By not fishing!

It’s pretty clear Gov Inslee could give two sh!ts about the sportsmen and women of this state.

http://www.king5.com/mobile/article/news...e/281-528561846

Tell me, where within that article is fishing even referenced?

“Under the order, state agencies will find ways to quiet state ferries around the whales, train more commercial whale-watching boats to help respond to oil spills and adjust fishing regulations to protect key areas and fish runs for orcas.“

Ah, thanks I didnt see that. And do you suppose that is automatically a net negative for Fishing interests??

Not really interested in getting into it. I did read the article though and recalled that it mentioned fishing restrictions, since you asked I c/p’d the quote. All I will say is I have ZERO confidence in this State. With that said I hope that whatever they do to try and “manage” whale health and populations works out better than the way they’ve “managed” the commercial and sport fisheries in Washington.

To chime in I don't see that as necessarily being an automatic net negative but it sure does cast a big net with potential huge negative impacts on recreational fisheries.

We will have to see how the Commission and WDFW reacts.

Oh, and here is a link to the agenda for the most recent meeting of the WDFW Budget and Policy Advisory Group: https://wdfw.wa.gov/about/advisory/bpag/agenda_030218_BPAG.pdf.

Lots of language therein about how to increase revenue and cut expenses.

I agree whole heartily that the various state agencies and government need to take action now. I'm very interested to see what direction and dollars Inslee will provide for immediate action.

Can we expect to see major changes if Forestry management for DNR, increase efforts to reduce pollution and water withdrawals from DOE, Accelerated replaced of fish blocking culverts and more fish friendly road systems for DOT and more control from Dept. of agriculture to provide more fish friendly farming?

Not holding my breath but it is clear to anyone who looks at the current plight of Puget Sound Chinook and the continued downward trend in their abundance that any meaningful long term increase in abundances will have to come via increased habitat protection and restoration. Somehow doubt the decision makers of the region orca concern goes that far.

curt

Providing food for the whales requires, primarily, changes in location. The harvest needs to shift to areas past the whales. First, of course, is the ending of fisheries on juvenile and immature salmon. Then, fish those that pass the whales.

Another benefit is that the cost in fuel per pound will be reduced as the fish will be significantly larger and closer to "home".

Managers could still use the same escapement goals. It would change fisheries but not eliminate fishing on salmon.

I think where the major impact will be for both the Commercial and Recreational will be in the large mixed stock fisheries in the Ocean, Strait, and Sound. It will be interesting for sure!

Give that man a GOLD star!

Restoration of habitat is the long term solution and need. Short-term (decade or two) significant cuts in mixed stock fisheries that intercept fish before the whales is the only way to get food to the whales now. Stick to habitat restoration and we risk completely losing the whales.

Need both.

I think the takeaways from this are:

Likely advancement of the "Orca protection/no boat zone" around the West coast of San Juan island, which will eliminate one of our states best late summer Chinook fishing opportunities and would also greatly impede transportation throughout the islands. As said it will remain to be seen what the stance of the commission and department will be, however, given what we've been seeing the past decade, I assume wholeheartedly they will fold like a house of cards.

A subsidization of whale watching boats to appease them for less opportunity to chase the whales. (In the article it states they should be trained as oil spill response... my guess would be as just-compensation for asking them to stay further away from the whales). Keeping in mind many rarely follow the distance restrictions currently in play.

An increase in taxes to foot the bill for research and implimentation (Inslee might as well change his name to Gimme at this point) which is the last damn thing we need in this state currently.

Given the current state of affairs with the degradation of stocks in general, the political environment of NOF, and the complete lack of leadership competency we have been seeing from the Department in general, I would think it would be pretty clear to all that this is going to mean nothing at all good for the recreational fisherman.... and quite frankly it's probably not going to mean a damn bit of good for the whales themselves.

Its good for Inslee, he wantz everyone to know he cares about whales. What a nice guy!

Shouldn’t the dilemma of the Orca be more than a Washington state/San Juan Island problem?

Who has Governor Inslee enlisted and teamed up north to help with the orcas cause?

I doubt there is really anything that WA can or will do that will make a detectable impact on the whales.

It will take AK, BC, WA, OR, and CA working reasonably in concert to actually fix the problems that have driven the whales down.

The heavy lifting on habitat is probably from the Fraser south. The major fishery issues are from the Fraser north. But unless we deal with all the components, failure is the result.

One of the primary reasons for my pessimism is that. like salmon, there are a myriad of problems. This allows each problem-causer too say that "He's doing more damage, fix him not me". If we closed the ocean the whales still face the toxics and the Chinook poor FW habitat so fix those first.

Canada is already talking about shutting down large areas to fishing to study the whales feeding behavior.

Just listened to a news report about Gov Inslee signed an executive order forming an Orca protection task force. The next few years could be real interesting. The Tribes say they are board. The question, on board to get recs off the water? Or, mass produce hatchery Chinook. The latter is something they could probably get away with, even under hatch vs wild ESA restrictions. Other restrictions could come to regulate water/shipping commerce, something IMO would be difficult, clean up storm water runoff pollution, super expensive, boat speed limit and protection zones w/ more enforcement. The report mentioned that historically the population has been lower than now and bounced back. My take is we are at a low point in the population cycle. Species populations in nature, other than humans, always find equilibrium based on their environment. Possibly this is what is presently occurring. Trying to be an optimist, I really hope some way we can get more PS Chinook out of this. Chinook that will stay inside PS.

Chinook that stay in PS accumulate higher levels of toxins than those that go to the oceans. The whales, and the humans who eat the Chinook too, would be better off with ocean-run fish.

The population of whales is looking for a new equilibrium. It will be controlled by how much food is available.

In the article I read, NMFS Regional Administrator Barry Thom said, "it's not too late." Unfortunately I think he is wrong.

The actions that can be taken right away or in the near term would result in small incremental benefits to the southern resident orcas. I doubt that is enough to prevent further population decline. And of the near term actions that can be taken, lip service will be the most prominent one, whereas actions that could make a significant difference will have too high a social and economic cost to the movers and shakers who control actions government agencies actually take.

The near term actions are mostly of the type that would treat symptoms rather than the root cause of the problem; the root cause being degraded habitat that produces too few Chinook to adequately feed orcas throughout the year. Restoring PS freshwater and marine habitat to produce adequate forage for orcas will take a longer time than the whales likely have remaining. And that amount of habitat restoration is extremely unlikely to ever happen anyway, given the other over-riding priorities of society, which mainly are the development of the PS area to accommodate the Californication of western WA.

Sorry to be so pessimistic about the whales and Chinook restoration and recovery, but if society and the state and federal agencies really want to feed Chinook salmon to the orcas for the next 50 years or more, it will have to be with hatchery Chinook because the natural habitat simply cannot and will not produce the abundance and diversity of forage the whales need.

Sg