2019 Area 7 chinook fishery bloodydecks p gasket 300tdi


I’m concerned that those of us with an understanding of the fishery in Marine Area 7, and fisheries management in general, are being shut out. From what I have observed, we are up against for-gone-conclusions, and that the Prey Availability moderator/facilitator is unilaterally choosing which viewpoints to advance and which to disregard or cast aside. She does this regardless of the available science and well-reasoned group member objections. gaston y daniela In a nutshell, I think we are being intentionally sidelined and it worries me. Not being part of the task force or any working group allowed me to roam from room to room and listen to the discussions being held. gas after eating eggs The groups were attempting to distill the proposed action items and find agreement. I was taken aback by what I observed: Individually many of the group members have knowledge in their field, but the problem is many feel qualified to suggest actionable ideas of which they have no background or understanding. They weigh in on matters for which they have zero technical and scientific knowledge, and they often have no way of backing up some of the ideas or recommendations they put forth. It’s nothing short of astounding.

One member (a San Juan County Commissioner) was mad at the commercial fishing going on at Eagle Point this past week. gas variables pogil worksheet answers He stated that they were “taking all the fish.” During a brief sidebar, I pointed out to him that they were tribal boats who were sockeye fishing and not targeting kings. He didn’t care for my explanation and insisted they were catching fish that the Orca could eat! He got quite agitated and emphatically stated that ‘15 miles of no-go zone was not going to save the SRKW’ and that much more was needed. electricity wiki To note, the best available science points to SRKW feeding on adult chinook, not sockeye, and the primary foraging grounds are no longer the west side of San Juan Island, as it has been in the past, but well to the west and other areas in the straight and sound.

Penny Becker led discussions on Prey Availablity but was far from a neutral facilitator. With each group, she introduced the idea of shutting down geographical areas to fishing that historically support SRKW foraging. She then would give a “for instance” and suggest the west side of San Juan Island. list of electricity usage by appliances She would further add that this action would work in concert with vessel restrictions in the same area, but that the vessel working group was assigned this specific task. She makes no attempt to hide her agenda and is quite intentional in her ‘steering’ of the separate working groups toward her own goal of seeing the west side closed to recreational harvest and fishing boats. A point to note is that when one

Kevin Ranker’s comments in the vessel working group room really concerned me. He openly stated that we should disregard Phil Anderson’s assurances that 1. A higher number of migrating fish could be expected due new to Pacific Salmon Treaty agreements with the Canadians. electricity billy elliot chords And, 2.That a re-worked 10-year management plan would further restrict harvest throughout the Puget Sound marine areas. Further, Kevin went on to state that the task force should immediately move forward with harvest cuts, concentrating on area 7, because “we have been listening to Phil tell us for years that cuts to recreational harvest are coming, and yet nothing has yet happened’. Given that I have been involved in the North of Falcon process for the last 10 years and have been witness to nothing but annual reductions in harvest opportunity, I call BS on Kevin’s point. gas in dogs causes What astounds me is that Kevin and many others refuse to acknowledge this point. We have 104 fewer days of Chinook fishing when compared to 5 years ago and yet this does not seem to register with folks on the task force. gas utility boston I heard on group member put it this way though, and I couldn’t agree more. He stated ‘why would we continue to go down the path of harvest reductions as a way to help save the SRKW when based on the last 10 years of reductions, it hasn’t helped?” To expect different results from further cuts is lunacy and a waste of time, not to mention it will only serve to hurt recreational opportunity, industry, and businesses throughout Puget Sound.

I know that the design of the task force discussions is based on the marketplace of ideas. The intention is that good, reasonable, and workable solutions will rise to the top and be implemented, while others will sink to the bottom. What worries me first, is that some of these crazy suggestions, ideas. and notions will take hold, and second, that individual or group agendas will find their way to the governor’s desk and be written into law.