Does this seem selfish to anyone else?

https://ibb.co/LZ452Sh

Seems about the right attitude to work at wdfw...it's also the attitude that made moving out of state a whole easier

I'm not sure whether it's "selfish" or not, or really what you mean by that, but it is an accurate description of the status of fish and game in the State of Washington under both state and federal law.

Fish on...

Todd

By saying it’s the state of Washington’s fish & they can do whatever they want with it. Where does that leave sportfisherman? Is the state here to tell us we can’t provide for ourselves? Buy your seafood don’t catch it? Unreal how they think they own the resource. That’s why every run is trashed.

Again, not sure where the disconnect is here.

Federal law says that the State of Washington owns the fish and game, not the people of Washington.

State law reflects this exact same position.

If accurately pointing out what the law says makes someone selfish, well, I think that's a little weird.

Fish on...

Todd

The State is required to provide a viable commercial fishery.

The Sport side is held to a lower bar, opportunity.

It cannot be a bad thing to point out the growing disparity even if one loses this battle.

Where can I find this information?

Required? As in legally obligated?

Hmm wheres the law that says a natural resource must be upheld for exploitation

By law, all states are like this and it's always been this way. Each state owns their own fish and game and is responsible for management. If it wasn't this way, there would be no licenses to buy and no fish and game left. It's simply a business transaction to reach management objectives.

If you don't like it, vote in the ballot box or with your wallet.

Bingo. The State owns them, if you don't like the way the State doles them out, you have a choice, vote and change the people who are in charge of doling them out. Doesn't guarantee they will change how they dole them out, but Inslee just got a 3rd term, so unlikely to see any change soon. He appoints the commission, so in effect, they do his bidding until he removes and appoints a new group.

Last I checked, this is still considered a democracy, and also agree with Todd, the language is a simple statement of fact, not sure how its "selfish".

Inslee is doing good for the fish by not constructing a new dam on the Chehalis for one.

The RCW 77 sets out the sideboards for the Commission and WDFW. I would encourage folks to read through the statutes. Some are old and some have been updated. That said, they are ripe, in my opinion, for a major overhaul. The downside to any statutory changes, however, is making sure the bill title is tight enough that NGOs and others can't push through their pet projects. Once something is set in the statutes, getting changes is difficult.


https://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=77

RCW 77.04.012

Mandate of department and commission.

Wildlife, fish, and shellfish are the property of the state. The commission, director, and the department shall preserve, protect, perpetuate, and manage the wildlife and food fish, game fish, and shellfish in state waters and offshore waters.
The department shall conserve the wildlife and food fish, game fish, and shellfish resources in a manner that does not impair the resource. In a manner consistent with this goal, the department shall seek to maintain the economic well-being and stability of the fishing industry in the state. The department shall promote orderly fisheries and shall enhance and improve recreational and commercial fishing in this state.
The commission may authorize the taking of wildlife, food fish, game fish, and shellfish only at times or places, or in manners or quantities, as in the judgment of the commission does not impair the supply of these resources.
The commission shall attempt to maximize the public recreational game fishing and hunting opportunities of all citizens, including juvenile, disabled, and senior citizens.
Recognizing that the management of our state wildlife, food fish, game fish, and shellfish resources depends heavily on the assistance of volunteers, the department shall work cooperatively with volunteer groups and individuals to achieve the goals of this title to the greatest extent possible.

Nothing in this title shall be construed to infringe on the right of a private property owner to control the owner's private property.
[ 2000 c 107 § 2; 1983 1st ex.s. c 46 § 5; 1975 1st ex.s. c 183 § 1; 1949 c 112 § 3, part; Rem. Supp. 1949 § 5780-201, part. Formerly RCW 75.08.012, 43.25.020.]
NOTES:

State policy regarding improvement of recreational salmon fishing: See note following RCW 77.65.150.

http://app.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=77.04.012

RCW 77.04.012
Mandate of department and commission.

Wildlife, fish, and shellfish are the property of the state. The commission, director, and the department shall preserve, protect, perpetuate, and manage the wildlife and food fish, game fish, and shellfish in state waters and offshore waters.
The department shall conserve the wildlife and food fish, game fish, and shellfish resources in a manner that does not impair the resource. In a manner consistent with this goal, the department shall seek to maintain the economic well-being and stability of the fishing industry in the state. The department shall promote orderly fisheries and shall enhance and improve recreational and commercial fishing in this state.

The commission may authorize the taking of wildlife, food fish, game fish, and shellfish only at times or places, or in manners or quantities, as in the judgment of the commission does not impair the supply of these resources.

The commission shall attempt to maximize the public recreational game fishing and hunting opportunities of all citizens, including juvenile, disabled, and senior citizens.

Recognizing that the management of our state wildlife, food fish, game fish, and shellfish resources depends heavily on the assistance of volunteers, the department shall work cooperatively with volunteer groups and individuals to achieve the goals of this title to the greatest extent possible.

Nothing in this title shall be construed to infringe on the right of a private property owner to control the owner's private property.

**********

Also, from the Boldt Decision...

https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/FSupp/384/312/1370661/

U.S. v. Washington 384 F. Supp 312 (WD Wash. 1974)

...page 332, Section 7:

However, off reservation fishing by other citizens and residents of the state is not a right but merely a privilege which may be granted, limited or withdrawn by the state as the interests of the state or the exercise of treaty fishing rights may require.

***

Again, like it or not, it's the correct statement of the law, and stating it correctly doesn't seem selfish to me...it seems correct.

Fish on...

Todd

Mmmm, I think it was more the tribes than their puppet Inslee that effectively blocked the dam construction.

Sounds like it contradicts itself.

Yeah, there's a lot of that in fisheries management lol.

Fish on...

Todd

The Northern intercept fisheries take care of the industry obligation IMHO.

So do the tribal fisheries.

Fish on...

Todd

What is the obligation?

Did you not read Bushbear's and Todd's posts setting forth RCW 77.04.012?

The issues become how well those obligations are carried out.

Strange, nowhere does it say take all the Chum & Coho out of the Snohomish system & shut it down for 3 years. Says quite the opposite to my understanding. These people in the department just do what they want & don’t even follow their own rules, selfish...

While there is the mandate to ensure a viable commercial fishery, I believe that a court (State) held that the recreational crab fishery could be considered commercial because of the economic impact. Further, the Tribal fishery is commercial and keeping that viable would seem to meet the commercial/recreational industry split going.

The mandate says a lot more than ensuring commercial fisheries. Lots to focus on besides the commercial aspect.

Todd and Bushbear are correct. The fish and wildlife resources within State boundaries belong to the State. The State has the authority to manage them in manner consistent with State law, for the benefit of the people of the State. That’s the case in all 50 States. Nothing new here. We can (and do) argue about how they manage these resources, but we ought not argue about the authority to do so.

I would add that the Tribes have co-management authority in their ‘usual and accustomed places’ in Washington (and Oregon), so they have the authority to manage those resources consistent with Tribal law, in cooperation with the State.

To the extent that folks didn't realize this, it is a good reminder.

The tribes have the final say so, WDFW always takes a back seat.

Thanks, Socrates.

Am I dumb for reading "so-crates" like Bill and Ted? lol

Lol I do the same. Loved Bill’s step mom.

Dude. That's your mom dude...

"The department shall promote orderly fisheries and shall enhance and improve recreational and commercial fishing in this state."

If it wasn't so sad that would be fvcking hilarious!

The new rules do nothing but retard the Steelhead fishery on the coast. “Retarded” not “enhanced”. How much influence did Fergussen & Inslee have on these new rules?

None. Neither the AG or Guvner gives a rats ass about steelhead, let alone how they are fished for.

Only time those two will step in now is if it inconveniences the tribes or Puget Sound Orcas.

Best to keep the stupid left/right political feelings crap on the dark side.

Correct .

"The department shall promote orderly fisheries..."
Back in the day meant commercial fisheries.

The merger of the agencies was meant to communicate better to protect our public resource. The sad fact is Food fish, harvest at all cost "management" was elevated.

IMHO they should have been dismissed. Our public resource should have been preserved for the future generations.