Action Alert! Huge threat to recreational fishing!

Please take action now on this very important matter. Please click on this link now!!!!!

https://www.votervoice.net/PSA/campaigns/41601/respond

We are at the end of the 2015 legislative session. We have severe danger to our fisheries that are now on the table that arose Tuesday. The House Appropriations Committee approved a 2015-2017 operating budget that proposes to cut our funding for hatchery salmon production. The Committee also accepted an amendment from Representative Kristine Lytton (D-Anacortes) that wouldundermine the Willapa Bay salmon fishery reform policyrecently adopted by the Fish and Wildlife Commission. Please take just one minute click on the link above to send your state representatives telling them to reverse these bad policies. If you don't act now, our fisheries are going to be on an unrecoverable death spiral. THIS IS THAT IMPORTANT!

The House budget proposal would cut funding for the marking of hatchery salmon by over $400,000. Since state law requires that all hatchery salmon be marked, this will result in a direct cut to hatchery salmon production, including Chinook and Coho. Every previous version of the House and Senate budgets have included this funding, so there's a chance we can save this funding if we act now!

Thanks for the notice, FN. It would be such a huge bummer if this went through. Emailed my reps.

DONE!

Sent... Here we go again. Blake is like a lobbyist from Hell. When does his legislative term end, so he can answer his true calling to serve the few?

Done. Too bad Blake's little session tomorrow morning won't allow for public testimony!

Guess if your going to cut some funding for hatcheries you might as well cut the funding to clip the nonexistent smolts.

they have to cut something to pay for their 11% raise

They are proposing shifting hatchery production over from the Nemah to the Naselle? Very limited bank access on the Nemah "ditch". Naselle has multiple boat launches and a lot more access.

I've fished the Nemah and many parts aren't accessible. Why fund a hatchery that is only running at 1/4 production?

Because the Naselle cannot meet HSRG requirements on straying. The weir fails in high water events and is pulled around Oct 15th dependent on flows. The purpose of both the Nemah & Naselle hatcheries is primarily for the marine fisheries. Targeting harvest in river is not the purpose for any Willapa estuary hatchery but rather a secondary consideration.

Wouldn't fish caught in the river and bay serve as more recreational opportunity if hatchery production was increased? I thought you guys were wanting additional opportunity. That was a big push of yours earlier in the year.

Also, there would probably be some efficiency gained at a single hatchery vs. having two. Savings in personnel costs could likely be realized by not having duplication of duties at two sites.

Additional production would help boost marine fisheries, wouldn't it?

Ah a boost in hatchery production would do zip for the Recs. The freshwater catch is about equal to Rec marine at present but most fresh Rec comes from the Nemah fresh. The Sept 16 dead line for no nets benefits most in T&U. The Rec only had at best access to about 30% of the adults combined hatchery production prior to the new WMP as the Commercials cleaned out things in front of them. Add more to the pie the inriver and will not notice it. Marine Rec some depending where you fish. You need to turn loose of BB DG as he has went right off the deep end.

You still have to get the hatchery fish out of the river to meet HSRG. Until the wild runs increase in size the hatchery production, especially where fisheries are non-selective (nets) must be reduced.

Saw an analysis of some lower Columbia Chinook programs. IF wild Chinook recovery was goal there were at least a few hatcheries that could release a couple thousand smolts as the wild run had been beaten so low.

Notes sent.

What a piece of work BB is.... I admire his dedication to the cause, but it's a cause with which I can no longer sympathize, so....

This makes it official; he's gotten his last vote from this constituent, even if that means I have to vote for a (shiver) Republican.

FF02, I would believe it, maybe if I saw pictures of the ballot lol

LOL. Indeed, jgreen, it is very nearly as difficult for me to vote for Democrats. I only vote so nobody can throw me that BS line about how you can change a bad situation by changing your vote. I know I'll get the same screwing in the end.

If the budget isn't passed, they will screw us all. I'll still fish anyways. I got my permit, it's not my fault they can't do their jobs.

Today's work session is available on TVW.

http://www.tvw.org/index.php?option=com_tvwplayer&eventID=2015060077

emailed my reps and senator, but maybe too late. The nice thing about Blake is that he isn't trying to hide the fact that he's a scumbag.

If watching video.......1st part is interesting but boring....WDFW starts about 1:08:40,

If you haven't been to Willapa Bay meetings, this would be a good place to catch up on the reasons for the Willapa Bay Plan.

The TVW video between 34:20 and 37:30 discusses Coastal WA chinook ESU. The NOAA wonk states there is nothing on the radar re potential petitioning for ESA listing.

The ESU was last evaluated in 1998 when only 3 of the 11 chinook populations in the ESU were showing a down trend. In contrast, fast fwd to 2015 when ALL but 3 of those same populations are showing a distinct downtrend.

I suspect it's about to hit the radar pretty dam quick.




YO! Houston.... think we gotta problem?

Blake is intentionally trying to minimize the significance of WDFW's historic hammering of wild WB chinook.... burying the harvest abuses in WB within the greater aggregate of the much larger ESU. Essentially he is saying WB does NOT matter in the greater context of the ESU... other streams in the ESU should be the driver.

This idea that a smaller population within a larger aggregate is inconsequential is the very mindset that has destroyed historic salmon population EVERYWHERE.

Once you've decided a component of the population is expendable, then it's just a matter of time before the entire population becomes expendable.

Viable salmon populations can only be as strong as their component sub-populations. As go the parts, eventually so goes the whole. It's just a matter of time.

PROPS! to Steve Thiesfeld for his very compelling presentation/testimony for conservation in WB... cue up 1:08:35.

When fish/wildlife mangers are doing their jobs right, the state should always be MILES ahead of the fed. When it's the other way around, the state is simply NOT doing its job. Refreshing to see this sea change within the agency as it concerns WB.

I see that a member of the comm fish sector got in the final word for this "work session" ... one expressly disallowing public comment by procedural design. Two and a half minutes of discretionary airtime on the clock to be exact.

Procedural foul on the part of Mr Blake?

No one else from the public got in a single word edgewise.

It was informative but pretty one-sided with Blake crafting the questions to obtain information he wanted.

WDFW's Steve Theisfeld was asked about recreational regs and Theisfeld confirmed that the Department has very liberal regs for the recreational fishers. This in the context of commercials taking most of the fish. What wasn't discussed was the timing of the commercial fleet's fisheries and their impact on recreational success. Theisfeld missed that opportunity.

Blake also asked Theisfeld to provide information on the number of recreational fishers and Theisfeld promised to provide data on the number of recreational fisher trips. I hope he goes back far enough to show how active that fishery was and addresses how great it can become - and not simply provide one data point.

Those observations aside he (Theisfeld) did a great job against a stacked deck.

Scott Ramsey's bit on who & how a request for a stock evaluation can be seen at about 1:00:33 and it is interesting to say the least. Also on the slide presented that was posted previously, the Willapa numbers are wrong / right depending on what years were used for the average. Take Willapa Estuary off expansive multiple year averages and use 2010 to present Willapa is not a plus but rather plummets to the minus column also. So we only have two Chinook stocks that are not in decline.

Theisfeld is a breath of fresh air. Glad he is in region 6.

The state should make everyone that wants to fish buy something, let's call it a "license". The revenue from "license" sales should go into a pot to help run fishery related programs.

An extra fee could be considered if you wanted to fish the Columbia River tributaries. I'm not sure why but something tells me that should be a pay to play region.

Additional fees could be considerd for a "salt water license" and a "shellfish license".

If my noble idea is implemented, the State would be swimming in money and the fisheries would be booming.

I always liked Steve Theisfeld when he was up north, felt he was honest but somewhat constrained by the wdfw status quo.

Be ready for round 2 in the morning.

Word on the street is Round 2 delivered a decisive 3-part TKO to the Blake camp.

1) Threat to the commission's Willapa Bay Policy thwarted
2) Funding for mass marking preserved
3) Commissioner Wecker keeps her post.

Egg on his face? Or was that caviar? Embarrassing, regardless.

That is VERY GOOD NEWS............Shame on Brian Blake !!!!!!!!

Hope this is the beginning of Blake's diminished political power. My constituent response from Rep. Sam Hunt was word for word identical to Blake's, as mentioned earlier. Hope his actions spoke louder than his words at crunch time. Big THANKS to everyone who kept us current on these issues.

Fantastic news!

Fish on...

Todd

That's great news.

CedarR,

I think Rep. Hunt could be educated on this. He was probably just following Blake as a fellow Dem.

Sg

What you should find out is Blakes position on the O/G projects for Grays Harbor, before you start slamming him to hard.

Okay, I'll bite. Why don't you explain to us what might mitigate our criticism?

I'd start by digging up the mitigation plans for proposed O/G projects. They need them to get started, WDFW and NMFS should both have them by now. Blake may have already seen them, just wondering what side of the fence he's on. Been watching the same crapzolla down here for almost ten years now and don't expect that industry to play fair or follow the rules.

His position for public consumption, or his position for big oil/gas campaign $$$... 'spect he has more than one; after all, he is a politician.

He'll be on the side of the fence that pays him best, that ensures his re-election.

True but it split the politicians down here, not sure they wanted to get into the fight early on since taking on the O/G industry is political suicide at that level. But some tried to block some things they were after using different methods. After Oregon's governor resigned and the emails were released it's apparent just how pro LNG he was. But no one could ever pin him down in office and get a statement from him other than "Our environmental laws should protects us" ?

That's it????

The old adage that all politics is local is truly evident here.

With both Reps Lytton and Buys who submitted and pushed (respectively) the Naselle closure in the Budget committee the Vice-Chair and Ranking Minority member, respectively, of Blake's Agriculture and Natural Resources committee it would be incongruous to suggest Blake as the Chair did not support that amendment (or asked the other two to take the action they did).

As to the $400K initially removed by amendment by House Budget committee it isn't much of a leap to believe who pushed it.

No, he does not get a pass from me on these issues; he clearly had both hands in it up to his neck.

I think now is the time to find out who is running against blake and make sure every rec salmon fisherman in the state donates to the cause.

Time to give this tool the boot before he can do any more damage.

Will CCA, PSA, etc step up and lead the charge on this?

I would like to see and support Miranda Wecker to oppose Blake in the next election for Representative of the 19th district.

Reality Check time!

CCA as well as a number (if not all) of the individual PSA chapters have 501(c)(3) tax status precluding them from partisan politics.

Or maybe, after all of her years of stellar service, have the Senate confirm her appointment so she isn't a political focal point/target.

Commissioner Wecker, thank you for your steadfast service to the resources of the State.

Lucky,

I could get behind that in a heartbeat.

Larry,

So they have a lobbyist but can't participate in partisan politics? I am confused.

It is my understanding that lobbying on behalf of issues is legit whereas supporting individual candidates is not.

Larry is right, 501 (c)(3)s can lobby for issues, but not for candidates.

However, they can come out in favor/opposition to an issue, then publish an informational statement showing where various candidates stand on that issue ;-)

Fish on...

Todd