RT,

I think the Columbia River tribes balk at the tangle nets or any discriminate fishing method because they have adopted a position that hatchery fish equal native fish. That is, a hatchery fish spawning in the natural environment is just as good as a wild native fish spawning naturally. The science doesn't support that position, at least for steelhead. I don't know if there are any study results supporting either position for salmon. Most biologists don't support it.

If the tribes used the tangle nets, that would serve to undermine the position they have taken, and possibly tend toward subjecting their fisheries to some of the same protective standards that restrict the non-treaty recreational fishery. Naturally, that doesn't serve their interest in harvesting more fish.

Actually, with availble technology it's hard to justify either treaty or non-treaty gillnet fishing in the Columbia River. We've got plenty of engineering expertise to modify the fish ladders at Bonneville with fish traps. Harvestable hatchery fish could be removed there for treaty and non-treaty commercial fishing interests, and wild salmon and steelhead could be passed along unharmed to their upstream migration.

The big resistance to fish traps, or most alternatives to gillnets, is the ownership of the catch. Who gets the fish/money from the transaction? It's stupid, but we sacrifice conservation interests to maintain "traditional" commercial fishing like it's some sacred cow. The technical solution is dead simple. The social/economic equation is a political cat fight. So for the paltry few bucks realized from this fishery, we stick with an obsolete fishing method to placate an outdated occupation at the expense of wild native salmon and steelhead.

The regulators' mastheads should read, "Dumb****s are Us."

Sincerely,

Salmo g.

[ 04-17-2001: Message edited by: Salmo g. ]