Convenience of State F&W commission meetings

I have read that many individuals would like to attend some of the commission meetings but time and other constraints seem to be the issue. Therefore, a suggestion would be to set up satellite meeting places at all the six regional WDFW offices. With technology today, it should be doable with minimal costs. I have driven a minimum of 90 minutes plenty of times to be able to speak for 3 minutes and it would be more than welcomed for convenience sake to drive to a regional office to give testimony or watch in real time if TVW isn’t broadcasting that day. It just seems like this could help others in this state as well since most open public input concerning any subject is usually first on the agenda, like this weekend.

They have already experimented with a meeting place in Eastern WA for convenience. Skype would really be more convenient from our own homes but for now let’s throw around the idea to possibly expand what has already been tried in Eastern WA.

Anybody out there more apt to attend at any of the possible regional outlets?

Thoughts ?

Give that man a gold star!

Great idea......

I can tell you this.....at yesterday WDFW Commission meeting, there is thought to being able to "punch your fish", with a smart phone. This would give faster results....and might be a much better way to use sports catch information. I just know information 1.5 to 2 years old, is not much help.

Now there's a GREAT idea for a change! +1

Would that mean that to fish for a species with a CRC that I wold need a smart phone?

Not worth it to me.

I would actually turn in salmon cards if I could do it online.... but I dont need stamps or envelopes so I dont have them... I could go to a post office, but then i'd have to wait in line..

wdfw needs to get with the times...


Can you imagine a time when you dont have to carry 6' of plastic paper in your wallet?

There were others, in the meeting, that expressed the very same comment.....I just know that I enjoy my IPhone 6, didn't cost me anything, go no where without it.

It will not cost anything more to the wdfw to keep the current status quo option available to those lacking technology... but there are realized savings in both cost and speed of compiling data available by using technology to do the work...

I would be all for a penalty for not turning in a card, but only if we have the option to do it online

Just great. My flip phone won't work?

Oh no!

fp

fp, if you can post on PP you can turn in your CR card online...

you might have to log in a couple hundred times but its not like your password isn't written on a sticky note on your monitor

Simulcasts to regional offices might get a few more butts in seats, though I think sufficient will to participate is a bigger limitation than sufficient time, if folks want to be honest. I can definitely see where it would benefit folks who like to attend meetings in multiple regions.

The smart phone thing is not new, but in order for something like thst to be used as a tool for in-season management, there would need to be a way for folks without smart phones to report their catch. Of course, if the smart phone option becomes available, there would be an accompanying website, and just about everyone has access to the Internet. The bigger problem would be figuring out how to strongly encourage anglers to use the system on a regular basis, in my opinion. Either way, I think an online reporting system would be a great convenience, and it would probably improve angler participation in catch reporting.

So we have the meetings and the reporting system ready for the new millennium. Now we just need a way to make the fish numbers look like they did in the last millennium, and we'll be set for a world class sport angling experience.

The other aspect of in-season reporting is that WDFW would actually have to use it. Again, back in the day, about 99% of any one day's commercial catch was available on computer and was used to make management decisions. If the commercial and/or rec catch was that available would you support WDFW's using it on a weekly basis for openings and closures?

The fish would.

Should also note that in the early years of Boldt WDF tried to manage the rec fishery on a day to day basis. Of course, they were also trying to manage for allocation and not "opportunity" but they gave it up as being unworkable due to too many changes confusing anglers.

Seriously?

Sure I would support electronic data being used to make in-season management decisions - but that data would have to have a significant statistical reliability factor which WDFW doesn't seem to be able to achieve with some of its existing recreational electronic/paper catch data reporting (crab) even with 50-60% of crabbers reporting on time and in the face of a $10 reminder for not submitting CRCs timely (they have set a return goal of 80%).

As to confusion caused by too many changes the ability to get the word out to the large number of recreational participants (versus commercial) is problematic. What recreational anglers and the industry they support desire is reliability in season settings. Sure, monitor data and if a serious problem emerges take action but I can't envision weekly edicts opening and closing seasons in various management areas to tweak the process.

The idea of having Commission sessions real-time to WDFW offices or via internet should be reasonably achievable. However, I think it would be more valuable to have the after the fact recordings include video as well as improved audio as it is often difficult to determine the source of comments from Commissioners.

Finally, Commission meetings should include opportunities for public input other than at the very beginning of the session (8:15). First, it is often difficult for the public to arrive at sessions early enough to catch that opportunity and, secondly, an end of day public comment period would provide opportunity for timely feedback on Staff presentations made earlier that same day.

I fully agree with this......Don't think WDFW staff would like this but there are some questions that general public would like to ask, that WDFW Commission might find interesting.

I fully agree with this......Don't think WDFW staff would like this but there are some questions that general public would like to ask, that WDFW Commission might find interesting. [/quote]

Probably not - and that is why it might be so valuable to Commission members.

I agree with this too.

Seems like a few years ago someone here had posted a list of WDFW salaries, with many of the highest being programmers and such. Can you imagine how many more it would take to do a project like that?

$150K Done - including WebApp, iOS and Android apps for reporting catch and also provides another communication channel for emergency closures. Way easier to use! Another $20K and It'll pick up your GPS location and fill in your location code for you.

Hmmm, no thanks.

An interesting aspect of the discussion on electronic catch data submission is what would appear to be shifting costs from WDFW to the angler. Instead of having staff read and enter the data it is now the responsibilty (and cost) to the end user.

Wonder if that would free up agency funds to provide more research or better management.

That plus my concern of being responsible to input data immediately and accurately:

Honest officer.....

the battery just died (kids were bored and were playing games)

I couldn't get service

I leaned over to unhook a wild fish and it fell out of my pocket (into 300 feet of water)

I was so sea sick I input the wrong species/date/etc.

My new phone is incompatible with WDFW's archaic system

and on and on.....

Recreational "opportunity" doesn’t pay the bills attested to by the bottom dwelling non-resident angler effort of the Pacific NW States affecting drastic revenue loss from both out-of-state angler licenses and tourism compared to the other 21 U.S. coastal states.

As far as the original question of meeting places at the six regional WDFW sites for convenience there seems like some interest along with a good idea from Larry B to change general public comments from first agenda items to last for convenience for far away travelers and to be able to comment on daily items. I have on occasion really wished that the public comments were the last item on the daily agenda to respond to the staff reports to the commission.

I’d even suggest an open microphone to be able to ask questions or comment on what has been presented.

My impression has been the same as DrifterWA about the purposeful early morning public comments period because of possible WDFW staff objections.

It is a public forum that would be nicer if more accessible and user friendly.

On a number of occasions folks have requested that WDF&W staff share their presentations with the public BEFORE meetings at the Commission. This would allow folks to comment at the time in the public input portion on WDF&W's ( whatever is being discussed ) in particular the Commission meetings. Lets just say using actions speak volumes as a guide it appears that the agency staff are not all that supportive of that concept.

They probably try to avoid turning these meetings into document reviews, probably to avoid blowing up the agenda while picking apart documents, and possibly to avoid well-prepared opposition to their proposals.

Whatever the case, in my daily work, I am expected to deliver an agenda, complete with links to resources, at least one business day prior to any meeting I organize. I'm sure that's true for internal meetings at WDFW as well, and I think it's reasonable for us to expect that courtesy in public meetings where we're intended to function as stakeholders in a process to which such documents are relevant.

We are about a month out from the Commission meeting to be held in Port Townsend and there is no agenda posted yet although a status report on the Point No Point launch project has been promised.

It would really be interesting to see that presentation in advance as I am sure there will be a heavy spin factor at play. And to have an opportunity for questions and/or "rebuttal."

WDFW staff reports to the commission remind me of MLB umps that during the last century were judge, jury, and executioner on the bad calls that they made until recent review on certain calls were enacted.

The looks on some faces of the old school faction is priceless.

Paul Harvey's line "And now for the rest of the story" comes to mind.

In defense of staff, the public is allowed to say what they want at Commission meetings and staff is (at least were) not allowed to provide data to refute public statements.

What WDFW wants is the APPEARANCE of public input.

They absolutely do not want any real public input into decision making.

The advisory groups are there to provide a diversity of opinion sure to bracket the predetermined decisions that have already been made. Then the policy makers just say we listened to the public and chose something that balanced competing interests.

+100
I have seen that first hand.

There were around a dozen of us that handed out, collected, and turned into the commission close to 2800 signatures gathered in a short amount of time, to try to prevent the proposed closure of recreational sturgeon harvest in Puget Sound. The petition was presented to the commission and each of us gave testimony on various research topics. The result was a reduced season instead of a closure to harvest PS sturgeon. The Department staff wasn’t too thrilled and somewhat shell-shocked to say the least but rule changes throughout the state in the coming years with C&R of sturgeon in PS through the strait and down the coast occurred instead of harvest of sturgeon.

The rest of the story just for Larry B:

The most interesting part is currently the only place in this state allowed to harvest sturgeon recreationally or commercially during certain times of the year is at the terminal area, which is the Columbia R.

WOW, what a novel idea to not harvest depressed sturgeon in transit to their terminal area! State and federal salmon managers---TAKE NOTICE!?

I know there is a large disparity in maturation between salmon and sturgeon but the principal idea is the same and that it is easier to manage a depressed stock without everybody taking a portion out of the pie. Especially if that portion is an ESA listed Chinook salmon in an ocean mixed fishery.

Good Day

There is the understatement of the century.

The icing on the sh!t cake: Why the FVCK is my licence and CRC still a wadded up mess of paper in my wallet??? In this day and age....

The Chair requested the PT meeting agenda if available and Tami said that she could send it to him today.

Thanks for that info. If an agenda was sent to the Chair yesterday it was not concurrently posted to the Commission's webpage (http://wdfw.wa.gov/commission/meetings.html this morning). Hopefully the agenda will be posted not later than Thanksgiving to allow for interested stakeholders to be properly informed of that interface opportunity.

That agenda posting should include the Region 6 Director's presentation. After all, this has been a hot issue for a couple of years and was most recently raised to the level of the Commission at their June 2015 meeting when at least two Commissioners indicated they wanted more information. So, she will have had at least six months to prepare and timely provide her presentation for review BEFORE her presentation to the Commission and public.

What with this project's history and the long running issue with access to the Cowlitz at the Wallace gravel pit where WDFW paid for a large easement maybe WDFW needs another Advisory Group tasked with oversight of WDFW's current and potential public access.