The public comment period starts next week. I have documents in PDF format that I need converted so they can be viewed here. Help would be appreciated. I can send them via email.

The documents I am referring to are a set of PDF’s that discuss the proposed changes to fishing in Marine Area 4B. They state they wish to take the “’socio-economic impacts to local communities” into account. We'll see how that goes, but I did alert the Clallam County EDC as well as the Makah Tribe.

There is an opportunity to speak coming up on:

August 23rd 5:30-7:30 University Branch of the Seattle Public Library
5009 Roosevelt Way NE Seattle.

August 24th, 7:00-9:00pm at the DSHS office on 201 W First Street in Port Angeles

August 26th 7-9pm Room 175, Natural Resources Building, 1111 Washington Street in Olympia

I would implore you to consider attending and speaking up on the various proposals. You don't have to be articulate, because I certainly am not.

There are lots of references made towards “non-consumptive users”, (Divers), and to date nobody has shown the economic impact of these non-consumptive groups. My guess is that commissioner Jennings has been hard at work, trying to get his dive park put in place, again.

Proposals include closing the long line fishery, select closures from the Sekui River to Tatoosh, and even a proposal for the closure of the area all around Tatoosh into area 4A east to Koilah Point with a small opening around the entrance of Neah Bay, and then 5 miles of shoreline east of Waddah.

Status quo would keep things where they are at today. Anything else would be a take-away. Also, there is no “Sunset Clause”, meaning that there is no mandatory time set to review any closures that would be put into place.

The proposed changes could essentially end the small boat fishery in Marine Area 4B. The last thing any community needs in this economic climate is a threat to their financial well being.

Hopefully you find this useful. I will be at the August 26th meeting in Olympia. This has the stink of "Jennings" all over it.

Andy

I can't help with the posting of the PDF's but will attend the mtg on the 23rd down the road.

Will be at the meeting in PA.

Still need help with the PDFs? If you send them to me I'll convert to jpgs that can be posted here.

Dan
danssmrat@hotmail.com

I've spent a ton of time with my kids over the past 10 years fishing that area in a 14' aluminum boat with a 25 hp outboard. Lots of time as a kid in my dad's 16 footer. Certainly don't want to see that fishery lost!

I'll get them to you tomorrow am.

Its past time to ask the commission or maybe the senate to remove Jennings if they can. Also, sierra club and others like them are part of the advisory committe, and they all like marine preserves with no options to reopen. There are voices of reason on the advisory committee but likley are drowned out.........

Andy,

Please send me the PDF's as well. I'll see what I can do to convert them for postings and submission to regional sport fishing newsletters in addition to what Ocean Sun does with the JPG files from the PDF's.

dm56@aol.com

I don't get up to Area 4 much anymore, but spent many days in 19 foot rental Lunds and in my 14 foot Olympian years ago.

While sport diving might provide some tourism, it could never produce the same level as sport fishermen.

Unfortunately, Neah Bay is not the friendliest place for any tourist, but that is another matter.

This would be awful. 90% of my salt water fishing is in MA4. Yeah, lets cram more people in Sekiu where there is not enough room for them and oh, yeah, the fishing is worse. I can't make the meeting but I could send a few letters. Who can I write to?

Send your e-mails here: Ami.Hollingsworth@dfw.wa.gov and here COMMISSION@dfw.wa.gov .

I have sent copyies of the data and the PDF's to those who wanted them. Here is the text of what is out there. I would like to post the maps so you can see just how far reaching the worst proposal is. Notice that all along the way they insert "non consumptive recreation".

As others involved have stated, there is already a 120 foot rule, which is essentially an MPA, so there is no need for yet another MPA. There would be NO FISHING in these closure areas, even for salmon, if anything other than the status quo option was approved.

Marine Area 4B Marine Fish Management
Draft Management Objectives and Alternatives for Public Comment
Marine Area 4B encompasses the waters in the western Strait of Juan de Fuca from the Sekiu River west to the Bonilla-Tatoosh line near Cape Flattery at Neah Bay.
The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife is in the process of developing specific management objectives and a range of alternatives for managing marine fish in this area. The process has been structured to include wide spread public input and began with the formation of an ad hoc focus group of interested citizens that provided input and advice to the department during the development of draft objectives and a range of alternatives that will be presented to the public at a series of meetings throughout the region.
The public is invited to comment on the draft management objectives and range of alternatives by either attending public meetings scheduled throughout the region or by providing comments in writing.
Public meeting schedule:
 August 23 – 5:30-7:30 p.m. University Branch of the Seattle Public Library, 5009 Rooselvelt Way NE, Seattle, WA
 August 24- 7:00-9:00 p.m. Department of Social and Health Services Office, 201 West First Street, Port Angeles, WA
 August 26- 7:00-9:00 p.m. Room 175 of the Natural Resources Building, 1111 Washington Street SE, Olympia, WA
Send written comments by U.S. Mail or email through December 4, 2010 to:
Ami Hollingsworth
600 Capitol Way North
Olympia, WA 98501-1091
Ami.Hollingsworth@dfw.wa.gov
The department will brief the Fish and Wildlife Commission on the draft objectives and range of alternatives and the input received at the public meetings at their meeting December 2-4 in Olympia where there will be the opportunity for public testimony.

Draft Management Objectives
Management objectives for state managed recreational and commercial fisheries in Marine Area 4B will be defined using existing RCW’s, Washington Fish and Wildlife Commission Policies, the Puget Sound Groundfish Management Plan, and the Puget Sound Rockfish Conservation Plan. Marine Area 4B management objectives can be added provided that they are consistent with existing policies and objectives.
The following set of draft objectives were developed considering input from the Marine Area 4B Focus Group
 Conserve bottomfish resources and where data are limited apply a precautionary approach
 Use best available science emphasizing site specific data for managing bottomfish resources in Marine Area 4B
 Alternatives for bottomfish management will consider socio-economic impacts to local communities
 Management alternatives will provide fishing opportunity on healthy stocks of bottomfish, halibut and salmon and recreational opportunities for non-consumptive users
 Adopt regulations that are enforceable
Draft Alternatives
Management alternatives were developed to consider a broad range of options

Status Quo-Current Regulations
A status quo alternative would maintain existing regulations for bottomfish in Marine Area 4B necessary for the long term sustainability of bottomfish populations while providing for a variety of uses including non-consumptive recreational opportunities.
Sport Fishing Regulations:
Management Area: Bonilla-Tatoosh line east to the Sekiu River.
Retention of rockfish other than black or blue prohibited.
Bottomfish season: Open year-round.
Fishing for bottomfish prohibited in waters deeper than 20 fathoms year-round.
Bag limit: Aggregate bottomfish limit of 15 per day; no more than 6 rockfish (black or blue only), 2 lingcod and 2 cabezon.
Lingcod season: Open mid-April through mid-October, minimum size 24 inches.
Halibut season: Halibut fisheries are based on quotas determined by the International Pacific Halibut Commission and season structures described in the Pacific Fishery Management Council’s Catch Sharing Plan. Typically the season opens in mid May, two days per week until the quota is obtained. Bag limit: one fish per day.
Salmon season: salmon seasons are set during the North of Falcon process through the Pacific Fishery Management Council.
Commercial Fishing Regulations:
Management area: western boundary Bonilla-Tatoosh line.
Long line fishery landing limits:
Sablefish: 300 pounds per landing, no more than 600 pounds per month
Rockfish/lingcod: No more than 30 pounds per landing
Lingcod slot limit: 26-40 inches
Bottomfish pot fishery allowed with special permit issued by the Director

Alternative 1
The intent of this alternative is to enhance the quality of consumptive and non-consumptive recreational opportunities by taking a more conservative management approach intended to increase the abundance of bottomfish. Management measures under this alternative would include more restrictive regulations that would limit seasons, area or daily limits. The following proposal was developed considering input from the Area 4B Focus Group.
Sport Fishing Regulation Proposals:
A) Reduce the aggregate bottomfish limit from 15 to 12 per day maintaining current sub limits for rockfish (6 black or blue), lingcod (2), and cabezon (2); or
B) Reduce the aggregate bottomfish limit from 15 to 10 per day maintaining current sub limits for rockfish (6 black or blue), lingcod (2), and cabezon (2).
Commercial Fishing Regulation Proposals:
Close long line bottomfish fishery.
Retain the permit only bottomfish pot fishery.


Alternative 2
This alternative considers closed nearshore areas to bottomfishing that would provide additional protection for bottomfish and increased non consumptive recreational opportunities in Marine Area 4B.
Figure 1 depicts six potential areas developed based on input from the Area 4B Focus Group to consider and comment on as potential areas that would be closed to bottomfishing from 0-20 fathoms.
Although there are six areas presented for public comment it is not necessarily intended that all of them would be closed under this alternative. Comments should reflect pros and cons for each of the areas and which area(s) should be considered under this alternative.

Alternative 3
Alternative three would provide protection for all marine resources and maximize non-consumptive recreational opportunities by establishing near shore no-fishing zone(s) for all fish, shellfish and other invertebrates in the western Strait of Juan de Fuca.
Figure 2 depicts an area extending east of Tatoosh Island to the entrance of Neah Bay in addition to the six areas depicted in Alternative 2 for discussion. Although there are multiple areas presented for public comment it is not necessarily intended that all of them would be closed under this alternative. Comments should reflect pros and cons for each of the areas and which area(s) should be considered under this alternative.

Here are the maps they refer to as figure 1 and figure 2.



The Tatoosh to Koitlah closure zone is eerily similar to the dive park closure area Jenning proposed last year.

There are already restrictions from 120 feet and out, making that an MPA. We don't need another MPA.

Option 2 & 3 indicate non- consumptive use, I believe they have non-consumptive use now.

Hey, isn't it open to bottomfishing wherever the diving isn't so good?

I'm not a diver, so I wouldn't know. Are you saying that the areas set for closures are areas of particular interest to divers?

For clarification, it appears that Alternative 2 provides for closure of bottom fishing whereas Alternative 3 provides for closure to ALL comsumptive use (in those discrete areas identified on the respective maps).

Note that one of the management objectives is to have regulations that are enforceable. Frankly, any regulation is "enforceable." The real issue is whether the regulations are reasonably understood and that the public can reasonably comply. Chopping up that coastline into multiple sections does not seem to meet my criteria of reasonability. Fog, wind, tides, fog, fog.....

And I am particularly peeved by the implication that there is a need for less fishing opportunity in order to provide for non-consumptive recreation. That is a form of elitism. Nothing currently prevents non-consumptive recreation but what those non-consumptive users want is their own private aquarium. Nuts to that! If the bottom fish resource/fishery is properly managed for a healthy, sustainable population then that should be good enough for the dive community.

Re: Alternate 1, is there really a viable non-tribal long line fishery in this area? Or is this simply a red herring to get the sport fishing community to buy into this alternative?

The long line fishery in that area typically takes place in waters deeper than 200 feet. The bulk of the fishermen who long line fish in that area are tribal fishermen. There are likely some non-tribal long liners up there, but I don't think the impact would be as hard felt (except if you are one of those few) as essentially making Neah Bay a "salmon only" destination fishery.

Dogfish,

I don't know how interesting the proposed closed areas are to divers; I was being a bit of a smart ass. But it seems like the proposed closed areas are the preferred bottom fishing areas. Does the plan describe anywhere the ecological need for closing any of these areas to bottomfishing in order to conserve bottomfish? That would seem to be the tripwire criterian for closure. Otherwise, why? For Jennings?

Complete closures are one way to increase conservation if it's necessary. Another is reduced limits. Another is reduced seasons. Complete closures are typical management actions when less restrictive measures won't achieve the necessary conservation objective.

Sg

DF: Your input generally supports my perception that there is little non-tribal long lining in that area so the closure of that type of commercial fishing will have little impact on the near shore resource as tribal interests will continue their activities (re: Alternative 1).

Sg - If only it were so....review of the history of this monster clearly shows a genesis in a desire by Commissioner Jennings for a "world class dive site" at the expense of recreational fishermen.

what the heck is a "non-consumptive" user ??

must be REALLY special since it/they/da corporation get to have exclusive rights.

just wondering....

would BP energy be given exclusive rights to this area ?

What do the tribes and citizens get in return for handing over these rights, periwinkle ?

Your honorable Chris G
your boy is giving away tribes, states, and citizens rights to corporations in a time of runaway government corruption....
should we continue this discussion ?

For those on this board who are not familiar with the area 4B, here are a few photos from the area.

The fish photos were made prior to the current regulation, but just for fun, do you know which is which and which is legal?