NOVEMBER 1, 2014 MEETING 2 WILLAPA MANAGEMENT PLAN
Well this was meeting #2 for the public. The meeting went OK I guess but staff
struggled to communicate with a lady who by name is associated with a
gillnetters family. Nice lady I guess but it was like watching the agency
explain the world in 2014 to someone who just woke up and thought it was 1930.
This is expected I guess but lord there are days when I hope the citizens
associated with the NT Net Commercials catch up not to this century ( I have
given up on that ) but someplace midway through the last. Oh well
................. here ya go and keep in mind these are my notes from my
Willapa Management Plan Public Meeting Nov 1,
Introductions Staff & the public participants
HOC Committee meeting.
*Side tracked to how come the
reduction from 3 to 2 on the Naselle for Recs.
*On to newspaper add
comparing Gillnetters to coal strip mining. Again the lady from the gillnetters
family was upset.
* Did review the objectives kinda / sorta / maybe.
*The information provided to the WDF&W Commission Fish
Committee was provided to the public.
*Region 6 Fish Program Manager Steve
Theisfeld outlined the process thus far and what the future meetings schedule
will look like.
*Not all the meeting sites for the Commission meetings have
been secured and are a work in progress.
* The Commission meeting 11/8/2014
is at the NRB Building in Olympia and off we went again all over the world.
Summary of poll taken at the first public meeting:
the questions misleading ( which they were ) and wondered if accuracy even
existed. ( real low point here folks as staff really stank up the place on this
bit. Poll was pure BS )
* Chum management and the definition of aggregate to
Recs ..... this one just took off all over the place and was basically wasted
Commercial input on poll:
*The use of ex vessel value to define
commercial seasons and the commercials want 900,000 a year. For those not
familiar ex vessel is the value of the catch of the fleet. Now this one went
everyplace but the jest was the commercials wanted a maximum guaranteed value to
their catch. Just so all know under the current Director that is how Willapa is
*From the Rec perspective the agency pretty much just run them off
with the manner they set seasons.
*The process is bizarre and one can hardly
believe what they see.
*Strong objections to ex vessel value being a
Recreation input on poll:
*Support alternative gear 75% to
100% Rec / zero to 10% Commercial.
* NO 2T Commercial anytime
*Economic value of Rec fishers is misrepresented. Steve Theisfeld did
his best to explain but pretty much fell on deaf ears.
*In new plan split
Willapa into two management zone ( similar to GH and the Chehalis &
Humptulips ) North Willapa / North River / Smith Creek & South Naselle /
Nemah / others. Remove commercials from 2T for good.
* Present a true Rec
value in harvest.
Apparitional Objectives ( wish list ) This went NOT
well as conflict while civilized showed the huge gap between Rec &
* Chinook in current hatchery configuration are a no
*Coho & Chum maybe OK but issues all over.
*Harvest to be divided
60 commercial / 40 Rec on Coho & Chinook
*Move run timing for Coho two
weeks later. Came from a commercial and sorta speechless on this one.
Change Chinook run timing from the same commercial.
* Enhance Rec
*Nutrient Enhancement should be a priority.
*Make Forks Creek
( Willapa ) primary stream.
*Forks Creek has a weir and a second upstream
that could be refurbished. Now the but .. . no weir on main stem river ( Willapa
) and Chinook swim right by Forks Creek.
* Substantial funding needed to
address straying issue on Naselle & Willapa.
*If Forks Cr. ( Willapa ) is
primary stream then Commercials out of U & 2T.
*Split Willapa North &
South / No 2T Commercial / reduce Forks Cr. production up
*Commercial fisheries do not decrease or effect Rec
*If split is done Commercial cost ( fuel burn ) would rise making
*Ron Warren outlined several issues and why Naselle was
primary stream. Also explained that surplus hatchery fish are not wasted. Funds
generated go to RFEG's and they use it as seed and matching funds to get
substantial funds that are utilized primarily for habitat
*Commission should not make a decision based upon the
information provided thus far.
*RW Outlined current plan and explained that a
large amount of information is still to come before a Commission
*RW Still working on 2010 plan but it was never formally adopted by
*This one needs emphasis: That staff make the Power
Point presentation for the 8th Commission meeting public PRIOR to the Commission
meeting the 8th so folks can reveiw and prepare prior to the
Posted on Sun, November 2, 2014
by Dave Hamilton