A Director of a Department who has the responsibility to manage OUR public resources, who goes before a Senate committee and does such a poor job of presenting his case should not get the sympathy of the citizens, he should be run out of town!

Is there any question WHY our fisheries are spiraling down the $hithole and the Tribes are running the show?

My sympathies go out to the poor staff at WDFW that are busting their humps trying to make sense out of a Department who's leadership is just plain incompetent.

Why are the tribes running the show? Not because of the Director or the Commission! While WDFW certainly has its issues the Leadership Issue which Sen. Pearson opined it is my view that that problem starts at the top - meaning Federal. And then there is the Governor and State legislature which further constrains the Commission and Department.

So, let's hold the Commission and Director accountable for what is within their purview - and not for perceived failures over which they have little or no control.

And let's also continue to push those in a position of power for appropriate changes both in financing and relationships with the tribes.

The Director is in a difficult position. He has no money unless the legislature and governor give it to him. He can't simply spend money unless it is appropriated.

If the legislature;ature is mad, they can control the money.

So, he can say all he wants but if the Leg says no money, they're broke.

legalize gambling or at least threaten to legalize it and watch the cockroaches run... untaxed $$

Thank you Larry,

You and I have agreed on many points and I respect your opinion, on this though, we have a difference of perspective:

It IS the Directors responsibility to manage the resource. If it fails, it is ultimately his failure. If he does not have the tools to effectively do his job, or is in need of assistance to correct some issues that impact his ability to responsibly manage, then it is HIS responsibility to reach out and seek that assistance. Are the Feds needed to correct the permitting issue which gives the Tribes leverage in the NOF process, yes. Is it the Directors responsibility to get federal assistance by notifying the appropriate departments, yes.

An effective leader stands up for what he believes, says what he means, and means what he says.

For example: Director Unsworth stated publicly that he supported open NOF meetings, yet what did he do to try to get that accomplished? He allowed the Tribes to declare the meetings Gov't to Gov't, without any challenge at all. Further, he put out a public relations statement arguing FOR the Tribes position by saying "These government-to-government meetings must occur for fishing seasons to be set." It is HIS FAILURE to find a solution to the permitting problem that makes it a "MUST" we agree with what the Tribes want!

I can go on and on about failed accountability, failed enforcement, etc. It is clear, there is a lack of competent leadership. Leadership that will stand up for whats right!

Simply saying a leader is not to blame for his failures contradicts the meaning of leader. What an effective Department Head does is look for and works for solutions, not makes excuses that it's not his fault.

I agree, he is the head of a department that in many ways is a mire of agendas, influences, personalities and political end games, but that's what he was appointed to manage. Failing to do so, and looking for excuses is not leadership. At least not the leadership we need to fix the problems. We need a Director that will have the integrity to stand up. Seek the resources and assistance needed to make the changes, and let us all know when things aren't looking good so we can all work together to save our fish.

I'm on board with Baywolf. Throughout this nightmare, I have yet to see any form of documented attempt to reach out to the Feds for oversight, direction, mediation or arbitration. Has it come down to arrogance and/or stubborn pride? Jim Goerg recently updated his running editorial @ Reel News by putting forth "WA State, the only one with two governments...the USofA, and the Tribes." For my part in this, it comes down to one simple principle, that being upholding and defending the civil liberties and rights of ALL Americans has the same priority, and is just as important as doing so for Native Americans. Get DC into this mess based on applying the principles set forth by the Boldt Decision, put all parties involved in their proper place, and return some sanity and direction to this fiasco.

I used IE in order to make the link work, so I finally was able to watch the linked meeting. Eh gads, I've never seen a departmental representative so unprepared to testify for a legislative committee. There used to be a Legislative Liaison position in the Department; I don't know if there still is. Some one needs to educate the Director about how state government works and how to work with the gov't.

Based on the W&M meeting and Pearson's NR committee meeting, it looks like no new money for WDFW in the upcoming biennium, and likely another decrease in GF money. It's late in the game now, but I think WDFW should "right size" its business plan based on the prospective budget and share it with the key Legislative committees so they have a heads up on hatchery closures and other cut backs to balance the Department's budget.

Since commercial fishing brings in less than 3% of the Department's budget, this could be a golden opportunity for the Department to close hatcheries that primarily produce salmon for BC and the small NT commercial fleets in GH, WB, and LCR. The Department should spend no more on commercial fishing than commercial fishing contributes to the Department, unless the Legislature chooses to provide GF $ to subsidize welfare fishing. That could alleviate most, if not all, of the projected budget shortfall.

The law does say "commercial". Does not say NI commercial. The Indians are commercial, they are voting citizens of the state, and maintaining their commercial industry complies with bit state and federal law.

The law does say "commercial". Does not say NI commercial. The Indians are commercial, they are voting citizens of the state, and maintaining their commercial industry complies with bit state and federal law.

Since commercial fishing brings in less than 3% of the Department's budget, this could be a golden opportunity for the Department to close hatcheries that primarily produce salmon for BC and the small NT commercial fleets in GH, WB, and LCR. The Department should spend no more on commercial fishing than commercial fishing contributes to the Department, unless the Legislature chooses to provide GF $ to subsidize welfare fishing. That could alleviate most, if not all, of the projected budget shortfall.

Since commercial fishing brings in less than 3% of the Department's budget, this could be a golden opportunity for the Department to close hatcheries that primarily produce salmon for BC and the small NT commercial fleets in GH, WB, and LCR. The Department should spend no more on commercial fishing than commercial fishing contributes to the Department, unless the Legislature chooses to provide GF $ to subsidize welfare fishing. That could alleviate most, if not all, of the projected budget shortfall.

‘The powers to be’----have spoken.

http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news...gn=RSS_politics

Gov. Jay Inslee’s handling of nominations for a federal fishery-council seat has come under attack from the leaders of major North Pacific fishing-industry groups, which have taken the unusual step of sending a complaint letter to the U.S. Secretary of Commerce.

In their letter sent Tuesday, they asked Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross to reject Inslee’s nominations and called for the governor to come up with some new names for a seat on the council. The industry backlash reflects the high stakes in fish politics, where the federal fishery council helps sets the rules for a billion-dollar groundfish harvest, much of which is caught and processed by Seattle-based companies.