Court Opinion

ID: 9793616
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-31 02:50:39.599137+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:06:14.606459
License: Public Domain

Andersen, A.C.J.
(concurring in the result) — The plaintiffs are gillnet fishermen. They seek damages from the State and its director of fisheries based on the director's 1974 reduction of non-Indian commercial fishing days for coho salmon in Puget Sound from 12 days to 6 days.
From a review of the record and the statutes empowering the director of fisheries to act, I am satisfied that his actions, concerning which complaint is made, were discretionary governmental actions as a matter of law. It is not a *405tort to govern. However unpopular the director's acts may have been in some quarters, they are not actionable in tort. Evangelical United Brethren Church v. State, 67 Wn.2d 246, 252-61, 407 P.2d 440 (1965); Barnum v. State, 72 Wn.2d 928, 930, 435 P.2d 678 (1967); Loger v. Washington Timber Prods., Inc., 8 Wn. App. 921, 928-30, 509 P.2d 1009 (1973).
On this basis, I concur that the trial court did not err in granting a summary judgment dismissing the plaintiffs' complaint.