We finally received Director Unsworth's reply to our letters. We have posted the letter below for you to read and judge if he is really doing all he can do to represent you in ending these Secret Meetings and bringing transparency to our fisheries. From our take, it sounds like he is saying that the Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission can dictate policy. They tell him no cameras, no public oversight and all he can do is say "ok"! Seems like the Chair of the Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission is doing a better job of representing her stakeholders then our guy is... Director Unsworth, you state you've been working with the tribes on this issue, perhaps it's time to reach out for some help? After all, if the tribes have the authority to tell the department how things will go, maybe the department needs some assistance from the state or feds to even the playing field? Maybe start with a formal letter to Chair Loomis asking for cooperation? Here is Director Unsworth's Reply to our letters: Thank you for your continued interest in the North of Falcon process and the transparency issues associated with the state-tribal negotiations. I am well aware of the public interest in attending or at least monitoring via video, the state-tribal North of Falcon (NOF) meetings. We will continue to pursue ways to allow the public access to the meetings, but as I have said before, we will ultimately need agreement with the tribes for this to happen. Your most recent inquiry asks for an explanation as to why the Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission directed your questions back to us. You interpret the response to mean that "Chair Loomis is indicating that the Department is the final authority." I interpret the response differently. It seems to be a further expression of the fact that the tribes are sovereign governments, and they have no legal obligation to meet with the public or to respond to inquiries from the public. The tribe's relationship with the State of Washington are government-to-government relationships. Chair Loomis made her view clear in a statement on this subject last year, saying that "NOF involves government-to-government negotiations between treaty tribes ad the state regarding how salmon will be managed for the coming year. The State of Washington, through WDFW, represents its citizens in these negotiations." The willingness to allow (or not) public attendance at state-tribal meetings varies between tribes and has changed over time. In recent years, the tribal consensus has been to not allow public attendance. I cannot claim to know or understand all of the reasons the tribes choose not to allow public involvement in the NOF meetings, and will not speculate beyond what we have been told by the tribes - that they felt the negotiating positions of the state and tribes were being mischaracterized by those attending the meetings. I recognize your view that allowing video broadcast of the meetings would let everyone reach their own conclusions on the negotiations. We will continue to work with the tribes to find ways to increase the transparency of the process whether it be video broadcast or some other method. While many or our state-tribal negotiations over fisheries are quite tense, I continue to believe that the state and tribes share the common goal of conservation of fish and wildlife and their habitat, and are far more effective when we work together. Thank you again for your interest in our salmon resources. Sincerely, James Unsworth, Ph.D. Director