I believe the rules at NOF are about to get turned upside down.

A bit of transparency never hurts....

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B2tWjgmgVy3yUWtFUlB3c3RKQ1U/view

I like it!

It may be like turning the lights on in a darkened tenement room. The roaches, rats, and mice all scurry for cover....

Anxious to see WDFW's response.

I'm willing to show up and stand at the door at the Co-managers/WDFW closed door meeting. Anyone willing to join me?

Maybe invite the press??

This should extend beyond NOF as well.

Some of the hardest hits are the emergency closures that directly result from "meet and confer" conversations between Co-managers that occur OVER THE PHONE.

I would contest that transparency is paramount in ANY circumstance that will impact season setting,

"we ask that the tribal co-managers consider allowing the tribal and non-
tribal citizens an opportunity to observe (without participation) during co-management meetings wherein the discussion includes proposals for an upcoming harvest season(s)."

In the instance of emergency "meetings" there should be a physical location and schedule with meetings being conducted in a transparent way. No more "close the fishery now, here comes our lawyers."

I've been asking for open meetings and Advisory Panel participation in these meetings for the last three years. Last year, we were told that we would be able to attend some co manager meetings but it never materialized. Abesnt of any direct participation, I've also asked for meeting minutes and the Department has refused by not supplying them nor following up on the recommendations.

In many ways, the Advisory group acts in a strategic capacity, but without any visibility into how these meetings work, we are in the dark.

Ah not being rude but I think that is their intent.

There was a time, some years back, when the Dept was able to get non-agency personnel into some meetings as observers. That didn't last very long.

I'm a hundred per cent in favor of increased transparency of the NOF process (as well as other fish management processes).

That said I doubt that having the co-manager meetings open to the public would be very productive. There is just too much passion and diversity of interests on both sides of the table. It would be difficult to prevent progress from getting sidetracked by off topic debates.

Having given this issue a lot of thought I do have a suggestion that potentially would stream line the NOF process and at the same time increase transparency across the board. There is no reason not to take advantage to the technology available today. I would " stream" the co-manager meetings. The co-manager meetings should be limited to just a relatively small handful of policy folks from both sides of the table. Technical staff and other co-managers would be in separate rooms and the public would also be able to watch the meetings live without being in the room.

Direct public involvement would continue in the various NOF public meetings and I would hope via a interactive NOF web site. Such web site would not only allow the public to submit questions, opinions, etc. there should be links that provide immediate access to a variety of the data that drives the NOF. Such things as forecasts and methods, escapement history, run reconstruction. Additional information might be contact information for advisors so folks with concerns or a spoke person for their concerns would have a ready avenue.

The down side of all the above is that having a larger user involved and at the same time more informed users would be very much a double edge sword for some managers!

GodsLovesUgly
I think a major step in transparency in in-season updates and closures would to expand what was done this summer with the MA 9 and MA 10 summer Chinook selective fisheries. A table was available on WDFW's web site that list "quota" for those fisheries with frequent updates of in-season catch estimates. I see no reason why that could not be provided for all monitored salmon fisheries with at least updates at least a couple times a month.

Curt

Give that man a GOLD star!

Well guys in GH it was back some that observers could sit in and do just that observe. Hell one of the QIN used to bring a bag of smoked fish for all. What happened I am told was a couple of commercials just had to run their mouths so that did it. What should have happened is the offending parties should have been thrown out on their noses and staff apologize for the interruption and violation of the ground rules, did not happen. The point most are missing is that while the QIN prefer no public participation at all ( or so staff says ) so does WDF&W. It works to their preference as if one has not noticed they do not like interaction from the public so using the tribes as the guilty party works for them. Honesty around this issue is seldom present.

I like all the suggestions about "opening the meetings to the general public", be it "in room or closed circuit".

Taking this one step further, I'd like to see a "question/answer period", at the WDFW Commission meetings. The general public being allowed to ask questions of WDFW presenters......a 30 minute session might be very eye opening.

I completely support this. And thank the folks involved for their time and efforts.

Strategically, however, please consider not threatening to sue, especially in the passive manner in that letter. To a lawyer, a weak threat like that shows that you almost certainly don't have the bankroll or resolve to actually sue. So why put it in the letter?

If you want to use litigation to enforce your will (something that sport anglers should have started doing some time ago) you need to simply say that you will sue by a certain date if your request is not honored, then when it's not honored, you must in fact sue--using a good lawyer--who is probably fairly expensive. Then do it again on a different issue. And again on a different issue. And about that time, you won't have to threaten any more because it will be clear that you are both able, and willing, to utilize the courts to enforce your rights.

They have the attorneys and are well versed in litigation as evidenced by their involvement with the Willipa Bay fisheries that they have been very active in.

They do take contributions if you'd like to help...

Tim Hamilton from THWFA is asking for everyone who would like to see a more transparent and open NOF process to send letters to Dir. Unsworth and to the Commission. Below is an email from Tim regarding the subject.
I've also include a copy of the letter I sent to the Directors office. Feel free to copy and paste.

Letter from Tim Hamilton, THFWA;

That would be great. I've added the following at the end of our feature on the website regarding the letter we sent in.

Those that would like to support the effort to open co-management meetings to the public are asked to send a short email to Director Jim Unsworth at Director (DFW) <director@dfw.wa.gov> and carbon copy the Commission at WDFW Commission <commission@dfw.wa.gov>

The more emails we can get in the better. I'd really appreciate you lighting up the blogs, social media, whatever you can do to get it out there.

Tim"

My letter to Director Unsworth's office and the Commission;

Director Unsworth,

As you are well aware, the relationship between the citizens of Washington State and our Tribal Co-managers is at a very low point. Following the chaos and mis-communications that took place last year at and following the NOF process it is understandable that many in the non-tribal community have a perception of misdeeds and mistrust.

You have a great opportunity to remedy a lot of the misconceptions as well as greatly improve relations between our communities.

We are asking you to concur with and put into place a method to open the Co-management/State NOF negotiations to the public. Further, we would like to have public records available for any electronic and telephonic communications where fishery are discussed.

By prohibiting the public from attending these meetings, the agency has perpetrated a climate of secrecy, mistrust and suspicion.

Please, do the right thing. Agree to open these meeting to the public, and press the Tribal Co-mangers to agree as well. If in fact everyone is negotiating in good faith, and there is nothing to hide, then there is no reason to keep the door closed to the tax payers!

Regards,"

UPDATE
This is an update from Tim at Twin Harbors Fish and Wildlife Advocacy:

On Friday, we appeared before the Commission in Olympia to promote the transparency in NOF. The Dept (Warren) stated the tribes were "sternly opposed". Course the historical staff at WDFW led by Ron Warren are in the same boat, just won't admit it in public. However, the Commissioners themselves were very receptive. Wecker intro a "blue sheet" on Saturday which is an instruction to the staff for a briefing on the rights of the citizens and the applicable state laws. Passed unanimously.

It's going to be an uphill fight. The staff will try to argue that if the public is allowed to see what goes on that the tribes will refuse to negotiate and as a results the feds will block all non-tribal seasons in PS. Course, I'd see that as a BS scare tactic to try and get the Commissioners to back off. Warren is reportedly preparing the Dept's response to the letter we sent in.

As I've anticipated all along, I suspect we will have to seek a "boldt decision" for the people.

Tim

PLEASE!!! Continue to send letters to the commission, the Governor, the WDFW Director and to your legislative members endorsing this. Transparency in these negotiations is the first MAJOR step in equality! There is a reason the Tribes and WDFW are fighting this so hard!! It's State Law that these meeting be open to the public, yet they are violating the law and shutting us out! WHAT ARE THE HIDING???
Here is a list to send emails to:
commission@dfw.wa.gov (WDFW Commission General email)

Ron.Warren@dfw.wa.gov (Assistant Director - Fish Program) He's fighting against and is the spokesmen against!

Jim.Unsworth@dfw.wa.gov (Director, WDFW)

Miranda.Wecker@dfw.wa.gov (Member, WDFW Commission ) She Supports open meetings!!

http://www.governor.wa.gov/contact This will get you to a form to contact the Governors office.

cbowhay@nwifc.org (Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission,Craig Bowhay Fishery Programs Director.

https://fortress.wa.gov/atg/formhandler/ago/ContactForm.aspx State Attorney's Generals Office Contact Form.

THFWA@comcast.net (Twin Harbors Fish and Wildlife Advocacy) They are the ones initiating the action!!

The RCW at the heart of this:
RCW 42.30.010
Legislative declaration.
The legislature finds and declares that all public commissions, boards, councils, committees, subcommittees, departments, divisions, offices, and all other public agencies of this state and subdivisions thereof exist to aid in the conduct of the people's business. It is the intent of this chapter that their actions be taken openly and that their deliberations be conducted openly.
The people of this state do not yield their sovereignty to the agencies which serve them. The people, in delegating authority, do not give their public servants the right to decide what is good for the people to know and what is not good for them to know. The people insist on remaining informed so that they may retain control over the instruments they have created.

I never have liked how the NOF final meetings end with closed doors to the public. I agree that these meetings should be transparent, so sending this example off to many.

RCW 42.30.010
Legislative declaration.
“The legislature finds and declares that all public commissions, boards, councils, committees, subcommittees, departments, divisions, offices, and all other public agencies of this state and subdivisions thereof exist to aid in the conduct of the people's business. It is the intent of this chapter that their actions be taken openly and that their deliberations be conducted openly.

The people of this state do not yield their sovereignty to the agencies which serve them. The people, in delegating authority, do not give their public servants the right to decide what is good for the people to know and what is not good for them to know. The people insist on remaining informed so that they may retain control over the instruments they have created.”

This legislative declaration is not being followed by the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) in their salmon allocation negotiations with the state tribes at the yearly North of Falcon (NOF) meetings.

We might have read or listened to media how the tribes took the conservation lead this year to not harvest Coho in Puget Sound because of poor Coho returning projections. What actually happened was that the Tulalip Tribe came out of these highly secretive meetings with a 100% allocation direct Coho fishery according to the List of Agreed Fisheries (LOAF). There is a big difference between conservation and 100% allocation going to one user group--- the Tulalip Tribes.

IMO, this example epitomizes why these illegal clandestine meetings should not exist according to RCW 42.30.010.

Excellent!
I hope many, many others take the time to follow your example!

I think one problem with using this rcw as a basis for access to the NOF meetings lies in the definition section. See highlighted section below. To me, this would not define the season negotiation meetings but the commission meetings where the seasons are finally adopted, which is a public meeting, where the final descision is made (action taken) and there is a vote that is publically taken.

RCW 42.30.020
Definitions.
As used in this chapter unless the context indicates otherwise:
(1) "Public agency" means:
(a) Any state board, commission, committee, department, educational institution, or other state agency which is created by or pursuant to statute, other than courts and the legislature;
(b) Any county, city, school district, special purpose district, or other municipal corporation or political subdivision of the state of Washington;
(c) Any subagency of a public agency which is created by or pursuant to statute, ordinance, or other legislative act, including but not limited to planning commissions, library or park boards, commissions, and agencies;
(d) Any policy group whose membership includes representatives of publicly owned utilities formed by or pursuant to the laws of this state when meeting together as or on behalf of participants who have contracted for the output of generating plants being planned or built by an operating agency.
(2) "Governing body" means the multimember board, commission, committee, council, or other policy or rule-making body of a public agency, or any committee thereof when the committee acts on behalf of the governing body, conducts hearings, or takes testimony or public comment.
(3) "Action" means the transaction of the official business of a public agency by a governing body including but not limited to receipt of public testimony, deliberations, discussions, considerations, reviews, evaluations, and final actions. "Final action" means a collective positive or negative decision, or an actual vote by a majority of the members of a governing body when sitting as a body or entity, upon a motion, proposal, resolution, order, or ordinance.
(4) "Meeting" means meetings at which action is taken.

But, I'm not a lawyer...

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.

Alison Morrow contacted me after I suggested a more in-depth piece into the entire process.

In addition to the perception of the closed door meetings resulting in poor management practices and loss of opportunities for sportsmen coming out to these meetings, I addressed to Alison, the question of the Tribes using the leverage of permits as coercion to get the State to bend to their will.

I also spoke of the Co-managers banner of "Champions of Conservation" and asked that the tactics of Net schedules vs ESA listed fish in system timing and the whole by-catch scam. (Lowering escapement numbers to increase harvest when even the lower escapement isn't met.) Follow the money if you will!

Hopefully, we will see a little more coverage. But as Tim Hamilton (THFWA)reminded me: The Casino's are huge advertiser money to the stations!

ESB 5964 the Open Government Trainings Act, was passed by the Legislature on March 2014 and the Governor signed it on March 27, 2014 and went into effective July 1, 2014. The bill was introduced at the request of the Washington State Attorney General with bipartisan support.

The Act is designed to foster open government by making open government education a recognized obligation of public service. The Act is also designed to reduce liability by educating agency officials and staff on the laws that govern them, in order to achieve greater compliance with those laws. Thus, the Act is a risk management requirement for public agencies.

The Act provides for open public meetings and records trainings. In sum, the Act is intended to improve trust in government and at the same time help prevent costly lawsuits to government agencies.

http://www.atg.wa.gov/OpenGovernmentTraining.aspx

Might be interesting to see, through a PDR, the specific training WDFW has had in complying with this Act.

Might be interesting to see, through a PDR, the specific training WDFW has had in complying with this Act.

The state attorney general office is a strong advocate for open government and is set up to answer all questions and concerns, along with their websites being a wealth of information.

"Government accountability means that public officials— elected and un-elected— have an obligation to explain their decisions and actions to the citizens. Government accountability is achieved through the use of a variety of mechanisms— political, legal and administrative— designed to prevent corruption and ensure that public officials remain answerable and accessible to the people they serve. In the absence of such mechanisms, corruption may thrive."
— U.S. Department of State

IMO, in past years, the NOF meetings stop short with the last meeting of the process involving the negotiations with state and the tribes.

The last NOF meetings should be regional public meetings just like the start of the process but this time to explain the results of the negotiations and how those decisions were made instead of having to read through the LOAF and then calling WDFW with questions or comments.

Regarding Chair Loomis NWIFC representing the 20 area tribes quote--- “Treaty tribes – as sovereign nations – are not bound by the state’s open public meetings laws.”

Case law states “all Indians born in the United States are now citizens of the United States.” So it is disheartening that the tribal people as co-managers are embracing arrogant contempt of current laws regarding transparency through open meetings and time will tell at the upcoming state F&W commission meeting just how close WDFW is in lock step with their co-cronies regarding NOF clandestine settings.

They are citizens, as you vote, of the United States. WA open meetings laws do not cover meetings in other states, and the Reservations are not under WA law.

An intersting question for a legal mind to ponder is if the Tribes are US citizens but, as Lorraine says, not subject to WA law then why can they vote in WA elections?

The Tribes are taking a stand that they are going into these meetings as a Sovereign Government, and as such, are not required to adhere to Washington State Law. In other words, they have no legal obligation to have the public attend "their" meetings. The question for the courts is, can a State agency ignore the OPMA (open public meeting act) because it is in negotiations with a "sovereign government"?

More on point, is that the Tribes have the State by the nut sack! Because the tribes can get their permits "Fast Tracked" in a matter of weeks, they have nothing to lose in walking out of negotiations at the NOF. Their "test case" was the Coho fishery last season and it went off very well in their favor!

The State (us) on the other hand cannot get permits through NOAA on our own in a time frame that would allow us to fish.

So, the tribes have the trump card! And I suspect this is why the Tribes and WDFW are fighting to keep these meetings closed. Because the State has capitulated so much over to the tribes under threat of them walking out, that they are now afraid to let the public know what is really going on. They (WDFW) are just hoping that the tribes will back off and the WDFW can try and sugar coat everything to make it look like it's all holding hands and singing Kumbaya like the've been doing for years.
Problem is, they tribes have an agenda, and it doesn't include backing off...

Baywolf,
I think you are on track with the question about whether the state can ignore the OPA. In this case I do not think they can. It probably would involve a law suit, but I think the tribe would need to show a compelling reason for the meetings to be closed. Since, in this case, the state is nothing more than a representative of us, and no state secrets are being discussed, and all members are required to negotiate by law, I see no way the Tribes could argue to keep the meetings fully closeted. They might be able to get away with closed circuit meetings to keep out disruptions or other reasonable accommodations, but in my opinion that is the best they could do. The state should follow the tribes suit and try to get an injunction forcing the tribes to negotiate with the closed circuit cameras.

The tribes have been using the same sovereign nation argument to pay off the politicians, claiming they are not bound by campaign financing laws. Again, they may be right .... but I believe the politicians they are paying off are subject to the law. I think the first step in all this process is to get a law passed that limits what a politician can accept. We may need to get an initiative started that forces this issue.

Absolutely concur!

Actually, there already is an initiative in place to challenge the closed door NOF meetings. (See THFWA.Org website for updates)

The hard nut to crack is the States reluctance to challenge the Tribes. Not just in allowing the people of the State into these meetings, but on many issues in our fisheries.

With just a little research, you can see that the Governor (or his staff) is up to his balls deep in meddling with the NOF process on behalf of the Tribes. (could it be because of donations?)

There is also the court of public perception. We need to get the truth out in this arena as well. The tribes always fall back on the position of being "Champions of Conservation". And they do a lot in that regards, but they also over fish and use non-selective methods that take ESA listed fish out of already strained systems.

We (the sportsmen) really need to organize now more than ever and get involved. It's not easy, and may look overwhelming, but if there is any hope in improving the fisheries the burden is on us to do it.

If the State participates in negotiations in BC or Oregon or California (which they do) they are bound by the laws of those jurisdictions, not by WA laws. The "out" in the State/Tribal negotiations is that when the occur on Reservation the governing law is Tribal. So, if the Tribes insist in meeting on Rez it is their rules. If the State aquiecieses (sp?) then they agree that the Tribe's desire for secrecy is necessary to a successful (to someone) outcome.

There are many ways they will try to keep things secret, and keep things going like they have been. As far as their concerned, the sport fishermen are only a source of money!