Fava sees the light here. The marketplace affects the outcome more than any other factor. In 1979 fish buyers paid treaty fishermen $2.50 per pound ex-vessel for gillnet caught steelhead. Over the last couple years the price received has dropped to $0.65 to $0.75 per pound. As you might expect, the cost of fishing commercially has not decreased over the last 20 years for boats, nets, and fuel. If it becomes unprofitable to fish, few will do it for spite, but they may net some for personal use, and I'm perfectly fine with that. If the price continues to drop, or stay where it is, we may yet see some tribes take an interest in a deal where we, through the state, pay them to leave the fish in the river.

I've mentioned this concept several times over the last few years. I hope I was just ahead of my time. I like to believe it will actually get serious consideration in the near future.

Imagine. Tribes make more money leaving steelhead in the river than by netting and selling them. We continue to acknowledge tribal treaty fishing rights. They take what they wish for personal use. We attain our goal regarding year around, statewide wild steelhead release. The supply of hatchery fish in the rivers increases as a result of the deal with treaty tribes. You're allowed to bonk hatchery fish to prevent them from breeding in the natural environment.

Imagine, a very Merry Christmas, everybody!

Sincerely,

Salmo g.