The 1999 Board of Fish meeting was very contentious. The vice-chair created an “Umbrella Plan” on his laptop. Remember there were no arrests, no ambulance calls, no ER visits. The vice-chair also created the committee process which had been used historically however only for unresolved issues during deliberations. As I have stated, the committee process added an additional week to board meetings. Still does.
Regarding process, I recall my youth. If someone tried to change the rules 2 hours into our Monopoly Games there would be a brawl. A board generated proposal is not published in the books, does not pass through the advisory committees, and basically occurs exclusive of or outside the public process. In 2014, two costly restrictive proposals were passed the last 2 hours of a 2 week long meeting. The Board lawyer got his retirement cake and everyone made their plane reservations. The management plans change every 3 years. The plans do not mimic the life cycle of a salmon and therefore the affect of changes in management cannot be quantified.
Finally unlimited guides, unlimited dip-netters, unlimited traffic, unlimited hook and release where giant kings once spawned are not part of a sustainable fishery. People that are familiar with the board process understand that having the workshop in Soldotna was a dodge. At the very least, Soldotna should be the venue for UCI deliberations in 2020. That would end a 21-year drought based on KRSA correspondence and hyperbole and so-called danger. After that a rotating schedule. It’s a new board, can it be a new day as well?