WFW Commission Meeting synopsis:
(I'll limit this post to the portion about Grays Harbor. Will post another thread about other topics discussed.)Presentation by Kirt Hughes started with a brief history about the development of the GH Tier Plan, its objectives, and a cursory walk thru how it applies to chinook. He then spent a little time on the NOF process followed by a brief review of the GH hatchery facilities and the aggregate volume of hatchery releases by species. He then went into a discussion of basin-wide (aggregate, not stream by stream) escapements for chinook, coho and chum... all of which have been trending downward with escapements below goal the past three years (05/06/07). '08 data is still pending, but preliminary numbers are likely below goal for chinook and chum, and marginally above goal for coho. He then talked about treaty vs non-treaty harvests for chinook and coho, indicating that some years we take more and some years the QIN takes more.
Nice concise presentation but a little short on details.
Phil Anderson then remarked about how Kirt's talk was technically accurate but did not reflect the true COMPLEXITY of managing a basin with mixed stocks, depressed stocks, BC/AK interceptions, the conflicting interests of diverse stakeholders... a treaty tribal gillnet fishery, a non-treaty tribal gillnet fishery, a non-tribal gillnet fishery, and a recreational fishery (splintered along the lines of estuary vs in-river users), a sometimes less than cooperative co-manager relationship in terms of sharing data, reaching technical agreement on run-size forecasts and escapements, and setting harvest policies.
After all, they are one of three "self-regulating" tribes.
Usually these briefings end up being FYI type sessions that just get a rubber stamped Good Housekeeping Seal of Approval. Nice presentation, good job.... next. NOT THIS TIME.
Commissioners then proceeded to press the director with tougher questions.
It was really refreshing to see the commission pushing for more accountability, enough to make staff squirm just a bit. It was almost comical to hear them formulate a dodge to the direct questions, then almost get lost in their responses... at one point Phil stopped himself and said , "I'm not really sure where I'm going with this, but...." On the other hand it was also painful to listen to some of the responses.
How about in-season management? Nope, don't have the capabilities to accurately assess the run in-season. Even if we stopped fishing, not sure our co-managers would.
How about chronic failure to meet escapement goals? Uh.. Uh.. Uh.. Well that's as much art as it is science. We can't always come to technical agreement. In fact, QIN would actually like to see us lower the spawning escapement goals. We just do the best we can given the circumstances.
What about harvest? Are we catching too many? Uh... Uh... Uh... Well sometimes they take more, sometimes we take more. When runs are small we try to limit our take to 10% but the QIN is not bound by that limitation nor any others in the tier plan. If we don't maximally fish our share, they'd probably do it for us.
What about the harvest model? Is it accurate? Can we improve it? Is there another model? Uh... Well it depends on the BC/AK interceptions. It depends on ocean survival. The treaty with Canada might help get us some more fish back. The amount of fishing time is limited, so the catch rate can vary. If they hit the days just right... well... it depends on weather... it depends on participation... it depends on whether the fish are there when our folks are fishing. Uh... Uh... Uh....
To his credit, Kirt did say he would run a retrospective analysis of how well the pre-season harvest model held up for the actual post-season run-size for each year. If needed, the model could be adjusted accordingly.
Back to escapement. We really need to look at these numbers. How about harvest buffers?Uh.... Well if we don't take them, the QIN would happily take them for us.
Then out of the blue, one commissioner spoke up to give WDFW kudos for their working releationship with the QIN. "You know, years back, 2003, 2004, we had all these conflicts about so many nets, so many days in the Chehalis, and now, not so much. It's so much better now, and I appreciate what you folks are doing"
My assessment?
Commissioners sincerely want to take WDFW to task in Grays Harbor but really don't have a strategy for it.... YET. Kudos to Chair Wecker and Commissioner Conrad Mahnken for leading the charge.
The sad part? The staff responses amounted to nothing but a bunch of excuses for business as usual. The least I was hoping for was some commitment to being better stewards of our half. NADA!
And the less than cooperative relations between the co-managers? Not sure anything will change anytime soon. But it was refreshing to hear Anderson finally acknowledge that everything isn't peaches and cream. That's a change from every prior meeting I have ever attended. Perhaps they're finally wearing his patience thin.
So where do we go from here?
The only direct action I see coming out of the meeting is that the harvest model will be re-examined. That's at least a step in the right direction. I was a little disappointed that the Commission did not give Phil and Kirt a specific timeline to work on some of these deficiencies, or at least assign a date for the Commission to re-visit the issue at a future meeting for any progress.
Previous Topic
Index
