#958211 - 06/01/16 08:40 PM
Skok Closure
|
Juvenile at Sea
Registered: 07/30/05
Posts: 118
Loc: Kitsap
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#958213 - 06/01/16 08:51 PM
Re: Skok Closure
[Re: BiLLYiZME]
|
River Nutrients
Registered: 11/05/04
Posts: 2713
Loc: right place/wrong time
|
Those darned executive orders can certainly be troublesome.
_________________________
"The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter." Winston Churchill
"So it goes." Kurt Vonnegut jr.
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#958216 - 06/01/16 09:23 PM
Re: Skok Closure
[Re: BiLLYiZME]
|
River Nutrients
Registered: 11/21/07
Posts: 7438
Loc: Olema,California,Planet Earth
|
The Commission has directed WDFW to support the folks who pay the freight. Of course, taking the Skok fish in the Canal, Straits, and Ocean does count but I suspect that program size will be reviewed.
But, there is (or was) a component of George Adams that is mitigation for the Cushman Project so it will stay as long as Tacoma pays.
It will be interesting to see, as the Tribes "close" sporties off that hatchery production shifts.
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#958222 - 06/02/16 04:57 AM
Re: Skok Closure
[Re: BiLLYiZME]
|
Dick Nipples
Registered: 03/08/99
Posts: 28170
Loc: Seattle, Washington USA
|
The contention is that the treaty establishing the Skokomish Rez gave them the stream bed as the border, not the edge of the river.
I can't see this one going down without a fight, I hope the AG's office is getting tuned up for it.
Fish on...
Todd
_________________________
Team Flying Super Ditch Pickle
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#958225 - 06/02/16 05:11 AM
Re: Skok Closure
[Re: BiLLYiZME]
|
The Renegade White Man
Registered: 02/16/00
Posts: 2424
Loc: The Coast or the Keys !!!
|
this is going to get ugly, as it gets closer to the normal opener .....I see a lawsuit or straight revolt and revolution or cowboys and indians wuth the state being the [Bleeeeep!] idiots for closing it down to sportsmen who pay for those fish and its a wdfw run hatchery.......how [Bleeeeep!] stupid this state is and the new top dog a complete [Bleeeeep!] idiot.....Phil would have never let this happen...............
_________________________
Facebook/Superfly Guides
360-888-7772
Stay Tuned for upcoming Hunts & Fishing info...........
New website & Channel Dropping soon !
Stay tuned for Turkey, Bear & Deer Hunts Along with Guided Sport Fishing.
Book Release Prior to Christmas 2021
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#958227 - 06/02/16 07:56 AM
Re: Skok Closure
[Re: superfly]
|
Returning Adult
Registered: 04/17/13
Posts: 289
|
this is going to get ugly, as it gets closer to the normal opener .....I see a lawsuit or straight revolt and revolution or cowboys and indians wuth the state being the [Bleeeeep!] idiots for closing it down to sportsmen who pay for those fish and its a wdfw run hatchery.......how [Bleeeeep!] stupid this state is and the new top dog a complete [Bleeeeep!] idiot.....Phil would have never let this happen............... Phil Anderson was a piece of [Bleeeeep!] as a director, the only thing he did was line his own pockets as the head of the Westport Charter Boat Association. He would continually push (and get!) extra chinook limits when quotas weren't met in what he considered a "late": run. It never was late, just paper fish projections. He bent us all over for commercial gill netters. What a sh*thead! Bob R
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#958231 - 06/02/16 08:29 AM
Re: Skok Closure
[Re: BiLLYiZME]
|
River Nutrients
Registered: 11/21/07
Posts: 7438
Loc: Olema,California,Planet Earth
|
That would include McKernan which used to kick out a whole bunch of chum. Take away the chum hatchery production nd you'll have to take a while to restore all those HC chum streams and fish at a wild stock rate. I agree with Salmo that the Tribes may lose a lot by "winning".
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#958232 - 06/02/16 08:29 AM
Re: Skok Closure
[Re: BiLLYiZME]
|
River Nutrients
Registered: 11/05/04
Posts: 2713
Loc: right place/wrong time
|
The article in the Kitsap sun states. In its opinion, the Interior Department relied on an 1855 treaty and 1874 executive order that established the reservation's boundaries.
_________________________
"The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter." Winston Churchill
"So it goes." Kurt Vonnegut jr.
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#958243 - 06/02/16 10:33 AM
Re: Skok Closure
[Re: BiLLYiZME]
|
Spawner
Registered: 02/06/03
Posts: 783
|
First off flicker, the Skokomish Tribe doesn't have the ability to guide, it's not written in their treaty, and I highly doubt that the QIN & Makah political machines will let them somehow change their treaty to allow it...they don't want to mess with their market of tribal guiding, as several people have told me in convos on the issue.
Second, I don't understand why just because the lower river is tribal you guys think it'll close... Well it will, but the skoks have more than enough money to buy it and let the feds run it for them (like cook creek). They can drop the run size and have a Wipeout fishery in the slough..
All the while, and thru this threads time, the native chinook production continues to get driven harder into the mud, soon to be followed by others
Edited by On The Swing (06/02/16 10:34 AM)
_________________________
Fish gills are like diesel engines, don't run them out of fuel!
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#958251 - 06/02/16 11:31 AM
Re: Skok Closure
[Re: Salmo g.]
|
2112
Registered: 01/11/07
Posts: 4996
Loc: in the mass production zone
|
Skok Tribe stands to lose by winning. best reasoning so far. the injuns eventually win. injuns love sticking it to the whiteman these days.
_________________________
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#958256 - 06/02/16 11:51 AM
Re: Skok Closure
[Re: BiLLYiZME]
|
Three Time Spawner
Registered: 06/03/06
Posts: 1535
Loc: Tacoma
|
Salmo, Do you know where I can get a copy of the opinion and who made it. It does not appear to be readily available from the Department of Interior's web site. I think you are right in what they did in regards to Frqnce, but I would like to see if they included any reason for making that decision and what they relied on. In addition, I think I might try to file a freedom of information act to see who else may have influenced the decision or weighed in on it. . It would be interesting to see what, if any, political influence was exercised. I would also like to see what the original request from the tribe looked like. It feels a bit unfair that no one was allowed adequate time to file briefs or opinions on the matter before a decision was made.
Thanks
Edited by Krijack (06/03/16 10:09 AM)
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#958257 - 06/02/16 12:13 PM
Re: Skok Closure
[Re: BiLLYiZME]
|
The Chosen One
Registered: 02/09/00
Posts: 14489
Loc: Tuleville
|
Does this mean I have to return the new step ladder I bought for this season on the Skok? I was looking forward to getting away from Reiter and on to a nice quiet river all to myself......
_________________________
Tule King Paker
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#958260 - 06/02/16 12:41 PM
Re: Skok Closure
[Re: BiLLYiZME]
|
Three Time Spawner
Registered: 06/03/06
Posts: 1535
Loc: Tacoma
|
Here is the opinion... https://solicitor.doi.gov/opinions/M-37034.pdf. A quick reading reveals several problems with this opinion. First, they basically ignore the Skokomish/France decision. By doing so, they are able to ignore the conclusions in it and make their own. A quick review of all the maps attached appear to not include the river or its bed. Second, the decision mentions the need for fishing, ignoring the fact that the tribe raised this question and was assured that the reservation was not for hunting and fishing, but rather only for residing and that they were able to utilize all their traditional areas (as can be seen in the attachment to the decision). This explanation is clearly at odds with the decision. The decision also tries to assert that owner ship of the bed and water is essential to the fishery. They neglect to understand that the tribe no longer uses weirs, that the weirs would be explicitly allowed if the tribe opted to use them, and that sharing of the water and river bed has been done for the last hundred years. Further more, the tribe itself at one point issued non-tribal permits at a cost, further implying that shared use did not prevent their ability to use the river. All in all, its a very poor decision in my opinion and does not stand up to historical or common knowledge
Edited by Krijack (06/03/16 10:11 AM)
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
1 registered (Excitable Bob),
483
Guests and
2
Spiders online. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
11498 Members
16 Forums
63783 Topics
645418 Posts
Max Online: 3001 @ 01/28/20 02:48 PM
|
|
|