New leg action - the numbers will never add up now

Got the following note this afternoon. Looks like our legislators don't want to let WDFW share any commerical harvest information with the folks who are paying the bills. Hope the House has more sense than the Senate, which passed it 45-0.

This bill has passed the Senate and is currently in the House. Looks like the Tribes will not only be able to continue to have secret NOF meetings but if this bill passes the House then there will be no way for the public to determine how many fish are taken by the Tribes and Non-Tribal fisheries. We’ll be totally in the dark.

SB 5761.E - DIGEST
(AS OF SENATE 2ND READING 3/03/17)
Exempts the following from disclosure under the public
records act: (1) Tribal fish and shellfish harvest
information shared with the department of fish and wildlife;
and
(2) Commercial shellfish harvest information shared with
the department of fish and wildlife.



SB 5761 - 2017-18

Exempting certain confidential fish and shellfish harvest information from disclosure under chapter 42.56 RCW, the public records act.

Sponsors: McCoy, Hunt, Hasegawa


http://app.leg.wa.gov/billsummary?BillNumber=5761&Year=2017




SB 5761 - 2017-18
Exempting certain confidential fish and shellfish harvest information from disclosure under chapter 42.56 RCW, the public records act.
Sponsors: McCoy, Hunt, Hasegawa

YGTBFKM, right?

Who are these bastages ?

How do we stop it? Can SECRETLY fishing "in common" even pass legal muster?!

Something really changed then after is passed out of committee.

When watching the hearing that occurred with the Senate Natural Resource Committee , Sen Pearson rejected the bill as proposed and submitted task force wording. There was a vote with Sen. McCoy being the dissenting vote on the bill that he was originally the prime sponsor on. Sen. McCoy wasn't happy with what had happened and spoke out about it after the vote.

Ok I think I see, the Digest is a brief description of the bill by staff and in this case so brief it is deceiving------- more than likely.

The original bill as proposed by McCoy was to delete personal info of the fisherman,tax info, location of catch, price etc... with the amount and specie of harvest still intact and still shared with agencies and the public as usual.

Better call tomorrow and find out definitively.

What the bill only ADDS to existing law is that the individual fisherman's name, catch value, price, tribal tax, etc. can't be shared.

Catch area, total catch, (the numbers) are still able to be shared.

When I played with individual catch data (single fish tickets) we were not allowed to see who the individual fisherman was.

U F B! Checked out the sponsers. If you look at their districts, their is a strange potential connection to 3 Tribes. McCoy...Tualip, Hunt...Nisqually, Hasegawa...Muckleshoots! Looks pretty fishy to me. I always say, "Follow the money". The bigger question is how a 45-0 vote?

I really liked the task force aspect that Sen. Pearson added to the bill. Hopefully that didn't get chopped along the way.

I don't like this bill at all. Granted, it doesn't appear as nefarious as what the thread title implies, but I think the precedent set is extremely dangerous. Location may be key to an individual's rate of success, but it's also key to conservation of endangered species.

The main reason why I think catch location should always be reportable is twofold:
First, it tells us how many fish are being harvested from specific areas, which is key to avoiding overfishing of imperiled stocks. Second, it tells us they're not fishing where they're not supposed to be, with respect to ESA constraints, for example. If all we know is the number of fish harvested, there's no way to know which stocks are getting exploited most, and there's no way for managers to decide whether in-season adjustments might be necessary.

Mostly, I am disappointed that our legislature seems to be concerning itself with tribal matters more than with citizen matters. Further proof that the ones with the money get all the politicians' time (as if we needed it).

I sent my opposition to my legislators. I am curious how it ended up a 45-0 passing vote? What am I missing here? Hopefully my representative that voted yes will provide a response.

Senator Pearson is one of the few true advocates for the fish. We owe him a great deal of thanks and support.

Sen. Pearson passing Task Force Sub.

You can reach Senator Pearson through his email at:
Kirk.Pearson@Leg.Wa.Gov

It is not an easy task to govern with resolute integrity when many around you falter to influence and leverage.

I called and they walked me through the bill. Pretty much as stated above except the task force was removed. Too bad. IMO, Getting the stakeholders together to talk to each other seemed like a good idea.

Summary of Bill found in ESB 5761:

Certain information shared with the DFW regarding tribal fish and shellfish harvests are exempt from disclosure under the PRA. Such information includes the fisher's name and signature, total value of the harvest and value per species, the price per pound, and any tribal tax information.

Certain information regarding commercial shellfish harvest information is also exempt from disclosure, including an individual farmer's name and signature, total value of the harvest and value per species, the price per pound, and any tax information.

I just re-read the bill, the Engrossed version. There is nothing NEW in the bill that adds location of catch as being non-disclosable.

My concern is not whether the information is disclosable; it clearly is. My concern is the limitation on to WHOM it may be disclosed. What this means is that you and I (and any special interest groups we support) can no longer request data about where commercial fish were caught. That WDFW may request those data is good in principle, but it also requires them to do just that to get any of those data, and chances are, they won't be asking for it with any regularity.

My opinion is that if transparency in government is the goal, there should be no mechanisms in place to prevent citizens from requesting any non-confidential data. This puts in place just such a mechanism. I personally believe the Puget Sound Treaty Tribes are taking this as a next step toward keeping non-tribal citizens away from the bargaining table. The more information we have to collect, after the fact, that has been filtered through a government agency, the less we will know about what is really going on.

If none of this is new, I think the existing laws suck, and I'm just really late to the roast.

I repeat, there is NOTHING in the bill about location of catch. The bill is about fisherman name, money paid them, taxes paid.

It appears to me that "location" is covered under (1) as being exempt from disclosure. (5) looks to be new wording (underlined) that protects the names and other personal information of tribal fishers


1) Commercial fishing catch data from logbooks required to be
provided to the department of fish and wildlife under RCW
77.12.047, when the data identifies specific catch location, timing, or
methodology and the release of which would result in unfair
competitive disadvantage to the commercial fisher providing the catch
data, however, this information may be released to government
agencies concerned with the management of fish and wildlife

Logbooks. A fish ticket, which is how salmon and shellfish are sold in WA, is a different beast. That logbook thing generally applies to the high seas trawlers as they are very secretive.

All we ever get, anyway, on a fish ticket is catch area. Which, as any angler knows, doesn't tell anything about where the fish was actually caught.

Plus, that logbook RCW may come from an overarching Federal Law/rule.

Thanks for the clarification. Maybe something in the Magnuson-Stevens Act covers that.

It is rather common practice in the really industrial fleets (longline, pelagic gill net, trawl) to be secretive about where they fish. I know researchers who try to use high seas fishing data and it is hard because the narrowest may be a 5 degree by 5 degree box of lat-long. At that scale, there is some logic to not sharing the exact where.

At the other end of the scale, and probably the most accurate in WA, is reef net data as each netter fishes one site.

So why now?? I mean, why not make the law specific to those fisheries! Why make it so broad based that it coveres all netting ventures (including Tribal). And why exclude the information from any public information inquiry? Look at the bill sponsors. Look at their districts. How many have big industrial fleets in their districts? How many have Tribal fisheries? Why don't they just pass two laws and be done with this piece meal destruction of our rights and our fisheries?

Bill 1: All managment of the Natural Resources will be conducted as Gov't to Gov't and the final decisions in all matters related to any Natural Resource will be the responsibility of the Sovereign Tribal Nations of Washington.

Bill 2: Any and all actions, transactions, contracts, agreements or any interreactions monitory or otherwise conducted by the Sovereign Tribal Nations of Washington will not be subject to nor need to conform to State law unless specifically agreed to by the Sovereign Tribal Nations of Washington.

Bay wolf, I think Bill 1 and 2, if not Law are at least Policy, at least in practice.