WDFW Rule changes

[billm]

Last year I submitted a proposal for a rule change in Puget Sound. My mistake, but I did not follow up and lost track of it, but did not forget about it. Today I was looking at the WDFW web site and came across the proposed rule changes. I was a little disappointed on what I found. I find the information misleading and just lip service to the sport fisherman. Here is a letter I wrote to the Director.

Dear Director Unsworth,

During the past year there were numerous individuals who proposed a 2 pole endorsement in Puget sound. Although only three were posted for review and comment, there were more submitted since I had also made the recommendation last year and it was not listed. I wonder how many more individuals made this proposal and it did not get included.

The WDFW response to all three recommendations was:

Salmon, goes through the North of Falcon process
This proposal deals with salmon. Salmon seasons are set through the Pacific Fisheries Management Council/North of Falcon process. This process adopts a cohesive set of rules for sport and commercial salmon fisheries, from ocean fisheries to those inside Puget Sound including freshwater fisheries each year during March and April.
Your proposal will be provided to the manager(s) responsible for this species so that it can be considered during the appropriate rulemaking process.

Does not fit conservation or recreational opportunity criteria

This proposal does not address a conservation concern or significant recreational opportunity.

I anticipate the proposal will be presented to the managers and hope WDFW will put some effort into this proposal. I also hope this is not just lip service to the sport sport-fisher. The other “managers” can fish with a means that can catch many hundreds of fish at one time, while the sport sport-fisher can fish with only one means at a time. This places the sport-fisher at a great disadvantge.

Also, does the last statement by WDFW above, “Does not fit conservation or recreational criteria” automatically reject the proposal? I certainly hope not. If it does, WDFW is misleading the public. As you can see, all three listed proposals have the same statement, implying all three did not follow the rule. I find this coincidental. I can certainly provide that rational if desired, as I am sure many other recreational sport-fishers can.

I hope to see and follow these proposals in the North of Falcon meetings.

Thank you.

Respectfully,

Bill Macaras