As I mentioned, we won't be getting into anything blatantly racist on this BB. Not all Native Americans are into the over harvest by gillnet of native steelhead to the detriment of present and future fish runs. But by circumstance of unfortunate interpretation of Treaties and improper over fishing past what those Treaties and Federal Court reviews of them allocated for, a group of people that happen to be Indians are taking unfair advantage of, and even breaking Treatiy laws with this wrongful gillnetting of nates! That is not racism, but realism! I'm just as opposed to whites or other races of people gillnetting nates. What could possibly be 'reverse' racism is this: it was never historic Indian tradition to over harvest the fish resources, but for some of them it is now - could this be about more than just a relatively small amount of money? Could it be partly a 'rub it in "whitey's" face' situation to be doing this because of what some white people's ancestors did in another lifetime?!? Sorry to have to say this, but by most accounts this seems probable. That's very unfortunate and counterproductive for all parties in the short and long run. I wish and hope for better sense to abate this scenario before it's too late. The Indian's can certainly get monetary compensation for not netting the nates. SO - why don't they?!? Is the answer in the above scenario, or is there something we are unaware of that we should know about? I want to know if my suspicions, and others, are wrong. And what can be done to resolve the issue! Potter? Anyone?

RT