When we discussed this for the first time back in, what, 2013, I was thinking the PFBC was just telling us what they were going to do to these streams and asking for input. I didn't pay enough attention to realize that this was also going to be the new verbiage of a policy statement.
This miniature fiasco, in a sense, has let the cat out of the bag regarding the nature of policy statements. Folks just about everywhere interpreted the policy statement to be equivalent to regulation. It isn't. It's just a policy statement. They should be simple and general, not convoluted and specific with all kinds of annual contingencies that have to be checked.
They seem to have realized that and took it back. They always knew they were going to do reduced stocking on these streams and wanted to be diplomatic about it, but day-to-day business practice is not supposed to be itemized on a policy statement and this was a little reminder why.
They added general language that allows for future ATWs to be added to Class A and continue as stocked (probably at reduced rates) and added one restriction to the ED.
As far as I can tell, the ED, even as we speak under the current policy statement, has the authority to stock a Class A, right now. No permission from anyone needed. The policy says that is not to happen, but the policy is not a regulation. The regulation says the ED, and only the ED, can.
Now, as someone who seems to care how his commissioners and constituent anglers and the governor feel about things, and not wanting to act "outside policy" he would not likely do that, but he could.
With the addition of that little phrase about obtaining permission from the commissioners first before stocking a Class A, the commissioners have put a bit of extra burden on him. But that probably reduces, not increases, the burden on him when it comes to responding to pressure from anglers and legislators regarding stocking places he would rather not stock. They have to take it to all of the commissioners, not just one. That is also what the local PFBC office will have to tell them.
The current policy statement provided cover for not stocking for many years. Some biologists on their own would take sections off the stocking list as soon as a survey showed Class A biomass if they wanted and thought they could get away with it, even before the section was added to the list.
The opposite is of course true, and those of you who presume evil stocking intentions lurk in the hearts of everyone at PFBC and the commissioners will never be pleased. But if the ED wants to stock a Class A, he is supposed to get permission from all of the commissioners. I would not characterize them as lockstep voters on these things.
Keep in mind that there will be more ATWs proposed for Class A. There's bound to be. Water quality is up and pressure is down along with stocking generally. They should get added and protected faster because they don't have to be afraid of losing access, ticking off this or that local club, etc.
