives in a dispute resolution process managed by Department staff.
Incidental Mortalities

Limits on the incidental mortalities of non-targeted species will be defined as necessary for commercial and recreational fisheries. Management regimes will include strategies to limit seabird mortalities consistent with the federal Migratory Bird Act.
Communications

The Department shall strive to make ongoing improvements for effective public involvement during the North of Falcon planning process and annual salmon fishery implementation, incorporating the following intents:
include representatives of recreational and commercial participants at North of Falcon as observers during appropriate state/tribal discussions of fishery issues.
maintain a timely record of all significant fishery discussions and decisions during North of Falcon process to all interested parties, both at the meetings and following the process.
use a variety of communication tools to effectively communicate with the public and receive timely input on pre-season planning and in-season fishery implementation, including use of the Department web site.
Other Species

The Fish and Wildlife Commission's policy on Lower Columbia Sturgeon Management (POL-C3001), effective January 1, 2006, shall guide pre-season and in-season planning of Columbia River and coastal sturgeon fisheries and related incidental impacts. Management of Willapa Bay sturgeon fisheries will be further guided by Willapa Bay Framework management objectives.
Delegation of Authority
On November 10, 1999, the Fish and Wildlife Commission permanently delegated the authority to the Director to make harvest agreements with Northwest treaty tribes and other governmental agencies, and adopt permanent and emergency regulations resulting from the agreements made during the annual North of Falcon process.

The Chehalis and Area 2-2 season I outlined will most assuredly consume the available chinook impacts... the dilemma is getting WDFW to acknowledge same.

Their "harvest at all cost" mindset is what causes them to manufacture the ridiculous exploitation rates used in the harvest models. They deceptively paint a picture of catch inefficiencies in both the sport and gillnet fisheries to justify more days of killing. If they believe the entire sport fleet can only take 16 paper fish a day, they can easily justify 31 days of chinook retention in the bay.

Real-life on-the-water-experience in the field tells us that far more fish will be harvested each day. But that's a reality that's difficult to grasp if your experience only dwells in the realm of paper fish. The management disconnect with the realities afield cannot be overstated, folks.

Andy and Francis, thank you for all the time and effort you are putting into this. Any others I didn't name also.

Hog & Doc,thanks for your hard work towards a better fishery in the future.We need to get more people like your selfs involved including myself.Good luck,
STRIKE ZONE

Blind sided by the Chehalis gill netters......guess we should have seen that comming at the Montesano meeting, with the local gill netters asking for "more sturgeon", from the the Willapa gill netters share.....now getting a larger share of other returning Chehalis fish......getting greedy aren't they??????

Maybe its time to work toward having only 1 group gill netting the Chehalis????? See no reason to have 2 groups working on reduced stocks of fish......glad I saw the good years, pre-Bolt, and that my kids got to enjoy the fishery in the late 70's and early 80's......sure doesn't look like my grand kids will get that opportuntity.........grrrrrrrrr to WDFW, and the QIN for allowing 4-5 days of netting a week.....10/1 - 4/???......shows on the "in river sport fishery", both salmon and steelhead....yep it does!!!!!

Andy does anyone have the escapement numbers for the Satsop and Wynoochee Chinook the last couple years? Also what the projected return is for each? I'd like a look at them.

I would vote for the old days of NON retention of Chinook in the hump. Why not create a world class cnr chinook river? We dont HAVE to bonk and kill every nook that hits the boats guys?

Oh but wait....we live in Washington....nevermind...

hey andy where are they going to put the october 1st opener line on the humptulips?

I would sure like to see the tidewater open up on the 1st of october.

keep up the good work andy..



Casey

Phil

WDFW does the spawning surveys on both streams to arrive at an escapement estimate for the entire Chehalis Basin. There are no published escapement objectives for either stream apart from getting enough kings to the Satsop Springs broodstocking program. The only management objective is to put 12.4K spawners on the gravel regardless of the trib-by-trib contribution.

This is something that I have long been interested in as I have heard lots of conflicting info as to where the backbone of chinook production is in the Chehalis system. I will talk to the lead spawning survey bio about historic escapement estimates that he may have on the Satsop and Wynoochee... if I don't forget.

Thanks Bud, I'm very interested in what the numbers are. Seems it would be good for everone involved to know what is spawning in each of the rivers. A break down of where the fish in the Chehalis are going. It seems to me we should be looking at each trib as individuals and not a whole. This is one system I think should be micro Managed.

Thanks for the call !!

Well the GH Committee's proposed Chehalis sub-basin season went down in flames... shot down by Region 6 managers at PFMC.

We actually sent a representative to bypass Region 6 and plead our case directly to the Council on Wed as per the printed agenda. Unfortunately, the stalemate between the state and the tribes concerning Puget Sound set the entire PFMC agenda WAY behind schedule, and our representative never got the chance to present testimony before the Council.

The only alternative was to bring our case back to Region 6.

Well they were briefed on our package and its conservation-based rationale. They were also apprised of our desire to maximize recreational opportunity for all users within the primnary constraints of conservation based on the runsize forecasts and WDFW's very own Tiered Salmon Sharing Plan.

In retrospect, we never had a chance.

Region 6 never blinked at our proposal. It was full speed ahead with their irresponsible, ill-contrived month-long chinook kill season that they presented in Olympia 10 days ago.... despite multiple violations of their very own tiered harvest guidelines and the certainty that the available chinook surplus will be overharvested by a HUGE margin.

I am so utterly disgusted and disappointed in this process that I am nearly speechless! (Ok that may be stretching it... I've never been known for keeping my mouth shut).

Over two years invested in committee meetings with the naivety that we would somehow make things better for the sportsman. The results... the loss of two more weeks of opportunity, three back-to-back seasons of rampant wholesale over-exploitation of chinook stocks, and more fish allocated to the gillnetters.

It is obvious that Region 6 has turned a blind eye to virtually every concern the recreational community has brought to the table in managing Grays Harbor... in-season management, annual limits, maximum recreational opportunity, harvest regs inclusive of ALL recreational users in GH, and above all else...CONSERVATION! WDFW's historic objective (as has been documented over and again) remains harvest at all cost, the resource be damned.

(Did I miss anything Andy?)

It's time to take this fight directly to the Commission where our concerns might have access to more sympathetic ears. For the sake of the fish, I hope I'm right.

OK... in fairness to WDFW, they did listen to sports on one issue.

Barbed hooks are legal in Willapa Bay ( where you are NOT required to fish selectively).

We brought this to the table in 2006 and it was shot down. It was brought back again this year, and by the grace of God it passed.

You all should thank the tireless efforts of Mr. Robert Muhlhauser for getting this passed. He collected hundreds of signatures on a petition to make the point that barbless does NOT make sense in a fishery where anything you catch is bonkable!

We have officially named this reg "Bob's Law". If you see him puttin' around out there in his little boat, give a shout out, "Thanks Bob!"

ttt

My question is why do they wait so long to start the talks?

Are the Commi's going to target Chinook in the Harbor?

We need to get better data on stream escapement for the tribs on the Chehalis. I really do not understand how they can just lump it all together as one river? How do we know if the Satsop is reaching escapement goals? Doesn't really sound like it has an escapement goal? Same with the rest of the tribs? How many Chinook actually spawn in the main stem?

This river system is STILL one of the best in the country ( Lower 48) for producing large Coho, Chums, Kings, Steelhead not to mention Sturgeon it could be 50 times better with proper management. I spend alot of days on this river from Oct thru May and at times call the "Crick" home. Be nice to see it managed for what it could be. There's still a chance to bring this one back to at least a fraction of what it once was.

ttt... I just read a lively discussion about this topic on the steelheaderDOTnet board, much of it a misrepresentation of the actual events that took place. If there are members in this community who have concerns about the 2007 GH salmon season, I just want to make sure the record has been set straight.

I did a little straightening there, as did Joe and Andy...

Fish on...

Todd

ttt...

Just as a reminder to folks planning to participate in the general Grays Harbor Fishery or just SolFly.

Take the time to review this thread before hitting the water. Hopefully it will bring you to a more enlightened decision on whether to bonk or not to bonk.

I see the folks on that other board are taking a pro-active stance to educate would-be participants about the impending blood-bath on kings that is likely to occur under WDFW's harvest rules for 2007.

If anyone is a member over there, I would offer this excerpt as a place to dig up some sound-bytes that highlight just how bad the chinook over-harvest could be if everyone keeps the kings they are legally entitled to.

The 2007 WDFW plan currently on the table is yet another sure-fire formula for over-exploitation. Think about it folks.... 501 fish for the bay comes out to a harvest rate of only 16 fish per day. Anybody out there actually believe the sport fleet is so lame that they can only muster 16 dead kings a day with hundreds of boats plying the water each day in October? Get real! I know a handful of regulars that could single-handedly blow thru those fish without blinking! That entire allocation will be bonked before we see three tide exchanges after the opening bell! Any takers on that bet?

The Mainstem Chehalis piece of the chinook retention season is only budgeting a kill rate of 21 fish per day. How quickly do you think sports will blow thru that allocation of 667 kings? With the effort we are likely to experience in GH, I give it a week max.... MAX!

Last year's harvest model underestimated exploitation by a factor of four! If that's the same model they used this year ( and that's anyone's guess because they won't divulge the model... too complex for us simpletons), what makes anyone think the result will be any different?

WDFW is obviously turning a blind eye to conservation.