Did you know that The Skokomish Tribe has claimed the whole river for themselves?

Please attend the demonstration on July 30th to protest this outrageous act.

Here is Ron Garner's very polite letter on the subject:




Ron Garner
24707 Florence Acres Road Monroe, WA 98272
June 27, 2016

Mr. Charles “Guy” Miller Chairman, Skokomish Tribal Council Skokomish Indian Tribe
80 North Tribal Center Road Shelton, WA 98584

Dear Chairman Miller:

This letter is in follow up to a visit by Frank Urabeck to your office on Wednesday, June 15, and his several subsequent telephone calls with your executive secretary, Darlyn Warren. Mr. Urabeck, as a representative of the Puget Sound Anglers, a well recognized long established sport fishing/conservation organization of more than 7,000 members, was seeking a meeting with you to discuss the Skokomish Indian Tribe’s decision earlier this year to not allow non-tribal sport fishing for hatchery Chinook salmon in traditional sport fishing reaches of the Skokomish River. Sport fishing for Chinook and Coho salmon has occurred here for many decades as these fisheries are extremely popular with many thousands of Washington citizens. Several years ago sport fishing was significantly restricted by the State of Washington to minimize gear conflicts between sport and tribal fishers. A number of other actions have been taken to accommodate tribal concerns.

The purpose of this letter is to ask the Skokomish Tribe to reconsider its position and allow sport fishing to continue for hatchery Chinook salmon during the coming month of August. We are responding to the public call by Lorraine Loomis, Chair, Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission, for the recreational fishing community and Puget Sound tribes to come together and cooperate where we have mutual interests of saving and restoring our salmon and steelhead resources to harvestable levels. We have read the U.S. Department of Interior’s Solicitor General’s January 15, 2016 opinion regarding the tribal reservation’s southern boundary. While we, the State of Washington and others may not agree with that opinion, we accept that this will likely have to be resolved in the Federal courts, which may take a number of years. Consequently, until the issue is resolved by the courts, we reluctantly accept that we can be denied access to that portion of the Skokomish River that you believe to be part of the southern boundary of the reservation – if the Skokomish Tribes elects to do this.

In a June 9 op-ed article, published in the Shelton-Mason County Journal, Lorraine Loomis, Chair of the Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission, stressed the importance of cooperation between the comanagers of the salmon resource (Puget Sound tribes and the State of Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife), and the need to work together on fish habitat protection and restoration, as well as seeking greater production of salmon through our hatchery programs. We agree with Ms. Loomis. However, the co-managers must recognize a third partner. This is the non-tribal sport fishing community. We too care deeply about our fish resources as evidenced by the many fish habitat restoration and enhancement project accomplished by Puget Sound Angler chapters and other organizations. Our members also serve on a number of governmental/citizen committees dedicated to restoring ESA listed salmon and steelhead runs. Our citizen/constituent based political power is very significant, as has often been demonstrated. Without our involvement further significant improvements to habitat and increased hatchery production is unlikely. Also, just keeping hatchery production at current levels will continue to be a struggle and requires citizen support. Without meaningful fishing opportunities, that support will wane.

If sport fishers continue to see our fishing opportunities diminished, especially when not conservation driven, then we will question continued funding of hatchery programs where we receive little or no benefit. Consequently, we are approaching the Skokomish and all Puget Sound tribes in a spirit of cooperation. Unless we are all together, we all will lose. A good model of successful cooperation was the effort by three northern Puget Sound Tribes, three significant sport fishing/conservation groups (Puget Sound Anglers, Coastal Conservation Association and the Steelhead Trout Club) and the Department of Fish and Wildlife, that saved five early winter Puget Sound hatchery steelhead programs in April.

We will be sponsoring a gathering of the public at the George Adams hatchery on Saturday, July 30, at 1 p.m. to discuss the tribal closure of the Skokomish River Chinook fishery. You are invited to speak to the tribal perspective on this issue. A representative of the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife may speak as well. Please let us know of your interest.

Again, repeating my earlier thought: “Unless we are all together, we all will lose.” Allowing a sport fishery to take place this August will demonstrate that the Skokomish Indian Tribe wants to work with the sport fishing/conservation community. Our hand is extended to you.

Mr. Urabek is our contact for the July 30 event and can be reached by telephone at 253-208-7323; by email: urabeck@comcast.net.

Thank you for giving our views consideration.

Sincerely yours, Ron Garner President Puget Sound Anglers State Board
16 Chapters Statewide

Cc:
Lorraine Loomis
WDFW Director Jim Unsworth
WDFW Ron Warren
WDFW John Long Washington Fish and Wildlife Commission
Senator Maria Cantwell
Senator Patty Murray
Senator Rick Larson
Governor Jay Inslee
NOAA Will Stelle-West Coast Administrator
Senator Kirk Pearson, Chair Senate Natural Resources
Senator Pam Roach, President Pro Tempore


Here is a map to the hatchery:
https://www.google.com/maps/@47.3015869,-123.1843062,16.25z

An interesting letter, to be sure. If the Skokomish Tribe decides to continue the closure of the lower river, I wonder what WDFW's reasons will be for continuing to operate the George Adams fish hatchery.

WOW... just WOW!

I'm confident that neither WDFW nor the tribe will choose to do the right thing.

Just sell them the hatchery. $500 million sounds fair. No? Well boo hoo. The tribe can suck it for all I care. They don't own the stream bed (including gravel bars). Why can't the state just tell them that until the litigation is finished things will at least continue as scheduled? Shouldn't the state have judiciary power in this matter? It is a state funded hatchery, not federal. Unless I'm missing something.

they have had since 1855 to argue this, and they are just doing it now?

I think the new sockeye fishery they are implementing is the real reason. They don't want to share in the catch if it takes off. An early July Sockeye season would be great! They want all the fish with none of the burden of paying for it.

The stream bed ownership/reservation boundary is, I believe, the issue. An opinion from the Dept. of Interior supporting the tribe is no different than that of a parent supporting their child. In short, not necessarily the most rationale, impartial posturing.

I strongly object to the WDFW closing what has been State waters absent a court order.

And while I understand the argument for closing what is a State hatchery so doing would, IMHO, undermine the State's position in ongoing litigation. Keep that closure idea on the shelf but clearly visible.

I agree. And to rub salt, they say they'll have someone out there patrolling to make sure their idiotic ruling is strictly enforced.

I told my buddy a couple years ago when they started construction on these big new hatchery projects that we'd never get a crack at those fish because the Skok tribe was going to lay claim to the river and boot us off of it. I just didn't think WDFW would actually assist them in doing so by being such pussies.

You're pathetic WDFW.

At least part of the George Adams production is mitigation from Tacoma. WDFW could and should close facilities that do not produce fish harvested by those who pay the bills.

If you follow more than just WDFW you will see the many ways in which the Tribes control the state; they own the D's.

Years ago, many of the folks I was working with noted that the Tribes were slowly taking away non-Indian fisheries, particularly sport. A little here, a little there. The frog in the pot on the stove and the water is about to boil.

But we kept the ocean, B10, and the outer Staits open at least some...

agree that this is bs to close state raised fish to residents of the state. that being said, wdfw did increase the limit in the salt to 4 fish... if sport anglers would cooperate and share intel and technique for intercepting the chinook in the canal - that would be the best response. If we were able to put a serious dent in the return by getting em in the salt , how sweet would that be!!?!!???

so, who knows the where, when and how?

It would raise the impact on the wild Chinook and get the fishery shut down sooner.

CM, I believe that allowing four in the Canal versus two in the Canal and 2 in the Skokomish (sort of making that up as I'm not sure what the limit in river would have been) could actually extend the fishery as catches in the Canal would be diluted by both hatchery programs from Hoodsport hatchery and George Adams hatchery, while in-river impacts would only be diluted by GA fish.

But the Canal would also have the Dose, Duck, Hamma squared, Quil, and probably other wilds.

It is really complex when we insist on producing hatchery fish that will be co-mingled with wild fish that we give lip service to recovering.

I was thinking primarily of the impact on Skokomish fish and I believe that impact would be reduced. I think you are right, though, if 4 fish could actually be caught in the Canal versus two there and 2 in the river, the impact on the independent 12B populations would be higher. But since the fishery is typically open only below Ayock Pt. (12C), I'm not sure it would be much higher. I'm not sure how the fishery model allocates fish in that area.

I haven't seen a quota for that area. .. have you?

I would be surprised if they shut it down in the salt, as all our impacts from the Skokie are transferred there.

I want to take my boat out and kill 4 skok hatchery fish. .. anyone care to share some intel? They are good biters in river, so I would think they would be in the salt too.

Not great biters the further south they go, Coho killers off Bald Point,. maybe Jiggs

The Skok Laddermen's Association will have something to say about this.
Might have to bring in Tom Horn.

Buddy of mine whackem last year in the salt water at the mouth of the river jigging Point Wilson type jigs.

Sadly we again avoid the fact that no other single factor decimates the fish runs more than a net strung across a river. While the tribes complain and take millions from the government and make millions from US citizens from casinos and illegal sales of different products they are STILL the number one reason FISHING SUCKS! They talk about pride..........what a joke!

I think ocean fisheries (both commercial and sport) account for more dead fish than gillnets in rivers, but gillnets strung up across your local crick sure does feel like a kick in the nuts; especially when the nets are in 4 or 5 days out of the week.

Truth be told, as much as I hate gillnets in rivers, I think our sport fishing would be a lot better overall if we handed over all commercial harvest to the Tribes. They are entitled to 50% of the harvestable fish, and they plan their fisheries accordingly. Under the status quo, if the NT commercial fleet takes its planned allocation and the runs come in below the forecast, the Tribes still fish to the same schedule/impacts, leaving the runs under-escaped. If the Tribes got to fish for 50% of all returning fish in terminal areas, the Tribes would be assured their treaty rights, and there would be a lot more fish left for in-river sports and the gravel.

The whole thing stinks. I talked to a young native guy when I stopped by to look at the river on my way up to go camping at the family lake property. He said that it sucks that we don't get to fish. He mentioned that at meetings over the last couple years about setting seasons within the tribe, that since the planting of sockeye (2014 I'm pretty sure) they have been working to shut down the river to non tribal fisherman. He was a pretty nice kid. Must of been only 19 or 20. Drove off in a lifted 2013 or newer F-250.

I knew that was a bad thing when they were talking about it (planting sockeye). Any excuse to shut us out, the tribe will take it. It started with the selected open dates in certain sections of the river (above 106 only open Friday-Sunday), now its flat out closed. The Skok has gotten better, more egg fisherman, and not as many out right snaggers as years past. Sure, it still has its problems, but losing this river really sucks for us broke a$$ shore bound anglers. My first real shot at Salmon every year in my location (minus driving 200 miles round trip).

I thought how cool would a sockeye fishery be? Maybe early July, fly fishing. That would have been fun...Oh well. Im sure the state will just bend over and take it, per usual.

Why don't we organize a "fish in", it sounds like the state isn't arresting or giving out tickets, just mediating with anglers and tribal police. What if 300-400 fisherman showed up and just started fishing and didn't give into tribal pressure. Surely the state would have to do something. Either stand up for us, or start giving out tickets and arresting people and take the tribes side. It won't happen. Recreational fisherman couldn't decide what gear to use. "I think it should be bobber only", "fly fishing only you neanderthals", "free drifting eggs if you use lead then you're a snagger", "Floss em up guys", "skok fly baby". We all know its true. Its the sad reality. Its pretty easy for the tribe to decide, gill nets. Done.

Just watch, they have been trying to get fishing rights to Satsop, give it a couple years, we will see nets up the park and the river will only be open Friday-Sunday above the Highway bridge. Packing us all into the mouth, with all the sleds. Sounds fun.

If they win this, they can get that.

A good fly fisherman can floss way better than any lead chucker could possibly do. Just saying.

I am not sure that pushing the issue is the best tactic now, but at some point this may need to adjudicated. The easiest way would be for the state to open the season with a warning and then step back. Once someone got arrested, it would be up the tribe to prove they own the river. Unfortunately, it sounds like what is more likely to happen is the tribe will detain you and hand you over to the state, which will then prosecute for fishing out of season, preventing the ability to for this to ever go to trial.
I remember sitting in a counsel meeting years ago when they were passing a controversial law. They asked their attorney what their options were. He looked up and stated that there were some serious problems with the law, but that they could enforce it up to the the time someone fought it. At that point they could fight up to the court date and then drop the charges, effectively penalizing the defendant but never setting a precedent. It seems that is the approach the state and tribe are taking. Passing rules and laws that effectively mask the real question, whether the tribe has any right to the river. As long as the state does not open it, they effectively own the river. Opening the river up with a statement that no access is allowed, would then allow the legality of ownership to come up.

All the articles I have read (I haven't talked to any officials directly) stated that the WDFW officers won't be pursuing charges for people fishing. Just being the middle man to make sure fisherman and tribal officers don't get violent when the tribal police try and seize gear. Thats what the Kitsap sun and a couple other publications said.

"Fish and Wildlife will have enforcement officers at the river when the fishing season begins. Their purpose is less to catch anglers breaking jurisdictional rules the state doesn't fully acknowledge and more to ease expected conflicts between tribal police and anglers. Some anglers might have not heard about the new restrictions. Others might know but will "try to fish anyway," Peterson said."

From the Kitsap Sun

It's the habitat.....the population explosion in Hood Canal over the last 100 years has been exponential! Condoms not condominiums!!!

Habitat? what a joke, that has been the biggest lie I ever heard. If the fish are present they will find a way, but without fish there is no chance.

Picture hundreds of fish traps up and down both shores of the Canal, year round prior to 1900, then massive white commercial harvest with gill nets till the 50's, then in 1972 after the bolt decision, gill nets corked off the mouth of every inlet into the Canal until it was a waste of time to set them. By 1975 it was all over.

WDFW and the rest of the Washington State government employee fools can help finish off the resources in this state and have full protection, with a nice salary & benefits, vacation and sick leave, and a nice taxpayer funded retirement. And they get all this reward for doing a shatty job.... Good for them and shame on us...

You can say it's not their fault because they don't get to decide management policy, they just do what they are told... So they get a big reward for "doing what their told" and not going against the grain...

Hope they are happy with their paychecks, retirements, and so on.... I wonder if everybody else will be happy with no fish, watching the State employees driving around in nicer cars, living in nicer houses and getting fatter paychecks then they do?? It bet the every day Joe is happy to eat a little less, get paid a little less, drive an old beater and pay rent to someone else so State Employees can enjoy the nicer things in life.

You know they deserve it,,, They deserve to have things a little better than everybody else.....

This thread, and others, have (at least at times) a theme of Shared Waters and Shared Salmon. Sounds all warm and fuzzy; we can all get behind that.

Why not have WDFW (and the necessary public/open involvement) and each of the Tribes get together to define exactly what kind of fisheries they want to see within each U&A. On the Skok, for example, the tribes wants to harvest 20,000 Chinook, 30,000 coho, and 200,000 chum, with a netting schedule of xyz. The NI side wants 5,000 river chinook, 15,000 coho, and 10,000 chum based on a schedule/limits of abc.

Work this out to the ocean, including BC and AK. The models exist to create this. We would then know what kind of escapements we need to generate that run and what fisheries we will have.

In this way, we should either get agreement on fishery locations or force into the open that certain fisheries are unacceptable. At that point, the state can decide where to put its efforts.

Unfortunately, the tribe doesn't want to share. At this point, neither do I.

I know I am awfully critical of WDFW, and government employees in general... The reason why I feel I am justified in doing that is because I was a government employee for about 17 years. 99% of them don't earn what they get paid, and they get a better life just because they are loyal...

This whole thing is a sign of the times, maybe they should just arm the Quilbillies with some Assault riffles and hand grenades and send them down to the Skoke bout August first with some 10 foot ladders,,. I'm sure the Natives will have their guns in their Cedar canoes, while they are netting fish with their Cedar woven nets. Would prove to be a productive confrontation I suspect, probably get figured out once and for all.

That's is exactly the point. A public process where they say "It's all ours, you pay for it."

The real reason you feel this way is because you were the kind of employee you are complaining about now. Don't put all govt. employees in your boat. Saying you were the one percent really doing work is self serving bull*hi*. If you felt that way why keep pretending you were accomplishing any real work when only 1 % was working? Doesn't that make you the worse kind of hypocrite? Collecting a paycheck when your workplace was so dysfuntional that only one % was actually accomplishing any real work is pretty much playing the system. I have more respect for those who stayed feeling they actually were doing their job and felt that way about most of their fellow employees.So you were also part of the problem, not any solution. Another pointless, not well thought out post. Just what we can expect from you. Bob R

The Hood Canal has been closed to Kings for the last 20 or so years due to the Mid Hood Canal Chinook.........Our experts have had 20 years to rebuild these runs.......Its time to call the game folks, its not our fishing pressure that is hurting these fish. ITS TIME TO REOPEN THE HOOD CANAL WITH THE STATED GOAL TO TAKE OUR 50 PERCENT OF THE RUN OF KINGS and of course sockeye, coho, and chum