Superfly,
Points well taken. Here's a little more to consider with regard to them.
1. That attitude of "if them, why not I" is childish. It comes back to ethics and logic. I believe just as many sportsmen are aware that the tribes are killing so many fish and are therefore that much more inclined to release their natives. Also, I believe, if C&R regs went into effect, these indignant fishermen will forget about who's keeping the meat and begin considering who's killing the fish. This could translate into increased pressure on the tribes to stop, more than has ever been mounted on them.
2. Enforcement takes place, in large part, every time one of us goes fishing. Fishermen know the rules and I'm not sure poaching is such a problem when C&R fishermen are walking the banks. When C&R guys are not out there (i.e. when catch-and-kill fisheries mandate a complete closure) that's when the poachers have a field day.
3. Tribes have indeed been stubborn with regard to negotiation. But at the very least they will be forced to pay attention to us when they're the sole culprits. We don't know what the results will be because we've always been whack-em-and-stack-em in our philosophy. Therefore, we have no precedent.
4. This rule is as much of a compromise between groups as we're going to find. It doesn't entail gear restrictions, that's separate. And the brats are free for anyone to whack. Sure, this will be tough for many to swallow, but what other proposal will consolidate sportsmen, especially considering the growing number of us who are in favor of Native C&R?
Just talkin'