WDFW has leverage but chooses not to exercise it. WDFW could prepare and submit a multi-year, say 20 year, Section 10 Conservation Plan (CP). The CP would set the side boards within which annual fishing plans would be submitted according to run-size projections. WDFW could hold open NOF negotiations with the tribes, which the tribes may choose not to attend - but they will be paying attention to what is presented there. WDFW could present that recent plans have delivered too little to the constituency that pays WDFW's bills, keeping the doors open and lights on at the NRB. Unless WDFW's higher paying constituents get a worthwhile share of the hatchery salmon that they pay for producing, WDFW will simply stop raising so many. Besides, the east-side and central regions say they don't have enough money to stock more trout in lakes, so WDFW will switch from raising hatchery salmon for BC, WA commercials, and treaty tribes and instead raise and stock hatchery trout throughout the state, returning more of what taxpayers and license buyers pay for to them. And then call the bluff and do it.

Sorta' like the piss-ant deal with no non-treaty fishing on the Skokomish River. Shut down George Adams hatchery unless and until the Skoks decide sharing the river is better with fish in it than without.