Salmon Treaty
Salmon Treaty
Looks like no new news reguarding treaty.
Re: Salmon Treaty
Was there supposed to be an announcement of some sorrt?
Re: Salmon Treaty
No there wasn't supposed to be an anouncement however I did receave an e mail from ATA this morning saying that negotiations were still underway and it may drag into March before there is some agreement on Chinook. With all the talk about California and puget sound killerwhales listing as threatened under the ESA along with statements the KillerWhales perfered diet is chinnok i just wish they would get this treaty wrapped up.
Re: Salmon Treaty
As Carol W mentioned, Treaty is still in play and could be drawn out beyond the hoped for February finale. However, Treaty negotiations have little to do with this year's season. The current Treaty agreement expires December 2008. Hopefully we'll have another one in place and be good to go under the Endangered Species Act (you need a permit to fish, because of listed salmon stocks). If not, we will be back to the bad old days with the state trying to secure an ESA permit to fish from NMFS and, of course, any ensuing acrimony from disgruntled Treaty parties. We're hoping for (and working toward) the best...
2008 season, business as usual for chinook. We are awaiting the chinook abundance estimate, which determines the quota and comes out by May. Abundance is anticipated to be a bit lower than 2007, which could impact the quota. How much? Who's to say? Let's hope the fish surprise us and we end up about the same level as last year.
Reminder about other issues that impact the troll quota: 2009 Board of Fish proposals due first week of April 2008. The ATA Board will draft ATA's the first week in March. Be sure and send me any ideas ASAP, and remember, the fleet is stronger working together on their issues - let's work out any fleet issues before proposals go in, or, at minimum before we get to the meeting. There's nothing more damaging than the fleet fighting itself in front of the Board of Fisheries - it really distracts from other, more critical/risky business!
Fish On!
Dale, ATA ata@gci.net
2008 season, business as usual for chinook. We are awaiting the chinook abundance estimate, which determines the quota and comes out by May. Abundance is anticipated to be a bit lower than 2007, which could impact the quota. How much? Who's to say? Let's hope the fish surprise us and we end up about the same level as last year.
Reminder about other issues that impact the troll quota: 2009 Board of Fish proposals due first week of April 2008. The ATA Board will draft ATA's the first week in March. Be sure and send me any ideas ASAP, and remember, the fleet is stronger working together on their issues - let's work out any fleet issues before proposals go in, or, at minimum before we get to the meeting. There's nothing more damaging than the fleet fighting itself in front of the Board of Fisheries - it really distracts from other, more critical/risky business!
Fish On!
Dale, ATA ata@gci.net
Re: Salmon Treaty
Is there a place a person can find a copy of the treaty as it's written?
It's my understanding that in the current treaty is language that states that there can be no new fisheries implemented, only limited changes to existing fisheries.
It is also my understanding that the text of the treaty legally binds the board of fish as to what they can or cannot change with respect to king salmon allocation issues, if this the case, then no matter how unfair it may seem to some, we are bound by our current traditional fisheries, correct?
Having an in depth look at the treaty as it's written, might help some understand why it won't be so easy to accommodate their requests.
It's my understanding that in the current treaty is language that states that there can be no new fisheries implemented, only limited changes to existing fisheries.
It is also my understanding that the text of the treaty legally binds the board of fish as to what they can or cannot change with respect to king salmon allocation issues, if this the case, then no matter how unfair it may seem to some, we are bound by our current traditional fisheries, correct?
Having an in depth look at the treaty as it's written, might help some understand why it won't be so easy to accommodate their requests.