Tribes fish and WDFW roll over again.

Status
Not open for further replies.
_WW_ said:
How many of you guys complaining in this thread have attended Commissioner's meetings to voice your concerns?
How many have attended any NOF meetings?
Click to expand...


I used to go occasionally with the old man, even he stoped as he saw the lack of accountability/action from WDFW
 
Divad said:
To be fair it’s because it’s in their culture. Likely will arrive to check the handwoven nets via horse, adorning no rubber or modern textiles in a dugout canoe.

Then will undergo the multiple day trek avoiding westernized roads.
Click to expand...

Yeah I always see em deploying their handwoven nets in canoes dugout from large cedar trees.

I’ve never ever ever seen em in a modern boat with 3 250’s on the back.
 
Matt Paluch said:
Last time I checked it wasn't the tribes who destroyed the salmon runs. It seems pretty ridiculous to complain about them getting to fish first.
Click to expand...
They’re not solely responsible but you don’t think indiscriminate netting of rivers is a contributing factor to the decline in salmon and steelhead populations?
 
charles sullivan said:
Please inform everyone as to how WDFW erred their.
I have struggled for a long time understanding how to blame wdfw for that PS steelhead listing.
Click to expand...
WDFW should look out for the People of Washington and tell the Feds to go pound sand..

Also this is why oppose any more listings regardless of the condition of the runs
It just doesn't do any good. Yeah it opens up some federal funding but I have yet to see that funding accomplish anything, might be a lot different if we weren't fighting ocean survival.
Let people fish empty rivers if they want to.
 
Last edited:
Paige said:
Which is precisely why we need to do it, nothing will change unless we take that hit!
Click to expand...
I Appreciate this perspectiive. I understand wanting to change the paradigm.
WHat do you think can/ should be expected as an end result?
I have thought this through a bunch. If they decided to go it on their own with NMFS, what would the most likelt result be? Why would the result be likely to be better.
The reasoning that "The devil you know is better than the devel you don't" is hardwired into state and local goverment. Agencies and employees are risk adverse. Since there is little reward for success and personal attacks for failure, it makes sense. It also keeps these agencies from being creative. Creative minds may just be better suited for free market enterprise.
I Have never been able to forecast a better outcome from the state getting their own permit. I would love to read a more optimistic progostication and would love to find those reasons for optimism.
I work for a local government agency. I have also worked in private buisiness. It is a lot more acceptable to take risks in private buisiness. If the state were to take such a risk, they would need to have some understanding of the probable outcome. I suspect that the decision makers at the state level either don't like the probable outcome of seeking their own permit or they truly view it as an unknown.
This is a long winded way of saying that if you want that change, you may need to do the work of forecasting the most probable scenarios and then lobbying for the action. In some ways, that is what was done by WW, SG, Curt et al. In getting the Skagit opened. The permit path was shown. The numbers were shown, the logic expressed and the commission was lobbied using that information.
I am also curious as to how this wildlife commission would react. Do they value having a shared destiny with the tribes. Would they be willing to take a risk in an effort to secure more oportunity? Do they care about fishing oportunities? I think that they share a lot of views with WFC and TCA as far as what the role of the department should be. I am not sure if that is good or bad in this case.
 
Rob Allen said:
WDFW should look out for the People of Washington and tell the Feds to go pound sand..

Also this is why oppose any more listings regardless of the condition of the runs
It just doesn't do any good. Yeah it opens up some federal funding but I have yet to see that funding accomplish anything, might be a lot different if we weren't fighting ocean survival.
Let people fish empty rivers if they want to.
Click to expand...
I live in the land of reality. Tell the feds to go pound sand would not only not work, it would not be very popular.
Of all the stupid thoughtless ideas that people have written on fishing boards this one may be the least connected to reality.
There are almost 8 million people in Wa state. Your plan would be popular with about 300 of them.
 
charles sullivan said:
I live in the land of reality. Tell the feds to go pound sand would not only not work, it would not be very popular.
Of all the stupid thoughtless ideas that people have written on fishing boards this one may be the least connected to reality.
There are almost 8 million people in Wa state. Your plan would be popular with about 300 of them.
Click to expand...
There are 300 people who would oppose keeping the rivers open and the rest wouldn't care either way or even know it's an issue.
 
Rob Allen said:
There are 300 people who would oppose keeping the rivers open and the rest wouldn't care either way or even know it's an issue.
Click to expand...
I would think that the vast majority would care that their state agencies to comply with ESA.
 
Rob Allen said:
They don't care about other vastly more important federal laws...

I'd be willing to bet that at least 3/4 of Washington state voters know what ESA even is.
Click to expand...
Weak.
Everyone who does not see it your way is stupid huh?
Weak, very weak.
 
Lake flyer said:
We trolls in the mitten have no intention of invading WA.
Click to expand...
Just for the record, I never thought you all did have those sorts of intentions.
:)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top