Chair Blake responded that he agrees, now let's see what that translates into.

Just, Good point. I hope the guys with the law degrees will sort out the applications. I'm just glad that someone has at least questioned the practice of "secret negotiations".

I find it very troubling that the Tribes only need to "Threaten to walk out" and the State would capitulate. Yes, if the State and the Tribes cannot agree on a season, then we (non-tribal citizens) are left hanging because the State has tied OUR ABILITY TO GET NOAA APPROVAL to the Tribes! This has in fact, made us hostages to the Tribes!! This was highlighted last season with Coho-gate!! The Tribes refused to negotiate in good faith and WE LOST!! This climate of appeasement and coercion has got to end!

HOLY COW!!!

That's a MAJOR ENDORSEMENT!! Chair of the Natural Resources Committee!!!

Lucky, did he respond to one of your letters???

Blake is a good guy to have on your side... until it comes time to divide up the State allocation. That's where we typically are reminded where his allegiances lie (hint: it's NOT with sport fishers in any situation where non-tribal commercial fisheries are part of the allocation).

I guess Puget Sound doesn't have as much (or any?) NT commercial salmon fisheries as say Willapa Bay or Grays Harbor, so it may be that his support here would be 100% positive, which would be cool.

His response was to an email similar to what I said would be sent out in this thread regarding the issue of transparency through open meetings in accordance with RCW 42.30.010.

and for some more news


December 19, 2016
To: NOF Interested Parties
Re: Commission "Blue Sheet" on NOF transparency
A "blue sheet" is the term for a written directive to the Department of Fish & Wildlife from the Commission on a subject matter to be placed on the agenda of a future meeting. In response to the Advocacy's letter to tribal and state co-managers requesting they cease the practice of using meetings closed to public, the WDFW Commission passed a blue sheet on December 10, 2016 calling for a future staff presentation to the full Commission on the rights of citizens and the application of open meeting and other transparency laws of the state of WA during the North of Falcon process used to set fishing seasons. Introduced by Commissioner Wecker and seconded by Commissioner Kehoe, the sheet passed unanimously.
The main component of the text of the blue sheet is shown in the graphic below. The full 2-page form and the letter to the co-managers are available for viewing on the Advocacy website here.
The actual date of the hearing by the Commission will be announced in the future.
Respectfully,
Tim Hamilton
President
Twin Harbors Fish & Wildlife Advocacy

Wecker's tenure on the Commission has been such a blessing to recreational conservation interests. From day one, she struck me as one of the most intelligent and engaged commissioners over the past 12 years. We ALL owe her a debt of gratitude.

So very true, Doc.

Fish on...

Todd

Here is the blue sheet. Missed on putting it up.

Commission Request to Department
“Blue Sheet”

Date of Request: Dec 10, 2016

Title of Request: Application of Government Transparency Laws to Fisheries Management Negotiations at North Of Falcon

Commissioner: Wecker

Request Due Date: January Commission meeting.

Priority Level (put one check in each row):
Importance: [x] High [ ] Medium [ ] Low Urgency: [x] High [ ] Medium [ ] Low
Knowledge or Action Being Requested (narrative). Describe what you
want to know. Be specific.

Information on: 1) state and tribal laws (Open Public Meetings Act, Admin Procedures Act, Public Records Act and other procedural laws) governing transparency of government operations; 2) the efforts over the years to address calls for greater transparency with regard to North of Falcon decision-making; 3) case law on applicability of sunshine laws to fisheries negotiations; and 4) recommendations on how to improve transparency.

Output Requested (e.g., telephone call, memo, material from files, new report, presentation, other):

Briefing for the full commission.











Commission Requests That Require a Significant Staff Workload:

Requests include, but are not limited to, information that benefits the Commission’s decision-making process, requests for evaluation of information by Department staff, review of concepts to be included in the Department’s public involvement process, and requests for information related to past or future actions of the Department.

A. Requests are initiated by the Commission during a Commission meeting, work session, or conference call and are reviewed by a quorum of the Commission to determine desirability of the request. A Commissioner may also initiate requests for those times when a Commission meeting, work session, or conference call is not scheduled and an expeditious response is required, but the request must later presented for consideration to the full Commission during the next meeting.

B. Commission staff forwards requests to the Director’s Office for review, assignment and scheduling.

C. The Director or designee discusses the request to staff at the debrief session, and the Commission Office forwards a copy to the appropriate program.

D. Management Team members are responsible for ensuring Commission requests are completed in a timely manner.

E. The Commission is responsible for reviewing the finalized assignment for completeness and may return the assignment for additional clarification and/or information as necessary.

Lucky, can you please post or send a copy of Blake's reply to me. I sent an PM to you with my email address. I'm really interested to see what he said.

A letter to Com. Wecker would be a great way to say thank you!
Miranda.Wecker@dfw.wa.gov

Sorry I didn't see your PM. sent

I have already thanked the commission for their consideration and I agree with others on here that Miranda has been doing a wonderful job contributing with her knowledge and depth of issues, and leadership.

Now is the time to look over the DRAFT Commission policy for 2017-2018 NOF and to make comments:

Here is the link. Commission Home page

You will find a link to comment under the Draft Policy link.

Let em know we ARE expecting them to advocate for us!

Here is a copy of my comments:

Commissioners,

I am writing as comment for the Draft NOF process policy C-3608 for the 2017-2018 year.

I am a life long recreational sportsmen of Washington State. Over my lifetime of fishing, I have spent thousands of dollars in our local economies in pursuit of my love, fishing.

This year I understand that at last, the question of why the Tribal/WDFW NOF negotiations are closed to the public has been raised.

I have long held that if there is nothing to hide, then why keep things secret? By shutting the doors to accountability, you have perpetuated the feeling of mistrust and misdeed!

This has not only breed anger at the agency, but has greatly deteriorated the feeling of cooperation we, the sportsmen feel toward the Tribes.

Further, I believe a legality issue has been raised by prohibiting the public from inclusion in these meetings.

I understand the Tribes have strongly opposed opening the doors to these negotiations, and may have threatened to “walk away” from the meetings if you push to follow the law. Of course, the fear is this will again have a major impact on our ability to get our needed permits for a season.

By using threats to influence your ability to negotiate a fair and ecologically sound management season for the tax paying public, are the Tribes not guilty of coercion?

After last years “Coho-gate” have you not learned that the current co-management process needs a major overhaul? Are you really doing the very best for your stakeholders if you're not able (or willing) to stand up to bullying?

I highly encourage you to take a stand. Open the Tribal NOF process to the public. Let the light shine on exactly how things are negotiated “in good faith” from both sides. Represent your stakeholders, the tax paying public to the very best of your ability. WE MUST REGAIN OUR TRUST IN YOU FOR THE SAKE OF OUR FISH, BUT YOU MUST ALSO EARN THAT TRUST BACK!

If the Co-managers walk away, so be it. At least you will have taken a stand and we can let the court of public opinion judge their actions!

Respectfully,

Got a little air time, but could of been much better!

King 5 News Fishing Season Process May Change

This link is to a written paper on a king 5 bit on NOF and the Advocacy take on it which are the folks leading the charge. Oh scroll down the paper and read about a boat that did C&R & tagged a 3000 lb Great White.

http://www.king5.com/mb/news/local/fishing-season-decision-process-may-change/375331663

Recently the Advocacy was contacted by a reporter for KING TV regarding
the letter sent by the Advocacy to the WDFW and Northwest Indian
Fisheries Commission requesting the secret meetings between co-managers
during NOF be opened to public observation. The reporter was provided
the letter and a review of the issues. She expressed an interest in
doing a story if she could get approval from her producer.

With the passage of the Blue Sheet on transparency by the Commission, I
forwarded a copy to the reporter and again walked her through the
issues. I also supplied her with a copy of the List Of Agreed Fisheries
(LOAF) for Puget Sound adopted WDFW and the tribal co-managers. KING TV
ran a broadcast last night on the passage of the "Blue Sheet" for
transparency by the Commission. The Northwest Indian Fisheries
Commission provided a statement and a long time rec advocate from Puget
Sound was quoted as well. A link was provided to the LOAF.

Thank you, Alison, king5 news

amorrow@king5.com

Hmmm. Looks like the Tribal stance has been communicated, loud and clear, and on par with what we already knew. Not much to work with here, from a legal standpoint....

Chair Loomis of NWIFC has been wrong before for instance when she stated “that the NWIFC pre-emptively closed the coho fisheries of the 20 member treaty tribes for the year.” That isn’t what happened-- in fact The Tulalips came out of the NOF clandestine meetings with a direct Coho net fishery with 100% allocation according to LOAF.

That’s pretty poor communication if the tribes didn’t get that memo.
Public meetings would have probably worked better.

At least when I was involved the Tribes made it clear that NWIFC does NOT speak for them if that individual tribe does not agree. And, I don't think that NWIFC has any regulatory authority.