A native steelhead is a fish. Just like any other. It's not a holy grail. If they're not endangered in a river, there is no reason to impose full C&R. Why not impose full C&R on ling cod? They're endangered in some areas. How about halibut and sturgeon? Once a fish is endangered, sure, go C&R, but until then, there's no reason to force people who food fish or trophy fish, to let them go.

Also, people who say sportsmen are as guilty as tribes are either full of it, or stupid. Let's say that there were no nets. Now, let's say that every sportsman kills 2 nates every time they fish (which we know will never happen). Even under those circumstances, the runs would flourish. With the amount of fish that would be returning, the sportsman could not keep enough (legally) to harm the runs at all. Now, get rid of the sportsmen, and put the nets back in. The runs would decline. Why is that? Because nets kill far more fish than sportsmen. If it was full C&R, that would mean the tribes could catch more. The treaties give them 50% of harvestable fish. Let's say that 100 harvestable fish enter a system. They would be able to harvest 50 of them and sportsmane the remaining 50. Now, sportsman have never caught their 50% (it's not a right for us) so we'll say we caught 30 fish. The remaining 20 can now go and spawn with the rest of the fish. Go full time C&R, and the tribes will now be able to target all 100 fish. With nets, they will probably be able to catch them all, if not, there will be much fewer that will make it to spawn. I hope my analogy makes sense as I'm in a hurry and don't have time to explain.

[This message has been edited by WA fisher (edited 03-26-2001).]